Results 1 to 14 of 14
  1. #1
    Thailand Expat KEVIN2008's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    1,740

    US troops just paraded along the Russian border.



    US troops just paraded along the Russian border. Is that as insane as it sounds?

    On Wednesday, the US Army did something that seemed, and maybe was, dangerously provocative: it paraded soldiers and armored vehicles from the Second Cavalry Regiment in the Estonian town of Narva, just 900 feet from Russia's border.

    The Washington Post's Michael Birnbaum, reporting the incident, explains, "Narva is a vulnerable border city separated by a river from Russia. It has often been cited as a potential target for the Kremlin if it wanted to escalate its conflict with the West onto NATO territory."

    There is a logic to this sort of demonstration, which is surely meant to show Russia that the US is sincerely committed to the defense of Estonia, which is a member of NATO. In other words, it is meant to deter Russia from starting a Ukraine-style conflict in Estonia, which could plausibly spiral into World War Three. At the same time, such a demonstration is also dangerous, as it risks being misinterpreted by Moscow as an act of aggression and thus making war more likely.

    Estonia and other Baltic countries, like Ukraine, used to be part of the Soviet Union and have significant Russian or Russian-speaking minorities. Europe has feared that Vladimir Putin might attempt some version of what he did in Ukraine, stirring up pro-Russian sentiment, arming separatists, or even overtly invading. President Obama took this seriously enough to travel to Estonia in September to give a speech pledging that the US would defend the country against Russian aggression.

    This isn't just scary because it would be bad to repeat the Ukraine crisis in another country, though it surely would. Estonia is a member of NATO, which means that all other members are committed to help defend it in a war. That includes the US and most European countries, two of which (France and the UK) are nuclear armed. If Putin were to invade Estonia tomorrow, it would spark war between several nuclear powers, and that would be a global catastrophe.

    Putin does not want World War Three, though, so he's not going to simply invade Estonia. What's more plausible, and in many ways scarier, is the possibility that he could attempt smaller and more indirect provocations of the sort he deployed at first in Ukraine.

    Indeed, shortly after Obama's speech there, a handful of Russian agents crossed the border and kidnapped an Estonian state security officer. It was not an act of overt war, it certainly seemed like a provocation intended to signal Moscow's willingness and desire to bully its Baltic neighbors. It's not difficult to imagine how Putin could follow it up with a more provocative act, then another, then another, until the US felt some sort of uncrossable line had been crossed and felt compelled to respond militarily.

    The core danger is not that Russia would deliberately start a war. It's that Russia and the US might have different understandings of where the bar is for what would trigger war. A fear you hear expressed by some analysts is that Russia believes the US has set that bar very high — that Russia could get pretty aggressive with Estonia without an triggering a retaliation — but that the US has in fact set it quite low.

    This mismatch in perceptions is really dangerous, because it means Putin could accidentally trigger war by misreading American intentions. Parading a bunch of US Army armored vehicles within sight of the Russian border is meant to to convey to Moscow that the US is so serious about defending Estonia that it would consider Russia stirring up trouble even in this little border town to be a trigger for war.

    To be clear, this is distinct from the popular and wrongheaded conservative argument that Obama is emboldening America's enemies by being insufficiently tough or by not bombing enough countries. The concern is not that Obama is weak (if anything, it's the strength of his commitment to deterrence in Estonia that is coming into play). Rather, the concern is that the US and Russia do not have the same understanding of where the US draws the line for war. Obama is trying to make that line as clear as possible to Putin — and prevent it from getting crossed.

    If Putin misreads this as an act of aggression, it could make things more dangerous, not less


    This only works, though, if Putin sees the US Army parading on his border and understands that it's meant as a deterrent. It's all too possible that Putin, who is known to get a bit paranoid about US intentions, could read this as a threat of American aggression or outright invasion. That would make things substantially more dangerous.

    An underlying issue in the Ukraine war is that the Kremlin seems to earnestly believe that the crisis began because the US backed a fascist coup in Kiev (in fact, pro-Europe protesters ousted the pro-Russia president) and that the West is motivated by innate hostility to Russia. The US certainly sees Russia as the aggressor. But if both sides see one another as the hostile aggressor that must be deterred, then any act of escalation invites more escalation, which raises the risk of war.

    This gets to part of the problem of the crisis between the US and Russia: their respective leaderships simply live in different realities. Putin, having dismantled much of Russia's free media and replaced it with dogmatic state media, has become the victim of his own propaganda bubble. That makes it more important to deter him from further aggression, but it also means that demonstrations like this week's in Estonia risk being misperceived as something they are not.



    http://www.vox.com/2015/2/26/8109445...ia-russia-army
    Last edited by KEVIN2008; 27-02-2015 at 11:30 PM.

  2. #2
    I am in Jail

    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Last Online
    13-01-2016 @ 11:14 PM
    Posts
    3,982
    Whats next Russia sells nuclear to Iran.

  3. #3
    'ello 'ello 'ello Luigi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    Abuja
    Posts
    23,523
    War makes powerful Americans richer. Why not parade American troops 900 feet from a Russian border.

  4. #4
    En route
    Cujo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Last Online
    Today @ 04:19 PM
    Location
    Reality.
    Posts
    28,389
    America should just mind its own fucking business and let the Russians expand as much as they like.

  5. #5
    I am in Jail

    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Last Online
    13-01-2016 @ 11:14 PM
    Posts
    3,982
    Another Empire to implode.

