Tango01 | 17 Apr 2015 10:05 p.m. PST |
…train national guard, US army says. "Hundreds of US paratroopers have arrived in Ukraine to train its forces fighting pro-Russian rebels, the US army says, in a move that Moscow says could "destabilise" the war-torn ex-Soviet country. The troops from the 173rd Airborne Brigade arrived on Tuesday and Wednesday in Yavoriv, western Ukraine, to spend six months training three battalions of Ukrainian troops, the army said in a statement. "We will have about 300 soldiers from the brigade on the ground providing the training that will last over the next six months," said US army spokesman Donald Wrenn. The move raised hackles in Moscow, which accuses the United States of backing the protests that brought down Ukraine's Kremlin-backed president Viktor Yanukovych last year…" Full article here link Amicalement Armand |
David in Coffs | 18 Apr 2015 7:19 a.m. PST |
I told them to take the unit patches off and call them volunteers! ;-( |
Tango01 | 18 Apr 2015 10:35 a.m. PST |
|
Legion 4 | 18 Apr 2015 11:29 a.m. PST |
Well sounds like this would be a good deployment. I know back in the day this would be the kind of training I'd like to do. |
Mako11 | 18 Apr 2015 1:55 p.m. PST |
Aren't they just guys on vacation? It is still Spring Break in some locales. If not, perhaps their navigational, and map reading skills need remedial attention. |
GeoffQRF | 18 Apr 2015 2:42 p.m. PST |
The location is the training area they use annually for Trident, which is hosted by Ukraine. The US are regular attendees and the number is comparable to that normally sent, so it's nothing out of the ordinary. Training in 'soft skills', medical support, orienteering, etc has been on the cards for several months. However I suspect the timing may be deliberately chosen to add a little counter-pressure to a potential buildup by the separatists, who are already trying to change the terms of the Minsk Agreement by demanding complete independence for the entire Donetsk and Lughansk oblasts. link "A senior separatist leader in eastern Ukraine has claimed an agreed ceasefire deal will fail unless Kiev recognises the independence of rebel-held areas. Aleksandr Zakharchenko told the BBC he wanted to expand the self-proclaimed Donetsk People's Republic (DNR)." |
Mako11 | 18 Apr 2015 3:29 p.m. PST |
From what I read, pretty much daily, there really is no "real" ceasefire, but merely a reduction in the level of hostilities. Sounds like there is still a lot of low-level fighting going on, and in some cases, including rockets/heavy artillery fire, and tanks. |
gamertom | 18 Apr 2015 7:52 p.m. PST |
I had lunch with a coworker yesterday whose oldest son is in Kiev. He's an ex-Marine who wound up doing time for a drug conviction and found he could not find employment after he was released. Some ex-Marines he knew recently contacted him about contract work in the Ukraine and he went over there to teach Ukrainian forces how to work on communication equipment. He was supposed to be in Kiev, but found himself along the ceasefire boundary doing the teaching. He recently called his mom from a hospital in Kiev, not because he had been wounded, but because he had contracted bad food poisoning from some wretched rations he had been given. This has gotten me wondering how many US ex-military types are in contracts with the Ukrainians. I doubt it's anywhere near the number of Russians in the eastern provinces, but this isn't something I've seen discussed much in the media. |
Noble713 | 18 Apr 2015 11:57 p.m. PST |
Really makes you wonder how many ex-mil guys we have plying the trade *EVERYWHERE*. OIF/OEF gave a LOT of men operational experience. When you consider the poor state of the US economy, the alarmingly-high rates of homelessness/ poverty/suicide for veterans, and the US educational system's general inability to easily-retrain the labor force (granted at least we get the GI Bill to help with that, I'm using it myself right now)….point is there is probably a huge number of experienced men quietly doing what Uncle Sam trained them for in the "private sector". |
Lion in the Stars | 19 Apr 2015 11:17 a.m. PST |
If I had been a combat type instead of an office admin weenie, I'd probably be in one of the hellholes right now. Been more than 2 years since I graduated with a business degree in HR, and nothing in my degree field. No employment at all, to tell you the truth. |
USAFpilot | 19 Apr 2015 12:29 p.m. PST |
Ukraine was once part of the Soviet Union. Ukraine borders Russia. Ukraine is not part of NATO. So why does the US continue to poke Russia in the eye? How did the US feel when the Soviets where poking around in our hemisphere by deploying missiles to Cuba back in the 60s? I realize it is not the same thing. The point is this will only escalate tensions between our two countries. We should be working together to destroy Islamic radicalism. |
