# NATO response to Russian sabre rattling



## MarkOttawa

USAF BUFFing back, with RCAF involved in Arctic and even over North Sea:



> POLAR GROWL strengthens Allied interoperability, essential bomber navigation skills
> 
> OFFUTT AIR FORCE BASE, Neb.  — Two B-52 Stratofortresses from the 5th Bomb Wing, Minot Air Force Base, N.D., and a pair from the 2nd Bomb Wing, Barksdale Air Force Base, La., completed today simultaneous, roundtrip sorties from their U.S. bases to the Arctic and North Sea regions, respectively…
> 
> Each of the two legs of POLAR GROWL provided unique training opportunities, all while testing the bomber force’s command and control apparatus’ ability to support two synchronized flight paths. The bomber crews flying the North Sea route participated in dissimilar air intercept maneuvers with fighter aircraft flown by the Royal Canadian Air Force, the U.K.’s Royal Air Force and the Royal Netherlands Air Force. In addition to conducting dissimilar air intercept maneuvers with Royal Canadian Air Force fighters, bomber crews on the Arctic leg of the mission transited around the North Pole, providing the crews invaluable training in polar navigation…
> 
> Flown in support of both U.S. European Command and U.S. Northern Command, POLAR GROWL was specifically designed to demonstrate U.S. commitment to Allies and enhancement of regional security, and not directed at any country [but love the mission name, eh? Grrr!]…
> http://www.afgsc.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123444130



More here on four CF-18s deployed in Western Europe (Netherlands?):
http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/operations-abroad/nato-ee.page

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## MarkOttawa

From Canadian government, Hornets in W. Europe not involved:



> Canadian NORAD Region conducts airspace defence training with United States Strategic Command
> 
> The Canadian NORAD Region (CANR) conducted comprehensive training yesterday [April2] in support of its mandate to detect, deter, and defend against all threats to North America’s sovereign airspace.
> 
> CANR conducted intercept and safe passage operations of two pairs of B-52 Stratofortress bombers returning from long range training flights through Canadian northern and eastern aerospace approaches.
> Quick Facts
> 
> CF-18 fighters were scrambled from 3 Wing in Bagotville, Québec, and 4 Wing in Cold Lake, Alberta, to intercept two B-52 Stratofortress bombers each in the northern and eastern extremity of the Canadian Air Defence Identification Zone (CADIZ) respectively.
> 
> The B-52 Stratofortress bombers were operating as part of Exercise POLAR GROWL, a separate training event under the command of United States Strategic Command.
> 
> NORAD KC-135 Stratotanker Air to Air Refuelers were launched from Fairchild Air Force Base in Spokane, Washington, and from Bangor Air National Guard Base in Bangor, Maine, to provide air-to-air refueling to the Canadian jets.
> 
> The Canadian Air Defence Sector (CADS) from 22 Wing in North Bay, Ontario, conducted identification and aerospace control for the Canadian jets while they were conducting intercept training. CADS also ensured safe passage of the American B-52s through Canadian airspace once the training was completed...
> http://news.gc.ca/web/article-en.do?nid=958479



Mark
Ottawa


----------



## McG

Estonia wants a bigger, permanent NATO presence to deter Russia.


> Estonia seeks permanent Nato force
> BBC News
> 12 Apr 2015
> 
> Estonian President Toomas Ilves has called for a permanent Nato force to be stationed in his country.
> 
> Mr Ilves told the UK's Daily Telegraph newspaper that Estonia felt threatened by Russian military flights and exercises in the area, as well as by belligerent rhetoric from Moscow.
> 
> Currently the sole Nato contingent in Estonia is a 150-strong US infantry company, stationed temporarily.
> 
> Nato has pledged a 5,000-strong task force to defend vulnerable members.
> 
> According to Nato's founding charter, if a member country of the alliance is attacked every other member would be obliged to go to war in its defence.
> 
> But the 1997 Nato-Russia Founding Act forbids the presence of permanent bases in eastern and central Europe.
> 
> The Russian government meanwhile has said that it is concerned over moves by Finland and Sweden towards closer ties with the Nato.
> 
> Nordic defence ministers - also including Norway, Denmark and Iceland - agreed on Friday that Russia's recent behaviour was the gravest challenge to European security and that northern Europe must be prepared for a possible crisis.
> 
> But in a statement, the Russian foreign ministry warned that this could undermine co-operation in the region that had been developed over several decades.
> 
> Finland - which borders Russia - and Sweden are not Nato members but have increased co-operation with the alliance.
> 
> Mr Ilves told the newspaper that it was time for Nato to recognise that the security environment had changed since 1997 and that a brigade at the very least should be stationed in Estonia.
> 
> "One hundred and fifty soldiers is not a lot, so we do think that further stationing of troops at a higher number is only reasonable," he said.
> 
> "We get exercises [by Russia] that take place behind our borders that have 40,000 to 80,000 soldiers. Yet we are accused of escalating the situation... and Russia says that it will have to take counter-measures."
> 
> The Estonian president suggested that Russian troops could reach the Estonian capital Tallinn - just 218km (135 miles) from the Russian border at Narva - in just four hours.
> 
> Nato has said that a 5,000-strong rapid response force, pledged at the alliance's summit in Wales last September, could be deployed within 48 hours to protect Eastern European members in the event of Russian aggression.
> 
> "It's a great idea but it probably is, in terms of the realities, just too late," said Mr Ilves.
> 
> Estonia has a standing army of just 5,300 troops and relies on Nato to police its airspace.
> 
> In early 2014 Nato quadrupled its policing mission over the Baltic states from four to 16 fighter jets, a tiny fraction of Russia's combat aircraft numbers.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-32274170


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver

Anyone who has doubts about how far Putin and his regime is willing to go only needs to read articles of the last 15 years by Garry Kasparov, or follow his conferences on the subject.

I can't wait for his next book, titled "_Winter is Coming: Why Vladimir Putin and the Enemies of the Free World Must be Stopped_", to come out this summer/early fall.


----------



## vonGarvin

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> Anyone who has doubts about how far Putin and his regime is willing to go only needs to read articles of the last 15 years by Garry Kasparov, or follow his conferences on the subject.
> 
> I can't wait for his next book, titled "_Winter is Coming: Why Vladimir Putin and the Enemies of the Free World Must be Stopped_", to come out this summer/early fall.


Propagandistic drivel.  He's gone no where, but *we've* crept ever closer to him.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver

Sorry, my bad, I apologize.

I didn't realize that it was our fault that Georgia was invaded by Russia, to create puppet states called Abkhazia and Ossetia, or annexed parts of Eastern Ukraine.

And lets face it, we forcibly expanded NATO by unilaterally annexing the old Eastern European countries of the Warsaw pact or at the very least threatening them with severe economic sanctions - such as cutting their fuel - if they didn't join.

And everybody knows that every time a member of NATO opens a base somewhere for its own purpose, it becomes a NATO base, which explains why NATO has bases in the Philippines, Japan, South-Korea, and so forth.

My bad again - I apologize.


----------



## Kat Stevens

There are NATO bases all over Canada, threatening Russia's claim that anything with snow on it is Russia.   :rofl:


----------



## vonGarvin

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> And lets face it, we forcibly expanded NATO by unilaterally annexing the old Eastern European countries of the Warsaw pact or at the very least threatening them with severe economic sanctions - such as cutting their fuel - if they didn't join.


In 1991 or so, when the USSR was collapsing, we (the West) assured they (the USSR/Russia) that we (the West) had no aims to "spread" to the East.


We've spread to the east. We could have said "no".  

It was the USSR that forcibly expanded West back in 1945.  They had grounds to build up a buffer.  How they did it of course we objected to (hence "NATO").  

As far as I can tell, the fuel is still flowing to the West, but it is we who have expanded and it is we who are sanctioning them (right or wrong).

But if you think that Russia wants to expand to the West, you're mistaken. Do they want Sevastapol?  Damned right they do (see the agreements back in 1991 or so).   

They sure as hell aren't saints.  But neither are we.


----------



## Kirkhill

TV - You have indoctrinated yourself

Way too many hours replaying Kursk -  ;D

The Soviet Army was inefficient then and it is inefficient now.  They won because of total disregard for casualties outside of the Kremlin.  And that is what makes them such obnoxious neighbours.

There are two types of Russians in the hierarchy: Bullies and Wiesels that know how to survive amongst the Bullies.

And that's the fact, Jack.  :nod:


----------



## The Bread Guy

Technoviking said:
			
		

> In 1991 or so, when the USSR was collapsing, we (the West) assured they (the USSR/Russia) that we (the West) had no aims to "spread" to the East.


I've found a bit of a mixed record on that.  Some say there was a "DEAL-deal" in place to not expand NATO, while others say nothing was in writing, some Soviet officials denied such a deal, and that it was never brought up during "official" discussions.  

For what it's worth, here's NATO's Info-machine version of that narrative - as with all sources, caveat lector.

Also, in 1994, when Ukraine gave up its nukes, they (the Russians) assured "us" (the Ukrainians & the West) that Russia would _"respect the independence and sovereignty and *the existing borders of Ukraine*."_  So ....


			
				Technoviking said:
			
		

> They sure as hell aren't saints.  But neither are we.


.... I'd have to agree.


----------



## dapaterson

Kirkhill said:
			
		

> There are two types of Russians in the hierarchy: Bullies and Wiesels that know how to survive amongst the Bullies.



Actually, Elie Wiesel is a naturalized American.

Weasels, on the other hand, are small mammals, considered vermin, resident in all continents except Australia and Antarctica.


----------



## Kirkhill

Pedants. Pedants everywhere.  ;D

Actually - here's a Wiesel






But - as usual - you are correct and I did mean the small, furry critter....

Cheers.


----------



## Robert0288

that's a pretty cool little armored ATV.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver

Yes, quite. Perfect for wolf hunting in the Black forest.


----------



## Bird_Gunner45

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> Sorry, my bad, I apologize.
> 
> I didn't realize that it was our fault that Georgia was invaded by Russia, to create puppet states called Abkhazia and Ossetia, or annexed parts of Eastern Ukraine.
> 
> And lets face it, we forcibly expanded NATO by unilaterally annexing the old Eastern European countries of the Warsaw pact or at the very least threatening them with severe economic sanctions - such as cutting their fuel - if they didn't join.
> 
> And everybody knows that every time a member of NATO opens a base somewhere for its own purpose, it becomes a NATO base, which explains why NATO has bases in the Philippines, Japan, South-Korea, and so forth.
> 
> My bad again - I apologize.



To be fair, it's not as though the west would use sanctions/economic threats to force countries to do their bidding, or invade nations for no real reason *ahem Iraq ahem*......


----------



## CougarKing

Kirkhill said:
			
		

> TV - You have indoctrinated yourself
> 
> Way too many hours replaying Kursk -  ;D



Tecnoviking's longing for his previous life when he led the desperate Soviet soldiers fighting to stem the tide of Wehrmact/Waffen SS Panzers marching on _Rodina_. 

  ;D


----------



## vonGarvin

S.M.A. said:
			
		

> Tecnoviking's longing for his previous life when he led the desperate Soviet soldiers fighting to stem the tide of Wehrmact/Waffen SS Panzers marching on _Rodina_.
> 
> ;D



:rofl:


----------



## CougarKing

The 2nd ACR wants more firepower:

Military.com



> *US Troops in Europe Request Bigger Guns Amid Tensions With Russia*
> 
> Fox News | Apr 27, 2015
> One of the last American combat units stationed in Europe is asking the government for bigger guns amid rising tensions over Russia's involvement in the Ukraine conflict.
> 
> *The 2nd Cavalry Regiment is requesting that 81 of its 8-wheel-drive Stryker infantry carrier vehicles be equipped with 30-mm automatic cannons -- double the caliber of the 12.7-mm guns they already carry, the military news website Breaking Defense reports.*
> 
> The House Armed Services committee is already setting aside money for the upgrade, which the Army approved Wednesday, according to a memo obtained by the website.
> 
> The upgraded cannons would give the Strykers added firepower against other light-armored vehicles.
> 
> (...SNIPPED)


----------



## MilEME09

S.M.A. said:
			
		

> The 2nd ACR wants more firepower:
> 
> Military.com



A 30mm cannon would in theory be able to punch through a BTR-90 and a BMP-2/3 which would definitely be a game changer for any conflict.


