The Baltics
header pic

College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!! The Best FREE College Football Forum on the Internet!!!

The 'Old' CFN/Scout Crowd- Enjoy Civil discussion, game analytics, in depth player and coaching 'takes' and discussing topics surrounding the game. You can even have your own free board, all you have to do is ask!!!

Anyone is welcomed and encouraged to join our FREE site and to take part in our community- a community with you- the user, the fan, -and the person- will be protected from intrusive actions and with a clean place to interact.


Author

Topic: The Baltics

 (Read 126 times)

Cincydawg

  • Global Moderator
  • Team Captain
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 5357
  • Liked:
The Baltics
« on: February 08, 2019, 07:56:39 PM »
https://taskandpurpose.com/army-outgunned-europe-russia-wargames?fbclid=IwAR3UxuI0FJqZt6GhbHIOle3huTVcVY9wtnqKc4t8b6dX5v8eivLUdXML2jo&utm_campaign=buffer&utm_content=bufferd16da&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com

These countries are in NATO and thus subject to Article 5.  That is a potential flash point that could be really ugly.  Russia has them flanked on three sides including what once was Prussia.  I don't expect Russia to go after the Baltics any time soon, they have their own issues.

China is the greater threat longer term I think.




gymvol

  • All Star
  • ******
  • Posts: 2822
  • Liked:
Re: The Baltics
« Reply #1 on: February 09, 2019, 12:02:48 AM »
Europe and the Eastern Bloc countries need to start spending their own money to build up a military to defend themselves.

NATO has grown into a quagmire for us because we are now committed to defending 29 countries with many of them part of the former Soviet Union and including Turkey.

We're providing not only the majority of the money for NATO but also the military men and equipment.

We're spending money defending people who are not are friends who work against the interest of the United States.  

They do business with Russia, Iran and other countries that sponsor terrorism around the world while expecting us to pay for a military to defend them.

It's time to get the hell out of NATO along with the United Nations too.

Cincydawg

  • Global Moderator
  • Team Captain
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 5357
  • Liked:
Re: The Baltics
« Reply #2 on: February 09, 2019, 08:54:12 AM »
I don't believe Turkey was ever part of the Soviet Union, if it matters.  The Baltic states were, but that would be it.  Turkey was a very early member of NATO.

Anyway, 3 out of 29 is not really "many" to me.  Some were part of the Warsaw Block, but not the SU.

gymvol

  • All Star
  • ******
  • Posts: 2822
  • Liked:
Re: The Baltics
« Reply #3 on: February 09, 2019, 09:37:40 AM »
I don't believe Turkey was ever part of the Soviet Union, if it matters.  The Baltic states were, but that would be it.  Turkey was a very early member of NATO.

Anyway, 3 out of 29 is not really "many" to me.  Some were part of the Warsaw Block, but not the SU.


You do have a problem understanding what you read.  If there is a school close by take a remedial course in both English and Reading you have a problem with both.

Cincydawg

  • Global Moderator
  • Team Captain
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 5357
  • Liked:
Re: The Baltics
« Reply #4 on: February 09, 2019, 09:41:01 AM »
"NATO has grown into a quagmire for us because we are now committed to defending 29 countries with many of them part of the former Soviet Union and including Turkey."

Many of them were not part of the Soviet Union including Turkey.  Three of them were, and none of them were Turkey, ever.

Three out of 29 is not "many" in my book. 

Cincydawg

  • Global Moderator
  • Team Captain
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 5357
  • Liked:
Re: The Baltics
« Reply #5 on: February 09, 2019, 09:54:41 AM »
Trump seems to have backed off any threat to withdraw from NATO.  The NATO countries have made some vague promises to spend more on defense, just as they did to Bush and Obama who criticized them the same way.  Right now, only three of them spend the 2% mandated, and one is a Baltic country.

They might be up to four now.

gymvol

  • All Star
  • ******
  • Posts: 2822
  • Liked:
Re: The Baltics
« Reply #6 on: February 09, 2019, 10:14:37 AM »
"NATO has grown into a quagmire for us because we are now committed to defending 29 countries with many of them part of the former Soviet Union and including Turkey."

Many of them were not part of the Soviet Union including Turkey.  Three of them were, and none of them were Turkey, ever.

Three out of 29 is not "many" in my book.  



Depends on what your meaning of many is and in this case it's over ten percent so that's many if I want to say it's many.

If you don't like it tough shit go whine about something else.

You were probably a whiney ass little kid that never grew out of it and you're still whining about the small things thinking it makes you look smart.

You need to grow up and quit being a whiney butt.



