ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2017 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Wednesday, January 04, 2017

This guy won a peace prize?

The neocons really appear to be desperate to start a war with Russia before Obama leaves office.
PRESIDENT Obama has deployed US special forces troops along Lithuania’s border with “aggressive” Russia.

Tensions between Washington and the Kremlin have reached Cold War levels amid reports Vladimir Putin is deploying nuke-ready missiles in the Russian province of Kaliningrad – which borders Poland, Belarus and Lithuania.

US military chief General Raymond T Thomas told the New York Times that America has a “persistent” presence in the Baltic states bordering Russia. He added that many former Eastern Bloc countries are “scared to death” of Russia and the vulnerable states are “desperate” for America’s leadership.

The US and its Nato allies will send battalions of up to 1,200 to each of the three Baltic states – Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia – and Poland by spring this year, reports the New York Times.

Lithuania’s foreign minister Linas Linkevicius confirmed Russia’s military activity in Kaliningrad is terrifying the region. He said: “Iskander missiles capable of carrying nuclear warheads have been deployed. There are S-400 missiles and modernised jets.”
Still doubt that a Hillary Clinton victory would have meant war? However, I don't think Putin is having any of it, as his restrained response to the expulsion of the 35 Russian diplomats tends to demonstrate. He knows Trump isn't going to embroil the USA in a war just to please the neocons.

This is astonishingly dumb on so many levels. How, exactly, are special forces troops supposed to defend against nuclear warheads?

Labels: ,

149 Comments:

Blogger Off The Wall January 04, 2017 1:50 PM  

... How are special forces supposed to defend against nuclear ...

They aren't. Most likely reason is that they are the only force ready to deploy. You know Obama is all about virtue-signalling.

Anonymous VFM#1819 January 04, 2017 1:54 PM  

How, exactly, are special forces troops supposed to defend against nuclear warheads?

I am reliably informed that they are able to hide in antique refrigerators which will be dropped to them on the front from flying saucers with crystal-boned aliens inside.

Anonymous Napoleon 12pdr January 04, 2017 1:56 PM  

A lot of the political establishment still thinks in Cold War terms. Especially the Democrats.

Russia is playing the Great Power Game, trying to maximize their influence. Frankly, Putin is holding a poor hand, but playing it very skillfully.

Russia is a rival, not an enemy. Trump seems to understand this more than Obama ever could.

Blogger Feather Blade January 04, 2017 1:59 PM  

Why can't the Golfer-in-Chief stay on the links for the last of his term? He never had a problem doing that before.

16 days.

Just 16 more days.

Blogger Noah B The MacroAggressor January 04, 2017 1:59 PM  

"How, exactly, are special forces troops supposed to defend against nuclear warheads?"

By preemptively destroying the nukes on the ground, possibly. Let's hope Obama isn't stupid enough to try that.

Anonymous Delusional Hillary Hussein supporter January 04, 2017 2:00 PM  

We won. Didn't you hear? Damn it, we won! We won! We get to be in charge as long as we want because we won! Why won't you people admit we won?

Anonymous Daniel H January 04, 2017 2:04 PM  

OT: I don't know if you all have seen this, but it is hilarious. This is the first I am seeing this. Surprised that it wasn't all over the nets. Something like this only makes Trump more awesome. Leftards have no sense of humor, of course.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d76gCuIct4A&feature=share

Blogger Some Dude January 04, 2017 2:05 PM  

The neocons remind us all they are dangerous not just for Americans and Russians and eastern europeans, but everyone else in between that could suffer from war.

Blogger Some Dude January 04, 2017 2:06 PM  

By the way, these (((people))) have been running western foreign policy for 30 odd years. Now you can see why their home nation, Israel regularly gets outvoted 290-2 in the UN.

Anonymous A Deplorable Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents January 04, 2017 2:09 PM  

Hey, did the Reset button stop working?

Blogger Some Dude January 04, 2017 2:10 PM  

Once you grasp the gamma nature of many neocons, you can see the emotion, neuroticism, treachery and wildness. Let's hope they don't provoke Putin with an assassination attempt or start kidnapping army officer children.

Blogger John P January 04, 2017 2:12 PM  

I am retired Army. This is symbolic. We have too few assets in Europe and can't deploy anything in enough numbers to effectively fight Russia there in Europe. I just want that A@#Clown Obama out of there and the rest of his minions asap. Brennen, Biden, etc. bye!

Blogger Twisted Root January 04, 2017 2:15 PM  

It is a very generous and considerate move by Putin. Trump can negotiate to have the nukes withdrawn and then concede something on the build-up in another area on the Russian border without looking weak.

Anonymous p-dawg January 04, 2017 2:15 PM  

Well, they could sneak in and use explosives to render the nukes harmless. That would be pretty special-forces-y.

Blogger Stg58/Animal Mother January 04, 2017 2:20 PM  

This is no doubt because to the disease ridden mind of the average neoconservative and progressive, special forces can do anything. They're like a mixture of Captain America and Wolverine. They're so perfect and awesome and can beat Russia all by themselves.

Blogger The Chortling January 04, 2017 2:21 PM  

Putin just needs to send a million or two refugees into Kaliningrad. Never mind that they 90% are healthy males age 18 - 25 and that they seem to have a lot of luggage. What could the Western leaders say?

Anonymous One Deplorable DT January 04, 2017 2:24 PM  

@2 - I am reliably informed that they are able to hide in antique refrigerators which will be dropped to them on the front from flying saucers with crystal-boned aliens inside.

Why do I feel the sudden urge to play Fallout 3?

The UN situation with Israel has revealed to us that Obama is literally Hitler. No...worse than literally Hitler. Which explains his desire for war with Russia. He is a mad man and an antisemite.

I disavow Obama and all his works. And anyone who doesn't is a Nazi and worse than Hitler.

Blogger dc.sunsets January 04, 2017 2:24 PM  

As often-stated, NATO is an abomination only the perpetual children playing real-life RISK(tm) can't understand.

To me, anyone who is pro-NATO yet grasps the contribution of useless, quagmire-inducing alliances made to World War One (and thus the rise of Bolshevism, WW2 and the Cold War) reveals himself to be a Machiavellian, scheming to destroy every civilization created by Caucasians.

Could this have anything to do with the dominant (((membership))) of neocon organizations? Or is this just continuity between today's agitators and their Trotskyist forebears?

Blogger Noah B The MacroAggressor January 04, 2017 2:25 PM  

Russia has expressed interest in integrating with NATO, but their ideas have been brushed off. They are behaving like a rational actor who is prepared to deal honestly, while the US and NATO are not. A man like Trump, who is prepared to negotiate from a position of strength but to be fair, should be able to deal with them very effectively.

Blogger Eric Mueller January 04, 2017 2:26 PM  

To a neocuck or full blown liberal who has NEVER served in the military, special forces are magic. They can do anything.

I saw a report on Infowars last night that every active US aircraft carrier is currently in port. As a Navy veteran, this disturbs me. Alex thinks this is a setup for a false flag, but he does tend to think everything is a setup for a false flag. Still parking every carrier strikes me as a very bad idea.

Blogger Paul R January 04, 2017 2:27 PM  

My guess would be that they're being put there in order for some sort of 'accident' to happen to them which would give a little better excuse to go to war?

