webfact Posted June 22, 2016 Share Posted June 22, 2016 Russia must be ready to respond to NATO’s ‘aggressive actions’, says PutinMOSCOW: -- President Vladimir Putin has said Russia must boost its combat readiness in response to NATO’s “aggressive actions” near its borders.Addressing the Russian parliament Putin also criticised the West for its reluctance to build a collective security system with Russia.‘‘NATO is strengthening its aggressive rhetoric and its aggressive actions near our borders. In these conditions, we are duty-bound to pay special attention to solving the task of strengthening the combat defences of our country,” he declared.Last month, Moscow announced plans to create three new divisions to meet what it described as a dangerous military build-up on its borders.NATO chief, Jens Stoltenberg urged dialogue.“The important thing is that we need the NATO/Russia Council to have a chance of political dialogue open with Russia and especially when tensions are high. It is important that we talk, that we meet and that we do whatever we can to prevent misunderstandings, miscalculations, and try to reduce tensions,” Stoltenberg said.NATO is also set to send four battalions to Poland and the Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania in an attempt to prevent a repeat of Russian actions, such as the annexation of Crimea in 2014. -- (c) Copyright Euronews 2016-06-23 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pumpuy Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 An eye for an eye ...until everybody turns blind ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caps Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 If that is the case..Why won't the West do a collective security system with Russia? Maybe some countries don't want it because of other motives? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bassman Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 America is in Europe playing Winston Churchill, willing to defend EU borders to the last American dollar; meanwhile Europe plays Neville Chamberlain and don't seem too bothered with Russia building 3 new divisions on their borders spending a paltry 1.35 % of GDP on defense. Many of us believe it is time for these roles to change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
klauskunkel Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 ‘‘NATO is strengthening its aggressive rhetoric and its aggressive actions near our borders. In these conditions, we are duty-bound to pay special attention to solving the task of strengthening the combat defences of our country,” he declared. "I am therefore planning to dispatch our Russian football fans, once they are released from French jails, to the borders who will show NATO what aggressive actions really look like." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
halloween Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 America is in Europe playing Winston Churchill, willing to defend EU borders to the last American dollar; meanwhile Europe plays Neville Chamberlain and don't seem too bothered with Russia building 3 new divisions on their borders spending a paltry 1.35 % of GDP on defense. Many of us believe it is time for these roles to change. Oh come on! The last US dollar was spent some 19 trillion ago. Since then it's been credit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Somtamnication Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 (edited) If I was surrounded by tanks and missiles, I too would be pissed and on a war footing. Edited June 23, 2016 by Somtamnication Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
halloween Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 If that is the case..Why won't the West do a collective security system with Russia? Maybe some countries don't want it because of other motives? How do countries who like their borders the way they are enter into a collective security with a nation busily expanding theirs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mansell Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 (edited) Mr. Putin how many countries has NATO invaded......Hmmmm Zero. How many countries has Russia invaded in the last two years?I rest my case Mr. *(edited out)* Putin. Edited June 23, 2016 by Scott Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neverdie Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 It would be a good idea to goto a 1 world government and put Putin in charge. Much better option than the present selection of USA contestants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oxo1947 Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 Mr. Putin how many countries has NATO invaded......Hmmmm Zero. How many countries has Russia invaded in the last two years? I rest my case Mr. Putrid.......sorry Putin. You do not wish to change your statement with the words USA --in place of NATO...... which is as good as the USA do you Mansell ?.......it might not look so palatable to you then. The 2003 invasion of Iraq lasted from 20 March to 1 May 2003 and signaled the start of the Iraq ... General Wesley Clark, the former Supreme NATO Allied Commander and Joint Chiefs of Staff Director of Strategy https://www.google.co.th/search?q=did+NATO+in+vade+Irqe&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&gws_rd=cr&ei=21BrV_OvM4bnUuXygtAG#q=did+NATO+invade+Iraq And so it went on from there Mansell-----without being impolite you must have your head in a bucket of sand to make a statement like that.................. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caps Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 If that is the case..Why won't the West do a collective security system with Russia? Maybe some countries don't want it because of other motives? How do countries who like their borders the way they are enter into a collective security with a nation busily expanding theirs? Have you ever thought that expanding borders might not happen if a collective security system was in the making Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
