NATO/US Military Build up in Eastern Europe-Russian borders

US Troops Not to Be Stationed in Czech Republic

Read more: http://sputniknews.com/military/20150307/1019199964.html#ixzz3Tns8Hgld

5,000 Military Servicemen to Take Part in Norway Drills Near Russian Border

Read more: http://sputniknews.com/military/20150309/1019235467.html#ixzz3TtclYECR

NATO Wraps Up Joint Naval Drill in the Black Sea

Read more: http://sputniknews.com/europe/20150310/1019292939.html#ixzz3TzAMk2r7


US Abrams Tanks to Be Deployed in Lithuania

Read more: http://sputniknews.com/europe/20150310/1019293176.html#ixzz3TzAQ8W8J


Boots on the Ground: US Tanks, Humvees Arrive in Latvia

Read more: http://sputniknews.com/europe/20150309/1019260431.html#ixzz3TzATvFgL

Moscow Will Respond to NATO Military Buildup Near Russia's Border - Lavrov

Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov said that Moscow would respond to NATO military buildup near Russian border "in an adequate way."

NATO military buildup near Russia's border does not contribute to the restoration of trust in the Euroatlantic space, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said Tuesday.

"We have confirmed our stance that military buildup near our border does not contribute to the restoration of trust in the Euroatlantic," the Russian foreign minister said during a news conference with his Spanish counterpart.

Lavrov added that "we are forced to react in an adequate way, but we are sure that these problems need to be solved through an equal dialog based on mutual respect."

Following Crimea's reunification with Russia in March 2014 and the start of an internal armed conflict in Ukraine’s southeast in April, NATO has been boosting its military presence near Russia’s borders, including in the Baltic states.

On February 5, NATO defense ministers agreed to set up a new high-readiness force dubbed Spearhead Force as part of the NATO Response Force. Altogether, the enhanced Response Force will be increased and count up to around 30,000 troops.

The ministers also decided to establish six command and control units in Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and Romania tasked with “ensuring that national and NATO forces from across the Alliance are able to act as one from the start” if a crisis arises.

Read more: http://sputniknews.com/politics/20150310/1019290192.html#ixzz3TzAXwx6x

US Tanks, Paratroopers to Arrive in Estonia for Military Drills This Week

US Abrams tanks with personnel, as well as two groups of US paratroopers will arrive in the Estonian town of Tapa at the end of this week to participate in the Siil 2015 (the Hedgehog 2015) international military exercises, the General Staff of the country's Defense Forces said Tuesday.

MOSCOW (Sputnik) — The Siil 2015 military training will be held in Estonia from May 4 — 15. A total of 13,000 US and Estonian soldiers will take part in the drills.

"In addition to Abrams tanks, support equipment and other auto vehicles, as well as two groups of US paratroopers will arrive in Tapa," Estonia's General Staff said in a statement.

Vehicles and equipment will arrive in Tapa by rail.

The presence of US soldiers in Tapa is part of operation Atlantic Resolve, which demonstrates US efforts in support of its NATO allies and partners in Europe.

More than 120 armored vehicles, including Abrams tanks and Bradley armored vehicles were delivered on Monday to Latvia from the United States.

NATO has been strengthening its military presence along Russia's western border amid the conflict in southeastern Ukraine, claiming Moscow's involvement.

Russia has repeatedly stressed that it is not party to the Ukraine crisis and has expressed concern over the expansion of NATO forces along its borders.

Read more: http://sputniknews.com/military/20150310/1019312656.html#ixzz3U5oLSntl

NATO Drills Begin in Lithuania on Monday

According to Lithuania’s Defense Ministry, NATO's Fire Thunder exercise using US Paladin M109A6 artillery systems has begun in the country.

RIGA, (Sputnik) – NATO exercise Fire Thunder using US Paladin M109A6 artillery systems has begun in Lithuania, the country's Defense Ministry said Monday.

Servicemen from Lithuania, the United States, Poland and Portugal comprise the 450 military employees who are participating in the drills.

The NATO soldiers are expected to perform coordination and shooting exercises. According to Lithuania's Defense Ministry, the drills will take place at two training areas in the country.