CFeicht | 19 Apr 2015 6:36 p.m. PST |
It's Russia pulling the strings here. We'd have nothing to react to without the Russian involvement in Ukraine. |
Petrov | 19 Apr 2015 8:37 p.m. PST |
We have a defense treating with Ukraine, they gave up their nuclear weapons in exchange for protection from USA and England. Maybe russians need to stop poking around in Ukraine and go back to their vodka induced stupor in moscow. |
GeoffQRF | 20 Apr 2015 7:09 a.m. PST |
Ukraine borders Russia So does Poland, Slovakia, Hungary and Romania, all EU and NATO members. We have a defense treating with Ukraine, they gave up their nuclear weapons in exchange for protection from USA and England. Unfortunately all the Budapest Memorandum did was provide "…security assurances against threats or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine as well as those of Belarus* and Kazakhstan". There was no actual remit to provide protection, merely 'assurances', and no recourse for Ukraine in the event that one of them (in this case Russia) fails to meet the conditions of the treaty. Of course it means any treaty Russia signs may be viewed with suspicion from now on… "We are signing this as a binding agreement" "Is this binding as in binding, or like it was with Ukraine?" Russia has been stirring up trouble in Crimea for some time. In 1994 Meshkov tried issuing Russian passports and currency. In 2003 Russia tried to build and annex an island close to Crimea, eventually giving it up in 2012. The Orange Revolution of 2005 also saw pressure over the naval base, which was linked to the low price gas. On seizing Crimea Russia gained the base (indefinitely) without having to supply the low price gas (ever) – a convenient change of terms. I still think Ukraine should be allowed to bill Russia, on a 'per hectare' value. $200 USDbn should just about do it… |
Legion 4 | 20 Apr 2015 8:18 a.m. PST |
I realize it is not the same thing. The point is this will only escalate tensions between our two countries. We should be working together to destroy Islamic radicalism.
I agree USAF, but like other "proxy" wars in the past. The Old School USSR/KGB types see anything that causes trouble to the US, UK, etc., is a plus. Of course the US support of the Muj was payback for the Russian support of the VC/NVA. And so it goes. Old habits, old hatreds, etc. … I highly doubt the Russians and the US will ever fight jointly to combat islamic terrorism. Which IMO is a much bigger threat to the world then Putin playing "little Stalin" in his own backyard. At least at this time. Just like during the Cold War '45-'90. It's a chess game between the US/NATO and the Russians. With islamic terrorism, it's just medieval barbarity fueled by corrupted religious ideology. And unrelenting hatred of the "infidels" … At least we can talk and maybe even try to bargain with the Russians. Not so much with Daesh, AQ, etc., etc. … |
USAFpilot | 20 Apr 2015 10:00 a.m. PST |
Let's not forget the absurdity of World War I and the lessons we supposedly learned. All those treaties plunged the world into war over what? Some Albanian Duke getting assassinated by a radical Serb in Sarajevo. These agreements between big nations and little nations can end up dragging us all down. NATO served its purpose during the cold war. It is very dangerous to expand it and start playing around in Russia's back yard. On a side not, the West has always been very critical of Russia in them dealing with their own radical Islam problems (ie Chechnya). The Russian intelligence agencies even warned us ahead of time about individuals responsible for the Boston Marathon bombing. We have a common enemy that reaches into both our homelands. |
Tango01 | 20 Apr 2015 11:01 a.m. PST |
Agree with you. Amicalement Armand |
Petrov | 20 Apr 2015 11:04 a.m. PST |
|
Legion 4 | 20 Apr 2015 2:58 p.m. PST |
Let's not forget the absurdity of World War I and the lessons we supposedly learned. All those treaties plunged the world into war over what? Some Albanian Duke getting assassinated by a radical Serb in Sarajevo. These agreements between big nations and little nations can end up dragging us all down. NATO served its purpose during the cold war. It is very dangerous to expand it and start playing around in Russia's back yard. On a side not, the West has always been very critical of Russia in them dealing with their own radical Islam problems (ie Chechnya). The Russian intelligence agencies even warned us ahead of time about individuals responsible for the Boston Marathon bombing. We have a common enemy that reaches into both our homelands.