----------



## a_majoor

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> I've found a bit of a mixed record on that.  Some say there was a "DEAL-deal" in place to not expand NATO, while others say nothing was in writing, some Soviet officials denied such a deal, and that it was never brought up during "official" discussions.
> 
> For what it's worth, here's NATO's Info-machine version of that narrative - as with all sources, caveat lector.
> 
> Also, in 1994, when Ukraine gave up its nukes, they (the Russians) assured "us" (the Ukrainians & the West) that Russia would _"respect the independence and sovereignty and *the existing borders of Ukraine*."_  So ........ I'd have to agree.



Sigh

Once again, I shold point out that the various nations who asked to join NATO, the EU, western trade organizations and various other Western organizations did so out of a desire to escape from the Russian orbit, regardless of what Russia saw as it's "sphere of influence".

While yes, it may have been possible to deny these nations access to the West or membership in our clubs, the net effect would probably have been to create another "zone" in Europe of former Warsaw Pact nations, probably centered on Poland, which would be suspicious and hostile to the Russians on the East, and resentful of being excluded from the wealthy and peaceful nations to the West. That does not seem to be the makings of a successful COA either....


----------



## vonGarvin

Sigh yourself...

It's one thing to escape a Russian orbit, and another thing to enter a NATO one.

Options such as Partnership for Peace seem to work for Finland, Sweden, Austria, etc.


----------



## jollyjacktar

S.M.A. said:
			
		

> The 2nd ACR wants more firepower:
> 
> Military.com



And how long would this upgrade take?  Would it be completed in time for this crisis or the ready for the next one?


----------



## vonGarvin

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> And how long would this upgrade take?  Would it be completed in time for this crisis or the ready for the next one?


If their system is like ours.... :/


----------



## jollyjacktar

Technoviking said:
			
		

> If their system is like ours.... :/



Ha, indeed.  Never Neverland.   :nod:


----------



## CougarKing

A first for Sweden's navy in this exercise:

Reuters



> *NATO starts anti submarine exercise in North Sea as tension with Russia rise*
> 
> By Balazs Koranyi
> 
> ABOARD THE USS VICKSBURG, North Sea (Reuters) - NATO launched one of its biggest-ever anti-submarine exercises in the North Sea on Monday, inviting non-member Sweden for the first time, amid increasing tensions between Russia and its northern neighbors.
> 
> More than a dozen vessels from 11 countries are participating in the "Dynamic Mongoose" exercise. NATO will simulate detecting and attacking submarines in one of the most hostile seas, with rugged but shallow underwater canyons, rapid currents and unusually high sound pollution from freshwater pouring in from Norway's fjords.
> 
> (...SNIPPED)


----------



## CougarKing

US forces in Europe weakened by the Pacific Pivot?

Military.com



> *Shrinking US Army Forces in Europe Fuel Concerns of Russian Expansion*
> 
> The Pentagon's restructuring of aviation units in Germany is stoking concerns that the dwindling U.S. presence in Europe is too weak to deter future Russian aggression.
> 
> The Defense Department announced April 29 that* it is restructuring the 12th Combat Aviation Brigade and subordinate units in Illesheim, Ansbach, Wiesbaden and Stuttgart, Germany, as part of the Army's Aviation Restructuring Initiative in Europe.
> 
> The move will result in the reduction of approximately 1,900 U.S. military positions in Germany*, according to a recent Army announcement.
> 
> (...SNIPPED)


----------



## Edward Campbell

S.M.A. said:
			
		

> US forces in Europe weakened by the Pacific Pivot?
> 
> Military.com



Yep. And that is China's reason for joining the Russians for _combined_ naval exercises in the Mediterranean.

The Chinese believe that Obama's _Asian Pivot_ is an aggressive* and provocative* move against China's (undeniably worrisome) rise.

China is supporting, pushing Russia in Europe because it wants Russia to pull America back from Asia.

_____
* Both those words have diplomatic meanings and I have seen both used in the semi-official Chinese media when the _Asian Pivot_ is discussed.


----------



## tomahawk6

The Administration is planning to reduce the size of the military due to budgetary constraints.So if you have to cut units do so from Germany.I think its too early to reduce the force beyond the current structure.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver

S.M.A. said:
			
		

> US forces in Europe weakened by the Pacific Pivot?
> 
> Military.com



How about the European nations step up and provide their own deterrent to Russia's future aggression?

Just saying' !!!


----------



## Kirkhill

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> How about the European nations step up and provide their own deterrent to Russia's future aggression?
> 
> Just saying' !!!



Just agreein`.


----------



## MilEME09

Kirkhill said:
			
		

> Just agreein`.



That will happen right about the time we stop relying on big brother 'Merica to save us every time and protect our waters and airspace on our own.


----------



## daftandbarmy

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> How about the European nations step up and provide their own deterrent to Russia's future aggression?
> 
> Just saying' !!!



The 20th Century proved they weren't capable of doing that kind of stuff on their own, so why should it be any different in the 21st?


----------



## Kirkhill

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> The 20th Century proved they weren't capable of doing that kind of stuff on their own, so why should it be any different in the 21st?



Och, just take their nukes away from them and let them revert to the Status Quo Ante while we become Jacksonians.  As the son of a Border clan  that were chased to Ireland by Jimmy the Saxt and First (a nod to the SNP) he knew something of family feuds and the odds of an outsider making any difference at all.

Now, if you like the occasional barney and want to keep your hand in then, from time to time you can choose a side and enjoy yourself for a bit.


----------



## Cdn Blackshirt

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> How about the European nations step up and provide their own deterrent to Russia's future aggression?
> 
> Just saying' !!!



Not sure we in Canada are sitting on any moral high ground to be making that argument too loudly....


Matthew.


----------



## Kirkhill

Matt

You and MilEME09 are both right.  However I retain my personal right to my opinion regardless of how much a hypocrite my government makes me.


----------



## MilEME09

Kirkhill said:
			
		

> Matt
> 
> You and MilEME09 are both right.  However I retain my personal right to my opinion regardless of how much a hypocrite my government makes me.



I don't blame you, I blame the government for not taking national security seriously


----------



## Cdn Blackshirt

Kirkhill said:
			
		

> Matt
> 
> You and MilEME09 are both right.  However I retain my personal right to my opinion regardless of how much a hypocrite my government makes me.



Too funny Kirkhill....


----------



## CougarKing

US forces back in Georgia for exercises:

Reuters



> *Georgia hosts joint military exercises with U.S.*
> 
> By Margarita Antidze
> 
> TBILISI (Reuters) - U.S. and Georgian forces began two weeks of military exercises in the South Caucasian republic on Monday, a move that is likely to irritate Georgia's former Soviet master Russia.
> 
> *About 600 U.S. and Georgian soldiers were taking part in the maneuvers*, for which the U.S. army for the first time transported an entire mechanized company, including *14 Bradley infantry fighting vehicles, across the Black Sea from Bulgaria.*
> 
> "This represents a big step in our training and a big step in our interoperability," Brigadier General Mark Loeben, director of exercises at U.S. European Command, told reporters.
> 
> (...SNIPPED)


----------



## McG

> *Is NATO Ready for Putin?
> Political hurdles hold NATO back — how convenient for Russian tactics.*
> Steve Saideman
> CIC
> 04 May 2014
> 
> Vladimir Putin has challenged the United States and its allies over the past year. The annexation of Crimea and then the intervention in Ukraine have been very difficult as Russia has far more at stake in these places than does the North Atlantic Treaty Organization [NATO]. That changes quite dramatically if we move slightly west and consider Poland and the Baltic republics of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. These countries are members of NATO, so NATO must respond if Putin tries anything serious.
> 
> But NATO is not ready for Putin. While the stories of defense budget cuts do not help, NATO continues to have enough military capability to hold its own and then some in a fight with Russia. The real problem is a political one—that NATO members disagree about what is necessary to deal with Russia’s threats. Yes, a key output of the NATO summit last fall in Wales was the development a new Very High Readiness Joint Task Force that would move quickly during a crisis. This new NATO unit could move east to deal with Russia or south/southeast to deal with threats in North Africa or the Mideast.
> 
> However, the Very High Readiness Joint Task Force is crippled by two political realities. First, most of the countries lined up to lead the first few rotations are precisely those that were handcuffed in Afghanistan by caveats—restrictions on what their troops could and could not do—Germany, Spain and Italy. Second, in a crisis, the NATO commander, General Phillip Breedlove, would not have authority to deploy the NATO force. He would have to wait until the decision-making body of NATO, the North Atlantic Council, agreed that to release the force.
> 
> During the cold war, because of the threat of a surprise attack, the NATO commander had the authority under specific circumstances to take the steps he saw as necessary to deal with Soviet aggression. While we are not yet in a new cold war, the hybrid war tactics used by Putin—the little green men, the interrupting of telecommunications, and the rest aimed to present a fait accompli—work best when the opponent cannot make quick decisions and where ambiguity stymies a collective response. Right now, various allies are opposed to granting General Breedlove this kind of authority.
> 
> There is another way. General Breedlove not only commands NATO but also happens to be the commander of all U.S. forces in Europe. Using that authority, he can move American troops around Europe as he sees fit as long as the President and Secretary of Defense do not mind. Of course, this means that the U.S. needs to keep significant capabilities in Europe so that this general has some resources to deploy as things heat up. Recent stories of moving Apache helicopters out of Europe and back to North America due to budget cuts are exactly what we do not need.
> 
> The point here is not to win a war with the Russians, but to avoid one. Putin has consistently been looking for and taken advantage of weakness. He does not want World War III, but he does seem to want to break NATO. Presenting difficult choices is his primary strategy. It is time that we make his decision-making harder by making clearer, stronger commitments to our Eastern allies. If NATO as a collective organization is slow to respond, then individual countries, such as the U.S. and Canada, can and must respond.


http://opencanada.org/features/is-nato-ready-for-putin/


----------



## CougarKing

More NATO activity, in addition to the US Army detachment with Bradley IFVs in Georgia mentioned earlier above...

Defense News



> *Israel, Greece and US to Conclude Maritime Drill*
> 
> TEL AVIV — Israeli, Greek and US naval forces are wrapping up a two-week annual exercise aimed at honing maritime proficiencies and interoperability for potential joint missions in the Mediterranean.
> 
> Now in its fifth year, the trilateral drill — dubbed Noble Dina — began April 29 in Souda Bay, Crete, and ends here Thursday after more than a week of anti-submarine warfare (ASW) training and joint maneuvers in international waters.
> 
> (...SNIPPED)



Defense News



> *US Army Plans Show-of-Force Exercise in Romania*
> 
> WASHINGTON — More than 350 American soldiers and 80 US Army vehicles — most of them Strykers — will begin a 400 kilometer "cavalry march" across Romania, with cover from US Air Force, this week, to kick off multinational exercises in Romania, the Pentagon announced Tuesday.
> 
> *The Canadian, UK, US and Romanian exercises will also involve A-10 Thunderbolt II's from the 354th Expeditionary Fighter Squadron,* which will demonstrate close-air-support by conducting multiple close passes above the convoy. The squadron belongs to the 355th Fighter Wing at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base, Arizona.
> 
> (...SNIPPED)


----------



## CougarKing

A "trip-wire" battalion in each Baltic state's capital?

Military.com



> *Baltic Nations Request Permanent NATO Troop Presence*
> Associated Press | May 14, 2015
> 
> VILNIUS, Lithuania -- The three Baltic countries -- Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania -- are asking NATO to permanently deploy ground troops to their nations as a deterrent against an increasingly assertive Russia.
> 
> *The countries' defense chiefs requested a brigade-size unit of NATO troops -- one battalion of 700-800 troops in each country -- *in a joint letter this week to the supreme allied commander in Europe, said Capt. Mindaugas Neimontas, a spokesman for Lithuania's chief of defense.
> 
> "It is necessary because of the security situation," Neimontas told The Associated Press on Thursday. "It's not getting better in our region, so it will be a deterrent."
> The Baltic countries -- former Soviet republics that regained independence amid the collapse of the Soviet Union over two decades ago -- have been alarmed by Moscow's intervention in Ukraine and the increasing activity of Russian forces in the Baltic Sea.
> 
> (...SNIPPED)


----------



## daftandbarmy

S.M.A. said:
			
		

> A "trip-wire" battalion in each Baltic state's capital?
> 
> Military.com



I used to be part of a brigade like that deployed to arctic Norway. 