The ministry said that this is the third Lithuanian Armed Forces Fire Thunder NATO collaboration drill, with the number of participating NATO allies increasing every year.

The drills will wrap up on April 24.

Earlier on Saturday, NATO launched exercise Joint Warrior in Scotland, with the participation of more than 50 warships and submarines, alongside 70 aircraft and 13,000 personnel from 14 countries.

Head of Russia's National Nuclear Risk Reduction Center Sergei Ryzhkov said the country is monitoring the scope of NATO exercises in the United Kingdom.

Read more: http://sputniknews.com/europe/20150413/1020821324.html#ixzz3XHj6N1it

what I find funny is that nato and us troops, think that they are rolling their tanks over the russian border and into moscow to get the evil leader putin, they think russia is like iraq in the gulf war in 1991, they would be in shock at what they would face,

Moscow Keeps Eye on NATO's Moves in East Europe

Russia is keeping watch over NATO's policies in Eastern Europe as they may violate the fundamental Russia-NATO Act.

MOSCOW, April 17 (Sputnik) – Moscow is following NATO’s policies in Eastern Europe to make sure the Alliance is not taking any steps that would breach the fundamental Russia-NATO Act, Director of the Department for Non-Proliferation and Arms Control Mikhail Ulyanov told RIA Novosti on Friday.

The 1997 Founding Act on Mutual Relations, Cooperation and Security between NATO and Russia stipulates that the bloc will not station substantial combat forces near the Russian border permanently.

“It should be said that we are carefully following what is happening in the policies of NATO on its so-called eastern flank,” Ulyanov said.

NATO Accuses Russia of Distorting Facts on NATO Military Activity
The official said that NATO frequently uses terms similar to those used during war times, including “frontal states.”

“We are currently watching closely for signs the Alliance isn’t doing anything in the territories of its eastern member states that would breach its obligations [in the Russia-NATO Act],” he added.

Earlier in April, NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg said that the bloc was undergoing its largest troop increase since the end of the Cold War.

In February, NATO said that its Response Force, stationed close to Russia in Eastern Europe, will more than double to 30,000 military personnel.

The nearly year-long conflict in southeast Ukraine has served as a justification for NATO expansion in Eastern Europe. The military bloc, along with its political and economic counterparts, claims Moscow is involved in the ongoing fighting. Russia has repeatedly denied its involvement in the confrontation between Kiev and Donbass.

Read more: http://sputniknews.com/military/20150417/1021006994.html#ixzz3XZQ6hARn

France Sends Battle Tanks to Poland

As NATO continues to beef up its presence in Eastern Europe, France has deployed a squad of Leclerc battle tanks into Poland for training exercises. It’s the latest example of the West accusing Russia of military aggression while it, in fact, takes steps toward establishing a stronger NATO.

On Monday, 15 Leclerc main battle tanks (MBTs) left France en route for Poland. Part of the 12ème Régiment de Cuirassiers, France has also deployed a platoon from the 16ème Bataillon de Chasseurs which includes four infantry fighting vehicles, and a platoon from the 13ème Régiment du Génie.

Only in service in 1992, the Leclerc’s aren’t exactly battle-hardened. Seeing minimal action in Kosovo and Lebanon, the tanks have never been used directly in a high-intensity conflict.

Earlier on Tuesday, Polish President Bronislaw Komorowski also indicated that he would negotiate with the United States to purchase medium-range Patriot defense missiles. This decision was in response to a vague, unspecified "threat from the east," mentioned by President Komorowski last year.

Some experts have suggested that the missile purchase could be a political move for the upcoming Polish elections in May.

"At a time of an armed conflict in Ukraine Bronislaw Komorowski wants to present himself as a strong commander-in-chief," political marketing specialist Wieslaw Galazka told Wirtualna Polska news.
Staff operate at the NATO Computer Incident Response Capability (NCIRC) technical center, at NATO's military headquarters SHAPE in Mons, southwestern Belgium, Tuesday, Dec. 10, 2013. The NCIRC protects NATO systems and information from any form of attack and from deliberate or accidental exposure.

