Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Ellapennella

NATO Deploys Troops

39 posts in this topic

NATO Deploys Troops Within 35 Miles of Russia's Kaliningrad Enclave

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Estonia? If so they do this every year for training exersies and reasuring the baltic states.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Mr.United_Nations said:

Estonia? If so they do this every year for training exersies and reasuring the baltic states.

Why do they do it for? Is there a reason?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Published on Apr 13, 2017

www.undergroundworldnews.com
Poland on Thursday welcomed the first U.S. troops in a multi-national force which is being posted across the Baltic region to counter potential threats from Russia.

More than 1,100 soldiers -- 900 U.S. troops as well as 150 British and 120 Romanians -- are to be deployed in Orzysz, about 57 km (35 miles) south of Russia's Baltic Sea enclave of Kaliningrad, where Moscow has stationed nuclear-capable missiles and an S-400 air missile defense system.

Three other formations are due to become operational by June across the region.

"Deploying of these troops to Poland is a clear demonstration of NATO's unity and resolve and sends a clear message to any potential aggressor," NATO Supreme Allied Commander Europe, General Curtis Scaparrotti, said at a welcoming ceremony for the first arrivals at Orzysz, 220 km (140 miles) northeast of the capital Warsaw.

Learn More:
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-nat...

NATO deploys troops to Poland while concerns about country's army rise

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Mr.United_Nations said:

Estonia? If so they do this every year for training exersies and reasuring the baltic states.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

8 hours ago, Ellapennella said:

Why do they do it for? Is there a reason?

Well, it is trying to justify the purpose of it's existence: War with Russia.

And with Trump's sudden change of heart on NATO, this is likely to continue for years to come.

Edited by TruthSeeker_
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

15 hours ago, Ellapennella said:

Why do they do it for? Is there a reason?

The same reason Russia fly into our airspace and sail warships of our coast, 'don't mess with us' though i don't agree with poking the 'Bear'.

Edited by hetrodoxly
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, hetrodoxly said:

The same reason Russia fly into our airspace and sail warships of our coast, 'don't mess with us' though i don't agree with poking the 'Bear'.

Do you think we would have been in war with Russia already if President Trump did not win? It's very possible, right? Do you know anything much about McMasters? I'm hearing negative things about  him & Petraeus and all that is going on .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

13 hours ago, TruthSeeker_ said:

Well, it is trying to justify the purpose of it's existence: War with Russia.

And with Trump's sudden change of heart on NATO, this is likely to continue for years to come.

In what way do you see the NATO situation as a negative in this very moment,I'm asking because I'm really not certain about it or Russia anymore. I thought Putin was suppose to have taken all those weapons out of there? Is it or was it a false flag or what? Did the rebels move chemicals and caused that to happen or was it Assad? Our Intel and I think forensics too  says that it was Assad.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4392138/Is-proof-Assad-DID-launch-chemical-weapon-attacks.html

ETA

This isn't the original link I was searching for but I recently seen a news video about it and it makes me wonder about the Naval incident that occurred w/Iran. I hope Russia didn't have anything to do with that.

 

What? Russia Claims Ability to Shut Down Entire US Navy in Insane Propaganda Vid

http://conservativetribune.com/russia-claims-ability-propaganda/

ETA again

I think it was this ...

 

 

 

Edited by Ellapennella

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Ellapennella said:

Do you think we would have been in war with Russia already if President Trump did not win? It's very possible, right? Do you know anything much about McMasters? I'm hearing negative things about  him & Petraeus and all that is going on .

No, you would not be in war with Russia if Trump didn't end up in the POTUS seat. But the chaos he sows made chances for any war skyrocket. His pro-NATO/against-NATO daily changes of his mind are doing huge favour to Russia. 

 

He is not fit for that duty, as psychiatrists of Yale publicly warned. 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-dangerous-mental-illness-yale-psychiatrist-conference-us-president-unfit-james-gartner-a7694316.html

“We have an ethical responsibility to warn the public about Donald Trump's dangerous mental illness.”

 

All the spinning and pro-Russian trolling won't make that fact go away. 

Actually, that warning deserves its own thread. 

 

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

4 minutes ago, Helen of Annoy said:

No, you would not be in war with Russia if Trump didn't end up in the POTUS seat. But the chaos he sows made chances for any war skyrocket. His pro-NATO/against-NATO daily changes of his mind are doing huge favour to Russia. 

 

He is not fit for that duty, as psychiatrists of Yale publicly warned. 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-dangerous-mental-illness-yale-psychiatrist-conference-us-president-unfit-james-gartner-a7694316.html

“We have an ethical responsibility to warn the public about Donald Trump's dangerous mental illness.”

 

All the spinning and pro-Russian trolling won't make that fact go away. 

Actually, that warning deserves its own thread. 

 

 

So I guess in your mind all of us who elected our President are not fit either.

ETA

Actually he never changed his mind , they're paying what they owe us.

 

Edited by Ellapennella

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

5 minutes ago, Ellapennella said:

So I guess in your mind all of us who elected our President are not fit either.

 

Yes. Obviously. 

Some of you were just brainwashed through your social networks, others are genuinely evil, like that guy who told me yesterday to better start learning Russian.

We will resist. And you will have some serious explaining to do when you meet your maker one day.  

Don't you realize how many lives you're actively helping to ruin with your pro-Russian crap? Or you have no problem with that? 

I will die because of you. 

Edited by Helen of Annoy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Helen of Annoy said:

Yes. Obviously. 