There I learned that 'tripwire' meant 'make sure that someone from several NATO countries is killed by the Russkies so they can use that as an excuse to drag their (somewhat hesitant) home countries into a major conflict'.

Not sure if that's such a good idea these days....


----------



## MilEME09

Crazy Idea but maybe bring back the CAST idea for the rapid response force this situation, works well for todays politicians cause its a token move really. I would also move for NATO to scrap the conventional forces in Europe treaty since Russia hasn't been practicing it since 2004.


----------



## Old Sweat

MilEME09 said:
			
		

> Crazy Idea but maybe bring back the CAST idea for the rapid response force this situation, works well for todays politicians cause its a token move really. I would also move for NATO to scrap the conventional forces in Europe treaty since Russia hasn't been practicing it since 2004.



Back when CAST was first announced, the troops began to refer to it as "Hong Kong Mark Two."


----------



## Kirkhill

Old Sweat said:
			
		

> Back when CAST was first announced, the troops began to refer to it as "Hong Kong Mark Two."



So maybe you don't do it the same way.....  CAST had no sovereign sea lift that could be held at notice to move for evacuation.  So some type of military transport would be useful.


----------



## MilEME09

Kirkhill said:
			
		

> So maybe you don't do it the same way.....  CAST had no sovereign sea lift that could be held at notice to move for evacuation.  So some type of military transport would be useful.



Reason to buy one of those Mistrals?


----------



## Old Sweat

Kirkhill said:
			
		

> So maybe you don't do it the same way.....  CAST had no sovereign sea lift that could be held at notice to move for evacuation.  So some type of military transport would be useful.



Actually the commonly held belief was that by the time came to think of evacuation, it would have been too late.

It is my belief, which can be incorrect, that the task was hauled out of the political butt to get out of reinforcing the Central Front without much military input in the planning process. Press releases included statements to the effect that the host nation will be responsible for providing air defence, air support, casualty evacuation, certain logistics support and some other fairly important stuff. When I was in the plans shop in NDHQ, I learned that they had said they could not do it, but we passed it to them it anyway in our political rush to get out of the Central Front.


----------



## Kirkhill

Oh what would you know?  Just because you were in the Plans Cell.....  

Thanks for that.


----------



## daftandbarmy

Kirkhill said:
			
		

> So maybe you don't do it the same way.....  CAST had no sovereign sea lift that could be held at notice to move for evacuation.  So some type of military transport would be useful.



I was in Norway the year Canada announced they were getting out of the 'CAST' business. 

The response was decidedly 'meh' largely because our giant best friends, the good ol' US of A, were there propping up the whole shoddy, semi-committed (except for the British) Euro-structure with some real punch. 

You know, as per SOP. Sadly.


----------



## MilEME09

Obviously for something like CAST to work, it would mean having the resources to move personal and equipment, the political will to back it, and of course troops, some possible prepositioned at a central location in the Baltic states.


----------



## Eye In The Sky

MilEME09 said:
			
		

> That will happen right about the time we stop relying on big brother 'Merica to save us every time and protect our waters and airspace on our own.



When did the US 'save us' and from whom?

Odd, I have never heard of the US patrolling our soverign airspace or territorial waters, or bumped into them while I was doing that.


----------



## SeaKingTacco

Oh please. If you think that we are single-handedly protecting Canadian territory without relying on any U.S. Military resources....


----------



## Eye In The Sky

Well there is that whole NORAD thing which was amended to include maritime approaches.  Anything else to add other than smug vague comments?

 :


----------



## MilEME09

ahem*

http://www.nationalpost.com/story.html?id=fb21432a-1d28-415e-b323-ceb22d477732&k=69493

old article but still valid, and I highly believe the US regularly patrols the arctic with sub's, cause we can't.


----------



## vonGarvin

[back to the original topic]
In spite of all the grandiose sabre rattling in Moscow, the Baltics, etc, I have a feeling that Russia is pulling a "Verdun" on this one.  But not "Verdun as it happened" but rather "Verdun as it was supposed to happen".  In short, they send in just enough and do just enough to get our attention.  Then we over react and send in much, much more.  

Witness us, little old Canada.  Of our meagre CF 18 air fleet, one half of our deployed strength is in Eastern Europe, along with Army sub units and so on. US forces are exercising there, and there are calls for more permanent presence, especially in the Baltics.

So, if that were the case, that Russia is only dripping in enough for us to deploy to Eastern Europe in strength, what ought to be our response?  Especially since the aim would be to open up something (or somewhere) else?


----------



## Ostrozac

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> Odd, I have never heard of the US patrolling our soverign airspace or territorial waters, or bumped into them while I was doing that.



But I do remember when Canadian jets patrolled US airspace -- back when the entire F-15 fleet was grounded.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/canadian-fighter-jets-temporarily-fill-in-for-u-s-air-defences-1.635315

It's an alliance. We help each other out all the time.


----------



## The Bread Guy

Technoviking said:
			
		

> [back to the original topic]
> In spite of all the grandiose sabre rattling in Moscow, the Baltics, etc, I have a feeling that Russia is pulling a "Verdun" on this one.  But not "Verdun as it happened" but rather "Verdun as it was supposed to happen".  In short, they send in just enough and do just enough to get our attention.  Then we over react and send in much, much more.
> 
> Witness us, little old Canada.  Of our meagre CF 18 air fleet, one half of our deployed strength is in Eastern Europe, along with Army sub units and so on. US forces are exercising there, and there are calls for more permanent presence, especially in the Baltics.
> 
> So, if that were the case, that Russia is only dripping in enough for us to deploy to Eastern Europe in strength, what ought to be our response?  Especially since the aim would be to open up something (or somewhere) else?


Good point - what do you see as THE prize for the Russians, then?


----------



## McG

I recall reading in an article that we ended the Baltic air mission about a month ago.


----------



## vonGarvin

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> Good point - what do you see as THE prize for the Russians, then?


I don't know.  Maybe pulling China (who owns a significant portion of our debt) away to their sphere?  :dunno:



			
				MCG said:
			
		

> I recall reading in an article that we ended the Baltic air mission about a month ago.



True.  But now we're sending trainers to Ukraine, and I think still participating in exercises in East Europe.


----------



## Kirkhill

Technoviking said:
			
		

> I don't know.  Maybe pulling China (who owns a significant portion of our debt) away to their sphere?  :dunno:
> 
> True.  But now we're sending trainers to Ukraine, and I think still participating in exercises in East Europe.



Maybe the question is:  What does  China get out of this?

Russian agression slows the Asian Pivot to China's advantage


----------



## Edward Campbell

Technoviking said:
			
		

> I don't know.  Maybe pulling China (who owns a significant portion of our debt) away to their sphere?  :dunno:
> 
> True.  But now we're sending trainers to Ukraine, and I think still participating in exercises in East Europe.




In so far as China is concerned, Russia doesn't have a "sphere" of it own; the Chinese aim, _I suspect_, to dismember Russia and make the Asian parts of Siberia into independent _client_ states (rather akin to Mongolia). The Chinese don't like the Central Asian _Stans_, but they don't want them tied to Russia, either. In China's mind, _as far as I MIGHT understand it_, Russia is a barbarian state that should be in China's _sphere_ ... or Germany's.


----------



## a_majoor

While Russia may hope that *we* will overreact; I think they have not looked too deeply into the well to see just how depleted our actual resources and will to act have become. We are not sending in the Armies and the Fleets because we simply don't have enough and don't want to, really.

And even if they have assessed our military mettel, we are still putting the squeeze on the Russians in other ways. The economic embargoes hurt, and the collapse of oil prices is something they don't have a real counter for. I'm pretty sure a lot of Russians can see the writing on the wall if China really starts using their influence in the region, and turning Russia into a semi dismembered Chinese client state; this is directly opposite to the current (and very deep ) narrative of Russia's "Destiny" in the world system. A nation which views itself as the "bridge" unifying the East and the West, and becoming "the New Rome" is not going to take being roughly demoted to a Chinese vassal state very well at all.....


----------



## Edward Campbell

Thucydides said:
			
		

> While Russia may hope that *we* will overreact; I think they have not looked too deeply into the well to see just how depleted our actual resources and will to act have become. We are not sending in the Armies and the Fleets because we simply don't have enough and don't want to, really.
> 
> And even if they have assessed our military mettel, we are still putting the squeeze on the Russians in other ways. The economic embargoes hurt, and the collapse of oil prices is something they don't have a real counter for. I'm pretty sure a lot of Russians can see the writing on the wall if China really starts using their influence in the region, and turning Russia into a semi dismembered Chinese client state; this is directly opposite to the current (and very deep ) narrative of Russia's "Destiny" in the world system. A nation which views itself as the "bridge" unifying the East and the West, and becoming "the New Rome" is not going to take being roughly demoted to a Chinese vassal state very well at all.....




I agree that Russia "will not take it very well," but, please, tell me why China should not be in this position?


----------



## CougarKing

Only 371$ for this upgrade?  ;D Got to love how certain press sources don't have proof-readers.

Defense News



> *US Army: Strykers Need Bigger Gun to Fight Russia*
> 
> WASHINGTON — One of the most important US Army units in Europe — the Stryker-equipped 2nd Cavalry Regiment — is outgunned by its Russian counterparts, Army officials say, and needs a fast-track upgrade.
> 
> The Army staff in April approved a request from the unit's commander, Col. John Meyer, to fit a 30mm cannon on 81 of the infantry carriers, needed for it to engage similar units or light-armored vehicles. The Senate version of the defense authorization bill contains* $371 for the Stryker lethality upgrade.*
> 
> (...SNIPPED)


----------



## McG

So, Strykers will be upgraded to LORIT LAVs?


----------



## CougarKing

Russia's jamming ability emphasized:

Defense News



> *Electronic Warfare: What US Army Can Learn From Ukraine*
> By Joe Gould
> 
> WASHINGTON — The US military has for weeks been training Ukrainian forces in US tactics, but the commander of US Army Europe says Ukrainian forces, who are fighting Russian-backed separatists, have much to teach their US trainers.
> 
> Ukrainian forces have grappled with formidable Russian electronic warfare capabilities that analysts say would prove withering even to the US ground forces, which are nearly a decade behind. The US Army has also jammed insurgent communications from the air and ground on a limited basis, and it is developing a powerful arsenal of jamming systems, but these are not expected until 2023.
> 
> "Our soldiers are doing the training with the Ukrainians and we've learned a lot from the Ukrainians," said Lt. Gen. Ben Hodges. "A third of the [Ukrainian] soldiers have served in the ... combat zone, and no Americans have been under Russian artillery or rocket fire, or significant Russian electronic warfare, jamming or collecting — and these Ukrainians have. It's interesting to hear what they have learned."
> 
> *Hodges acknowledged that US troops are learning from Ukrainians about Russia's jamming capability, its ranges, types and the ways it has been employed. He has previously described the quality and sophistication of Russian electronic warfare as "eye-watering."
> 
> Russia maintains an ability to destroy command-and-control networks by jamming radio communications, radars and GPS signals, according to Laurie Buckhout, former chief of the US Army's electronic warfare division, now CEO of the Corvus Group. In contrast with the US, Russia has large units dedicated to electronic warfare, known as EW, which it dedicates to ground electronic attack, jamming communications, radar and command-and-control nets.*
> 
> (...SNIPPED)


----------



## McG

USAF to deploy F22s to Europe as the next display of resolution and support.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/u-s-sending-f-22-fighter-jets-to-europe-air-force-secretary-1.3202273


----------



## CougarKing

Along with the A-10s that recently arrived in the Baltic states is another group of assets:

Reuters



> U.S. military deploys drones to Latvia on training mission
> Mon Aug 31, 2015 5:36pm EDT
> 
> WASHINGTON (Reuters) - *The U.S. military has deployed two MQ-1 Predator reconnaissance drones and 70 airmen to Latvia on a training mission as part of U.S. efforts to reassure European allies the United States is committed to their security, the Pentagon said on Monday.*
> 
> The deployment of the MQ-1 Predators to Lielvarde Air Base in Latvia over the weekend was the first time the U.S. military has sent a detachment of drones to Latvia to participate in partner training, said Navy Captain Jeff Davis, a Pentagon spokesman.
> 
> The United States has stepped up partner training deployments to NATO allies in Eastern Europe since Russia last year seized and annexed the Crimean region of Ukraine, raising concerns that Moscow next might target a member of the Western alliance.
> 
> (...SNIPPED)


----------



## CougarKing

MCG said:
			
		

> So, Strykers will be upgraded to LORIT LAVs?