Blogger Ron January 04, 2017 2:28 PM  

This is astonishingly dumb on so many levels. How, exactly, are special forces troops supposed to defend against nuclear warheads?

They arent. Perhaps this is a gamma shit test? "Nyah nyah, im gonna send my special forces against you, you big bad russian meanie! Pchew pchew! Whatcha gonna do now?! (Now hes going to overeact and kill those unsupported special forces bullies who all vote trumo, and then i can go cry to mommy about how mean he is and we'll make him feel bad, hee hee hee)"

Blogger Noah B The MacroAggressor January 04, 2017 2:30 PM  

@20 I have to think all the carriers being in port is more than just coincidence. Besides being a false flag setup, they could all be getting some urgent new refits and/or tech upgrades.

Blogger The Chortling January 04, 2017 2:31 PM  

LOL. "pchew, pchew".

Anonymous VFM High Inquisitor January 04, 2017 2:32 PM  

The Democrats and the Neocons should all be tried for treason. And since they themselves allowed it in the past in "extraordinary" circumstances where American lives were in danger (they actually are in this case) torture should be used in order to extract confessions and uncover plots.

I can see to the confessions myself, free of charge, with 100% guaranteed success rate if Mr. Trump is accepting volunteers.

Blogger Johnny January 04, 2017 2:33 PM  

Noah B The MacroAggressor wrote:"How, exactly, are special forces troops supposed to defend against nuclear warheads?"

By preemptively destroying the nukes on the ground, possibly. Let's hope Obama isn't stupid enough to try that.


I anticipate something really wild and crazy would get leaked to the press, which is about the only thing that would hold Obama back just now.

Then again maybe they are where they are to create an incident that can get the war drums goin.

Jan. 20th can't come soon enough.

Anonymous NateM January 04, 2017 2:33 PM  

The special forces are a symbolic threat. Outwardly we're in a defensive position but there is a threat they might do what special forces are designed for and incur into Russian territory and attack the weapons position. They want the Russians to think an attackers is imminent to up the pressure, make them jump and attack because they want a war.

Blogger Bard January 04, 2017 2:33 PM  

Reminds me of the HISHE episode about the original Superman movie:

Oh, I'd have some bat nuclear missile defense gadget on my utility belt. It wouldn't be a problem.

Blogger bob kek mando ( NABTY ) January 04, 2017 2:38 PM  

Affirmative Action president with ( Fake ) Nobel Peace Prize awarded by the ( no accomplishment ) Nobel Committee sets North Africa and the Middle East aflame for eight years and puts the cherry on top of the final days of his administration by ( trying to ) induce a war between the worlds two major nuclear weapon powers.

makes perfect sense to me.

Blogger Johnny January 04, 2017 2:41 PM  

I saw a report on Infowars last night that every active US aircraft carrier is currently in port. As a Navy veteran, this disturbs me. Alex thinks this is a setup for a false flag, but he does tend to think everything is a setup for a false flag. Still parking every carrier strikes me as a very bad idea."

Well, not a false flag but the deliberate effort to create weakness in the hope we get attacked somewhere, and that would be a trigger for aggressive action on our part. I assume other nation states would be smart enough not to do it, but some of these terrorist groups? Could happen.

The Democrats and the Neocons should all be tried for treason. And since they themselves allowed it in the past in "extraordinary" circumstances where American lives were in danger (they actually are in this case) torture should be used in order to extract confessions and uncover plots.

Or what the hell, just torture on them for fun?

I have a neighbor who suggested that they should take a congressmen out every now and then and shoot him, in the general hope that it would cause the rest of them to act better.

Blogger Keyser Soze January 04, 2017 2:41 PM  

Spécial forces are regularly used for False Flag events. Beware!

Blogger Melampus the Seer January 04, 2017 2:43 PM  

Since 2002 or so, Delta has been solely tasked with tracking, sabotage, recovery, and destruction of WMD (including nukes). FYI.

Anonymous VFM #6306 January 04, 2017 2:44 PM  

That asshole thinks he's a one-man Cuban missile crisis, but he's just Obay of pigs.

Anonymous Glacierman January 04, 2017 2:45 PM  

So, does Putin look at Obama the way America looks at Kim Jung UN?

Blogger Lazarus January 04, 2017 2:46 PM  

Eric Mueller wrote:I saw a report on Infowars last night that every active US aircraft carrier is currently in port.

lot of scuttlebutt on the net about super carrier obsolescence due to Russian anti-access/area denial (A2/AD) zones .


If the United States Navy is either unwilling or unable to conceptualize a carrier air wing that can fight on the first day of a high-end conflict, then the question becomes: Why should the American taxpayer shell out $13 billion for a Ford-class carrier?......

If these carriers can’t do that first day lethal strike mission inside an A2/AD bubble, why are we paying $13 billion dollars for them?” asks Jerry Hendrix, director of the Defense Strategies and Assessments Program at the Center for a New American Security'''

Blogger Lazarus January 04, 2017 2:48 PM  

Glacierman wrote:So, does Putin look at Obama the way America looks at Kim Jung UN?

I believe it was the Russian foreign minister who mused at a press conference that she did not know which was more dangerous for the world, terrorism or American stupidity.

Blogger tz January 04, 2017 2:52 PM  

It's a PsyOp, as in special farces.

I'm waiting for Trump to tweet something about having a nice conversation with Putin. Some neocon yesterday on Hannity is saying Putin wants the empire back. No, he just wants Russia safe, not belligerents on its borders.
In a decade, I can see a new NATIONALIST eastern bloc with Poland, Hungary, the Baltics, and Russia all expressing their own ethnic national ideas and restoring an Christendom of the east.
I think it was Chesterton that said a Nation's greatness is in its humility - that it can't tell other nations how to do things, only act like a shining city. Putin is restoring Russia to Christianity and their nationalistic pride. Trump wants to do that for the USA. Making Russia Great Again is in no way contradictory to Making America Great Again - and in most ways synergistic.

Anonymous A Deplorable Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents January 04, 2017 2:53 PM  

@23
@20 I have to think all the carriers being in port is more than just coincidence. Besides being a false flag setup, they could all be getting some urgent new refits and/or tech upgrades.

Or they are all in port due to years and years of shortchanging maintenance as well as crew shortages because girl sailors decide they don't like sea duty & get get knocked up to move shoreside taking up too many billets there. So carriers are now floating office buildings that are in no way ready for sea, but they do have Diversity.

A lot of military people are anticipating 20 January, too.

Blogger BassmanCO January 04, 2017 2:53 PM  

@33, VFM #6306

Very nice, like what you are doing there.

Anonymous One Deplorable DT January 04, 2017 2:54 PM  

@30 - I have a neighbor who suggested that they should take a congressmen out every now and then and shoot him, in the general hope that it would cause the rest of them to act better.

"A" congressman?

@34 - So, does Putin look at Obama the way America looks at Kim Jung UN?

No. Kim Jong UN is more rational.

Blogger Johnny January 04, 2017 3:03 PM  

We are lucky the other side did not anticipate their election loss, and then it took about a week to get it back together. Thus they had nothing in the works to screw up the incoming administration. And the closer we get to the 20th, the more it will look political if they try to gin something up.

The true hard core left we have in Washington is a dangerous business.

Blogger VFM #7634 January 04, 2017 3:05 PM  

Obama can't be out of office quickly enough. 16... more... days...

OpenID elijahrhodes January 04, 2017 3:08 PM  

Is there any doubt that Obama will become the most petulant, critical, obnoxious, narcissist ex-president ever? I have no doubt that the media will ask him to opine on Every. Single. Issue. And he'll gladly oblige, being a Constitutional Scholar and the Smartest President Evah! He’ll be on every talk show, every news program, every late night show, with his upturned smug chin. It'll be Obama Reality TV 27/7/365.

Anonymous Greg January 04, 2017 3:10 PM  

In other news:

German State Wants to Block Deportation of Migrants If They Are Victims of ‘Right Wing’ Crime
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/01/04/german-state-block-deportation-migrant-victims-right-wing-crime/

I sense an "increase" in "right-wing crimes" against "refugees" will be imminent.

Blogger Michael O'Duibhir January 04, 2017 3:10 PM  

And who is behind the hatred of Putin and Russia? Obama's just doing what he's told to do.

http://awdnews.com/political/assange-forget-russia-,-the-real-threat-to-america-comes-from-israel-and-the-israel-lobby

Blogger Francis Parker Yockey January 04, 2017 3:13 PM  

@p-dawg
"use explosives to render the nukes harmless."

Otherwise referred to as "in their most heinous attack to date, the terrorists set off dirty bomb at a site near a major city. Millions of lives are threatened by radioactive fallout from this act of unfathomable evil."

Oh wait, that's the narrative if the MSM claims that they did it to us. Never mind.

Anonymous A Most Deplorable Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Deplorable Cents January 04, 2017 3:14 PM  

0bama and Hillary Rodan Robot Clinton can share one prize:
Gun sales leaders, the FBI NICS check data shows over 27,000,000 guns sold in the US in the year 2016, beating the previous record in 2015 by 4,000,000 guns, and about 2x the sales in 2009.

Heck of a job, libtards! Americans are more gunned up than ever before!

Blogger Salt January 04, 2017 3:16 PM  

I hope the Special Forces have a barbeque and invite the Russians. Get enough sauce on everyone and the MSM will think there's been a battle.

Blogger sykes.1 January 04, 2017 3:16 PM  

The Baltics are a side-show. The strategic front in Europe are the western borders of Ukraine and Belarus. If Russia were seriously planning to do anything, it would occupy Ukraine to establish that front, and put in place a puppet regime consisting of angry ethnic Russian Ukrainians.

Anonymous old man in a villa January 04, 2017 3:17 PM  

Wow. A whole battalion. That should be effective. In the event anything goes south.

Blogger Mr.MantraMan January 04, 2017 3:18 PM  

No blood for emails

Anonymous BBGKB January 04, 2017 3:19 PM  

... How are special forces supposed to defend against nuclear ...

The special forces are overwhelmingly white so they might be able to come up with something.

Alex thinks this is a setup for a false flag

Everything is a false flag, the world will always end tomorrow. Buy gold instead of nitrogen packed freeze dried survival food& ammo.

Why should the American taxpayer shell out $13 billion for a Ford-class carrier?......

Because they let us drop $1million missiles of $5 goat carts.

Obama can't be out of office quickly enough. 16... more... days...

Better have your parties packed for at least 2 weeks of food after the inauguration

Blogger Robert Divinity January 04, 2017 3:21 PM  

@41

Agreed, totally. The "Russia hacked muh election" distraction fell apart and had to be magnified with this transparent ploy. It is reasonable to assume distraction was necessitated by an internal debate over whether to pardon Clinton and Co. and how to flood the country with more Muslims on an accelerated time schedule. The anti-Russia posturing is a safe distraction because Putin knows, and Obama knows he knows, that America's current CiC is a paper tiger.

Apparently only the Democratic Party didn't realize it was at least possible The Emperor-God would ascend to the Cherry Blossom Throne on January 20.

Anonymous Überdeplorable Psychedelic Cat Hair January 04, 2017 3:22 PM  

My jaw about hit the floor when I read that this morning. Unfrigginbelievable. I'm no fan of Russia or Putin but this is just beyond stupid. The reason I say that because had he done this YEARS AGO it may have been the one thing I backed him on. The man is just butt hurt beyond belief about how Trump is about to PWN is legacy.

"Tensions between Washington and the Kremlin have reached Cold War levels amid reports Vladimir Putin is deploying nuke-ready missiles in the Russian province of Kaliningrad – which borders Poland, Belarus and Lithuania."

Here's to hoping CIA and NSA have HUMINT and SIGINT sources inside the Russian military that indicate whether the nukes are mated with missiles.

" How, exactly, are special forces troops supposed to defend against nuclear warheads?"

They're a trip wire to be used as a sacrificial lamb for a casus belli. If they were supposed to disable the Iskanders, well, now the Ruskies know to look for the American equivalent of little green men sneaking around.

"Russia is a rival, not an enemy. Trump seems to understand this more than Obama ever could."

@3 Bing!

"Hey, did the Reset button stop working?"

@10 Oh, it's still working in two senses: 1) Dear Leader keeps hitting the Reset button and it keeps putting Russians in the "scary" mode and 2) it really read Overload in Russian. Ergo, Dear Leader is giving the world an overload of nuclear brinkmanship before leaving.

"I am retired Army. This is symbolic. We have too few assets in Europe and can't deploy anything in enough numbers to effectively fight Russia there in Europe. I just want that A@#Clown Obama out of there and the rest of his minions asap. Brennen, Biden, etc. bye!"

@12 It's amazing how anyone who knows jack **** about logistics can see that, right?!? Yet, our "betters" still in FedGov etc. don't or won't see it.

"This is no doubt because to the disease ridden mind of the average neoconservative and progressive, special forces can do anything. They're like a mixture of Captain America and Wolverine. They're so perfect and awesome and can beat Russia all by themselves."

@15 That's why the former Seal Team 6 was named Team 6. We wanted the Soviets to think we had 6 teams. We had...*drum roll* two!

"Why do I feel the sudden urge to play Fallout 3?"

@17 You're listening to Three Dog *howls!

"Russia has expressed interest in integrating with NATO, but their ideas have been brushed off."

@19 Remember back in the early 2000's when Russia was offered (IIRC) observer status at NATO and possible membership?

"I saw a report on Infowars last night that every active US aircraft carrier is currently in port. As a Navy veteran, this disturbs me."

@20 I read that a few days ago...hasn't happened since the '70s...well, besides women assigned to carriers getting preggo right before deployment, what else can be causing this? I remember F-18s cannibalizing from static displays to keep flying.

"they could all be getting some urgent new refits and/or tech upgrades."

@23 There's that, too.

"That asshole thinks he's a one-man Cuban missile crisis, but he's just Obay of pigs."

@33 When they were deployed months ago, it was called Obama's Cuban missile crisis. The difference is it doesn't directly affect us...yet.

"Wow. A whole battalion. That should be effective. In the event anything goes south."

@50

2-5k men, roughly vs. a single 100-200 kiloton nuclear warhead airburst five miles up, disabling their equipment with an EMP...

Anonymous VFM#1819 January 04, 2017 3:23 PM  

No blood for emails

Excellent. We need to meme the shit outta this. Plug "no blood for oil" into search for old memes to twist. There are tons.

Blogger Elizabeth January 04, 2017 3:23 PM  

@30 - I have a neighbor who suggested that they should take a congressmen out every now and then and shoot him, in the general hope that it would cause the rest of them to act better.

As Voltaire wrote in Candide regarding the wisdom of executing an admiral from time-to-time, "pour encourager les autres." In order to encourage the others. Of course, that's when the French had backbone.

Anonymous rienzi January 04, 2017 3:24 PM  

The weather in Lithuania for the next ten days is projected to be very Minneapolis winter-like. Not what you want to fight a war in.

The wind will be extremely strong, gusting to over 40 mph. From the north, then coming out of the southwest. So if Putin nukes the Lithuanians, he will end up dumping a load of fallout all over the motherland.

Putin isn't that stupid. The Neocons, Neolibs, and Obozo, yes, but not Vlad.

Blogger Johnny January 04, 2017 3:24 PM  

And who is behind the hatred of Putin and Russia? Obama's just doing what he's told to do.

http://awdnews.com/political/assange-forget-russia-,-the-real-threat-to-america-comes-from-israel-and-the-israel-lobby


A side thought about this is that Russia created conditions that caused many of the Jews to leave. the country is for the most part de-jewified.

Blogger Chrom January 04, 2017 3:25 PM  

@34

Putin look at Obama the way America looks at Carrot Top.

Anonymous VFMUltra January 04, 2017 3:27 PM  

I remember F-18s cannibalizing from static displays to keep flying.

Can confirm this is currently (still) happening. Make of that what you will.

Blogger Johnny January 04, 2017 3:32 PM  


If these carriers can’t do that first day lethal strike mission inside an A2/AD bubble, why are we paying $13 billion dollars for them?” asks Jerry Hendrix,...

Back when Britain ruled the waves they projected power by showing up in a distant port with a battleship. For a time the ships were used so rarely that some Brits began to doubt that they even worked. One captain, when he got to gunnery practice, had the crew pitch the bullets overboard. The reason was that firing the guns dirty up the battleship.

Early on in WWII a Japanese fighter plane armed with a torpedo took out a battleship. And then another one took out another battleship and the Brits had to pull the entire fleet out of the Far East to avoid future losses.

And now instead of the Brits with battleships, it is us with aircraft carriers. So, what is the real utility of these carriers? I doubt it is the expectation that they would be useful in a nuclear exchange. And perhaps not useful in any major war against a capable adversary.

Blogger MC227 January 04, 2017 3:32 PM  

Odumbo is trying to be the tough guy with zero risk to him. He's like the weasel in the bar that starts talking shit to some guy to show off and when the guy is about to use Odumbo's head as a basketball security has already shown up and that's when Odumbo really starts popping off because now he's safe. All talk. He shakes in his light loafers in the presence of real men like Putin or Trump. This is the kind of punk that needs a good beatin'.

Blogger Francis Parker Yockey January 04, 2017 3:32 PM  

@dc.sunsets

"To me, anyone who is pro-NATO yet grasps the contribution of useless, quagmire-inducing alliances made to World War One"

In the current year, it's clear that alliances always serve the cause of peace, and never lead to small wars escalating to big wars, or to the "My big brother can beat up your big brother" effect. Surely we we have enough trust in say, Erdogan, that any conflict that he chooses to involve Turkey in is worth involving NATO in, right?

Anyone who mentions John Quincy Adams, or "she does not go abroad in search of monsters to destroy," clearly has failed to keep up with the inevitable progress of true conservatism. Not only that, anyone who opposes the continued expansion of NATO is clearly a racist homophobe. Come to think of it, even referring to this process as "expansion" is very problematic. It would be much less xenophobic to refer to it as the "progress" of NATO in the future. Please keep that in mind, everyone.

Anonymous Michael Kingswood January 04, 2017 3:34 PM  

"Still parking every carrier strikes me as a very bad idea."

"I have to think all the carriers being in port is more than just coincidence. Besides being a false flag setup, they could all be getting some urgent new refits and/or tech upgrades."

Oh FFS, the Christmas Standdown is just now ending. If not actually deployed, if nothing's going on ships pretty much do not get underway in late December. It's not a conspiracy - it's the Holidays.

Jesu Cristo, people. Calm the fuck down. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

Anonymous Desert Rat January 04, 2017 3:36 PM  

"I have a neighbor who suggested that they should take a congressmen out every now and then and shoot him, in the general hope that it would cause the rest of them to act better."

Many years ago I read a Sci Fi story about a guy visiting a world and discovering that no one wanted to be president of the world and the current president wanted more than anything to leave the position. The planet also had ongoing voting with vote tallies posted far and wide. These tallies would change as people were allowed to vote for or against the current president and could change their vote at any time. The current president had a display showing the vote totals in his office and paid very close attention to it. The catch was that if the vote against ever overtook the vote in favor a tiny explosive device in the president's head would go off ending his presidency very suddenly. As I recall a new president was determined by a lottery and there was a set term of office so anyone who survived could retire with a large sigh of relief.

With today's technology I think something like this could be put in place and not just for the president but for all senators, congressmen and state governors.

OpenID basementhomebrewer January 04, 2017 3:43 PM  

elijahrhodes wrote:Is there any doubt that Obama will become the most petulant, critical, obnoxious, narcissist ex-president ever? I have no doubt that the media will ask him to opine on Every. Single. Issue. And he'll gladly oblige, being a Constitutional Scholar and the Smartest President Evah! He’ll be on every talk show, every news program, every late night show, with his upturned smug chin. It'll be Obama Reality TV 27/7/365.

I am sure that he will be. The funny thing is that the more people actually see Obama, especially off the cuff, the more they dislike him. He is good at highly scripted and choreographed events. He is terrible when he is required to think on his feet. If he is on TV 24/7 he will not have time to practice the scripts written for him and he runs the risk of someone asking a non-scripted question.

They will run him 24/7 for about 6 months at which point his stock will plummet and large numbers of his former supporters will loathe him. He will ultimately be reduced to the popularity of Al Sharpton or Keith Olberman. Very popular with 10-15% of the country but everyone else hates them.

Anonymous Takin' a Look January 04, 2017 3:47 PM  

Oh calm TFD Vox. This is just normal troop rotation. They're just puffing their chests up. Look, you guys swung me over, _nothing_ is going to happen. Trump is going to get sworn in, the swamp drained, Jews and their Shabbos goys spanked on the ass and told to behave.the global Pedosta and spirit cooking cult will be sent to hell where it belongs. Jobs will come back, the infrastructure will be repaired, women will stop catting around, we will be mining asteroids,eating novelty dino-chickens and doing Pleistocene Park Safaris in eight years.

Blogger Chris Gerrib January 04, 2017 3:47 PM  

the US is under Article 5 obligated to treat an attack on one member nation as an attack on the US and "assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force."

We are also obligated to "consult together whenever, in the opinion of any of them, the territorial integrity, political independence or security of any of the Parties is threatened."

In short, by law, if Lithuania feels threatened, we're required to listen to them, and if they get attacked by nuclear, conventional or unconventional means we're required to defend them. And Lithuania feels threatened enough to re-institute the military draft in 2015.

Our other options are 1) kick the Baltic States out of NATO (which actually requires NATO approval) or 2) withdraw from NATO, which requires a 1-year notice.

What Obama is hoping to do is to suggest to Putin that taking these states won't be as easy as rolling into Crimea was. Aiding him in this effort is the great reduction in the size of the post Cold War Russian Army.

The Western Military District, responsible for the initial attack, has three "Armies" but these "Armies" are each of ~2 division equivalent. (The Russian Army is moving from a divisional to a brigade equivalent, and for example 6th Guard Army is by brigade but 1st Tank is still in 2 divisions.)

Putin doesn't have a million men to send, he's got more like 400,000, of which the approximately 80,000 airborne troops are at NATO standard. The rest are 2-year conscripts.

Blogger Feather Blade January 04, 2017 3:51 PM  

@59 With horrified fascination?

Anonymous BBGKB January 04, 2017 3:52 PM  

"Better have your parties packed for at least 2 weeks of food after the inauguration"

that should be pantries

that Russia created conditions that caused many of the Jews to leave. the country is for the most part de-jewified.

Even better they got most of the jews to leave but they send money back to Russia to support those that didn't.

Anonymous JustAnotherPairOfEyes January 04, 2017 3:52 PM  

@35 "If these carriers can’t do that first day lethal strike mission inside an A2/AD bubble, why are we paying $13 billion dollars for them?” asks Jerry Hendrix, director of the Defense Strategies and Assessments Program at the Center for a New American Security""

The carriers are for little brush wars like Iraq. In a real war they will sink quickly but that doesn't mean that they aren't still spectacularly useful in projecting power against the 2nd and 3rd world. Hence various other countries are building them like China and Russia.

One of the (many) big mistakes of the Bush administration, in my opinion, was the cancellation of the beautiful new artillery unit, the Crusader IIRC. These things are about killing lots of people in big wars and the Bush wanted the military tuned for special service kinda things. Well Iraq has proved that defeating enemy military forces is totally worthless in terms of winning hearts and minds. The implication, as has been suggested in official US military writings, is that destroying an enemy's will to fight is mostly about killing their women and children, i.e. "collateral damage". Which is against modern ideas like the Geneva Convention.

Example, read between the lines on this article from the US military website:

"The Afghanistan and Iraq experiences show that limited wars fought under the new American military doctrine of minimizing collateral damage are not compatible with a political program of democratization by force. The fact that limited wars are fought with restraint and deliberately avoid exceptional violence means that attempts at transformative military occupations will fail because the enemy population will resist the imposition of new institutions and ideologies."
http://usacac.army.mil/CAC2/MilitaryReview/Archives/English/MilitaryReview_20121031_art004.pdf

Blogger Joe Katzman January 04, 2017 3:53 PM  

None of these things are deeply unusual. NATO holds exercises and conducts deployments to member countries. Makes "attack on one is an attack on all" more real. The Baltics in particular have been past beneficiaries, because they are (a) small and (b) exposed.

Does SOCOM counter nuclear missiles? May as well ask "does it counter extra-terrestrial invasions?" and ask Chuck Tingle, at least we'd have some lulz. It counters what it is meant to counter - Potential use of Clausewitz' maxim (On War, Book 1, Chap 2) against NATO countries:

"If there are any enterprises which are particularly likely to break up the enemy's alliances or make them inoperative... then it is easy to conceive how much these may increase the probability of success, and become a shorter way towards our aim than the routing of the enemy's army."

All of this can and will happen well short of war, especially the pre-announced, no-surprises stuff. Likewise, the screaming hysterics because an Su-27 flew into NATO airspace bore me. This is part of the game, everybody knows it. Wake me when we start seeing radical departures from the game.

It doesn't surprise me that many Westerners trust Russia more than their own leaders. Vlad Putin is usually not the guy trying to get them raped, killed, or financially ruined - and their own so-called leaders are.

But the dark world doesn't care about that emotional reaction. Hysteria is unbecoming, and not conducive to success.

Blogger Matamoros January 04, 2017 3:53 PM  

The Nobel Peace Prize is the Super-Cuck Prize

Anonymous RA January 04, 2017 3:57 PM  

One of the most idiotic things the Petulant One has ever done.

Good point about the weather. I've worked outside in weather like that and it is no picnic in the park. Cannot imagine wanting to fight a war or do extended recon missions in those conditions. Winters were traditionally the time to hunker down and get ready for the spring offensive. But of course January 20 is long before spring and we are dealing with REMF's running the show.

If Putin really wanted to take over Ukraine, he would have already done it. But he didn't because he can't afford to do it and it is apparently not essential to his purposes. Which are to get some border security without actually having to spend the money to occupy the border countries.

If something happens, we will hopefully be able to stand back and look for the false flag it might be. I'm sure Trump would have told the Petulant One not to start anything, but the Petulant One is doing a nice job sticking his jaw out and inviting the other side to throw a punch which could then be escalated into the desired war. If that's the case, then Putin just needs to withhold responding to anything and keep an eye out for false flag type operations. 16 more days. Fingers crossed.

Anonymous Joe the Plumber January 04, 2017 4:04 PM  

The funny thing is that the more people actually see Obama, especially off the cuff, the more they dislike him.

Tell me about it!

Blogger tz January 04, 2017 4:07 PM  

I suppose turning large areas of the US into radioactive smoking craters is one way to preserve obamacare and his legacy.

Blogger Johnny January 04, 2017 4:08 PM  

Joe the Plumber wrote:The funny thing is that the more people actually see Obama, especially off the cuff, the more they dislike him.

Tell me about it!


I thought Nixon got pushed out of office because the more people saw of him the less they liked him.

I am guessing that if support for Obama remains the teleprompter and scripting will also remain. So, maybe he will remain popular, but I don't expect much impact.

Blogger Starbuck January 04, 2017 4:08 PM  

This is astonishingly dumb on so many levels. How, exactly, are special forces troops supposed to defend against nuclear warheads? - Vox Day

The Seal Teams are really good shots with their M16's?!
You know they can do it in the movies, so it must be true. After all we are the good guys and the Russians are bad..

Blogger tz January 04, 2017 4:09 PM  

I think it was on Hannity where someone noted (as William Sturgis Lind and Phillip Geraldi and others have) that the CIA has all but abandoned HUMINT and is all drones and SIGINT - high tech. Why we can't do much about Al Queda or ISIS beyond drone-bombing a cell phone.

Anonymous Bob January 04, 2017 4:10 PM  

Obviously, Pres. Obama was snubbed for the Economics Prize ...

Blogger Francis Parker Yockey January 04, 2017 4:11 PM  

@Eric Mueller
"To a neocuck or full blown liberal who has NEVER served in the military, special forces are magic. They can do anything."

Though how they reconcile this faith with their belief in the magic of vibrant diversity, given the demographics of special forces, is never quite clear. Personally, I feel that it would be very "racist" and "sexist" to use our special forces against Russia, allowing these privileged white men to hog all of the glory. Clearly, we must give a far larger, if not exclusive, role to our soldiers of color, as well as women and transvestites, who have been unfairly held down for so long. No reasonable person who possesses even the most elementary understanding of the exigencies of intersectionality could possibly oppose this policy.

As far as the issue of the carriers goes, it might seem, on an initial, superficial analysis, to be a potential national security concern, but once more important issues are taken into account, it's clear that this is a major step forward for the US Navy. To wit: the regular deployment of carriers to far-flung parts of the globe, while seemingly useful in some ways, leads to an untenable disparate impact on our sailors of femaleness. When they become pregnant, they have, in the past, been forced to remain behind during deployment, missing valuabe opportunities for advancement.

Going forward, we plan to adopt a more progressive, advanced policy, that will be referred to as "affirmatively deploying fair naval vessels." This will involve, at least in part, maintaining our carriers, and most other naval vessels, in US ports, where it will be easier to fight sexism through basic measures such as shipboard maternary care and day care. I hope that you are now better able to appreciate the wisdom of this policy.

Blogger Phelps January 04, 2017 4:14 PM  

How, exactly, are special forces troops supposed to defend against nuclear warheads?

It's a trick question -- before or after Jan 21? After, they are a giant deterrent, because their mere presence means that any action taken against them, as American soldiers, will be treated as an attack on mainland America and responded to appropriately.

Before then? In the words of Gunny Highway, "they just get dead."

Blogger Ingot9455 January 04, 2017 4:20 PM  

@58 And just imagine, the Soviet Union got people to pay to take their Jews away!

Blogger Harsh January 04, 2017 4:40 PM  

By which country's laws, Gerrib?

Blogger Chris Gerrib January 04, 2017 4:59 PM  

Harsh @ 84 - by ours. The NATO treaty is, like all treaties, Federal law.

Anonymous Pennywise January 04, 2017 5:04 PM  

There wouldn't have been a nuclear war with Shitlery in charge. Her team may have pushed his buttons, but Putin was, and is, not going to risk a global holocaust for Mother Russia. And, even if his alpha male side got the best of him, and was triggered to the point that he ordered nukes to be dropped, then that would be the BEST thing for humanity. Billions of people low T, low time preference dead. In the wake of this calamity, a Western Civilization rebirth. Why prolong the agony until 2033?

Anonymous CC January 04, 2017 5:11 PM  

I don't generally hold grudges or feel resentment against public figures once they're gone, but I'm looking forward to Obama's reputation being flayed in the coming months and years. I'm certain that will happen. He's built up a lot of negative political karma that has to be repaid.

Blogger Noah B The MacroAggressor January 04, 2017 5:13 PM  

@85 The Constitution makes the POTUS supreme commander of US armed forces. If POTUS feels that the best way to aid allies is to observe the situation from a safe distance, that is his option. A treaty does not supersede the Constitution.

Blogger bob kek mando ( NABTY ) January 04, 2017 5:30 PM  

85. Chris Gerrib January 04, 2017 4:59 PM
Harsh @ 84 - by ours. The NATO treaty is, like all treaties, Federal law.



baw-hahahahahahahaha, what a MAROON.

hey, Chris, Ukraine would like a word with you about the ability of other nations to expect the US to honor their mutual defense treaty obligations.

Blogger Benjamin Kraft January 04, 2017 5:50 PM  

@30. So, basically, we just need to appoint a Congressional Commissar?

Sounds like a plan to me.

@38. People who haven't served in the Navy have no idea just how precisely your viewpoint maps to that of the average Sailor.

@44. You ought to have put those parentheses around "crime" as well, to be perfectly honest.

Blogger Elder Son January 04, 2017 5:52 PM  

First of all, Russia can put anything it wants, anywhere it wants, on their land.

In other news:

Everyone should know by now, that the Ukraine Orange Revolution was a US-NATO sponsored coup. Crimea was/is the prize.

Did anyone SERIOUSLY believe that Russia would just pack up and walk away from their Naval Base in Crimea and allow NATO to walk in and turn the Black Sea into a US/NATO playground?

Who in the fuck is really the ‘aggressor’ in all this? Note all the scare quotes in the article? NATO encircles Russia, right up to their borders, all the way around from Estonia to Georgia, pre-positioning heavy and light armor, air-land-sea missiles, artillery, combat aircraft, Naval vessels, all the implements of war, massive live-fire exercises on Russia’s borders of which 174 of those massive live-fire exercises are planned for this new year. And Russia is the aggressor? Russia and Putin responds to all this US-NATO hooliganism, and Russia and Putin are hooligans?

And by the way, shortly after all this US-NATO blustering started, we were told it was to prevent Russia/Putin's plan to blitzkrieg into Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland. Because Russia/Putin's plan was/is to first let US-NATO put a monkey-wrench into that plan by letting US-NATO build up as it has. Surely, the US-NATO tip-off is when Russia/Putin massed troops on Estonia's border.

Christ! Does anyone even THINK anymore? It's all an anti-Russian mind-fuck because: Everything your government does, it does to complete the globalist agenda. That is the default mode that your government operates on. US-NATO is the military spear-head of this globalist agenda.

They are doing everything they can to box Trump into this globalist trap. Plus, to delegitimize Trump and Putin making nice and making Trump look like some kind of pro-"warmongering"-Russia traitor.

Blogger Harsh January 04, 2017 5:53 PM  

That may be true de jure but not de facto. Unless the courts have the power to command the military. Your claim is therefore irrelevant in this case.

Blogger Elder Son January 04, 2017 5:55 PM  

@88 The consteetootion makes the president CiC UNDER CERTAIN conditions.

Anonymous Eric the Red January 04, 2017 6:02 PM  

The Affirmative Action Pustule unilaterally decides he's in a state of war with Russia, declares a national emergency, then martial law, and finally suspends the results of the elections.

At that point he essentially dares his internal opposition to do something about it, and believes he can win that bet.

Anonymous Eric the Red January 04, 2017 6:11 PM  

...I'll propose one step further.

Even if he loses the bet, he'll have plunged the nation into a crisis and thereby helped destroy it just that little bit more, which has been his motive all along.

Blogger buwaya January 04, 2017 6:28 PM  

"How, exactly, are special forces troops supposed to defend against nuclear warheads?"

It seems that the Russians are subtle and sensitive sorts these days. The methods in their toolbox are varied. The Crimea was taken by Russian special forces "Little Green Men" or "the polite people".
The Donets was taken by a state-backed irredentist insurgency intermittently backed up by all sorts of "deniable" Russian volunteers.

The Baltics primary threat mode from Russia seems to be another lot of irredentist ethnic Russians.
Against this sort of deliberately limited war US Special Forces could be very useful, being counterinsurgency and small wars types, as long as it doesn't expand beyond this.

I am not claiming that this is a wise move overall, that's not for me to say. Nor do I think its a likely place for Russian expansion either. Despite having a Russian minority I doubt the Baltic peoples, ethnic Russians included, would be pleased to be run from Moscow, and I doubt that Moscow truly wants to try.

This is a game of PR signals in every direction. Arguably it is imprudent of the current lame duck US administration to be playing this game as it will complicate the foreign policy of the incoming administration.

Blogger Johnny January 04, 2017 6:35 PM  

Chris Gerrib wrote:Harsh @ 84 - by ours. The NATO treaty is, like all treaties, Federal law.

I am not sure what the word law means in this context, but if we followed he constitution just as it is written, the government can not be forced into following a treaty agreement. They do play around with it a little at the edges. Sometimes judges adjudicate Indian Nation treaties, but that is either an overreach or a feature of law that I am unaware of. Plus they would kind of sort of, like to bind the US to some United Nations stuff. Pure judicial activism if it happens.

If they require someone in the armed forces to memorize the change of command the first name on the list is the Company Commander. Guess what the last name is? Hint: The President of the United States is the Commander in Chief of the armed forces.

Anonymous Malwyn's apprentice January 04, 2017 6:42 PM  

US military chief General Raymond T Thomas told the New York Times that ... many former Eastern Bloc countries are ... “desperate” for America’s leadership.

Just wait until Jan 20 and we'll actually *have* a leader. No idea who pajamas boy's supposed to be ...

Blogger Noah B The MacroAggressor January 04, 2017 6:49 PM  

@93 In pragmatic terms, a POTUS today can do whatever he wants with the military unless Congress acts to stop him - either through impeaching & convicting him or through defunding the DoD. Congress abdicated much of its power to POTUS through the War Powers Act, and few question its validity now. If a POTUS ordered something horrific enough, the military MIGHT refuse to follow his orders.

Other branches of government have no mechanism whatsoever for forcing a POTUS to use military force to uphold treaty obligations. All they could do is remove him from office and hope the next guy is an obedient puppet.

Blogger Matamoros January 04, 2017 6:51 PM  

@74 If Putin really wanted to take over Ukraine, he would have already done it. But he didn't because he can't afford to do it and it is apparently not essential to his purposes.

He didn't because 1) it would have led to a wider war he didn't want, 2) the Ukrainians cleaned their clock and chewed up several elite forces, and 3) he thought the proxy forces could take the landbridge to Crimea wrongly

Blogger liberranter January 04, 2017 6:53 PM  

I think it was on Hannity where someone noted (as William Sturgis Lind and Phillip Geraldi and others have) that the CIA has all but abandoned HUMINT and is all drones and SIGINT - high tech.

Effective HUMINT requires human resources with native-grade knowledge of target populations. The U.S. State Department and the U.S. Intelligence Agencies are the last places in the world where you'll ever find such people. Indeed, demonstrated abilities of that type are a career non-starter anywhere within the USG.

I suppose we can take small, cold comfort in the fact that somebody inside of that closet full of morons called the CIA recognizes this reality and is no longer foolish enough to pretend that they can overcome it.

Blogger VD January 04, 2017 7:21 PM  

He didn't because 1) it would have led to a wider war he didn't want, 2) the Ukrainians cleaned their clock and chewed up several elite forces, and 3) he thought the proxy forces could take the landbridge to Crimea wrongly.

That's absurd. Putin could take Ukraine in two weeks and no one would do anything about it. He won't do it because it makes no strategic sense and would weaken Russia's position. The only reason he would invade Ukraine is to keep it out of NATO and prevent US troops and missiles from being based there.

Blogger Bard January 04, 2017 7:31 PM  

Reminds me of the HISHE episode about the original Superman movie:

Oh, I'd have some bat nuclear missile defense gadget on my utility belt. It wouldn't be a problem.

Blogger Eric Steiger January 04, 2017 8:33 PM  

RE: dumb on so many levels. He has to do something to try to save face, and it's not like his base woul know how to win a water balloon fight against a gang of preteens.

Anonymous Rocklea January 04, 2017 8:39 PM  

"How, exactly, are special forces troops supposed to defend against nuclear warheads?"

Duck and cover. Foolproof.

Anonymous Rocklea January 04, 2017 8:49 PM  

Or how about Lame Duck and Cover

Blogger Jmac January 04, 2017 9:21 PM  

@89 The Budapest Memorandum was not technically a treaty, it was a memorandum of understanding, and thus not actionable. Ukraine got sold a bill of goods in '94.

That said Chris Gerrib isn't quite right about Article 5. NATO members aren't obligated to go to war if Article 5 is invoked, only to take actions they individually deem necessary, which could include armed force. But that action is to last only until the UN Security Council meets and takes action that supersedes NATO. Given Russian and American involvement in a Baltic attack, such Security Council action would likely be instantaneous.

Anonymous Bell Worthington January 04, 2017 9:22 PM  

"The enemy cannot push a button if you disable his hand... Medic!"

yuk yuk yuk

Anonymous Avalanche January 04, 2017 9:25 PM  

@34 "So, does Putin look at Obama the way America looks at Kim Jung UN?"

Don't we all?

Anonymous Anonymous January 04, 2017 9:41 PM  

Putin doesn't have such a poor hand. Russia is not weak. It can't beat NATO globally but it can kick the shit out of it locally and that means something.

Blogger Lazarus January 04, 2017 9:42 PM  

Noah B The MacroAggressor wrote:If a POTUS ordered something horrific enough, the military MIGHT refuse to follow his orders.

We all have our little fantasies. That's what keeps Hollywood in business.

Blogger Noah B The MacroAggressor January 04, 2017 9:42 PM  

@107 Five nations have veto power in the UN Security Council, including Russia and the US. So the likelihood of the UN doing anything constructive to mediate a US-Russia conflict is low.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash January 04, 2017 9:57 PM  

"The fact that limited wars are fought with restraint and deliberately avoid exceptional violence means tTat attempts at transformative military occupations will fail because the enemy population will resist the imposition of new institutions and ideologies."

Translation;
"We utterly failed to remake Iraq into a Western Liberal Democracy because we didn't kill enough people. If we had been allowed to kill more people, Iraq would now be Sweden. Or at least New Jersey. It is not our fault, nor the fault of the policy of nation building, which we all know is unquestionably correct. We just needed to kill more women and children."

Blogger Jmac January 04, 2017 9:58 PM  

@111 the point of the UN Security Council is to open dialogue over a US-Russia dispute. Obviously no resolution is going to pass authorizing force against Russia or NATO. It would be a deadlock.

But likely action would be to pass resolutions continuing dialogue on the supposed "Baltic crisis", which stops NATO action....

Blogger Rez Zircon January 04, 2017 10:10 PM  

I'm not sure if this is the dumbest move I've ever seen, or the most diabolical:

Obama crowds troops into tense region. Russia has no choice but to match them. Events simmer along until right after the inauguration, when there'll be an Incident and a blow-up. Suddenly we're at war despite Trump's immediate orders to pull back.

And come the next election, Democrats rely on average voters' short memories, and proclaim, "Do you want four more years of the people who got us into a war with Russia?"

Blogger Noah B The MacroAggressor January 04, 2017 10:11 PM  

@113 If NATO wanted to engage in dialogue, it probably wouldn't attack Russia in the first place.

Blogger modsquad January 04, 2017 10:48 PM  

"Modernized jets".... wow, those sound much more dangerous than regular jets.

http://www.israellycool.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/bibi-bomb.jpg

Blogger Jmac January 04, 2017 10:51 PM  

@115 Some German guy once said war is politics by other means, war is a form of "dialogue" in and of itself. The stakes are higher, especially with nuclear powers involved, so participants, after testing each other's strength, would like to find a ceasefire as quickly as possible.

In the late '60s the Soviets and China (both nuclearized) fought a short border skirmish, emphasis on the short. In 1999 India and Pakistan (both nuclearized) fought the Kargil War, again short.

Any armed conflict between Russia and NATO will be short (if it even reaches that point), with the UNSC likely taking immediate action.