The Western military alliance has also been increasing its presence in Baltic nations. Latvia has expressed its desire to host a permanent battalion of NATO troops.

"At the present moment, we are looking for an air defense system," Latvian Defense Minister Raimonds Vejonis told Sputnik on Tuesday. "Of course, we will discuss possible permanent NATO presence in the region – it is a key question for us."

NATO is also launching a series of cyber war exercises in Estonia. Though these are not officially in response to a perceived Russian threat, Rob Pritchard, a cybersecurity expert at the Royal United Services Institute in London, indicated a likely connection.

"Russia is currently looming large on the NATO radar, and the exercise is likely to simulate attacks similar to those used by the Russian state, and state-backed actors," Pritchard was quoted by the Associated Press.

Read more: http://sputniknews.com/europe/20150422/1021203619.html#ixzz3Xza7in6C

putinboss wrote:what I find funny is that nato and us troops, think that they are rolling their tanks over the russian border and into moscow to get the evil leader putin, they think russia is like iraq in the gulf war in 1991, they would be in shock at what they would face,

When are NATO and US troops rolling over the Russian border?

What sort of nightmares are you having?

Poland’s president signs law on establishing Polish-Lithuanian-Ukrainian military brigade

The brigade will be formed as part of the European Union’s combat groups with an aim to participate in operations under the UN, NATO and EU aegis

WARSAW, May 4. /TASS/. President of Poland Bronislaw Komorowski has signed a resolution on establishing the Polish-Lithuanian-Ukrainian military brigade, the Polish leader’s office reported on Monday.

The resolution will come into force two weeks after it is published, which will allow Komorowski to ratify the relevant agreement.

Talks on creating a large Polish-Lithuanian-Ukrainian military contingent had been held since 2007. The defense ministers from the three countries signed the agreement on its establishment in September 2014.

The brigade will be formed as part of the European Union’s combat groups with an aim to participate in operations under the UN, NATO and EU aegis. The manpower and military hardware assigned by the three countries to the military contingent will stay at the places of their permanent location and will be subordinated to the brigade’s command during exercises and the accomplishment of missions.

At present, only the Polish part of the command consisting of 50 officers and a Polish battalion 250 men strong are staying at the brigade’s headquarters in Lublin, Poland. The Ukrainian and Lithuanian servicemen are expected to join them soon.

The brigade’s first military exercises are scheduled for the autumn of this year.

The Polish-Lithuanian-Ukrainian military contingent is expected to reach its full combat readiness in two years and have a strength of up to 4,500 servicemen.

You could just write the Map of 2nd wave Euromeatshield.

sepheronx wrote:Lawmaker: Moscow can answer possible deployment of US nuclear missiles in Europe

Americans are very stupid people it appears.  You cannot counter Russian nukes or missile systems this way.  They are far spread out and if they don't break INF, they cannot try to "counter them".  Even if it is an impossible task.

If the US decides to actually abandon INF and places missiles in Europe to so called counter Russia, then Russia could build systems that carries and fires multiple of cruise missiles in salvo, effectively making US anti missile systems incapable.  Cruise missiles are relatively cheap to make and thus it will be even easier to build them en mass.  They could also expand Iskander to reach much farther.  They could also increase number of land strike variants of cruise missiles with long range for Kilo submarines and surface ships.

Effectively, Russia has plenty of options.  They could also open up bases in Venezuela and other countries and place such missiles in those countries too.

I highly doubt that those missile shields in Euromeatshield are even believed to target russian missiles aiming at US. Since the entire NATO (US) logistics goes through Germany,France and UK for their military NATO projection for Europe, they will when a war gets hot or when tactical nukes are deployed, they will need to target those locations and since Tactical nuking is a very calculated game to destroy offensive or defensive capabilities of your enemy with least amount possible theatre/tactical nuke deplyoment, it is a rather calculated game of Downing such missiles. Tactical nukes are rather easy to intercept than Strategic ones.