Here's more to answer your question:

*AUSA 2015: Army defends high cost for up-gunned Stryker* | IHS Jane's 360 - 13 October 2015


> The army is working to up-gun 81 Strykers with 30 mm cannons on remote weapon systems and others with Javelin anti-tank missiles, a long-considered upgrade that was pushed through an operational need statement from the 2nd Cavalry Regiment based at Vilseck in Germany. Service leaders approved the plan in April and now testing and integration work remains.
> 
> The cost per system appears particularly high (about USD5 million per vehicle), and according to Heidi Shyu, the army's acquisition executive, this is partly schedule driven because it is through an urgent need statement that is seeking the upgrade as soon as possible. It is also for only 81 systems, so the limited quantity drives up per-unit costs. The price includes a design and integration element as well, she added.


----------



## CougarKing

More on the above about the Stryker:

Defense News



> *Army Seeks New Stryker Capability Beyond Bigger Gun*
> By Jen Judson, Defense News 10:29 a.m. EST March 1, 2016
> 
> This story, first published at 9:39 a.m. on March 1, has been updated to include a link to the market survey posted to the Federal Business Opportunities website.
> 
> WASHINGTON — The Army is looking beyond carrying out an urgent request to equip Stryker units in Europe with a medium-caliber cannon by scouring the industry for capability upgrades, the Stryker Brigade Combat Team program manager said.
> 
> The service released a market survey Tuesday “intended to reach out to industry and involve them in the dialogue,” Col. Glenn Dean told a few reporters in an interview Monday. “What capabilities should we be considering beyond the things that were already sort of on our menu.”
> 
> The deadline to respond to the solicitation is April 1.
> 
> 
> (...SNIPPED)


----------



## CBH99

Couldn't they just take the turret & gun system from the CV90 series, and install them on the Stryker?  Or take the turret we have on our LAV's, and simply upgrade the gun?

Already proven systems, not much of a need to design/test, etc.


----------



## MilEME09

CBH99 said:
			
		

> Couldn't they just take the turret & gun system from the CV90 series, and install them on the Stryker?  Or take the turret we have on our LAV's, and simply upgrade the gun?
> 
> Already proven systems, not much of a need to design/test, etc.



Biggest gun I've seen in that chassis is a 105mm, and it was a prototype mobile artillery unit. A 105mm gun in a direct fire role on a LAV chassis would be impressive, but the ammo would be limited, that said it would be very mobile, like stripping all the armour of a Leopard 1, and putting the energizer bunny in the engine.


----------



## ueo

I seem to remember GM attempting to make the old Grizzly a DFSV in the early 90's. Good concept but the cannon's overpressure badly deformed the hull and would have been, in all likely hood, fatal to the crew. No further action was taken on the project and the vehicle was never considered in further R&D programs. The newer hulls are considerably more robust, but I'm not sure what the overpressure issues are. Doesn't one of the US forces have a variant in this class?


----------



## George Wallace

ueo said:
			
		

> I seem to remember GM attempting to make the old Grizzly a DFSV in the early 90's.



I doubt it was a Grizzly.  More likely a Cougar.  You would be safe in using the term AVGP.


----------



## CougarKing

Raptors permanently forward-deployed to Poland?

Aviationist



> *U.S. to permanently deploy F-22 Raptor stealth jets to Poland?*
> Mar 02 2016 -
> By Jacek Siminski
> Polish Łask Air Base might become a permanent home for the F-22 Raptor jets.
> 
> According to the Polish “Rzeczpospolita” Daily, that quotes the U.S. General David W. Allvin, Director, Strategy, and Policy, Headquarters U.S. European Command, the Americans may permanently deploy F-22 Raptor jets to Poland.
> 
> Rzeczpospolita claims that Allvin came up with an idea of reinforcing the Polish airbases with a U.S. presence instead of establishing a permanent US military infrastructure within the territory of Poland, which may violate the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (CFE).
> 
> The idea, already proposed by the Pentagon, needs to be approved by the US Congress now.
> 
> (...SNIPPED)


----------



## Colin Parkinson

ueo said:
			
		

> I seem to remember GM attempting to make the old Grizzly a DFSV in the early 90's. Good concept but the cannon's overpressure badly deformed the hull and would have been, in all likely hood, fatal to the crew. No further action was taken on the project and the vehicle was never considered in further R&D programs. The newer hulls are considerably more robust, but I'm not sure what the overpressure issues are. Doesn't one of the US forces have a variant in this class?



which is odd when you see stuff like this


----------



## Fishbone Jones

The platform rock on a Cougar with the low velocity 76mm was about all that thing could handle. Anything more would likely have tipped us over.


----------



## Kirkhill

CBH99 said:
			
		

> Couldn't they just take the turret & gun system from the CV90 series, and install them on the Stryker?  Or take the turret we have on our LAV's, and simply upgrade the gun?
> 
> Already proven systems, not much of a need to design/test, etc.



The article says they don't want to lose the ability to carry a section.  So no through turrets.

Instead maybe something like this...

http://www.kongsberg.com/en/kps/products/remoteweaponstation/protectormcrws/


----------



## Kirkhill

Colin P said:
			
		

> which is odd when you see stuff like this



Although I also recall the KOCR guys complaining about cracking welds on the Cougars with the 76mm when they were first issued to them.


----------



## ueo

The original front shock pylons in both  varients were the major problem. Leaking O rings and insufficient welds made for a maintainers night mare. The snap posted earlier appears to be some 76mm variant with a weird muzzle brake (possible USMC trial as it appears to be in front of a hovercraft.). Never seen this one before.


----------



## Colin Parkinson

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LAV-300


----------



## ueo

Thank you.


----------



## Edward Campbell

There's an excellent article in _*The Economist*_, that is reproduced here under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from that newspaper, that all should read:

http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21695003-dont-be-fooled-syria-vladimir-putins-foreign-policy-born-weakness-and-made


> A hollow superpower
> *Don’t be fooled by Syria. Vladimir Putin’s foreign policy is born of weakness and made for television*
> 
> Mar 19th 2016 | From the print edition
> 
> 
> JUBILANT crowds waved Russian flags; homecoming pilots were given fresh-baked bread by women in traditional dress. Judging by the pictures on television, Vladimir Putin won a famous victory in Syria this week. After his unexpected declaration that the campaign is over, Mr Putin is claiming credit for a ceasefire and the start of peace talks. He has shown off his forces and, heedless of civilian lives, saved the regime of his ally, Bashar al-Assad (though Mr Assad himself may yet prove dispensable). He has “weaponised” refugees by scattering Syrians among his foes in the European Union. And he has outmanoeuvred Barack Obama, who has consistently failed to grasp the enormity of the Syrian civil war and the threat it poses to America’s allies in the Middle East and Europe.
> 
> Look closer, however, and Russia’s victory rings hollow. Islamic State (IS) remains. The peace is brittle. Even optimists doubt that diplomacy in Geneva will prosper (see article). Most important, Mr Putin has exhausted an important tool of propaganda. As our briefing explains, Russia’s president has generated stirring images of war to persuade his anxious citizens that their ailing country is once again a great power, first in Ukraine and recently over the skies of Aleppo. The big question for the West is where he will stage his next drama.
> 
> Make Russia great again
> 
> Mr Putin’s Russia is more fragile than he pretends. The economy is failing. The rise in oil prices after 2000, when Mr Putin first became president, provided $1.1 trillion of windfall export revenues for him to spend as he wished. But oil prices are three-quarters down from their peak. Russian belts have tightened further because of sanctions imposed after Mr Putin attacked Ukraine. Living standards have fallen for the past two years and are falling still. The average salary in January 2014 was $850 a month; a year later it was $450.
> 
> Mr Putin was losing legitimacy even before the economy shrivelled. Many Russians took to the streets in the winter of 2011-12 to demand that their country become a modern state with contested elections. Mr Putin responded by annexing Crimea and vowing to restore Russian greatness after the Soviet collapse—“the greatest geopolitical catastrophe” of the 20th century, he called it. Part of his plan has been to modernise the armed forces, with a $720 billion weapons-renewal programme in 2010; part to use the media to turn Russia into a fortress against a hostile West; and part to intervene abroad.
> 
> With action in Ukraine and Syria, he has made it appear that Russia is the equal—and rival—of America. That is not only popular among ordinary Russians but also contains a serious message. Mr Putin fears that Russia, in its weakened state, could be vulnerable to what he sees as America’s impulse to subvert regimes using the language of universal democracy. In both Ukraine and Syria, he believes, America recklessly encouraged the overthrow of governments without being able to contain the chaos that followed. He intervened partly because he fears that the revolutions there must be seen to fail—or Russia itself could one day suffer a revolution of its own.
> 
> So far his plans have worked. Beguiled by a pro-Kremlin broadcast media, ordinary Russians have been willing to trade material comfort for national pride. Mr Putin’s popularity ratings remain above 80%, far higher than most Western leaders’. But the narcotic of adventurism soon wears off. Since last October, the share of voters who feel the country is heading in the right direction has fallen from 61% to 51%. Russians tired of Ukraine; now Syria has peaked. Sooner or later, the cameras will crave action. Ukrainians are petrified once again.
> 
> What does this mean for the West? So far America, at least, has misunderstood Mr Putin’s aims. In the autumn Mr Obama predicted that Syria would be a Russian “quagmire”. Speaking to the Atlantic recently, he argued that Russia’s repeated resort to force is a sign of weakness. That is true, but not (as Mr Obama suggests) because it shows that Mr Putin cannot achieve his foreign-policy goals by persuasion. For him, military action is an end in itself. He needs footage of warplanes to fill his news bulletins. There will be no quagmire in Syria because the Kremlin is not in the business of nation-building.
> 
> Mr Obama thinks Russia should be left to its inevitable decline. Like a naughty child, Mr Putin is rewarded by American attentiveness, he believes. Yet, Syria shows how, when Mr Obama stands back in the hope that regional leaders will stop free-riding on American power and work together for the collective good, the vacuum is filled by disrupters like Iran and IS, and by Russia in its search for the next source of propaganda.
> 
> So the West needs to be prepared. It is welcome that America is strengthening its forces in Europe. NATO’s European members should show similar mettle by putting troops in the Baltic states—which will require a change of heart in countries, such as Italy, that see any display of resolve as needlessly provoking Russia. If there is trouble, NATO and the EU will need to respond immediately to show that Russia cannot prise open the collective-security guarantee that lies at the heart of NATO.
> 
> Carry on Kiev
> 
> The biggest test will be Ukraine—a focus of Russian attention and also the country most like Russia itself. If Ukraine can become a successful European state, it will show Russians that they have a path to liberal democracy. If, by contrast, Ukraine becomes a failed state, it will strengthen the Kremlin’s argument that Russia belongs to its own “orthodox” culture and that liberal democracy has nothing to teach it.
> 
> Alas, America and the EU have Kiev fatigue. Instead of doing everything in their power to help Ukraine, they expect Ukrainian politicians to prove that they are capable of reform on their own. That is a mistake. They should be offering financial help and technical advice. They should help root out corruption. And they should be patient.
> 
> Eventually, deep Russian decline will limit its aggression. For the time being, however, a nuclear-armed Mr Putin is bent on imposing himself in the old Soviet sphere of influence. In Mr Obama’s last year as president, Mr Putin, fresh from Syrian success, could yet test the West one more time.




None of that means that Putin's Russia isn't a threat. It is. It is, in my opinion, a bigger, more serious threat than the radical, militant _jihadi_ Islamists. But it does mean that it is a threat that we should face, now, firmly and squarely, and push down to its proper size before Putin does something really stupid.


----------



## Kirkhill

Enigma - Mystery - Riddle.

Churchill and Schroedinger.

Schroedinger postulated the mystery of a cat in a box.  Was it a alive or dead?  And he answered: Yes.

Putin is that mystery.  He is wrapped in the enigma that is Russia.  We still perceive that enigma, that box, as unchanged from the heights of the Cold War.  A Putin, like Potemkin before him, works very hard to maintain that perception.  We focus on the box oblivious to the state of Putin within the box.  Putin, who like Louis XIV is the state.  

