Tango01 | 21 Jun 2015 9:41 p.m. PST |
"American battle tanks will be deployed to Bulgaria this weekend and conduct live-fire exercises across the Black Sea from Russia for the first time. As part of a maneuver dubbed "Power Shock," the pair of M1A2 Abrams battle tanks are scheduled to be flown from Ramstein Air Base in Germany to the Novo Selo training area in Bulgaria. They'll be joined by 15 U.S. Army soldiers from the "Speed and Power" battalion out of Fort Stewart, Georgia. The training exercise is part of a series of NATO war games taking place at Europe's eastern borders in the wake of Russia's annexation of Ukraine's Crimea region. Earlier this week, Vladimir Putin announced that Russia would add more than 40 new intercontinental ballistic missiles to its nuclear arsenal this year. Bulgaria was a close ally of Moscow during the Soviet era but joined NATO in 2004…" Full article here link
Amicalement Armand |
Legion 4 | 22 Jun 2015 6:02 a.m. PST |
… gett'n colder … Hope the Russians like the weather. I was going to say Putin and his pals. But with his high popularity rating he obviously has a lot of support from his countrymen. |
FatherOfAllLogic | 22 Jun 2015 7:32 a.m. PST |
So two tanks and fifteens soldiers is a training exercise? That'll impress the Russians! |
Tango01 | 22 Jun 2015 10:12 a.m. PST |
|
Mako11 | 22 Jun 2015 1:20 p.m. PST |
Let's see, virtually no military value at all, but this is a coup to the Russian propagandists who can point to actual American forces in a neighboring country, so supporting their claims about "colonial expansionism", and the threat that poses to Mother Russia. Clearly, someone needs to stick to playing checkers, since we've lost the chess match, before it's even started. |
tuscaloosa | 22 Jun 2015 3:40 p.m. PST |
"…this is a coup to the Russian propagandists who can point to actual American forces in a neighboring country" You think so? I don't agree with this interpretation at all. And despite the historical ties, Bulgaria isn't "neighboring". |
Tgunner | 22 Jun 2015 6:37 p.m. PST |
Let's see, virtually no military value at all, but this is a coup to the Russian propagandists who can point to actual American forces in a neighboring country, so supporting their claims about "colonial expansionism", and the threat that poses to Mother Russia. And it helps the Eastern NATO countries feel more at ease that the US is there and will help them if Russia get frisky in the near future. Plus it's just two tanks, a whole whopping section… hardly threatening to anyone with any level of common sense.
Power Shock is designed "to test the ability to rapidly deploy our forces," Capt. Randy Ready from the 3rd Infantry Division told NBC News. Somewhere I hear a Brit snarfing his beer and falling out of his seat laughing! referred to as 3-69 armor (sic). Oh good heavens. It's a proper noun!! 3-69 Armor… seesh!! Although I seem remember the correct way to write this is 3/69 Armor. |
Mako11 | 22 Jun 2015 11:50 p.m. PST |
I suspect Putin, and many Russian citizens will see it differently (and of course, they'll gloss over the TWO number of the tanks), and yes, anything bordering on the Black Sea (Russia's lake) is bordering (just like Crimea). Do you think two tanks are really going to make them feel better, especially since I suspect they know they won't get any more support, if/when a real attack from Russia, or "little green men" occurs? Given how well NATO protected Georgia, Crimea (not to mention Hungary, Czech., Afghanistan, etc.), and now failed to aid Ukraine with anything other than MREs, and first aid kits, I suspect they should be very concerned. |
Prince of Derekness | 23 Jun 2015 8:23 a.m. PST |
Poor old Captain Randy; God I miss Sid James! |
Lion in the Stars | 23 Jun 2015 6:12 p.m. PST |
Why would NATO deploy soldiers into the Ukraine for anything other than training? It's not like the treaty between the US, USSR, and the Ukraine mandated an armed response if someone failed to respect the borders of the Ukraine! |
tuscaloosa | 23 Jun 2015 8:49 p.m. PST |
"3-69 Armor… seesh!! Although I seem remember the correct way to write this is 3/69 Armor" No, 3-69 is if the unit is a battalion, but of only a historical designation, i.e. there is no actual current 69 Armor Reg't headquarters. 3/69 is if the 3rd Bn is subordinate to an actual 69th higher HQS. |
Legion 4 | 24 Jun 2015 6:30 a.m. PST |
I too believe that is correct … BTW, I was attached to 2-69 AR a number of times as a Mech Cdr, '87-'89 … |