All very true USAF … But I may be a little biased and jaded after my time on active duty, '79-'90. Maybe my mistrust of the Russians it still somewhere in the '80s. It would be great if the Russians were helping out more directly in the War on Terrorism. They did and are furnishing weapons to Syria which is up to Assad's in Daesh, AQ, etc., etc. … They did just deliver some, IIRC, Havoc Gunships that the Iraqs purchased previously. But selling S-300s to Iran … not so sure if I'd call that a good thing right now ? |
GeoffQRF | 20 Apr 2015 3:59 p.m. PST |
It is very dangerous to expand it and start playing around in Russia's back yard. This is still assuming that this whole thing has been led by NATOs desire to expand and contain Russia. It fails to take into account that these countries feel threatened, and are seeking some form of mutually supportive defence |
Legion 4 | 20 Apr 2015 4:13 p.m. PST |
Yes, many of the former Warsaw Pact don't have much love for their former Russian "allies". |
USAFpilot | 20 Apr 2015 5:22 p.m. PST |
I can't say I disagree with anything posted on this thread so far. All the viewpoints posted have their merit. I'm former active duty myself and have patriotic feelings toward my county, but I think our foreign policy is terrible. It has mostly always been but in particular these last few years. The Middle East is more unstable then it has been in a long time in part due to our interference. Plenty of blame to go around to both parties. The "Arab Spring" was a pipe dream. Libya, Syria, Iraq: are any of them better off now then before our meddling. I much prefer the Middle East of the 1980's when Iran and Iraq were at war with each other and we were secretly aiding both sides at various times. Much safer for the rest of the world at large. As far as Russia is concerned, I have to say I admire Putin. He is a strong leader and his people are behind him. There seems to be a resurgence of nationalism in his country which may not bode well with Russia's neighbors. He was very effective at taking over Crimea in good order in a very short time and has since shifted the world's focus to eastern Ukraine. I don't know what the answer is, but I wish my President would heed the words of Teddy Roosevelt and "speak softly, but carry a big stick" instead of doing just the opposite. |
Petrov | 20 Apr 2015 5:53 p.m. PST |
The people are not behind him but are afraid of him. Any one with half a brain or some money already fled russia. We are not playing in russians backyard, russia is playing in worlds backyard, they set a record number of invasions and onverthrough in satelite states. |
Barin1 | 21 Apr 2015 3:05 a.m. PST |
Actually…not. We might not be supportive of his internal policies, as he favours large companies, ruled or owned by his friends or supporters, but support for his external policies is the highest. Also, recent actions for "import replacement" give large chances for state support for local producers….pretty bad for those like me who work for international companies. The longer sanctions will be in effect, the stronger local support will be. Putin is smart enough to keep the pensions and wages for police/military at tolerable levels. While a lot of rich crooks indeed fled Russia, rising property prices in London and Nice, the biggest palyers are still there….and why should they run as long as they have Putin;s support? Russia is bad for medium business, tolerable for small business and pretty good for large business – bcs if you are large, you know the ropes. This year I've visited most of FSU countries as we need to check if we can keep the sales by replacing some of Russian business with other countries…and let me say, that we're in the middle of another round of Big Game. Everywhere, in every possible moment two powers are trying to grab influence, put their proxies into power, support opposition or most authoritarian and corrupt leaders if it suits the goals…It is the same story in all of these countries, however China is becoming a strong player in Central Asia too. Watch this space for more trouble soon… |
Legion 4 | 21 Apr 2015 9:43 a.m. PST |
I can't say I disagree with anything posted on this thread so far. All the viewpoints posted have their merit. I'm former active duty myself and have patriotic feelings toward my county, but I think our foreign policy is terrible. It has mostly always been but in particular these last few years. We are pretty much cut from the same cloth, it seems … |
Legion 4 | 21 Apr 2015 9:45 a.m. PST |
Barin1 being former Russian Army, IIRC, and being a citizen of Russia. Obviously has some good insights from that side of the fence. |
cwlinsj | 21 Apr 2015 10:47 a.m. PST |