We don't know the condition of the cat in the box, if it is alive or dead, if it is well fed or malnourished, or even if it is a cat.  It could be a rat: hungry and cornered.  That is the mystery.

The riddle is: What will happen if we open the box?

Personally I believe that we, the collective West, let our Cold War fears govern us and that is why we are doing everything possible to not make a decision, to the point of ignoring the box as much as we can.  But all the available evidence suggests that all that is left of the Cold War structure that caused so much fear is very dated, very rusted, very demoralized and very diminished.  

I believe that Putin sees this as well, as does "The Economist" and many others.  And that makes him dangerous - in the sense that a cornered rat is dangerous.  But cornered rats can be managed.  All that is necessary is to open the box.


----------



## CougarKing

Related:

Defense News



> *New NATO Units Will Help US Army Move Across Europe*
> Michelle Tan, Army Times 9:44 a.m. EDT March 17, 2016
> 
> HUNTSVILLE, Ala. – As the US Army grows its presence and steps up its activities and partnerships in Europe, the service has learned many lessons on navigating border crossings and securing diplomatic clearances across the region.
> 
> In fiscal year 2014, the Army processed about 2,000 diplomatic clearances, one for every border crossing, said Maj. Gen. Duane Gamble, commanding general of the 21st Theater Sustainment Command. That number almost tripled in fiscal 2015, with soldiers handling almost 5,700 diplomatic clearances as troops moved and trained in countries such as Poland, Latvia, Estonia, Romania and Bulgaria.
> 
> (...SNIPPED)


----------



## CougarKing

More:

Defense News



> *Army plans 9-month deployments for armored brigades in Europe*
> Andrew Tilghman, Military Times 8:18 a.m. EDT March 30, 2016
> 
> The U.S. Army in Europe will have a permanent footprint of *three fully manned brigades on the continent by next February*, defense officials announced Wednesday.
> 
> The Army will begin continuous rotations of U.S.-based armored brigade combat teams on nine-month deployments to train with Eastern European allies, officials said.
> 
> (...SNIPPED)


----------



## CougarKing

Hands off Putin!

Defense News




> *F-22 fighter jets are in Romania to keep tabs on Russia's Black Sea antics*
> Oriana Pawlyk, Air Force Times 10:36 a.m. EDT April 25, 2016
> 
> The U.S. sent its most sophisticated aircraft to Romania on Monday for exercises aimed to enhance training with other Europe-based aircraft.
> 
> Two F-22 Raptors and approximately 20 supporting airmen from the 95th Fighter Squadron, Tyndall Air Force Base, Florida, landed at Mihail Kogalniceanu Air Base along with a KC-135 aircraft from the 916th Air Refueling Wing, Seymour Johnson Air Force Base, North Carolina, officials with U.S. Air Forces in Europe-Air Forces Africa said.
> (...SNIPPED)


----------



## CougarKing

Poland's answer to Russian armoured spearheads slicing through Poland to relieve Kaliningrad if Putin ever threw the dice?

Defense News



> *Polish Defense Ministry Eyes Apache Helicopters*
> Jaroslaw Adamowski, Defense News 9:12 a.m. EDT April 22, 2016
> 
> 
> WARSAW, Poland — Poland’s Ministry of Defence is aiming to acquire 24 Boeing AH-64 Apache helicopters under its ongoing tender to purchase new combat helos for the Polish Air Force, according to local business daily Dziennik Gazeta Prawna.
> 
> The procurement, dubbed the Kruk program, is most likely to be awarded to Boeing prior to the forthcoming NATO summit in Warsaw, which is to be held July 8-9, the daily was told by two sources close to the tender.
> 
> “The drafting of tactical-technical requirements was completed, and, by the end of June, a decision regarding the mode of acquiring combat helicopters will be made,” ministry spokesman Bartlomiej Misiewicz said.
> 
> (...SNIPPED)


----------



## The Bread Guy

Possible poke ...


> Turkey, Bulgaria and Romania may expand the NATO alliance's maritime presence in the Black Sea as part of a broader strategy to deter Russia, NATO's deputy chief said on Friday.
> 
> NATO is looking to counter Russia's military build-up in Crimea, which Moscow annexed from Ukraine in 2014, and in the Black Sea, which is strategically important for both East and West given its energy reserves and closeness to the Middle East.
> 
> "There are some very valuable discussions under way among the allies who live on the Black Sea ... of more closely integrating their naval forces and operations," NATO's Deputy Secretary General Alexander Vershbow said in a visit to Sofia, mentioning the three NATO allies by name.
> 
> The U.S.-led alliance is concerned by what it sees as a Russian strategy to try to block NATO from moving about by air, land and sea by positioning surface-to-air missile batteries and anti-ship missiles in Kaliningrad, the Black Sea and in Syria ...


vs. possible counterpoke?


> The Russian Army and Navy will deploy additional forces and modern weapons to its southwest in reply to NATO’s plans to boost its presence in the Black Sea region, a Russian newspaper reported quoting Defense Ministry sources.
> 
> The military is planning to test the fresh forces, infrastructure and weapons deployed to the regions bordering the Black Sea in the headquarters exercise Caucasus-2016, scheduled for September, the sources told Novaya Gazeta daily. The exercise will include joint use of various forces in the Caucasus Mountains and on the Black Sea, they added.
> 
> The plans to reinforce Russia’s southwestern borders must be tied with NATO’s plans to boost its military presence in the region, as well as with its constant effort aimed at increasing the combat abilities of the Ukrainian Army, the newspaper suggested after receiving the sources’ information.
> 
> Novaya Gazeta’s military expert, Navy Captain Oleg Shvedkov said that despite the fact that combined strength of NATO forces and their allies will be more than the one of Russia’s Black Sea Fleet, deploying more aircraft and missiles to the region would successfully negate the new threat ...


----------



## CougarKing

Does "robust" mean mechanized? Or does it simply mean each battalion is reinforced in manpower strength?

Defense News



> *NATO To Deploy 4 'Robust' Battalions in Baltics, Poland*
> Agence France-Presse 12:13 p.m. EDT June 13, 2016
> 
> 
> BRUSSELS — NATO will deploy four international battalions to Poland and the three Baltic states as part of the wider push back against Russia's intervention in Ukraine, alliance head Jens Stoltenberg said Monday.
> 
> *"We will agree to deploy by rotation four robust, multinational battalions in the Baltic states and Poland," *Stoltenberg told a news conference ahead of a Tuesday meeting of NATO defense ministers in Brussels.
> 
> "This will send a clear signal that NATO stands ready to defend any ally," he said, referring to a whole series of measures the US-led alliance has taken since the Ukraine crisis to counter a more assertive Russia.
> 
> (...SNIPPED)


----------



## MilEME09

S.M.A. said:
			
		

> Does "robust" mean mechanized? Or does it simply mean each battalion is reinforced in manpower strength?
> 
> Defense News



Time will tell, one would hope 3 mechanized and one armored unit, complete with all required support assets


----------



## PuckChaser

Robust in this sense likely means something completely different to the politicians than it does the Generals planning and leading...


----------



## MilEME09

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Robust in this sense likely means something completely different to the politicians than it does the Generals planning and leading...



bigger question, is this the force Canada was asked to supply 1,000 troops for?


----------



## Kirkhill

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Robust in this sense likely means something completely different to the politicians than it does the Generals planning and leading...



Sie haben rechts. "Robust" is whatever Global Affairs defines as robust.  DND won't get a look in.


----------



## Lightguns

S.M.A. said:
			
		

> Does "robust" mean mechanized? Or does it simply mean each battalion is reinforced in manpower strength?
> 
> Defense News



Four whole battalions won't fill the barracks in one Russian Gulag.  I remember when NATO spoke in terms of brigades and divisions.


----------



## Infanteer

Lol - and you thought they were threatened by the 153 Divisions that Germany parked in Poland in 1941.  Wait until a few battalions show up!


----------



## Humphrey Bogart

Infanteer said:
			
		

> Lol - and you thought they were threatened by the 153 Divisions that Germany parked in Poland in 1941.  Wait until a few battalions show up!








_- mod edit to fix html formatting -_


----------



## cupper

NPR is reporting that Canada is considering leading one of the four battalions.


----------



## Cloud Cover

We don't have any battalions of 1000, that are robust. We do, however, have battalions of Majors that will combust if things get hot.


----------



## jmt18325

cupper said:
			
		

> NPR is reporting that Canada is considering leading one of the four battalions.



Yes, and a troubling headline to this article:

Canada considers European troop commitment as CSIS warns Russia is 'mobilizing for war'

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-baltics-troops-russia-1.3635139


----------



## MilEME09

Since the soviet days Russia has used military production to boost it's economy, however the Russian federations more hostile posturing will lead to a larger conflict if it continues, Georgia, and Ukraine were very much tests for russian equipment, training, and tactics, and they have learned.


----------



## jollyjacktar

I would be sad to see a punch up between the Russians and the West.  I would rather a joint effort against the common enemies such as Daesh.


----------



## Kirkhill

Might want to start stocking up on ATGMs.


----------



## MilEME09

> *NATO chief makes personal pitch for Canada to join Baltic force to deter Russia
> *
> 
> While Canada is facing a lot of international arm-twisting to join a NATO brigade destined for Eastern Europe, sources are telling CBC News the Trudeau government is hesitating over concerns participation could detract from future peacekeeping missions.
> 
> The military alliance's top official, Jens Stoltenberg, said it's imperative Western nations respond to "a more dangerous security environment" involving Russia in Eastern Europe.
> 
> "I'm glad to see Canada is among several NATO allies which are considering to contribute to this forward presence," Stoltenberg, said in an exclusive interview on CBC News Network's Power & Politics on Thursday.
> 
> He noted that Ottawa has already supplied CF-18 fighter jets for Baltic air policing, a frigate as part of NATO's standing force patrolling the Mediterranean Sea and the Black Sea, as well as a company of soldiers for training exercises in Poland.
> 
> "We are very grateful for the contributions from Canada, which we [have] already received, but we would welcome even more," Stoltenberg told CBC.
> 
> In the aftermath of Russia's annexation of Crimea two years ago, NATO leaders agreed to expand their multinational rapid reaction force to include up to 40,000 troops, who would be on notice to move within a week of a crisis. They also announced plans to create an ultra-mobile brigade of 4,000 soldiers that could get to trouble spots within a couple of days.
> 
> Canada was recently asked to provide troops and lead one of the four battalions that make up the contingent, but the Trudeau government has yet to formally sign off on the proposal.
> 
> The soldiers would likely be stationed in the Baltic, but other Eastern European nations have apparently indicated their willingness to host the brigade.
> Personal pitch
> 
> Stoltenberg made a personal pitch to Canadian Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan in a telephone call last week, according to the sources who have knowledge of the file, but could not speak publicly because of the sensitivity of the matter.
> 
> The proposal, which has apparently been endorsed by Sajjan, was up for discussion at a cabinet sub-committee but has not been given the government's full blessing.
> 
> Concern seems to revolve around the Liberal promise in the last election to put more emphasis on peacekeeping.
> 
> Behind closed doors, the suggestion is that tying the army into a NATO engagement involving several hundred troops might prevent the government from taking on a potential United Nations mission in French West Africa.
> 
> The sources said senior military commanders have indicated they can do both and that involvement with NATO would only last up to nine months.
> 
> The army already has one company of soldiers — just over 150 — training in Eastern Europe and the thinking is it would not be too hard to add an additional company and a headquarters unit.
> 
> Despite that, skepticism remains on the political side with some pointing out the last time the alliance asked for a short-term commitment (in Kandahar), it turned into a five-year combat mission, with an additional 2½-year training detachment in Kabul.
> Caution justified
> 
> The political apprehension is well founded, said Steve Saideman, an international affairs professor at Ottawa's Carleton University.
> 
> "Anybody who is saying this is temporary is missing the boat," said Saideman, an expert on NATO.
> 
> By creating the brigade, NATO's intention is to establish a "persistent" presence in Eastern Europe in order to hold Russia at bay. It is reassuring jittery allies, many of them new members of the alliance and former East Bloc countries.
> 
> Whatever countries agree to in the coming weeks, it should be understood it will be for the "foreseeable future," he said.
> 
> Saideman also added that the Liberal government put a lot of emphasis in last fall's election on winning a UN Security Council seat and a commitment to NATO "doesn't move the needle" on that endeavour.
> 
> The final troop commitments will be revealed at the upcoming leaders summit in Warsaw, Stoltenberg said.
> 
> "This is a very strong and firm response, but it is also a measured response. We don't want a new Cold War. We don't want to provoke a conflict, but we want to prevent the conflict. That's exactly what we are doing."
> Defence spending
> 
> Under the Harper government, Canada came in for a tongue-lashing on the issue of defence spending. Following the Afghan war, the budget for National Defence was trimmed — leaving the country spending approximately one per cent of its gross domestic product on the military — or about half the NATO benchmark.
> 
> "I've told Canada the same as I've told all other allies, who are spending less than two per cent. We have to stop the cuts and we gradually have to increase the defence spending," Stoltenberg told CBC News.
> 
> "Canada has actually stopped the cuts and I welcome that very much."



http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/nato-canada-stoltenberg-1.3639014


----------



## Journeyman

MilEME09 said:
			
		

> NATO chief makes personal pitch for Canada to join Baltic force


And with badge man LGen Hainse off to NATO HQ Brussels this summer as Canadian Military Representative, it all falls into place (except of course, it doesn't fit in with the PMs mythologized vision of peacekeeping)


----------



## PuckChaser

Campaign promises get in the way of real world issues again. Oh to be able to hide my head in the sand like Trudeau.