Like discussed in another thread of Russia invading US (is it possible), i've already said, if the US tries to attack or NATO as a whole is trying to sustain a short or long term war against Russia, all that russia must do is tactically nuke NATO supply routes in Germany, that will bring the entire NATO war machinery to an almost instant hold. Those ABM shields are exactly for tactical nuking aka serious WW3 preperations.

sepheronx wrote:

Then more cruise missiles are needed as those ABM's cannot deal with Cruise missiles.  At the same time, more S-300V4's, S-400s and S-500's eventually to help protect Russia from NATO Missiles.  At same time, striking hard and lots at military instillations that would be protecting ABM sites would be needed, so missiles like cruise missiles would be enough, especially with modern high explosive warheads.  Hopefully systems much like Iskander but carrying more than 4 or 6 Klub missiles could be considered to strike the positions.  Having enough of them with the ability to work remotely, I would say would give Russia the benefit of being able to strike very hard.  Since they would be based within the country or Kaliningrad, they could effectively strike at any country in eastern Europe, that would be basing these ABM sites and missiles sites.  Poland for example.  In Crimea, they would be able to strike Romania quite easily.

As well, hopefully Russia goes for non nuclear based ICBM systems carrying special type of warheads of heavy high explosives to be able to build them, store them and use them much cheaper than nuclear.

Cruise missiles to hit ABM make little sense - US nuke salvo is already half way to Russia and you prey so at lease one club hits ABM?

I strongly believe that multi warhead IRBM/MRBM/SRBM flying on non ballistic trajectory with maneuvering warheads is bet option. Fast delivery (iskander 8-9 Ma vs 0,9 Ma Klub) makes it weapon of choice.

And yes Russia must watch also budget but I am pretty sure that Rubezh is modular and Iskander had in construction phase option to grow on steroids

The crucial point here is really that Russia is so lazy and so careful or maybe hesitating with reactions. It is bound to have a limited amount of Cruise Missiles, IRBM's and Tactical Nukes. This limitation makes the entire situation and plan or lets call it for what it is Operation Unthinkable, a numbers game. Lets be very generous to NATO's ABM and Anti-Aircraft capabilities. Let us awesome the US has made its preperations since years and have build up entire ABM shield in sufficient numbers (sufficient numbers i will come to that), let us be another time generous of the capability of those SAM's and ABM shields against IRBM and Cruise Missiles is good enough to be almost immune to older generations without advanced ECM and flight trajectory changing to avoid interception. MEaning...they have planned the attack for decades, all their Meatshields are on alert and ready, the US initiates its proxy move and at some point, unlikely to be early from the start of the hot war, russia will have to respond, it will fight for quite some time this proxy war (ukraine) is first wave and 2nd wave will be poles looking at their political sphere and russian hatred, so after some years of slow depleting proxy war, Russia with an unknown leader will have enough of this shit and do what they would do in such situation, trying to overcome ABM shields in europe and trying to destroy key points of logistics which are concentrated almost only in Germany. Germany strategically is absolutley crucial and important for both sides, Projection over Europe of west and east goes always through Germany it was like that during 18th century it is the same case in 20th and 21ct century. So losing entire germany for russia is not an option. They will rely on strategy of defeating ABM shields and logistical key points in Europe and essentially germany.

Some numbers before here have been posted of the IRBM and ICBM's in russian inventory, for this kind of operation we can only suggest IRBM's and Cruise Missiles. Right now there is only one type of IRBM useful to overcome ABM and SAM without first dealing with ABM/SAM itself that would be Iskander-M which can change its flight trajectory, the rest of the current in active service missiles have no such feature, so giving the american Euromeatshield generoustiy to defeat any other type of missile would leave Russia with less then 100 IRBM's for this job. Statistically speaking this ABM shields can indeed cripple russia to such an extent it would need to rely on ICBM use in Europe against countries which are not possible to lose for short nor long term future. Nuking military assets is one thing, using Strategic weapons there were designed to be used against US is a total different thing, that will only bring more russophobia to europe and it would defeat its own future with Germany, since the greatest threat to the US is not China and Russia united but Germany and Russia united. The projection of political and economical power of these so called 1st World is Germany, call it indoctrination, call it self-evident century old perception whatever, that are the circumstances.