Cincydawg

  • Global Moderator
  • Team Captain
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 5357
  • Liked:
Re: The Baltics
« Reply #7 on: February 09, 2019, 10:38:43 AM »
Perhaps you could focus on being more clear and specific in your posts, or not, I do find them entertaining.

Cincydawg

  • Global Moderator
  • Team Captain
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 5357
  • Liked:
Re: The Baltics
« Reply #8 on: February 09, 2019, 10:40:30 AM »
Apparently, if Tennessee wins 2 games next year out of 12, we might opine they won many games that year.

Well, not "we" of course, as almost no one would maintain such a thing except after having made a rather obvious misstatement and being unwilling to retract or clarify it.  We all post things that are inartfully stated at times.  It can be best just to clarify and move on.

DunkingDan

  • Legend
  • ****
  • Posts: 7809
  • Liked:
Re: The Baltics
« Reply #9 on: February 09, 2019, 03:49:32 PM »

Depends on what your meaning of many is and in this case it's over ten percent so that's many if I want to say it's many.

If you don't like it tough shit go whine about something else.

You were probably a whiney ass little kid that never grew out of it and you're still whining about the small things thinking it makes you look smart.

You need to grow up and quit being a whiney butt.



Now now now Gym your arguing with the smartest prick alive. He has forgotten more than we will ever know.
We should be thankful we have such a  wonderful and gracious humble person to learn from.  
President Harry S. Truman said: “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount.  The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings…  If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.”

TREX

  • Global Moderator
  • Starter
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 1813
  • Liked:
Re: The Baltics
« Reply #10 on: February 09, 2019, 03:58:43 PM »
Ball Ticks sound scary. 

Had them lots of places but never there.


Cincydawg

  • Global Moderator
  • Team Captain
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 5357
  • Liked:
Re: The Baltics
« Reply #11 on: February 09, 2019, 05:18:12 PM »
It requires no insight or intelligence to appreciate that 3 out of 27 is not "many".  He made a mistake, obviously, and tries to pretend he didn't.


DunkingDan

  • Legend
  • ****
  • Posts: 7809
  • Liked:
Re: The Baltics
« Reply #12 on: February 09, 2019, 06:01:01 PM »
President Harry S. Truman said: “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount.  The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings…  If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.”

Cincydawg

  • Global Moderator
  • Team Captain
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 5357
  • Liked:
Re: The Baltics
« Reply #13 on: February 09, 2019, 06:05:13 PM »
I figure when people post memes and cartoons they are simply unable to respond intelligently with English and thoughts of their own.

I notice no one cared to discuss the actual issue raised here, that we appear to be unable to defend the Baltics militarily against any Russian incursion.

I'd imagine such an event would start with "green men" causing a disturbance and the Russians claiming the Russian people living in, say, Estonia needed their protection.  It's an oft used excuse, perhaps most famously in 1938, but more recently in Ukraine of course.

Then Russian troops come in to "provide stability".  

DunkingDan

  • Legend
  • ****
  • Posts: 7809
  • Liked:
Re: The Baltics
« Reply #14 on: February 09, 2019, 06:09:49 PM »
I figure when people post memes they are not talking about me
President Harry S. Truman said: “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount.  The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings…  If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.”

Drew4UTk

  • Administrator
  • All Star
  • *****
  • Posts: 3063
  • Liked:
Re: The Baltics
« Reply #15 on: February 09, 2019, 09:52:03 PM »
i'd have to type a tremendous amount here to justify my position, and i ain't talkin' my 'regular' tremendous amount, but tremendous even to me.... I'll spare y'all, but it will mean you have to accept my premise of conventional warfare being not near a threat it once was.  it will also require you to accept that the future of warfare will be 'small' (in terms of active fighters) and "0-100mph in two seconds flat" fast developing to the point of actual combat.  

for the future of warfare, i would take a regiment of supremely well trained and provisioned troops over a division of moderately trained and provisioned (think, perhaps, the 75th Regiment over 10th Mountain Division- or two MEUSOC's and a MAGTAF over the 3rdID.).... the caveat? I'll still be needing those boomers and B2's and supporting cast.  

In the past there were two factors that caused consternation among general's.  

the first was the FLOT (forward line of troops) and by extension, the FEBA (forward edge of battle area= FLOT+the maximum range of the weapons in their arsenal).  Strategies were to take ground no further than could be supported.  Lessons Learned for failing to heed this concept can be traced back to the earliest battles we're aware of all the way to the most recent conventional battles.  It's real simple: don't push any further than comfortable.  Stage- regroup- resupply- drag in the rear and prepare to extend again.  It's real simple- but it's damn hard to know when to stop. 

the second is more obvious but is also something harder to pin down.  

choosing your ground.   