  6. #6
    Custom user Neverna's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    Behind a rhododendron bush
    Posts
    17,377
    Russia will likely respond by placing some weapons nearby, or pointing some weapons in that direction. The US might then claim Russia is threatening Estonia, etc, etc, etc. All part of the Great Satan's plan, no doubt.

  7. #7
    Thailand Expat
    wasabi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Last Online
    20-06-2019 @ 09:35 PM
    Location
    England
    Posts
    10,947
    Shit the headline spooked Me, thought it was the border between Ukraine and Mother Russia.
    It's okay now, Britain will welcome loads of shit scared EU citizens who want to escape and sign on to Britain's welfare.

  8. #8
    Neo
    Neo is offline
    Dislocated Member
    Neo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Online
    05-08-2019 @ 02:34 AM
    Location
    Nebuchadnezzar
    Posts
    10,577
    it risks being misinterpreted by Moscow as an act of aggression
    Ya think..?

  9. #9
    Fresh Seaman CaptainNemo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    18-02-2018 @ 04:17 AM
    Location
    in t' naughty lass
    Posts
    5,408
    Quote Originally Posted by KEVIN2008 View Post
    Putin does not want World War Three, though, so he's not going to simply invade Estonia. What's more plausible, and in many ways scarier, is the possibility that he could attempt smaller and more indirect provocations of the sort he deployed at first in Ukraine.

    Indeed, shortly after Obama's speech there, a handful of Russian agents crossed the border and kidnapped an Estonian state security officer. It was not an act of overt war, it certainly seemed like a provocation intended to signal Moscow's willingness and desire to bully its Baltic neighbors. It's not difficult to imagine how Putin could follow it up with a more provocative act, then another, then another, until the US felt some sort of uncrossable line had been crossed and felt compelled to respond militarily.

    The core danger is not that Russia would deliberately start a war. It's that Russia and the US might have different understandings of where the bar is for what would trigger war. A fear you hear expressed by some analysts is that Russia believes the US has set that bar very high that Russia could get pretty aggressive with Estonia without an triggering a retaliation but that the US has in fact set it quite low.

    This mismatch in perceptions is really dangerous, because it means Putin could accidentally trigger war by misreading American intentions. Parading a bunch of US Army armored vehicles within sight of the Russian border is meant to to convey to Moscow that the US is so serious about defending Estonia that it would consider Russia stirring up trouble even in this little border town to be a trigger for war.

    To be clear, this is distinct from the popular and wrongheaded conservative argument that Obama is emboldening America's enemies by being insufficiently tough or by not bombing enough countries. The concern is not that Obama is weak (if anything, it's the strength of his commitment to deterrence in Estonia that is coming into play). Rather, the concern is that the US and Russia do not have the same understanding of where the US draws the line for war. Obama is trying to make that line as clear as possible to Putin and prevent it from getting crossed.

    If Putin misreads this as an act of aggression, it could make things more dangerous, not less


    This only works, though, if Putin sees the US Army parading on his border and understands that it's meant as a deterrent. It's all too possible that Putin, who is known to get a bit paranoid about US intentions, could read this as a threat of American aggression or outright invasion. That would make things substantially more dangerous.

    An underlying issue in the Ukraine war is that the Kremlin seems to earnestly believe that the crisis began because the US backed a fascist coup in Kiev (in fact, pro-Europe protesters ousted the pro-Russia president) and that the West is motivated by innate hostility to Russia. The US certainly sees Russia as the aggressor. But if both sides see one another as the hostile aggressor that must be deterred, then any act of escalation invites more escalation, which raises the risk of war.

    This gets to part of the problem of the crisis between the US and Russia: their respective leaderships simply live in different realities. Putin, having dismantled much of Russia's free media and replaced it with dogmatic state media, has become the victim of his own propaganda bubble. That makes it more important to deter him from further aggression, but it also means that demonstrations like this week's in Estonia risk being misperceived as something they are not.



    US troops just paraded along the Russian border. Is that as insane as it sounds? - Vox
    What a ridiculous propaganda piece - clearly trying to invent the news rather than report the news and do proper objective, evidence-led, and incisive analysis. Does this rag come on rolls?

  10. #10
    Gohills flip-flops wearer
    withnallstoke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Last Online
    17-08-2019 @ 08:29 AM
    Location
    The Felcher Memorial Home.
    Posts
    14,271
    Bloody Ivans.

    "Round 'em up, put 'em in a field, and bomb the bastards."


  11. #11
    disturbance in the Turnip baldrick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Last Online
    Today @ 05:24 PM
    Location
    Heidleberg
    Posts
    21,541
    Quote Originally Posted by KEVIN2008
    other Baltic countries
    Quote Originally Posted by KEVIN2008
    like Ukraine
    I stopped reading after this rubbish

  12. #12
    Thailand Expat
    bsnub's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    18,510
    What garbage. They were participating in a parade. During the cold war US troops patrolled the boarder frontier daily many times in direct view of Warsaw pact forces and vice versa. Confrontation was very rare as both sides were well aware of the consequences.

    This is totally different. The article is just a scare piece.

  13. #13
    Thailand Expat
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    18,030
    Quote Originally Posted by Koojo View Post
    America should just mind its own fucking business and let the Russians expand as much as they like.
    Or better yet, become partners in their already vivid expansion schemes.

    Win-win.

  14. #14
    'ello 'ello 'ello Luigi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    Abuja
    Posts
    23,523
    Quote Originally Posted by Neverna View Post
    Russia will likely respond by placing some weapons nearby, or pointing some weapons in that direction.
    Perhaps on Cuba.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •