RU U.S. Warns Allies of Possible Russian Incursion as Troops Amass Near Ukraine - Red Dawn 2


American intelligence officials are warning allies that there is a short window of time to prevent Russia from taking military action in Ukraine, pushing European countries to work with the United States to develop a package of economic and military measures to deter Moscow, according to American and European officials.

Russia has not yet decided what it intends to do with the troops it has amassed near Ukraine, American officials said, but the buildup is being taken seriously and the United States is not assuming it is a bluff.

Avril D. Haines, the director of national intelligence, traveled to Brussels this week to brief NATO ambassadors about American intelligence on the situation and a possible Russian military intervention in Ukraine. Ms. Haines’s trip was long planned and covered a variety issues, but the growing concerns over Russia were among the short-term threats discussed, according to officials briefed on them.

The United States has also been sharing intelligence with Ukraine. And on Friday, Gen. Mark A. Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, spoke with Lt. Gen. Valery Zaluzhny, the commander in chief of Ukraine’s military, to discuss Russia’s “concerning activity in the area,” the Joint Staff said in a statement.

American and British intelligence are increasingly convinced that President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia is considering military action to take control of a larger swath of Ukraine, or to destabilize the country enough to usher in a more pro-Moscow government.

American and allied officials sounded an alarm in April, as Moscow built up forces near its border with Ukraine. But the current buildup, which appears to involve more troops and sophisticated weaponry, has engendered more concerns — particularly as Russia has moved to jam Ukrainian surveillance drones. Hostilities have also spiked since Ukraine used one of its drones to attack a separatist howitzer, prompting Russia to scramble jets.

“It’s not inevitable that there’s going to be an increase of kinetic conflict, but all the pieces are in place,” said Frederick B. Hodges, the former top U.S. Army commander in Europe now with the Center for European Policy Analysis. “If we, the West, look like we are not cohesive and ready to work together, then the risk of the Kremlin making a terrible miscalculation goes up.”

American intelligence officials have told allies that Mr. Putin has grown frustrated with the peace process set up by France and Germany in 2014 after Russia annexed Ukraine’s Crimean Peninsula and engineered a separatist rebellion in eastern Ukraine.

Some former officials say Mr. Putin could be intent on securing a land route between eastern Ukraine and Crimea. And American analysts believe Mr. Putin sees the next few months as a unique moment to act.

With Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany leaving the world stage, there is less pressure on Ukraine to make concessions. Without a coalition in Germany, there is little leadership in Berlin.

Rising energy prices have made Europe more dependent on cheap Russian gas supplies, especially as winter deepens and gas reserves in Europe drop further. Fear of losing access to Russian energy could limit Europe’s support of tough sanctions.

Russia has already begun manipulating energy supplies in Europe, a Western official based in Brussels said. When energy prices rise, the official said, Mr. Putin feels he has more latitude to act.

And with rising prices and limited supplies, Russia has more money to pay for military operations, according to current and former officials.

American officials want to create a “common prescription” of actions the United States and Europe would take, should Russia move against Ukraine militarily. While there are parts of Russia’s economy that have not been subjected to sanctions, the United States will need to build support in Europe for new measures to be effective.

On Thursday, as Ms. Haines was leaving Brussels, the Senate confirmed Julianne Smith to become the next U.S. ambassador to NATO. Her nomination had been held up for months by Senator Ted Cruz, Republican of Texas, complicating American efforts to form a united response to the growing threat to Ukraine.

At NATO, Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg has offered his own warnings about Russia. Speaking in Berlin on Friday, Mr. Stoltenberg described the “large and unusual” concentration of Russian forces on Ukraine’s border. “It is urgent that Russia shows transparency about its military build up, de-escalate and reduce tensions,” he said.

Russia sent troops to a site in Crimea called Cape Opuk and moved a larger number to a former warehouse complex near the Russian town of Pavlovsk. The deployments put Russian tanks, howitzers and Iskander short-range ballistic missiles within striking distance of Ukraine’s border, according to a recent report from the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Earlier in the week, Lloyd J. Austin III, the secretary of defense, also said the Russian troop buildup was a matter of concern. “We’re not sure exactly what Mr. Putin is up to, but these movements certainly have our attention,” he said.

