Ser Scot A Ellison Posted March 16, 2015 Author Share Posted March 16, 2015 Nestor,My google fu is weak. I can't find the old Georgia/Russia war threads. Still looking though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ElizabethB. Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 Eh, the plan have never been to stop a Russian thrust on the border. You mobilize your forces and start pushing Russia back. It doesn't matter if the Russian are occupying all of the Baltics by the time the real fighting starts.Maybe I don't understand what you mean, but I would say that the location of the supposed fighting is very important. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted March 16, 2015 Author Share Posted March 16, 2015 Okay, I've used the search function, I've googled the board, and I've reviewed the the 30 oldest pages of threads. I think the old Georgia war debate threads are gone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snake Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 Okay, I've used the search function, I've googled the board, and I've reviewed the the 30 oldest pages of threads. I think the old Georgia war debate threads are gone. That was 7 years ago so they are most likely gone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arakan Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 Of course there is a possibility that Russian forces attack the Baltic states or even Poland. And of course there is the same possibility that before this happens, an asteroid collides with Earth and annihilates all life as we know it, before Vlad is ready to make his move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted March 16, 2015 Author Share Posted March 16, 2015 Arakan,Valdi Put Put has made it clear he's quite willing to use force if he deems it in his interest to do so. As such I believe we should deploy strongly in the Baltics to deter such an attack. If there is no question NATO will go all in for its member States if attacked Vald the invader will not take such a risk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arakan Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 dp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arakan Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 Arakan,Valdi Put Put has made it clear he's quite willing to use force if he deems it in his interest to do so. As such I believe we should deploy strongly in the Baltics to deter such an attack. If there is no question NATO will go all in for its member States if attacked Vald the invader will not take such a risk.Ser Scot,Putin might be a narcissistic egomaniac. But he is not crazy, the contrary is the case. He is a calculating cold-blooded power seeking politician. To attack a NATO member needs a crazy man. Putin is not a crazy man. He might be the RL version of Roose Bolton but he is no Mad King Arys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Fixit Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 Mr. Fixit,Russia taking Crimea by force was declared silly back in 2008. No, it wasn't. Everyone knew potential Russian plays regarding their (founded or unfounded) fears of NATO enlargement. They are called: Crimea (and Ukraine at large), Georgia, possibly Transnistria. People who talk of Baltic states are using fallacious logic to draw analogy where there is none. No foreign policy analyst worth their salt truly believes Putin will invade those countries. It's scaremongering, simple as that. And no, "they also said that about Ukraine and Georgia" is not true. In fact, as wikileaks show, Russians have repeatedly indicated that nothing is "off the table" if they feel their security interests in those two countries are threatened, primarily through potential or actual NATO enlargement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted March 16, 2015 Author Share Posted March 16, 2015 Mr. Fixit,So, as Putin would never ever attack the Baltics placing strong forces there as deterent to any potential actions would be harmless and of no interest to Russia? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arakan Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 No, it wasn't. Everyone knew potential Russian plays regarding their (founded or unfounded) fears of NATO enlargement. They are called: Crimea (and Ukraine at large), Georgia, possibly Transnistria. People who talk of Baltic states are using fallacious logic to draw analogy where there is none.Exactly. The tensions surrounding Crimea were well known. And the not so secret wish of Russian politicians to bring the peninsula back to mother Russia. At least in Europe (obviously I cannot comment to the state of analysis wrt to Crimea in the US, say arround 2008). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arakan Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 Mr. Fixit,So, as Putin would never ever attack the Baltics placing strong forces there as deterent to any potential actions would be harmless and of no interest to Russia?Ser Scot,you have a tendency to build your argumentation arround very VERY hypothetical questions which no one on this board can answer in a satisfactory manner. And I think you know that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Castel Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 Ser Scot,Putin might be a narcissistic egomaniac. But he is not crazy, the contrary is the case. He is a calculating cold-blooded power seeking politician. To attack a NATO member needs a crazy man. Putin is not a crazy man. He might be the RL version of Roose Bolton but he is no Mad King Arys.Pretty interesting how I see people on sites like Reddit, who despise the conservatives and their simplistic "they hate our freedoms" answer to policy issues, fall over themselves to construct an image of Putin as some madman who spends his days masturbating over a map of the USSR, one finger poised on The Button, ready to end us all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted March 16, 2015 Author Share Posted March 16, 2015 Castel,I think Putin is afraid of NATO. And a very rational deterant to Putin taking any further action is to show, by forward placement of NATO troops, that NATO will not allow the Baltics to fall without a serious fight. That would declare unequivocally that attacking a NATO member will not be tolerated. That is assuming Putin to be a rational actor. And that he would react rationally to such a declaration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ElizabethB. Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 Pretty interesting how I see people on sites like Reddit, who despise the conservatives and their simplistic "they hate our freedoms" answer to policy issues, fall over themselves to construct an image of Putin as some madman who spends his days masturbating over a map of the USSR, one finger poised on The Button, ready to end us all.How would you construct mr. P? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Castel Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 Castel,I think Putin is afraid of NATO. And a very rational deterant to Putin taking any further action is to show, by forward placement of NATO troops, that NATO will not allow the Baltics to fall without a serious fight. That would declare unequivocally that attacking a NATO member will not be tolerated.That is assuming Putin to be a rational actor. And that he would react rationally to such a declaration.NATO has already been making noises to reassure its member states have they not? But I find the view put forth here far less objectionable (even though I'm less worried about some Russia-NATO war than you)than the directionless "We're back to the Cuban Missile Crisis because Putin annexed a territory I couldn't give less of a shit about two weeks before" whining that comes up on the sites I visit. That's why I specifically used reddit. I was venting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted March 16, 2015 Author Share Posted March 16, 2015 Castel,My fear is that words without firm actions supporting those words will be seen as weakness, an opening, and a willingness to abandon the Baltics. That would be an opportunity to divide or destroy NATO and end its perceived threat to Russia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Castel Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 Castel,My fear is that words without firm actions supporting those words will be seen as weakness, an opening, and a willingness to abandon the Baltics. That would be an opportunity to divide or destroy NATO and end its perceived threat to Russia.Yes. We disagree on whether the status quo (plus recent rumblings) is weak enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arakan Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 Castel,My fear is that words without firm actions supporting those words will be seen as weakness, an opening, and a willingness to abandon the Baltics. That would be an opportunity to divide or destroy NATO and end its perceived threat to Russia.Eh, Ser Scot, you are aware that NATO is already doing what they can do, i.e. strengthening its presence in the Baltic countries and Poland, arent you?What kind of more "firm action" do you propose? Maybe a pre-emptive strike on Kaliningrad? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted March 16, 2015 Author Share Posted March 16, 2015 Castel,That's a fair assessment. I simply think that Putin isn't one to be detered by words alone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.