Some of you were just brainwashed through your social networks, others are genuinely evil, like that guy who told me yesterday to better start learning Russian.

We will resist. And you will have some serious explaining to do when you meet your maker one day.  

Don't you realize how many lives you're actively helping to ruin with your pro-Russian crap? Or you have no problem with that? 

I will die because of you. 

It's no surprise you think that way. Helen , are you an American ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's Putin that's doing the poking and the West is reacting exactly how he wants them to by presenting a viable threat to justify and facilitate his expansionist ambitions and resurgence of Russian military capabilities. Western antipathy is but grist for the mill. He needs an enemy to push against. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

It's Putin that's doing the poking and the West is reacting exactly how he wants them to by presenting a viable threat to justify and facilitate his expansionist ambitions and resurgence of Russian military capabilities. Western antipathy is but grist for the mill. He needs an enemy to push against. 

The poking was done. 

Doing nothing would send the wrong message, doing something raises tensions. So it's picking the less wrong option now. 

Personally, I'm happy with doing something in this particular situation and I would be very unhappy with lack of NATO reaction. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Helen of Annoy said:

The poking was done. 

Doing nothing would send the wrong message, doing something raises tensions. So it's picking the less wrong option now. 

Personally, I'm happy with doing something in this particular situation and I would be very unhappy with lack of NATO reaction. 

Oh yes. God forbid they should try constructive diplomacy and launch a peace offensive, instead. How he would have hated that. Well, if Europe wants to play war with Putin, they're going to have to shoulder most of the expense. Frankly, were tired of defending people who are too cheap to defend themselves. Why should we put our cities and loved ones in harms way over European paranoia, perhaps the worst "mental illnesses."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

Oh yes. God forbid they should try constructive diplomacy and launch a peace offensive, instead. How he would have hated that. Well, if Europe wants to play war with Putin, they're going to have to shoulder most of the expense. Frankly, were tired of defending people who are too cheap to defend themselves. Why should we put our cities and loved ones in harms way over European paranoia, perhaps the worst "mental illnesses."

You are not defending people who are too cheap to defend themselves, you are (were) working on common defence that shields you too.

It is rather naive to think they'll let you enjoy your peace after the cheap people are gone. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Helen of Annoy said:

You are not defending people who are too cheap to defend themselves, you are (were) working on common defence that shields you too.

It is rather naive to think they'll let you enjoy your peace after the cheap people are gone. 

Well, it's time for the "cheap people" to fish or cut bait. Common defense? Hardly. I rather doubt Europeans think of themselves as the front line of the defense of America. You should be strong enough to defend yourselves by now, you're certainly wealthy enough. Problem is, the heartland of Europe has grown fat and comfortable living on it's knees, letting other tend it's military needs.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Hammerclaw said:

Well, it's time for the "cheap people" to fish or cut bait. Common defense? Hardly. I rather doubt Europeans think of themselves as the front line of the defense of America. You should be strong enough to defend yourselves by now, you're certainly wealthy enough. Problem is, the heartland of Europe has grown fat and comfortable living on it's knees, letting other tend it's military needs.

If that is so - who am I to say it isn't - then, certainly, you should take your toys and go home.

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NATO exercises in eastern Europe 15,000 troops. a few hundred miles over the border Russian exercise 120,000 Russian soldiers, armour and artillery. 

mobilisation time for NATO exercise three weeks.

Russian Mobilisation time 72 hours.

Russia can move a force of 100,000 with ease. NATO 7,000 with difficulty. 

NATO needs to get its **** together, as NATO report finds.

Remember NATO'S performance in Afghanistan, say no more -and yet some people expect they'll perform against the Russkies. reality check.

 

 

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Helen of Annoy said:

If that is so - who am I to say it isn't - then, certainly, you should take your toys and go home.

 

Were it so easy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, stevewinn said:

NATO exercises in eastern Europe 15,000 troops. a few hundred miles over the border Russian exercise 120,000 Russian soldiers, armour and artillery. 

mobilisation time for NATO exercise three weeks.

Russian Mobilisation time 72 hours.

Russia can move a force of 100,000 with ease. NATO 7,000 with difficulty. 

NATO needs to get its **** together, as NATO report finds.

Remember NATO'S performance in Afghanistan, say no more -and yet some people expect they'll perform against the Russkies. reality check.

 

 

 

The NATO crutch needs to be kicked out from under them so they can learn to stand on their own. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, stevewinn said:

NATO exercises in eastern Europe 15,000 troops. a few hundred miles over the border Russian exercise 120,000 Russian soldiers, armour and artillery. 

mobilisation time for NATO exercise three weeks.

Russian Mobilisation time 72 hours.

Russia can move a force of 100,000 with ease. NATO 7,000 with difficulty. 

NATO needs to get its **** together, as NATO report finds.

Remember NATO'S performance in Afghanistan, say no more -and yet some people expect they'll perform against the Russkies. reality check.

 

 

 

So, what is exactly going on, are NATO trying to circle a certain land mass there so that Russia can't what? have land, sea & air power? Or something like that?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

15 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

The NATO crutch needs to be kicked out from under them so they can learn to stand on their own. 

But what about the domino effect of the old USSR? We can not allow for Russia to become that dominant. right?

eta

oh, nvm I get why you stated

eta

actually, I don't get it. I think NATO is needed if it functions properly.

Edited by Ellapennella

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, stevewinn said:

Remember NATO'S performance in Afghanistan, say no more -and yet some people expect they'll perform against the Russkies. reality check.

 

 

 

I don't understand this, can you break it down for me, please?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.