Problem with Putin is that he is just a "strongman" and doesn't have any real policies or a political succession in place. I also think that he reached this point due to inaction by the West during his early days. But, like all strongmen, they live, they dominate, and their empire falls-apart upon their death. While I don't like what's happening in Europe, I can at least understand why many Europeans want to wait-it-out with his regime. |
Lion in the Stars | 21 Apr 2015 3:39 p.m. PST |
But, like all strongmen, they live, they dominate, and their empire falls-apart upon their death. And where do the nuclear weapons go when Russia implodes after the death of Czar Vlad? |
tuscaloosa | 21 Apr 2015 5:59 p.m. PST |
"As far as Russia is concerned, I have to say I admire Putin. He is a strong leader and his people are behind him. There seems to be a resurgence of nationalism in his country which may not bode well with Russia's neighbors. He was very effective at taking over Crimea in good order in a very short time and has since shifted the world's focus to eastern Ukraine. I don't know what the answer is, but I wish my President would heed the words of Teddy Roosevelt and "speak softly, but carry a big stick" instead of doing just the opposite." As far as Germany is concerned, I have to say I admire Hitler. He is a strong leader and his people are behind him. There seems to be a resurgence of nationalism in his country which may not bode well with Germany's neighbors. He was very effective at taking over the Rhineland/ Sudetenland in good order in a very short time and has since shifted the world's attention to the Danzig Corridor. I wish my President would heed the words of Teddy Roosevelt…. |
Weasel | 21 Apr 2015 9:27 p.m. PST |
Oh give it up. Putin is not Hitler in any way, shape or form. There are big, gaping holes in my family tree because of Hitler. There are no holes because of Putin. |
GeoffQRF | 21 Apr 2015 10:35 p.m. PST |
Ah, but were those holes in your family tree there in 1936, or only in 1945? |
Mako11 | 22 Apr 2015 12:00 a.m. PST |
"There are no holes because of Putin". Perhaps not in your family, but I suspect a lot of people that live, or lived in Crimea, Eastern Ukraine, or in some families in Russia would disagree vociferously with your statement. |
Barin1 | 22 Apr 2015 3:42 a.m. PST |
Personally, I think he could have saved some people on "Kursk", if he asked for the help right after the accident, and he is partly responsible for "Nord-Ost" hostages poisoning. Crimea – no victims (there was a man, who died during stand-off several days before the annexation), Easten Ukraine – well, there can be a lot of people who can be blamed for the deaths there and not only in Russia and Ukraine. But you're right, that people tend to look differently to leaders when they were not on a "wrong" side. I was surprised to found that in my company there's plenty of people of different age who has a high opinion on Stalin. No surprise, that their families somehow escaped all purges, famine and suffering.Their grandfathers returned from WWII, and made to certain positions under Stalin. When I tell them that my mother's parents were kicked from their home in 30s just bcs. some neighbours thought them rich and had all their posessions confiscated one of the guys replied, that may be some starving peasants were saved…ok, most of the family died in pre-war period and on the fronts, and my father's family were labeled as enemies of the state. Nobody can convince me that Stalin was a good guy, even that I can acknowledge that he might be an important part in WWII victory. If we talk about him, we're talking about dozens of millions deaths. There's not much rulers in post-wwI period who can be on par with him apart of Hitler & Japanese military. But in the end you hear that to fight the monsters you have to be a monster… |
Petrov | 22 Apr 2015 7:35 a.m. PST |
When Stalin died my Great grandfather ( a veteran of WW2 and Winter War) locked himself in the room for 3 days and saw no one. My grandma told me he did this so my grandma (his daughter) could not see his happy face and tears of joy. Grandma said she was so brainwashed she would have turned him in. |
Legion 4 | 22 Apr 2015 9:18 a.m. PST |
Saw on CNN yesterday, that Putin who is friends with Steven Seagal, want's him to be on the US negotiation team. Also the US was considering Arnold, "The [former] Govinator" to be the new US Ambassador to Russia or some similar position. Besides his "macho" resume'. He fluently speaks German, which Putin likes to converse in, the report stated. Hey … don't shoot the messenger ! But that is what the report said. You couldn't make this stuff up ! I can think of a number of other guys that could be on Arnold's staff/crew/team. Willis, Stallon, Lungren … Hell, just the cast from "The Expendables" ! Both movies ! |