Biden considering deploying troops to Eastern Europe

[+Nuclear Wessel]

 

Quote

 

The United States is discussing the deployment of American military forces to Eastern Europe with its NATO allies, a senior administration official said Monday, as President Joe Biden weighs options for responding to Russian threats against Ukraine.

With Moscow massing more than 100,000 troops at its neighbor's border and no diplomatic breakthrough in sight, the West is stepping up its response amid mounting fears an invasion could be imminent.

 

Conversations are underway with NATO countries that could receive U.S. military forces as part of a plan to deter Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aggression, the official said.

NATO said Monday that it was sending ships and fighter jets to Eastern Europe and that Washington “has also made clear that it is considering increasing its military presence in the eastern part of the Alliance.”

Source: U.S. discussing military deployment near Ukraine with NATO allies (nbcnews.com)

 

 

Edited January 24 by Nuclear Wessel

[+Desertrat56]

So then we would be officially at war with Russia?  

[+Nuclear Wessel]

1 minute ago, Desertrat56 said:

So then we would be officially at war with Russia?  

I think applying that label would be somewhat premature. If Russia invades the Ukraine then I suspect that it will then be officially at war with them, but right now I think it's just a measure for deterrence. Either way, the situation does not look good at all.

[+OverSword]

And then watch as oil prices skyrocket.  Biden shut down the keystone pipeline creating a situation in which rather than exporting oil, the US and Canada must now import oil.  Guess where our former customers started buying their oil from when we could no longer sell it to them? Russia.  So Biden after enriching Russia and then making our European allies dependent on Russian oil thinks for some reason that the EU will go along with our deploying troops in Eastern Europe?  I think not.  We are being run by idiots.

[+Hammerclaw]

20 minutes ago, OverSword said:

And then watch as oil prices skyrocket.  Biden shut down the keystone pipeline creating a situation in which rather than exporting oil, the US and Canada must now import oil.  Guess where our former customers started buying their oil from when we could no longer sell it to them? Russia.  So Biden after enriching Russia and then making our European allies dependent on Russian oil thinks for some reason that the EU will go along with our deploying troops in Eastern Europe?  I think not.  We are being run by idiots.

It's a complicated relationship, whereby they're inextricably intertwined. I think it would be in the U.S. and E.U. best interests to drastically reduce our conventional military footprint in Europe. There's nothing we do as far as conventional warfare goes, that the E.U. is not capable of doing for themselves, if they so choose. 

The European Union and the Russian Federation - European External Action Service (europa.eu)

[kartikg]

In case Russia invades, will American people support war? This could lead to mass casualties on both sides. How will American public and European public react to it? 

[+OverSword]

Just now, kartikg said:

In case Russia invades, will American people support war? This could lead to mass casualties on both sides. How will American public and European public react to it? 

Sanctions is all that will happen. Sanctions and speeches.  Putin is manipulating the situation currently in hopes of a pro Russia coup on the part of the Ukrainians  

Edited January 24 by OverSword

[+Nuclear Wessel]

4 hours ago, OverSword said:

Sanctions is all that will happen. Sanctions and speeches.  Putin is manipulating the situation currently in hopes of a pro Russia coup on the part of the Ukrainians  

NATO sends reinforcements to eastern Europe as Russia accuses West of hysteria | Reuters

I think it's a bit naive to believe that sanctions are all that will happen when NATO is already at their doorstep.

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

2 hours ago, Desertrat56 said:

So then we would be officially at war with Russia?  

Nah, it’ll be a police action.

[+Desertrat56]

5 minutes ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

Nah, it’ll be a police action.

I don't think Russia is going to let that happen.   Are the British going to be there or did the British ask us to join them in this?  

[RAyMO]

9 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

I don't think Russia is going to let that happen.   Are the British going to be there or did the British ask us to join them in this?  

The UK policy is to support Ukraine by all means possible - except actual boots on the ground, as far as I know. 

[RAyMO]

2 hours ago, Desertrat56 said:

So then we would be officially at war with Russia?  

Not sure that follows - comments from NATO clearly reference attacks on allies. I am taking that to mean NATO members, Ukraine is not a NATO member. I suspect - and it is only a suspicion - that the US and NATOs actions are designed to  restrict any outbreak of hostilities to Ukraine. 

Edited January 24 by RAyMO

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

34 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

I don't think Russia is going to let that happen.   Are the British going to be there or did the British ask us to join them in this?  

A nice war will distract from all the horrible things the Tory government is doing/has done, so I think they’ll be all for it.

[+OverSword]

56 minutes ago, Nuclear Wessel said:

NATO sends reinforcements to eastern Europe as Russia accuses West of hysteria | Reuters

I think it's a bit naive to believe that sanctions are all that will happen when NATO is already at their doorstep.

I don't.  Nato troops will not enter the Ukraine unless Russia attacks them and probably not even then.

[+Nuclear Wessel]

1 minute ago, OverSword said:

I don't.  Nato troops will not enter the Ukraine unless Russia attacks them and probably not even then.

Time will tell, I suppose.