----------



## Altair

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Campaign promises get in the way of real world issues again. Oh to be able to hide my head in the sand like Trudeau.


Hey, I think we are missing something here.

Trudeau is looking to send troops overseas in one capacity or another. I for one cannot wait, and don't care which.


----------



## MARS

Altair said:
			
		

> Hey, I think we are missing something here.
> 
> Trudeau is looking to send troops overseas in one capacity or another. I for one cannot wait, and don't care which.


This.

This is a perfect example of what plagues this country: the vast majority of the general public doesn't care about foreign policy, and knows even less about it.  They are too busy keeping up with the Kardashians to actually care about boring stuff like Canada's strategic interests or insisting the government makes a considered and informed decision when sending men and women into harms way.

I am really struggling to see how a deployment to West Africa furthers those interests.  

Remember that meme from years ago, the pic of the troops on patrol, with the caption "Canada isn't at war.  These guys are at war.  Canada is at the mall."

Your post is that meme.


----------



## The Bread Guy

Altair said:
			
		

> Trudeau is looking to send troops overseas in one capacity or another.


But if I had to bet a loony, I'd guess he & Team Red were thinking more this ...





... and not so much this:






			
				MARS said:
			
		

> ... the vast majority of the general public doesn't care about foreign policy, and knows even less about it.  They are too busy keeping up with the Kardashians to actually care about boring stuff like Canada's strategic interests or insisting the government makes a considered and informed decision when sending men and women into harms way ...


Hence, the government(s) we get  :nod:


----------



## dimsum

Altair said:
			
		

> Trudeau is looking to send troops overseas in one capacity or another. I for one cannot wait, and don't care which.



I'm not sure if you're being serious or not, and I'm hoping/wishing that you are thinking beyond "ooh...this would be a great tax-free deployment".


----------



## Journeyman

Dimsum said:
			
		

> I'm not sure if you're being serious or not, and I'm hoping/wishing that you are thinking beyond "ooh...this would be a great tax-free deployment".


I have no doubt that the thought is serious.  I also agree with MARS that thought is lacking at any level regarding a strategic rationale.

For the government, it's about "being seen to contribute";  for some of the troops, I've no doubt it's "I don't care where, I just need to get _any_  deployment ribbon on my DEU so I can stop looking at my watch when anyone mentions 'time in.'     Neither of which is good.   :not-again:


----------



## Colin Parkinson

Minimal armour, almost no ATGM's, no SPG's, no ADA and little training to fight a peer opponent. Ugh  [:'(


----------



## MilEME09

Colin P said:
			
		

> Minimal armour, almost no ATGM's, no SPG's, no ADA and little training to fight a peer opponent. Ugh  [:'(



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5_XYb3AWK58

all of this has happened before, and it will happen again


----------



## Altair

MARS said:
			
		

> This.
> 
> This is a perfect example of what plagues this country: the vast majority of the general public doesn't care about foreign policy, and knows even less about it.  They are too busy keeping up with the Kardashians to actually care about boring stuff like Canada's strategic interests or insisting the government makes a considered and informed decision when sending men and women into harms way.
> 
> I am really struggling to see how a deployment to West Africa furthers those interests.
> 
> Remember that meme from years ago, the pic of the troops on patrol, with the caption "Canada isn't at war.  These guys are at war.  Canada is at the mall."
> 
> Your post is that meme.


To hell with the Canadian public. This is strictly personal.

I will cut off my left nut to go anywhere not called Petawawa or wainwright.

If that's peacekeeping so be it, if it's being a part of a rapid reaction force in eastern Europe so be it. I don't give a damn, let's just do something!


----------



## Altair

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> But if I had to bet a loony, I'd guess he & Team Red were thinking more this ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ... and not so much this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hence, the government(s) we get  :nod:


Wrong. 

Trudeau is thinking that.

Altair is thinking either of those pictures is a vast improvement over the training area and make work jobs on base.


----------



## Altair

Journeyman said:
			
		

> I have no doubt that the thought is serious.  I also agree with MARS that thought is lacking at any level regarding a strategic rationale.
> 
> For the government, it's about "being seen to contribute";  for some of the troops, I've no doubt it's "I don't care where, I just need to get _any_  deployment ribbon on my DEU so I can stop looking at my watch when anyone mentions 'time in.'     Neither of which is good.   :not-again:


nailed it.


----------



## dimsum

Altair said:
			
		

> To hell with the Canadian public. This is strictly personal.
> 
> I will cut off my left nut to go anywhere not called Petawawa or wainwright.



Sounds like a great reason for a VOT.  I suggest any of the aircrew trades.


----------



## Sub_Guy

Dimsum said:
			
		

> Sounds like a great reason for a VOT.  I suggest any of the aircrew trades.



Where is 427 Sqn and 450 Sqn located?   Petawawa?   

I'll suggest VOT to AES Op.  There are no positions for AES Ops in either of those shit holes.


----------



## Altair

Stop poaching, my career manager doesn't appreciate it.

No, I would just rather the goverment send me somewhere, anywhere out of this country. I've seen enough training bases, done enough training recleaned enough tents because there isn't jack all else to do.

Peacekeeping? Sure

Rapid reaction force? Sure

Screw foreign policy, screw the public,  hell, screw trudeau. Just send me somewhere.


----------



## YZT580

Altair, you do not want to send anyone to Africa.  Can you say Somali?  It is an infested hellhole that is guaranteed to eat troops and there is nothing to gain.  They have been either killing each other or selling each other into slavery for 600 years or more.  A few white faces will not stop these things from happening.


----------



## Altair

YZT580 said:
			
		

> Altair, you do not want to send anyone to Africa.  Can you say Somali?  It is an infested hellhole that is guaranteed to eat troops and there is nothing to gain.  They have been either killing each other or selling each other into slavery for 600 years or more.  A few white faces will not stop these things from happening.


two points on that. One, a cording to the article it making it sound like french west Africa,  so one notch above the utter crap hole Somalia is.

Two, good thing I'm not white.


----------



## cupper

Altair said:
			
		

> Stop poaching, my career manager doesn't appreciate it.
> 
> No, I would just rather the goverment send me somewhere, anywhere out of this country. I've seen enough training bases, done enough training recleaned enough tents because there isn't jack all else to do.
> 
> Peacekeeping? Sure
> 
> Rapid reaction force? Sure
> 
> Screw foreign policy, screw the public,  hell, screw trudeau. Just send me somewhere.



Just be careful of what you wish for.

I'm sure there is an embassy posting in some far of out of the way boring shit hole if you really wanted to get out country bad enough.


----------



## CBH99

Troops don't join the military so you can clean tents, clean rifles, and not going anywhere or do anything.

A foreign posting is what people join for.  Peacekeeping.  Warfighting.  Rapid Reaction.  Disaster Relief.  I don't think it really matters all that much - being able to actually DO your job is what keeps people in, not training in some remote location on the same lessons for the 100th time.


----------



## jollyjacktar

"Screw Trudeau",  Altair??  What about the Sunny Ways?  That doesn't sound very sunny...


----------



## cupper

CBH99 said:
			
		

> Troops don't join the military so you can clean tents, clean rifles, and not going anywhere or do anything.
> 
> A foreign posting is what people join for.  Peacekeeping.  Warfighting.  Rapid Reaction.  Disaster Relief.  I don't think it really matters all that much - being able to actually DO your job is what keeps people in, not training in some remote location on the same lessons for the 100th time.



That pretty much sums up my career as a reservist in the 80's.  :nod:


----------



## PuckChaser

Doing shit jobs in Poland sure as heck sounds better than shit jobs in Petawawa, right? Going somewhere to stand around isn't a deployment. You want to go somewhere, put a NOI in for CANSOF. Seems like those dudes, Auroras and the RCN in the Med are the only ones in the game right now, doing work against bad guys. Being able to check off "places visited" on Facebook isn't a reason to join every task that isn't combat.


----------



## Teager

Altair I will never forget when I first got to Afghanistan. A Cpl from the PPCLI that was on the out going tour told me he hopes I have a super boring tour and don't have to leave base. Unfortunately that didn't happen and I now understand why he said that. 

So for me as bored as you are right now I'm glad your not in some crap hole of a country with risk to you and your buddies. Remember things could always be worse. If you and others are put in harms way let it be necessary or as PuckChaser mentioned go CANSOF.


----------



## Altair

CBH99 said:
			
		

> Troops don't join the military so you can clean tents, clean rifles, and not going anywhere or do anything.
> 
> A foreign posting is what people join for.  Peacekeeping.  Warfighting.  Rapid Reaction.  Disaster Relief.  I don't think it really matters all that much - being able to actually DO your job is what keeps people in, not training in some remote location on the same lessons for the 100th time.


This. So much this.


----------



## CBH99

Doing crap jobs in Poland actually sounds way cooler than doing crap jobs in Petawawa!

At least if your screwing the dog in Poland, you can get some travel & cultural experiences in.  As for training, it's always beneficial to train with allies and become familiar with each other's concerns, tactics, strategies, equipment, etc.

I do agree with Teager.  If your going to be put into a potently dangerous situation, it better be worth it.  That being said, there are plenty of interesting things that the troops can do that are a) interesting enough to keep them interested in a military career, b) enhance the lives of people around the world, and c) aren't putting your lives on the line the same way Afghanistan did.

Look at how busy recruiting was during 2001-2011 with Afghanistan and compare it to today.  People join the military to do unique things, travel, and be busy helping to make the world a better place (regardless of what form that may take.)


----------



## PuckChaser

Travel and experiences until some idiot gets drunk and arrested and ruins it for everyone.

People joined during the Afghan war because it was a war, and they wanted to do their job for real, instead of pretending all the time.

Do I want to deploy again? Absolutely. Do I want to deploy to NATO's 6 month long version of MAPLE RESOLVE? Extremely less keen.


----------



## dimsum

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Travel and experiences until some idiot gets drunk and arrested and ruins it for everyone.
> 
> People joined during the Afghan war because it was a war, and they wanted to do their job for real, instead of pretending all the time.
> 
> Do I want to deploy again? Absolutely. Do I want to deploy to NATO's 6 month long version of MAPLE RESOLVE? Extremely less keen.



Agreed.


----------



## QV

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Travel and experiences until some idiot gets drunk and arrested and ruins it for everyone.
> 
> People joined during the Afghan war because it was a war, and they wanted to do their job for real, instead of pretending all the time.
> 
> Do I want to deploy again? Absolutely. Do I want to deploy to NATO's 9-12 month long version of MAPLE RESOLVE? Extremely less keen.



Ftfy


----------



## Altair

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Travel and experiences until some idiot gets drunk and arrested and ruins it for everyone.
> 
> People joined during the Afghan war because it was a war, and they wanted to do their job for real, instead of pretending all the time.
> 
> Do I want to deploy again? Absolutely. Do I want to deploy to NATO's 6 month long version of MAPLE RESOLVE? Extremely less keen.


way to dampen it...