The growing worry about Russian intentions comes after William J. Burns, the C.I.A. director, traveled to Moscow this month at the behest of President Biden to warn against any action against Ukraine.

American officials warned Russia that using its forces to intimidate Ukraine or take more territory was unacceptable and would prompt a strong reaction from the West.

While some cautioned that it was too soon to judge Moscow’s reactions, others briefed on the meeting believed Russia was not taking seriously the threat of a tough response.

Intelligence officials are still wrestling with the possible connections between the migrant crisis on the Polish-Belarusian border and Russia’s military buildup on the border with Ukraine.

Intelligence officials have not found direct involvement of Russia in the Belarusian border crisis, and some believe President Aleksandr G. Lukashenko of Belarus engineered it with little or no input from Russia.

On Friday, the Polish government announced that Ms. Haines had met in Warsaw with Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki and other officials to discuss security on NATO’s “eastern flank.” The meetings, the government said, were conducted at the request of the United States.

Mr. Putin has a long history of using drama in neighboring countries to advance his own interests. NATO countries, said the Western official, need to be mindful that the Belarusian crisis and troop buildup on Ukraine’s border are occurring at the same time.

“Putin is very fleet of foot,” said Jim Townsend, a former senior Pentagon official. “I think he likes diversionary things. This plays into his hands. All eyes are on the Belarus border. Meanwhile, he is putting together what he feels might need to go into Ukraine.”

Any response to Russia’s deployments should be carefully calibrated to avoid escalating the situation and further endangering Ukraine, American and European officials said.

“We have to be ready to be tough,” Mr. Townsend said. “We don’t have to go bomb something. But we have to be clever in how we show our military capability.”
 
This is the same SecDef who said climate change was very important to the US armed forces, caused brutal morale drops by fucking up Afghanistan, the vaccine nonsense, and the other social engineering policies. I doubt anyone in the Pentagon can win a game of HoI4, let alone actually engage even a paper tiger like Russia. I do have faith that Ukraine could probably put up enough of a fight that they would be able to hold off long enough for actually useful allies to come and save them, or threaten Russia with even more economic damage they can't take.
Also Milley is a dumb faggot who has more medals than actual command skills, so I have no faith in him either.
 
Who though?
Off the top of my head, the closest and strongest they got is Poland. But if Poland makes a move, there's no way in hell the EU or NATO will stand by. More of a domino effect. It's also why I think this is all bluster to drum up support for the sinking trust the average American has in the military: Putin has too much to lose if he goes after Ukraine right now.

2014 Ukraine vs 2021 Ukraine are two vastly different countries and armies first off, and Russia has pissed off and worried enough of its neighbors they are ganging together in case something happens, Ukraine and Poland very much included. The Baltic countries may get involved, but I doubt that.
 
Do Biden's handlers really want to start a war with Russia to prevent the Republicans from getting back in (as wartime presidents typically don't get voted out)
 
It's gonna be a nothing burger. Same shit happened when Russia held their yearly exercises earlier this year, and the year before, and the year before that.

There wouldn't even be a net benefit for Russia to invade Ukraine either.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Satina
even a paper tiger like Russia
i'd say at this point america is more of a paper tiger than russia
us military still has a massive advantage in materiel, technology, and global power projection via naval forces, but america is so thoroughly crippled by internal political corruption that all of this is as nothing, even in the face of a technologically and economically inferior adversary. what the russians lack in cutting edge equipment they make up for in morale, leadership, political unity and stability.
 
i'd say at this point america is more of a paper tiger than russia
us military still has a massive advantage in materiel, technology, and global power projection via naval forces, but america is so thoroughly crippled by internal political corruption that all of this is as nothing, even in the face of a technologically and economically inferior adversary. what the russians lack in cutting edge equipment they make up for in morale, leadership, political unity and stability.
Morale? Stability?