[RAyMO]

7 minutes ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

A nice war will distract from all the horrible things the Tory government is doing/has done, so I think they’ll be all for it.

doubt it. Russia has more troops outside Ukraine that the UK has in its entire army. The UK will join forces with everybody else - firing condemnations and invoking sanctions. 

[L.A.T.1961]

1 hour ago, RAyMO said:

doubt it. Russia has more troops outside Ukraine that the UK has in its entire army. The UK will join forces with everybody else - firing condemnations and invoking sanctions. 

UK has already sent 30 elite troops and 2,000 anti-tank weapons as well as surveillance aircraft.

The troops look like a gesture but if they are there and injured or killed by Russian forces it will put a completely different spin on things and the Russians know it. 

Ideally the NATO build up should have happened within a few days of Russia moving troops in. 

Not telling Putin he can have a little invasion and it will be overlooked. 

[DarkHunter]

NATO probably wouldn't need to do much beyond just continuing to supply intelligence and weapons to help Ukraine.

If any military action is taken by NATO it would probably just be in air support or putting up a no fly zone over Ukraine.  The Ukrainian military in theory should have a decent enough air defense to stop Russian air dominance for a while assuming Russian weapon systems are as good as they are made out to be.  The Ukranian army seems to have about 32 launches while the airforce seems to have around 250.  If they are all operational is another question, but Ukraine does have some level of air defense even if its lacking aircraft.

Russia does have around 127,000 soldiers near Ukraine but the Ukranian army has around 250,000 with another couple hundred thousand in various militias, some of which have combat experience.

Edited January 25 by DarkHunter

[jmccr8]

sounds like posturing to me.

[Agent0range]

5 hours ago, RAyMO said:

doubt it. Russia has more troops outside Ukraine that the UK has in its entire army. The UK will join forces with everybody else - firing condemnations and invoking sanctions. 

Numbers don't matter.  An ally presence is enough to prevent an attack.  Russia knows that if NATO troops get killed or injured...it's no longer a strategic game.

[+Nuclear Wessel]

5 minutes ago, Agent0range said:

Numbers don't matter.  An ally presence is enough to prevent an attack.  Russia knows that if NATO troops get killed or injured...it's no longer a strategic game.

The question is--does he care? How far is Putin willing to go? If he backs down it will be a sign of weakness. Putin does NOT strike me as somebody who will back down from a potential fight--in fact, this situation seems like it would be more likely to anger him and push him to escalate things further.

To him, the Ukraine is Russia. Do you honestly think he is just going to roll over and let NATO have their way with him?

Edited January 25 by Nuclear Wessel

[Agent0range]

2 minutes ago, Nuclear Wessel said:

The question is--does he care? How far is Putin willing to go? If he backs down it will be a sign of weakness. Putin does NOT strike me as somebody who will back down from a potential fight--in fact, this situation seems like it would be more likely to anger him and push him to escalate things further.

To him, the Ukraine is Russia. Do you honestly think he is just going to roll over and let NATO have their way with him?

I think he does care.  The world economy is not in great shape, but I think the economies outside of NATO are far more fragile.  And he knows he can't win a real war.  Not a "hearts and minds" "rebuild the nation" war.  I mean, he can't win a real World War.

[+Nuclear Wessel]

7 minutes ago, Agent0range said:

I think he does care.  The world economy is not in great shape, but I think the economies outside of NATO are far more fragile.  And he knows he can't win a real war.  Not a "hearts and minds" "rebuild the nation" war.  I mean, he can't win a real World War.

That won’t stop him from trying. It didn’t stop Hitler. 

 

[+Hammerclaw]

7 hours ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

Nah, it’ll be a police action.

Yeah, we won't be soldiers, we'll be military advisers. The problem is a military adviser, dead two days in the sun, smells just like a corpse in a real war.

[Tatetopa]

A little better than it looked a couple days ago. . I figured Biden blew it.  Presidents are supposed to be tough, that gives negotiators room to talk back the rhetoric.  If the president starts out wishy-washy its pretty much impossible to get tougher during negotiations

Unless you are about retirement age, in all of the conflicts you have seen .in your lifetimes the US has been the dominant power and could send overwhelming force into another country.   With Russia and China, we are peer to peer or nearly so.  A conflict between peers could destroy both  as world powers even if it is not nuclear.   Near equals don't want to get into that fight.

In this case, since we are not the invaders or occupiers, I think its pretty much up to Putin what he will choose to do, but @DarkHunter seems to have a better knowledge of military strategy than I do.

 

1 hour ago, Nuclear Wessel said:

The question is--does he care? How far is Putin willing to go? If he backs down it will be a sign of weakness. Putin does NOT strike me as somebody who will back down from a potential fight--in fact, this situation seems like it would be more likely to anger him and push him to escalate things further.

I think he has  given you the impression he wants to project.  It may the real him, but it is also a posture. He won't back down if he appears weak, but he might be looking for a way out that will keep him looking tough.  If he gets some concessions from US and NATO, he might be satisfied.  He can keep working on his other propaganda initiative and every year the US , UK and EU become more divided and weaker.  That gets harder for all of us to reverse.