I guess it was franco who has posted a short list of Russias inventory of ICBM's, IRBM's /SSBM's and Cruise Missiles and the numbers of advanced BM's is very short, short enough to deal even with a backwarded ABM and SAM sytems like the Americans.

If franco could provide again the numbers, we could see it even clearer what i mean. One of those numbers was just as 88 high of advanced Ballistic Missiles. So if this circumstances and reluctant reaction of russia stays the same with the same low numberes of advanced IRBM's,ICBM's, SSBM's and Cruise Missiles then it will end in a totalitarian war and exchange of ICBM's or a decade long war with only one benefiter, once again...

There will be no winner in 3rd world war except cockroaches I am afraid. But there is also good news. As long as MAD is in place no major war can take place. In case of total war bombing Germany or other countries do not matter. That´s why US wants to scale down Russia´s nuclear arsenal and use combination PGS/ABM and possibly bio-warfare (guess why Russia has put so much effort in Ebola vaccine?) to disarm Russia. The only way I can see in military dimension is to build up nuclear deterrent.

- large numbers of relatively cheap, nuclear capable missiles flying at non ballistic trajectories with maneuvering warheads (say either Iskander on steroids 1000-1500km Romania and Poland till Germany in reach) or modular system like Rubezh with scaled down range (till Cabo de Roca) and as many as to making EU part of MAD.

- build up hypersonic missiles with if not global then continental reach (EU ABM and US fleet with ABM)

- return to FOBS concept with Sarmat instead of Voevoda
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fractional_Orbital_Bombardment_System

- increase investments into info warfare (RT on steroids suporting local civil rights and ethic divisions in West:)

- invest in Sarmats to ensure erasing US from map just in case

About Russofobia I would not care so much, as hate propaganda is controlled by corpo news form one place. Then EU citizens would still have little chance to vote for different govts... to avoid Armageddon. Besides ere RT is best weapon.

I am not sure if before financial collapse of US all this can be implemented. Surging wave of hatery in US led media is best proof that collapse is closer and closer

http://www.usdebtclock.org

officially 61 trillion USD. They cannot and will not pay back. EU is not worse really . Money after looting Eastern Europe run out...that´s why IMHO Uncle Pu is spending so heavily on rearmament programme. the only thing that keeps bandits at bay.

As for Germany, with all my sympathy to Germans they are no match to power of Asia. Germans under US occupation 70 yrs ar on suicide course where Germans are being replaced by non-integrable immigrants who seem hate local culture and traditions. Besides Germany is way to small market to live only form Russia an German but China itself is enough not to mention India/Iran or Latin America. west in not really needed in this equation.

China is partner not to be replaced for foreseeable future ideally when Iran and India join the club.

sepheronx wrote:

GunshipDemocracy wrote:

sepheronx wrote:

Then more cruise missiles are needed as those ABM's cannot deal with Cruise missiles.  At the same time, more S-300V4's, S-400s and S-500's eventually to help protect Russia from NATO Missiles.  At same time, striking hard and lots at military instillations that would be protecting ABM sites would be needed, so missiles like cruise missiles would be enough, especially with modern high explosive warheads.  Hopefully systems much like Iskander but carrying more than 4 or 6 Klub missiles could be considered to strike the positions.  Having enough of them with the ability to work remotely, I would say would give Russia the benefit of being able to strike very hard.  Since they would be based within the country or Kaliningrad, they could effectively strike at any country in eastern Europe, that would be basing these ABM sites and missiles sites.  Poland for example.  In Crimea, they would be able to strike Romania quite easily.

As well, hopefully Russia goes for non nuclear based ICBM systems carrying special type of warheads of heavy high explosives to be able to build them, store them and use them much cheaper than nuclear.

Cruise missiles to hit ABM make little sense - US nuke salvo is already half way to Russia and you prey so at lease one club hits ABM?

I strongly believe that multi warhead IRBM/MRBM/SRBM flying on non ballistic trajectory with maneuvering warheads is bet option. Fast delivery (iskander 8-9 Ma vs  0,9 Ma Klub)  makes it weapon of choice.