halloween Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 (edited) If that is the case..Why won't the West do a collective security system with Russia? Maybe some countries don't want it because of other motives? How do countries who like their borders the way they are enter into a collective security with a nation busily expanding theirs? Have you ever thought that expanding borders might not happen if a collective security system was in the making Tell that to the Ukraine. IIRC in the last collective security arrangement between a European country and Russia, Russia got half of Poland. Edited June 23, 2016 by halloween Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnDodd Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 I recently listened to an interview with Dmitry Orlov who is a Russian who is based in the U.S. he is a geopolitical strategist, he stated that the Russian people are preparing for war both mentally and physically as they cannot believe the obvious lies demonising them, or the naked aggression by NATO aka Murder Inc. along their baltic coast. The Russian people are tough and pragmatic, other than a few Oligarch's and Medeved's Atlanticist's the whole country is behind their Leader. These people have long memories, Barbarossa, Stalingrad etc, 25 million dead Russians, every Russian family today lost a family member. So I'm not surprised the Russian Army is moving West, what I am surprised at is this NATO's Stoltenberg the latest mouthpiece of the psycho Zionist Anglo/American asking for more "dialogue" these gutless fascists could possibly turn the world into a giant Hiroshima....because the Russian's wont blink. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DTRACKER300 Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 Putin is nothing more than a crim and oneday will find himself in shackles and a jumpsuit. Vermin.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caps Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 If that is the case..Why won't the West do a collective security system with Russia? Maybe some countries don't want it because of other motives? How do countries who like their borders the way they are enter into a collective security with a nation busily expanding theirs? Have you ever thought that expanding borders might not happen if a collective security system was in the making Tell that to the Ukraine. IIRC in the last collective security arrangement between a European country and Russia, Russia got half of Poland. Aye..and what did NATO do, absolutely nothing, sanctions...big deal. It might be better to talk and until we try we don't know, but as I have said, Maybe a certain country doesn't want it that way because then they can not flex their so called muscles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orac Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 Very disturbing reports here of military build up and movements over the last few days http://www.defconwarningsystem.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=5507 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
halloween Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 Tell that to the Ukraine. IIRC in the last collective security arrangement between a European country and Russia, Russia got half of Poland. Aye..and what did NATO do, absolutely nothing, sanctions...big deal. It might be better to talk and until we try we don't know, but as I have said, Maybe a certain country doesn't want it that way because then they can not flex their so called muscles. Did you expect them to declare war? what do you suggest short of war but tougher than sanctions? I'm not following your logic - sanctions aren't enough, you want to talk to them instead? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caps Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 (edited) Tell that to the Ukraine. IIRC in the last collective security arrangement between a European country and Russia, Russia got half of Poland. Aye..and what did NATO do, absolutely nothing, sanctions...big deal. It might be better to talk and until we try we don't know, but as I have said, Maybe a certain country doesn't want it that way because then they can not flex their so called muscles. Did you expect them to declare war? what do you suggest short of war but tougher than sanctions? I'm not following your logic - sanctions aren't enough, you want to talk to them instead? My logic was the a Collective Security Arrangement talk which was stated in the main post....which you seem dead set against. So yes to do this the West and Russia will need to talk unless you suggest they do it on Twitter No I didn't expect them to declare war, but a presence in the area might have been a start, or would you rather Russia just decide to walk into a country? Edited June 23, 2016 by Caps Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manfredtillmann Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 "Addressing the Russian parliament Putin also criticised the West for its reluctance to build a collective security system with Russia." i recall a time in the early 80's when an american president named 'reagan' proposed to the ussr to built a ballistic missile shield in europe. from memory it was labeled 'star wars'... and it was heavily opposed by the then government of the ussr. my father warned me about putin some 20 years ago: 'the guy is kgb, don't trust him.' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rancid Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 NATO has been accused by two high ranking Germans of war mongering. A (non-US) NATO General has also admitted that there are no indications whatsoever that Russia intends to attack anybody. It is US controlled NATO that is alone raising the tensions. How would the Russians feel having a whole bunch of European armies, many of whom have tried to invade them in the past, massing on their borders? It is a mystery to me how people get sucked in by the war rhetoric being pumped out by the corporate media, you are being lied to. And of course the other great irony is that the sanctions on Russia are hurting Europe and barely even affecting the US, brilliant economics from the US vassals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiwiken Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 America is in Europe playing Winston Churchill, willing to defend EU borders to the last American dollar; meanwhile Europe plays Neville Chamberlain and don't seem too bothered with Russia building 3 new divisions on their borders spending a paltry 1.35 % of GDP on defense. Many of us believe it is time for these roles to change. Oh come on! The last US dollar was spent some 19 trillion ago. Since then it's been credit. Inside every European is an American trying to get out 555 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arjunadawn Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 Russia will not have to respond to NATO. Hard to see how they don't know this is a feign, a ruse for NATO to purposely fail. NATO's provocations toward Russia are designed to result in NATO evidencing incompetence, it's twilight ensured, and EU having no choice but to step into the breech. In this space the EU offers solution- a standing army, NATO having served its purpose. Wrong? I doubt it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redline Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 Mr. Putin how many countries has NATO invaded......Hmmmm Zero. How many countries has Russia invaded in the last two years? I rest my case Mr. Putrid.......sorry Putin. You do not wish to change your statement with the words USA --in place of NATO...... which is as good as the USA do you Mansell ?.......it might not look so palatable to you then. The 2003 invasion of Iraq lasted from 20 March to 1 May 2003 and signaled the start of the Iraq ... General Wesley Clark, the former Supreme NATO Allied Commander and Joint Chiefs of Staff Director of Strategy https://www.google.co.th/search?q=did+NATO+in+vade+Irqe&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&gws_rd=cr&ei=21BrV_OvM4bnUuXygtAG#q=did+NATO+invade+Iraq And so it went on from there Mansell-----without being impolite you must have your head in a bucket of sand to make a statement like that.................. Yes, the USA should let Europe defend itself! I agree completely. The world will respond properly to the kind wishes of Europe History is not on their side, and they have very little military strength besides Germany, France and England, which are closely connected to the US. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Publicus Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 America is in Europe playing Winston Churchill, willing to defend EU borders to the last American dollar; meanwhile Europe plays Neville Chamberlain and don't seem too bothered with Russia building 3 new divisions on their borders spending a paltry 1.35 % of GDP on defense. Many of us believe it is time for these roles to change. No need to make any of the radical and irresponsible changes Donald Trump is proposing from out of the blue, i.e., absent facts, data, information. Or as suggested by anyone else who might be equally ill informed and misguided. Nato countries in Europe (that is, not including the United States) spent $242.8 billion on defense in 2013 while Russia spent $98 billion. Even if Russia increased its military budget by 50% it would be more armed but waaay behind the Nato countries of Europe. USA and Canada are the only Nato countries outside of Europe and the two between 'em spent $ 601 billion in 2013 (USA $582 bn and Canada $19.6 bn). The USA-Canada $601 billion combined (2013) plus the $242 bn spent on defense by the Nato countries of Europe total more than $800 billion. Nato is a defensive alliance formed in 1949 to defend Europe against Stalin and now it is defending Europe against Putin, both of 'em Kremlin guyz. The wake up data in this equation is that Nato countries' GDP (excluding USA GDP) is $18 Trillion, so 1.4% of $18 Trillion supports 3 million Nato active armed forces that have more weaponry land, air, on the sea and under it than Russia could dream of having to include the total number and quality of armed forces personnel. The Nato secretary general is always from Europe while the Nato supreme commander is always from the USA (going back to General Eisenhower in WW2). Trump and the people who think Nato countries in Europe aren't carrying their share of the load are completely ill informed if they are informed at all. Same as Putin himself, they all make a lot of noise to include The Ignoramus Donald Trump. And when Nato initiates an attack on Russia I'd want to be among the first to know. http://press.ihs.com/press-release/aerospace-defense-terrorism/global-defence-budgets-overall-rise-first-time-five-years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orac Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 