ANY unit on the move is vulnerable, at least relative to defense.  Moving into an area well defended is going to cost you more often more than anticipated.  It's like building a home- factor in whatever variable you wish, and whatever figure you come up with: double it.  It's not real smart to entertain a frontal conventional battle seeking control over a position that's already well defended.  it's better to isolate that position and wait them out.. it's better to relentlessly bomb that area from afar (or air/naval) to wear them down... the only exception to this in modern warfare was offered by General Franks in (operation)OIF... it relied on the 'first' gulf war's extended bombing some 10 years prior and the enemy's (Iraq) memory of such... the US played it 'close to the vest' with the extremely propagandized 'shock and awe' that never materialized... because of the first experience of 30+days of bombardment, the Iraqi had 'dug in' to better withstand..... and when the war actually began they took to bunker- but never heard the expected bombs... when they stuck their heads out of the ground a few day's later to 'see what was happening', though they were 200+ miles from borders and prior US Military positions, well- the US Military sat looking at them.  This was brilliant strategy by Franks, and he doesn't get the credit he deserves- I'm certain he would have had the MSM been apprised of the tactics and not left completely embarrassed about how wrong they were.  this is an exception to this 'concern'- the 'shock and awe'- as the Iraqi unwittingly gave away their ground without knowing it.  this won't be repeated, i'm sure, at least successfully- but mentioning it is going to come into play in a few more lines of text.... 

changing gears momentarily.... 

Russian and China, in the late 20th and earliest 21st, were what most think tanks was going to be the next major conflict.  of course some hijacked planes changed their minds really quick.  both had eyes on, curiously, Nepal and Mongolia... they also both had eyes on Afghanistan.  So did we.  We didn't have a presence, and no cause to have a presence so it appeared we would 'sit that one out' and attempt some measure of diplomacy when one or the other either looked to be winning, or came to us with concessions enough to win our support.  Those planes changed that, and we moved into Afghanistan- which really frustrated both China and Russia.  In the end, and via clever slight of hand by the Chinese, China secured what they wanted anyway- and left us holding the bag empty handed otherwise. (related to mineral mining rights and some extremely valuable rare earth material highly valued by the tech industry).  This 'turn of events' allowed Russia and China to both stand down posturing.  Nepal and Mongolia were happy, i imagine, no?  it's only strange that they neither circled back around on that when you consider the likelihood of what them doing that would have caused- which very well could have been another world war.  they sat on the sidelines and watched us carefully.  

it's bizarre to me that prior to the first gulf war, like- just prior- old case studies in tactics employed in the Civil War were brushed off and revisited. Those tanks moving across the desert are hard to hide.  it was assumed to be much more like 'gentleman' warfare, with opposing forces standing opposite each other in plain view.  maneuvers become more important- enveloping and/or flanking- obscuring the intent until not possible anymore.  this is all on open terrain, mind you.  in an open terrain forces can be spread and more can be done with less.  protecting the 'caravan' becomes crucial, though, as a precision strike can remove the ability of a force to provide provisions.  

back on point:

we can strike anywhere in the world within hours now.  terrain be damned.  we can isolate, through the magic of network observation, crucial targets that are of extreme value to maintaining enemy force readiness.  if you were to remove them or neutralize them (the targets), the party falls apart.  In addition to our global reach, we also now have forces that can move into theater and stand alone for 90 days.  This gives the Army opportunity to move in- and once they do? they can sustain indefinitely (though with great expense).  we have also learned how to frustrate enemies with thousands of little tricks that disrupt communications, and break technologically advanced weapons before they can be deployed.    

eh..... I'm getting disinterested... if someone wants me to continue this rant and bring it into focus, i will.. otherwise, shalom.. 

Hoojang

  • Player
  • ****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 586
  • Liked:
Re: The Baltics
« Reply #16 on: February 09, 2019, 10:54:34 PM »
Do carry on.

Drew4UTk

  • Administrator
  • All Star
  • *****
  • Posts: 3063
  • Liked:
Re: The Baltics
« Reply #17 on: February 10, 2019, 01:02:30 PM »
.... it all boils down to Russia pretending they're a power when they simply couldn't sustain a fight, and they have single point of failure means of operation.  China would be stupid beyond stupid to do anything more than rattle their sabers in effort to gain economic edge- they NEED the US and its 'consumerism' in their model, which is propped up on that single point of failure.  they could sell to others, sure- but not what they're geared to sell to us which would require a full overhaul of their production. they'd have to take three steps back to take four steps forward.  


 

Amazon:
Support the Site:
Please Search Amazon from here!