Almost makes a peacekeeping mission sound more appealing


----------



## PuckChaser

Altair said:
			
		

> way to dampen it...
> 
> Almost makes a peacekeeping mission sound more appealing


Big fan of going someplace and watching genocide and the ROE prevents anyone stopping it. Or getting shot at and having to ask for ID before returning fire...


----------



## jollyjacktar

Ah, the innocence of youth.  It would be pleasing to be filled with the fire of not knowing what is out there...until that gets beaten out of you.


----------



## Altair

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Big fan of going someplace and watching genocide and the ROE prevents anyone stopping it. Or getting shot at and having to ask for ID before returning fire...


Doesn't look like much genocide in French west Africa,  more like securing the region against Islamic militants.

No idea what the ROEs are but the french don't look like they are asking for I'd before firing back.


----------



## PuckChaser

Fighting ISIL in Africa is not Peacekeeping in the sense Trudeau wants. He wants blue berets and no weapons. Nice, "safe" missions that are big on photo ops, but short on any element of risk or effectiveness. There's a reason third world countries are the peacekeeping leaders, free rations and UN pay.


----------



## Altair

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Fighting ISIL in Africa is not Peacekeeping in the sense Trudeau wants. He wants blue berets and no weapons. Nice, "safe" missions that are big on photo ops, but short on any element of risk or effectiveness. There's a reason third world countries are the peacekeeping leaders, free rations and UN pay.


If MILEME09 cbc article is to be believes then trudeau is looking french west Africa. 

There a 4 missions currently in westeen africa.

10320 in Mali.

7511 in the ivory coast.

5869 in liberia.

216 in western Sahara. 

http://www.cfr.org/peacekeeping/peace-operations-africa/p9333

Which of these would be considered french west Africa? I know which one I would bet on, but that could just be me.


----------



## PuckChaser

From your link:



> How effective are peacekeeping operations?
> 
> Peacekeeping missions have had mixed results in Africa. Those that took place nearly a decade ago in West Africa in cooperation with ECOWAS—in Liberia, Sierra Leone, and Ivory Coast—are widely hailed as successes, whereas current missions to CAR, DRC, Mali, South Sudan, and Darfur, have not improved stability. “These missions have failed largely because they were deployed in a context of ongoing war where the belligerents themselves did not want to stop fighting or preying on civilians,” says Williams. He says that these missions have nonetheless managed to protect many civilians and reduced some of the worst consequences of civil war.
> 
> Peacekeepers have come under fire for failing to intervene at critical moments: The UN’s 2014 internal investigation found that peacekeepers only responded to one in five cases in which civilians were threatened and that they failed to use force in the ten deadliest attacks on civilians between 2010 and 2013. A 2014 Human Rights Watch report claims that UN peacekeepers and Congolese forces failed to prevent an attack in the DRC that left at least thirty civilians dead. In other cases, peacekeeping forces have been accused of commiting human rights abuses: AU peacekeepers were implicated in the disappearances of eleven people in CAR in 2014, and French peacekeepers are under investigation for sexual assault there.



If we want to do nothing, we go to Ivory Coast or Liberia. If we want to be targetted by ISIL, we go to Mali. With our limited troops, we're not going to change the direction of these doomed missions, and AU definitely does not want white Western peacekeepers there. Sub-saharan Africa is a quagmire even worse than Iraq/Afghanistan, and I really hope we steer clear of that place.


----------



## Altair

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> From your link:
> 
> If we want to do nothing, we go to Ivory Coast or Liberia. If we want to be targetted by ISIL, we go to Mali. With our limited troops, we're not going to change the direction of these doomed missions, and AU definitely does not want white Western peacekeepers there. Sub-saharan Africa is a quagmire even worse than Iraq/Afghanistan, and I really hope we steer clear of that place.


Would you rather polish maple resolve for 6-12 months at a time for years to come?


----------



## PuckChaser

Altair said:
			
		

> Would you rather polish maple resolve for 6-12 months at a time for years to come?



Then watch genocide and human suffering and be unable to help because the UN castrates its forces when deployed? My long-term mental health begs me to say yes, I've seen a few too many friends still suffering from Somalia and Rwanda.


----------



## Altair

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Then watch genocide and human suffering and be unable to help because the UN castrates its forces when deployed? My long-term mental health begs me to say yes, I've seen a few too many friends still suffering from Somalia and Rwanda.


Don't know of any genocide in Mali.


----------



## dimsum

Altair said:
			
		

> Don't know of any genocide in Mali.





> 1 February 2013 – A senior United Nations official today warned of the risk of reprisal attacks against Tuareg and Arab civilians in various regions of northern Mali and urged the country’s military to protect all citizens regardless of their ethnic affiliation.
> 
> “While the liberation of towns once under the control of the rebel and extremist groups has brought hope to the populations of northern Mali, I am deeply concerned at the risk of reprisal attacks against ethnic Tuareg and Arab civilians,” the UN Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide, Adama Dieng, said in a statement.
> 
> Fighting between Government forces and Tuareg rebels broke out in northern Mali last January, after which radical Islamists seized control of the area. The conflict uprooted thousands of people and prompted the Malian Government to request military assistance from France to stop the progression of extremist groups.



http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=44058


----------



## Altair

Dimsum said:
			
		

> http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=44058


Yeah, and nothing since operation Serval. 

So I'll rephrase,  I don't know of any current genocide in mali.


----------



## Good2Golf

Dolphin_Hunter said:
			
		

> Where is 427 Sqn and 450 Sqn located?   Petawawa?
> 
> I'll suggest VOT to AES Op.  There are no positions for AES Ops in either of those shit holes.



But Pet is 25 minutes away from the Pembroke Mall!  ;D


----------



## dimsum

Altair said:
			
		

> Yeah, and nothing since operation Serval.
> 
> So I'll rephrase,  I don't know of any current genocide in mali.



Just because the world media has moved on doesn't mean it's not still happening.  How much do you hear about Somalia, DRC, and all those ongoing conflicts these days?


----------



## Altair

Dimsum said:
			
		

> Just because the world media has moved on doesn't mean it's not still happening.  How much do you hear about Somalia, DRC, and all those ongoing conflicts these days?


Congo I hear about on occasion. Somalia not so much. Usually even if major media has moved on the UN will still make a point to point it out. That hasn't happened at all recently.

On a whole though, i think more genocide is happening in isil held areas than in french west Africa. 

Again, just in case people think I want UN peacekeeping over being part of a NATO tripwire force, I don't care which one trudeau decides on, just send me somewhere.


----------



## dimsum

Altair said:
			
		

> Again, just in case people think I want UN peacekeeping over being part of a NATO tripwire force, *I don't care which one trudeau decides on, just send me somewhere.
> *



I wasn't being snarky when I suggested VOT to aircrew (esp AESOP).  If your trade isn't working out for you, it is definitely an option and AESOPs definitely travel to all sorts of places.  I'm sure any AESOP on here or in person will back me up on that..


----------



## PuckChaser

Altair said:
			
		

> Again, just in case people think I want UN peacekeeping over being part of a NATO tripwire force, I don't care which one trudeau decides on, just send me somewhere.



If your profile is right and you're a Signaller: If something sustained happens, you'll have more deployments than you know what to do with. Look at the guys around HQ&Sigs with 4 rotation bars.


----------



## observor 69

Dimsum said:
			
		

> I wasn't being snarky when I suggested VOT to aircrew (esp AESOP).  If your trade isn't working out for you, it is definitely an option and AESOPs definitely travel to all sorts of places.  I'm sure any AESOP on here or in person will back me up on that..



One of the better trades in the military "IMHO." Great place for a smart soldier looking to get ahead:
Airborne Electronic Sensor Operator


----------



## Journeyman

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> If your profile is right and you're a Signaller: If something sustained happens, you'll have more deployments than you know what to do with. Look at the guys around HQ&Sigs with 4 rotation bars.


Back when the earth was cooling (I read)...pretty much everyone in the Army had a Cyprus ribbon and a CD.....except for all of these Jimmy Cpls, with three rows of medals --- because they went EVERYWHERE.

Not sure what changed.


----------



## PuckChaser

There was only one place to go for the last 10 years.  ;D


----------



## Journeyman

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> There was only one place to go for the last 10 years.  ;D


But "back in the day" every peacekeeping operation included Sigs (as the only folks [not just Canadians]) who could establish HF comms.  No Canadians deployed without Sigs.  

Tangent:  maybe you folks made yourselves TOO special and got trumped by e-mail to UNHQ NY    :dunno:


----------



## PuckChaser

Might coincide with Sigs pretending HF wasn't important anymore. Concur with the email comment. I remember phone calls home with my Dad through a HAM radio patch. "Technology".


----------



## Good2Golf

[tamgent conntinues]

I've used HF on more than a few occasions to make ops life a little more functional. HF is definitely an UNDERAPPRCIATED art! :nod:

[back to people about to get what they may think they want for the time being...]


----------



## jollyjacktar

I have to agree, any of the "HQ and Pigs, Jimmies" I knew back in the day were going everywhere and not just where the CF was going either.  They were accompanying the PM on trips to Africa etc.  If anything, they were wishing they were not being tasked so much.


----------



## medicineman

I looked after 79 Comm Regt for a couple years in the late 90's before they were disbanded - the Rapid Deployment Squadron was called "Rapid Divorce Sqn" because the folks were usually 6 in/6 out or 3 in/3 out of Bosnia, Central African Republic, Kosovo, and all other little shyte holes in the world except for the Golan, which was a CFJSR task IIRC.  The folks in 1 Line Sqn were tasked away roughly 300 days of the year on jobs, projects and deployments.

It annoyed more than a few people that they were getting burned out when there were about 800 operators/techs over at CFJSR spinning on their thumbs that were grovelling for deployments...they soon got reintegrated into the Regiment a little before I was posted in 2002.

MM


----------



## MilEME09

> Canada must do more to help NATO combat Russian threat, Mulroney says
> 
> 
> 
> Robert Fife
> 
> OTTAWA — The Globe and Mail
> 
> Published Monday, Jun. 20, 2016 7:30PM EDT
> 
> Last updated Monday, Jun. 20, 2016 7:30PM EDT
> 
> Former prime minister Brian Mulroney says the Trudeau government should choose the very best fighter jet to confront the growing threat from Russia as he urged Canada to play a more forceful role within NATO and the United Nations.
> 
> In a prepared text for a major foreign policy speech to the NATO Association of Canada on Monday night, Mr. Mulroney warned that Russian President Vladimir Putin is attempting to create a new Eurasian union dependent on Moscow.
> 
> “The primary challenge now is to thwart further expansion by Russia and to ensure that those NATO members that border Russia, especially Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, remain secure and firmly under NATO’s wing,” he said.
> 
> NATO is scrambling to contain the threat by stationing four battalions of troops in the Baltic countries, but more needs to be done, Mr. Mulroney said.
> 
> “Canada is being invited to contribute troops in some way and, in my view, we should respond positively,” he said. “We need to be equipped and ready, as necessary, to preserve our values.”
> 
> Mr. Mulroney said Canada should double defence spending to 2 per cent of GDP.
> 
> “The simple reality is that if Canada expects NATO to do more on global security, we must decide to do more for NATO. That should be a top defence priority. What we cannot do is talk about Canada ‘being back’ in the world without making tangible commitments that will anchor our aspirations,” he said.
> 
> Mr. Mulroney was sharply critical of the Liberal government’s‎ waffling on an open competition for a new fighter jet. During the election campaign, Justin Trudeau promised to reject the former Conservative government’s favoured aircraft, the F-35 stealth jet, which 11 western allies have now bought.
> 
> The government is considering Super Hornets as an interim replacement for the aging CF-18s‎.
> 
> “We need new fighter aircraft, but most of all, we need a decision on what we will buy to serve our strategic needs, not an interim purchase driven by political considerations that risk repeating the helicopter fiasco,” Mr. Mulroney said.
> 
> The former prime minister noted the problems that happened in the 1990s, when the Chrétien Liberals succeeded the Mulroney Conservatives and cancelled their $4.4-billion purchase of EH-101 helicopters. Mr. Chrétien’s decision cost taxpayers half a billion dollars in penalties. The government ended up buying the same helicopters, but the costs had then risen to $7.6-billion.
> 
> U.S. defence giant Lockheed Martin has already said Canada could lose $825-million in aerospace contracts that were signed with Canadian companies to build equipment for the F-35 jets if the Liberal government buys the Super Hornets.
> 
> Mr. Mulroney said Canada should follow the Australian model and set up an independent, arms-length agency to handle major defence procurement through an open bidding process.
> 
> He also urged Mr. Trudeau to join the U.S. anti-ballisic missile defence system to protect Canada from countries such as North Korea that are heavily investing in long-range nuclear missile capability.
> 
> “We cannot subcontract our responsibility to national security to our southern neighbour, no matter how secure we may believe ourselves to be relying exclusively on American continental security,” he said.
> 
> Mr. Mulroney supported Mr. Trudeau’s plans to be more engaged in UN peacekeeping and to play a more prominent role in the world body.
> 
> The UN is in urgent need of an overhaul in its personnel policies, and requires much tighter accountability, Mr. Mulroney said.
> 
> “Since Cana‎da remains the 7th-largest contributor of funds to the UN and its agencies, we should move beyond fuzzy sentiments and position ourselves in the vanguard of those seeking genuine reform at the UN,” he said.



http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/canada-must-do-more-to-help-nato-combat-russian-threat-mulroney-says/article30531861/?click=sf_globefb


----------



## Altair

MilEME09 said:
			
		

> http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/canada-must-do-more-to-help-nato-combat-russian-threat-mulroney-says/article30531861/?click=sf_globefb


Defense spending at 2 percent of gdp would be beyond amazing. 