And yes Russia must watch also budget but I am pretty sure that Rubezh is modular and Iskander had in construction phase option to grow on steroids

Gunship

ABM's cannot counter cruise missiles or at least not effectively as ABM systems fly at a very high altitude but not low altitude.  Cruise missiles fly at a low altitude.  They are cheap too, and would be able to build enough in shorter time period than a BM.  That is why Russia is investing in new anti radiation cruise missiles.  Kh-58 I believe is the model.

US ABM system isn't going to be deployed in large numbers, and even if they do, it wont be effective anyway.  Especially if the BM in Russia are located far away anyway.  Iskanders is ideal but they lack the range at the moment.  And if in case the INF treaty does go bunk, they will most likely invest far more money in Iskanders and advancing them with much longer ranges.

ICBM's are Russias main deterrent.  And if Russia gets a glimps that US launches their BM (Which they will detect as soon as they are launched) they will launch theirs and no ABM system will protect them 100%.  So yeah.

Cruise missiles are actually a major threat to most countries and only few have abilities to counter them, Russia being one of them.  So yeah.  And that is the other thing, the US will have their (which will be Tomohawks of course), and Pantsir's and Tor's will be stationed to deal with them.  They may not be able to deal with a swarm of it, but that goes for US systems as well.

Let us also add, they can overwhelm the systems at time they launch their ICBM's as well.

It should also be noted (and GarryB can back me up on this) that Russian manpad's such as Igla-S, and soon to be unveiled June 15-16 at 'Army-2015', the next gen manpad 'Verba', are capable of destroying low flying cruise missiles (like the ones the US will redeploy to Europe), and that Russia also developed (I posted Rostec articles on this development) low-horizon radars (such as 'Outpost') that have signal processing that are capable of tracking 50 low-flying targets at a time, at 20 km distance, and only needs a minimum of 30 centimeters to differentiate between two low flying targets, that are likely capable of being integrated in to manpad teams:

https://www.russiadefence.net/t2547p210-russian-radar-systems#69712

1) what all low flying cruise missile usa posses except tomahawk ?
 

2) If usa is deploying them in europe then why cant ruussia deploy it in cuba ? lacking balls perhaps .

3) Does US posses igla , verba like manpad ? can you compare the efficiency of both rus and usa manpads .

max steel wrote:2) If usa is deploying them in europe then why cant ruussia deploy it in cuba ? lacking balls perhaps .

Well, there is something called the "host country". Contrary to what some people think, Russia can't just place nuclear weapons in this country or a Tu-22M3 regiment in that country unilaterally. They need to get consent first. And that will not be easily had. Do Cuba even want to host nuclear weapons when they are working on developing better relations with the US? Not to mention Russias pretty strongly expressed demand that nuclear weapons should only be deployed in their own countries.

"Lack of balls" has little to do with it. Too much balls and you risk having them cut off and stuffed in your mouth...

Cucumber Khan wrote:

Well, there is something called the "host country". Contrary to what some people think, Russia can't just place nuclear weapons in this country or a Tu-22M3 regiment in that country unilaterally. They need to get consent first. And that will not be easily had. Do Cuba even want to host nuclear weapons when they are working on developing better relations with the US? Not to mention Russias pretty strongly expressed demand that nuclear weapons should only be deployed in their own countries.

US, Cuba Will Take a Long Time to Normalize Ties . Not until THEY return G'bay . If US deploys missile in Europe ( because europe is a prey and usa is host ) russia has right to retaliate and it can place missiles in cuba with cuban govt consent only . They didn't park nukes in cuba unilaterally in 1960s , it was done after taking their consent .

max steel wrote:
US, Cuba Will Take a Long Time to Normalize Ties . Not until THEY return G'bay . If US deploys missile in Europe ( because europe is a prey and usa is host ) russia has right to retaliate and it can place missiles in cuba with cuban govt consent only . They didn't park nukes in cuba unilaterally in 1960s , it was  done after taking their consent .

So far Nicaragua agreed to hosts Russian military and Chinese canal a bit longer distance than Cuba (to Florida in virtually no time for Clubs or Iskanders)