America is in Europe playing Winston Churchill, willing to defend EU borders to the last American dollar; meanwhile Europe plays Neville Chamberlain and don't seem too bothered with Russia building 3 new divisions on their borders spending a paltry 1.35 % of GDP on defense. Many of us believe it is time for these roles to change. No need to make any of the radical and irresponsible changes Donald Trump is proposing from out of the blue, i.e., absent facts, data, information. Or as suggested by anyone else who might be equally ill informed and misguided. Nato countries in Europe (that is, not including the United States) spent $242.8 billion on defense in 2013 while Russia spent $98 billion. Even if Russia increased its military budget by 50% it would be more armed but waaay behind the Nato countries of Europe. USA and Canada are the only Nato countries outside of Europe and the two between 'em spent $ 601 billion in 2013 (USA $582 bn and Canada $19.6 bn). The USA-Canada $601 billion combined (2013) plus the $242 bn spent on defense by the Nato countries of Europe total more than $800 billion. Nato is a defensive alliance formed in 1949 to defend Europe against Stalin and now it is defending Europe against Putin, both of 'em Kremlin guyz. The wake up data in this equation is that Nato countries' GDP (excluding USA GDP) is $18 Trillion, so 1.4% of $18 Trillion supports 3 million Nato active armed forces that have more weaponry land, air, on the sea and under it than Russia could dream of having to include the total number and quality of armed forces personnel. The Nato secretary general is always from Europe while the Nato supreme commander is always from the USA (going back to General Eisenhower in WW2). Trump and the people who think Nato countries in Europe aren't carrying their share of the load are completely ill informed if they are informed at all. Same as Putin himself, they all make a lot of noise to include The Ignoramus Donald Trump. And when Nato initiates an attack on Russia I'd want to be among the first to know. http://press.ihs.com/press-release/aerospace-defense-terrorism/global-defence-budgets-overall-rise-first-time-five-years It takes more than money to start, fight and even win a war - recent history should have taught us this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caps Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 America is in Europe playing Winston Churchill, willing to defend EU borders to the last American dollar; meanwhile Europe plays Neville Chamberlain and don't seem too bothered with Russia building 3 new divisions on their borders spending a paltry 1.35 % of GDP on defense. Many of us believe it is time for these roles to change. Oh come on! The last US dollar was spent some 19 trillion ago. Since then it's been credit. Inside every European is an American trying to get out 555 what have you been smoking Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 Off-topic post removed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caps Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 Mr. Putin how many countries has NATO invaded......Hmmmm Zero. How many countries has Russia invaded in the last two years? I rest my case Mr. Putrid.......sorry Putin. You do not wish to change your statement with the words USA --in place of NATO...... which is as good as the USA do you Mansell ?.......it might not look so palatable to you then. The 2003 invasion of Iraq lasted from 20 March to 1 May 2003 and signaled the start of the Iraq ... General Wesley Clark, the former Supreme NATO Allied Commander and Joint Chiefs of Staff Director of Strategy https://www.google.co.th/search?q=did+NATO+in+vade+Irqe&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&gws_rd=cr&ei=21BrV_OvM4bnUuXygtAG#q=did+NATO+invade+Iraq And so it went on from there Mansell-----without being impolite you must have your head in a bucket of sand to make a statement like that.................. Yes, the USA should let Europe defend itself! I agree completely. The world will respond properly to the kind wishes of Europe History is not on their side, and they have very little military strength besides Germany, France and England, which are closely connected to the US. Yes you are right...it should let Europe defend its self and leave it alone completely Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Briggsy Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 (edited) I recently listened to an interview with Dmitry Orlov who is a Russian who is based in the U.S. he is a geopolitical strategist, he stated that the Russian people are preparing for war both mentally and physically as they cannot believe the obvious lies demonising them, or the naked aggression by NATO aka Murder Inc. along their baltic coast. The Russian people are tough and pragmatic, other than a few Oligarch's and Medeved's Atlanticist's the whole country is behind their Leader. These people have long memories, Barbarossa, Stalingrad etc, 25 million dead Russians, every Russian family today lost a family member. So I'm not surprised the Russian Army is moving West, what I am surprised at is this NATO's Stoltenberg the latest mouthpiece of the psycho Zionist Anglo/American asking for more "dialogue" these gutless fascists could possibly turn the world into a giant Hiroshima....because the Russian's wont blink. "Barbarossa, Stalingrad, etc. ...." If I recall, the "Zionist Anglo/American" side were allies of Russia or Soviet Union as was, were they not? Edited June 23, 2016 by Briggsy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now