The Russian military has had brutal hazing issues ever since 1967 when criminals started getting conscripted and some of the draftees got three-year terms instead of just two. Unit cohesion in the Red Army is where your unit's sergeant pimps you out to the company starshina as opposed to one in a different company. As to stability... I'd hardly call a place that's second to China for demographic issues and is notorious for killing the pain of living in Russia with enough vodka to give anyone but a Finn liver damage. Not to mention that the Ukraine invasion was bloody enough (hell, is bloody enough since they keep digging mass graves every so often) that Putin had to crack down on the details of KiA soldiers getting out since people were starting to agitate about the body count. They're not exactly 1980's level of fucked, but there is zero appetite in Russia for any sort of large-scale conflict.
 
Putin has too much to lose if he goes after Ukraine right now.
He has a real problem with the Crimea, Ukraine cut water to the peninsula and there is no easy solution for Russia to resolve the situation in the near term. Russia really wants to move the border to the Dnieper as its a natural border rather than the abitrary Soviet administrative lines that spawned most of these countries out of the SSR.
 
Off the top of my head, the closest and strongest they got is Poland. But if Poland makes a move, there's no way in hell the EU or NATO will stand by. More of a domino effect. It's also why I think this is all bluster to drum up support for the sinking trust the average American has in the military: Putin has too much to lose if he goes after Ukraine right now.

2014 Ukraine vs 2021 Ukraine are two vastly different countries and armies first off, and Russia has pissed off and worried enough of its neighbors they are ganging together in case something happens, Ukraine and Poland very much included. The Baltic countries may get involved, but I doubt that.

Poland was the only NATO country who was even remotely willing to intervene in 2014. The Poles have zero fucks to give about engaging Russian intransigence. Poland and France are likely going to be the real military powers in Europe for the next 30-50 years.
 
Morale? Stability?

The Russian military has had brutal hazing issues ever since 1967 when criminals started getting conscripted and some of the draftees got three-year terms instead of just two. Unit cohesion in the Red Army is where your unit's sergeant pimps you out to the company starshina as opposed to one in a different company. As to stability... I'd hardly call a place that's second to China for demographic issues and is notorious for killing the pain of living in Russia with enough vodka to give anyone but a Finn liver damage. Not to mention that the Ukraine invasion was bloody enough (hell, is bloody enough since they keep digging mass graves every so often) that Putin had to crack down on the details of KiA soldiers getting out since people were starting to agitate about the body count. They're not exactly 1980's level of fucked, but there is zero appetite in Russia for any sort of large-scale conflict.
russia doesn't get nationwide revolts that light multiple cities on fire whenever some nigger gets murked by cops though
like, at one point in 2020 rioters were close to laying siege to the fucking white house. with shit like that going on, america is in no condition to commit to anything abroad, not even close
 
russia doesn't get nationwide revolts that light multiple cities on fire whenever some nigger gets murked by cops though
like, at one point in 2020 rioters were close to laying siege to the fucking white house. with shit like that going on, america is in no condition to commit to anything abroad, not even close
Yes. But despite the best attempts by the left to tear down the walls of literally everything we still have a steady foundation (for now, admittedly), whereas Russia has what foundation? Oil exports and excise taxes on booze and cigs do not a country make. Shit, several years back a minister implored Russian men, already drinking and smoking themselves to death with an average life expectancy of about 66 right now which is about the highest its ever been, that it was their patriotic duty to drink more and smoke more because the government had a revenue shortfall. They've had a steady population shrink since 1992 to the point that not even annexing Crimea has enough to make up for their total losses. Russia is stable in the same way a pile of junk is stable. I won't make any Hitleresque statements about just giving the whole thing one solid kick, but its a hell of a lot easier to pummel them to death than the USA.
 
They've trotted this out every 3 or 4 years since 2008 and American "people" still haven't learned.
Something is bound to happen eventually. Countries expand and recede all the time. The Soviet Union collapsed over the course of a few years.
 
Every 3 or 4 years? A clone (the original?) of this article was posted just a week or two ago. I guess no one gives a shit because they're sick of fake casus belli and forever wars.
 
come on.png
 
Back