It will never happen.


----------



## The Bread Guy

Meanwhile (highlights mine) ...


> Russia is pushing back against NATO calls for Canada to help lead a new military force in Eastern Europe, describing the measure as “a complete waste of money and resources.”
> 
> The new force will be a central focus when Prime Minister Justin Trudeau meets his NATO counterparts in Poland next month. The alliance wants to station 4,000 troops across Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland as a bulwark against Russian expansion or aggression.
> 
> *The U.S., Britain and Germany have each promised to lead one battalion of about 1,000 troops, and allies have been actively pushing Canada to take command of the fourth. Cabinet ministers are believed to have discussed the request Monday and an announcement is expected soon.*
> 
> *In a sharply worded statement, however, the Russian embassy in Ottawa said the NATO force risks distracting from “the real existential threat” facing Canada and Russia: ISIL and terrorism.
> 
> “We believe that NATO build-up on Russia’s doorstep, which is reminiscent of Cold War sabre-rattling, is a complete waste of money and resources, diverting them from the real existential threat of international terrorism,” it says.
> 
> “Given that terrorists make no distinction between Russians and Canadians, as well as reports claiming 151 nationals of Canada are on an ISIS ‘kill list,’ common sense and pragmatism dictate the need to join efforts, as opposed to reincarnation of Cold War containment.”* ...


----------



## Kirkhill

Might resonate more strongly if Russia weren't killing the people killing ISIL.


----------



## The Bread Guy

Chris Pook said:
			
		

> Might resonate more strongly if Russia weren't killing the people killing ISIL.


Or at least some of them - but hey, it's the U.S.'s fault for not sharing _all_ their marked maps with Russia, right?

Funny how that gets lost in a lot of media coverage/debate - a bit messier than the old Fulda Gap red-and-blue map, indeed.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver

Chris Pook said:
			
		

> Might resonate more strongly if Russia weren't killing the people killing ISIL.



Or occupying nearby peninsulas that don't belong to them.  :nod:


----------



## The Bread Guy

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> Or occupying nearby peninsulas that don't belong to them.  :nod:


<Boris Badinov accent>
"But it's ALWAYS belonged to us -- just ask us!"
</Boris Badinov accent>


----------



## CougarKing

Rocky and Bullwinkle aside and Boris Badinov aside...  [

Meanwhile the USAF sends F22s to the Black Sea region:

*US sends F-22 warplanes to the Black Sea*

Source: Business Insider (Facebook page)


----------



## The Bread Guy

Russia, last week:   :tsktsk:


> A senior Russian diplomat on Wednesday warned NATO not to build up its naval forces in the Black Sea, saying such a move would undermine regional security and Moscow’s already frayed ties with the alliance.
> 
> Russian state media reported earlier this month that the USS Porter, a U.S. naval destroyer, had entered the Black Sea on a routine deployment, a move it said raised hackles in Moscow because it had recently been fitted with a new missile system.
> 
> Under the Montreux Convention, countries which don’t have a Black Sea coastline cannot keep their warships there for more than 21 days. NATO members Turkey, Romania and Bulgaria are all Black Sea Basin countries.
> 
> Russia, which annexed Ukraine’s Crimea in 2014, has its own Black Sea Fleet based at Sevastopol.
> 
> “If a decision is made to create a permanent force, of course, it would be destabilising, because this is not a NATO sea,” Russian news agencies quoted Andrei Kelin, a senior Foreign Ministry official, as saying ...


----------



## CougarKing

Although not military,  don't the Icelandic Coast Guard and their police force still count as some sort of security force?

Defense News



> *Iceland Authorizes Return of US Troops Amid Russian Threat*
> Agence France-Presse 12:03 p.m. EDT June 30, 2016
> 
> REYKJAVIK, Iceland — Washington and Reykjavik have signed a deal authorizing the occasional return of US forces to Iceland — a NATO member with no military of its own — amid rising tensions with Moscow, Iceland's foreign ministry said Thursday.
> 
> "The security environment in Europe, including in the North Atlantic, has changed for the past 10 years, and Icelandic and US authorities agree on the need to reflect this in a new declaration," Iceland's Foreign Minister Lilja Alfredsdottir said in a statement. "In particular, we want, in this new declaration, to highlight the rotational presence of US military forces in Iceland, which constitutes a gradation in our cooperation."
> 
> The United States has guaranteed Iceland's defense since 1951 following an agreement between the two countries.
> 
> (...SNIPPED)


----------



## CBH99

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> Russia, last week:   :tsktsk:





To be fair, I believe Russia has a point.

The west has built up military forces right up to Russia's borders, and has warships regularly patrolling the Black Sea.  This is traditional Russian territory, within their traditional geographical sphere of influence.

And yet when Russian military forces intercept or even come near our forces - which are parked right near the Russian border - our media has a storm with it.

I'm sure if Russian naval ships were patrolling just off the coast of Vancouver Island, we'd probably have some folks to meet them there.  

It seems to me that NATO is just as guilty of building tensions in the region as Russia is, whether we want to admit that to ourselves or not.


----------



## CougarKing

An update that goes with the parallel thread on Canada sending troops to Latvia for new NATO brigade thread.

Defense News



> *NATO Agrees On E. European Rotational Troops At Warsaw Summit*
> Jaroslaw Adamowski, Defense News 1:44 p.m. EDT July 8, 2016
> 
> 
> WARSAW, Poland — NATO leaders agreed to deploy four multinational battalions to Poland and the three Baltic States in a bid to show the alliance’s readiness to contain an increasingly bellicose Russia. The plan was agreed July 8 at the summit in Poland’s capital Warsaw.
> 
> NATO will deploy troops to Poland, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia with the aim to strengthen the alliance’s military presence on its eastern flank.
> 
> (...SNIPPED)


----------



## Kirkhill

CBH99 said:
			
		

> To be fair, I believe Russia has a point.
> 
> The west has built up military forces right up to Russia's borders, and has warships regularly patrolling the Black Sea.  This is traditional Russian territory, within their traditional geographical sphere of influence.
> 
> And yet when Russian military forces intercept or even come near our forces - which are parked right near the Russian border - our media has a storm with it.
> 
> I'm sure if Russian naval ships were patrolling just off the coast of Vancouver Island, we'd probably have some folks to meet them there.
> 
> It seems to me that NATO is just as guilty of building tensions in the region as Russia is, whether we want to admit that to ourselves or not.



The problem is: what is the appropriate response to the combined threat of external subversion (by means of exploiting minority discontent) and little green men volunteering to show up on their holidays with tanks and MRLs?

If you won't abide by the rules then you can't expect people to put much faith in you.


----------



## cupper

S.M.A. said:
			
		

> Rocky and Bullwinkle aside and Boris Badinov aside...  [
> 
> Meanwhile the USAF sends F22s to the Black Sea region:
> 
> *US sends F-22 warplanes to the Black Sea*
> 
> Source: Business Insider (Facebook page)



Didn't see that coming.  [


----------



## MarkOttawa

USAF B-2s to Arctic over Norwegian Sea:



> B-2 stealth bombers just flew their first Arctic missions, and it’s an unmistakable message to Russia
> 
> *Three US B-2 Spirit stealth bombers flew an extended sortie over the Norwegian Sea, a strategically important space in the increasing tensions with Russia.
> *The B-2s, part of the 509th Bomb Wing from Whiteman Air Force Base in Missouri, also made their first visit to Iceland last month and flew with Royal Air Force F-35s, the first time B-2s had flown with foreign F-35s.
> 
> In a clear message to Russian forces, three US B-2 Spirit stealth bombers flew an extended sortie over the Arctic Circle for the first time on Sept. 5, the Air Force’s 509th Bomb Wing confirmed to Insider.
> 
> “This familiarization was the B-2’s first mission this far north in the European theater,” according to a Facebook post from the US Air Forces in Europe and Air Forces Africa.
> 
> Details about the sortie over the Norwegian Sea are scarce, but the aircraft involved completed a night refueling over the Arctic Circle as part of Bomber Task Force Europe. In March, Norway accused Russia of jamming its GPS systems and interfering in encrypted communications systems.
> 
> “Training outside the U.S. enables aircrew and Airmen to become familiar with other theaters and airspace, and enhances enduring skills and relationships necessary to confront a broad range of global challenges,” US Air Force spokesman Capt. Christopher Bowyer-Meeder told Insider.
> 
> _Read More: Stunning photos show US Air Force B-2 stealth bombers training with British F-35 fighters for the first time_ https://www.businessinsider.com/british-f35s-air-force-b2s-train-together-first-time-2019-8
> 
> The B-2s are part of the 509th Bomb Wing from Whiteman Air Force Base in Missouri. They are _deployed to Royal Air Force Base Fairford near Gloucestershire, England where last month they flew with non-US F-35s for the first time. RAF Fairford is the forward operating location for US Air Force in Europe’s bombers.
> 
> Four KC-135 Stratotanker aircraft from the 100th Air Refueling Wing stationed at RAF Mildenhall joined the B-2s on the mission over the Norwegian Sea_ [emphasis added].
> 
> A spokesperson from the 509th Bomb Wing told Insider that no other NATO aircraft were involved in the mission, and the bombers did not have any ammunition on board.
> 
> Last month, the B-2 also made its very first visit to Iceland, establishing the Air Force’s presence in a region Russia considers its dominion. Iceland’s Keflavik Air Base was established during the Cold War as a deterrent to the Soviet Union, and the B-2s’ brief stopoff there demonstrated its ability to operate in cold-weather conditions.
> 
> In the past year, US forces have completed several missions from the region to deter Russian aggression against NATO allies, including B-52 training near the Crimean Peninsula, which Russia forcibly took in 2014. That aggression kicked off the European Deterrance Initiative to ensure quick reaction to threats and assure NATO allies of the US’s commitment to defense.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _A B-2 Spirit assigned to Whiteman AFB, Missouri, approaches to receive fuel from a KC-135 Stratotanker assigned to RAF Mildenhall over the Norwegian Sea, Sept. 5, 2019. This was an extended duration flight that proved the B-2’s ability to operate in the Arctic circle.
> Staff Sgt. Jordan Castelan /US Air Force / DVIDS_
> https://www.businessinsider.sg/b-2-stealth-bomber-flew-first-sortie-over-the-arctic-2019-9/



Mark
Ottawa


----------



## GR66

If the Americans were smart they'd simply fly their tankers up in the region then put out a press release that the stealth bombers did a sortie there.  It would drive the Russians nuts trying how to figure out how to track the totally invisible bombers!


----------



## The Bread Guy

GR66 said:
			
		

> If the Americans were smart they'd simply fly their tankers up in the region then put out a press release that the stealth bombers did a sortie there.  It would drive the Russians nuts trying how to figure out how to track the totally invisible bombers!


----------



## Cloud Cover

Great. You just solved the RCAF fighter replacement dilemma.


----------