The more likely scenario is that Russia subverts the Baltics using cyber attacks,the local Russian populace, "volunteers", 4th gen warfare, etc. Basically what they're doing in Ukraine, so it doesn't fall under the definition of "armed attack" and never triggers Article 5.

Blogger Noah B The MacroAggressor January 04, 2017 11:25 PM  

Any armed conflict between Russia and NATO will be short (if it even reaches that point), with the UNSC likely taking immediate action.

We're talking about armed conflict between US and Russia - the case where events have already "reached that point." You again miss the key issue that the Security Council can do nothing without the US agreeing, not even pass a continuing resolution blocking NATO action. And if the US wants to attack Russia and then extend an olive branch, then it can do so without requiring any assistance from the Security Council. So in any case you want to consider, the Security Council is irrelevant. It would be nothing more than theater in the event of a NATO-Russia conflict.

Blogger bob kek mando ( NABTY ) January 04, 2017 11:26 PM  

107. Jmac January 04, 2017 9:21 PM
Given Russian and American involvement in a Baltic attack, such Security Council action would likely be instantaneous.



both Russia and the US are permanent members of the Security Council and ( along with the other three permanent members, China, the UK and France ) wield unilateral veto power over any UN action.

https://infogalactic.com/info/United_Nations_Security_Council_veto_power

in any conflict regarding the Permanent Members, i'm pretty sure that we can count on both Russia and China vetoing any attempt to have the UN come in on the side of NATO.



113. Jmac January 04, 2017 9:58 PM
the point of the UN Security Council is to open dialogue over a US-Russia dispute.



oh, come off it. the US and Russia are talking, constantly, now.

the UN has no magical power to effectuate anything which isn't already taking place.



99. Noah B The MacroAggressor January 04, 2017 6:49 PM
If a POTUS ordered something horrific enough, the military MIGHT refuse to follow his orders.



go tell it to the Bonus Army.

tell them that MacArthur's tanks are purely figments of their imagination.

Blogger bob kek mando ( NABTY ) January 04, 2017 11:29 PM  

114. Rez Zircon January 04, 2017 10:10 PM
I'm not sure if this is the dumbest move I've ever seen, or the most diabolical:



if you assume that Obama is actually taking orders directly from Putin
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4JpPU-SwcbE

Obama can dance as close to the edge as he wants.

Blogger Noah B The MacroAggressor January 04, 2017 11:32 PM  

"go tell it to the Bonus Army."

The word MIGHT was in there for a reason. Commanders have on occasion refused to follow orders they considered immoral, illegal, or objectionable, but that's obviously not the historical norm.

Blogger Jmac January 04, 2017 11:52 PM  

"both Russia and the US are permanent members of the Security Council and ( along with the other three permanent members, China, the UK and France ) wield unilateral veto power over any UN action.

in any conflict regarding the Permanent Members, i'm pretty sure that we can count on both Russia and China vetoing any attempt to have the UN come in on the side of NATO."

Thanks for the unnecessary link and data. I understand that both Russia and the US hold veto power in the UN, in fact I'm counting on it for any resolution coming out of this imagined Baltic crisis. I never stated the UN would back NATO, rather that UN action-done in conjunction with Russia and the US would likely resolute in termination of NATO action.

Any resolution would have to get past the veto stage so its terms would have to be agreeable to both Russia and the US, and probably more agreeable to Russia.

"oh, come off it. the US and Russia are talking, constantly, now."

There's talking and there's TALKING, Do you hear me now, with the guns firing and tanks moving. Clausewitz, ever heard of him?


"the UN has no magical power to effectuate anything which isn't already taking place."

Yes, actually they do. It's called customary international law, codified in UN Security Council resolutions.

Blogger theFirstMonkey January 04, 2017 11:55 PM  

Special Forces cannot defend against nukes. They are, in O's mind, just there to die and further demoralize and destroy the best of the best...just the same way Team 6 was allegedly killed in a Chinook accident (they weren't- SOCOM NEVER puts 35-40 operators on one aircraft, let alone any aircraft not part of the only designated and properly equipped birds and planes of SOAR 160).

These troops are, like Benghazi, steadily being murdered in one awful mission after another. And they know it. Don't expect them to go quietly into that goodnight...they truly are the best of America's best and their chain of command is aware of what the Left is trying to do. The SF would NEVER refuse an order...but in certain cases it might take...a...loooonng...time....to....execute.

"Nuclear" bombs are only effective if the command/targeting modules are functioning(a bit of det-cord can cure that w/o big boom), so yes: Green Berets CAN disable "nukes".

*I don't believe in nuclear weapons. What we have been taught to think of as "nuclear blasts w/mushroom clouds" are just very, very high powered thermobaric fire/air bombs. How else could Nagasaki and Hiroshima have been rebuilt and repopulated by 1947?

Don't be surprised if exactly NOTHING happens before or after the 20th. The God-Emperor Ascendant has very close ties to military leaders; technically it's a toss-up as to who is really the CiC post-election/pre-inauguration. Or at least enough grey-area to slow things like stoopid orders to a snail-crawl.

And yes- i know a lil' bit about it.

Anonymous Überdeplorable Psychedelic Cat Hair January 05, 2017 12:27 AM  

"*I don't believe in nuclear weapons. What we have been taught to think of as "nuclear blasts w/mushroom clouds" are just very, very high powered thermobaric fire/air bombs. How else could Nagasaki and Hiroshima have been rebuilt and repopulated by 1947?"

@123 Hiroshima and Nagaski yields weren't even 50kt. Keep in mind Japan during the Second World War still had many cities that had wooden structures.

Anonymous Jack Amok January 05, 2017 12:34 AM  

Jmac, if there was a military dispute between the US and Russia, the UNSC would be as useful as tits on a boar in resolving it.

Blogger bob kek mando ( NABTY ) January 05, 2017 12:44 AM  

122. Jmac January 04, 2017 11:52 PM
It's called customary international law



to which no nation is bound by any effectual means whatsoever, if they decide to unilaterally ignore it.

unless, of course, the US decides to step in and murder their ass for ignoring the UN resolution.

oh, wait, we're stipulating the US is ALREADY in this mess.

Blogger Jmac January 05, 2017 1:04 AM  

"to which no nation is bound by any effectual means whatsoever, if they decide to unilaterally ignore it. unless, of course, the US decides to step in and murder their ass for ignoring the UN resolution.

oh, wait, we're stipulating the US is ALREADY in this mess.""

That's the thing about customary international law, it's reciprocal. Ask yourself why the territorial sea limit was set at 12 miles long before it was written into treaties, and then ask yourself why Qaddafi and his Line of Death are no longer around.

States practice these customs to the point that they become law and punish transgressors. Saddam (1990-91), Qaddafi, Somali pirates are examples. Could a state defy the UN Security Council, recognized by almost all other states as the ultimate arbiter of international disputes? Sure, but their actions will have consequences.

Even Russia will only go so far, protected as it is by its veto, it still attempts to abide by UNSC resolutions, and vetoes resolutions it doesn't like. If the UN were really toothless than why wield the veto at all?

Blogger Noah B The MacroAggressor January 05, 2017 1:39 AM  

"That's the thing about customary international law, it's reciprocal."

Not even close to true, even for international law to which the US is a signatory. The US violates international law whenever it believes doing so will be beneficial - see the toppling of governments in Iraq and Libya. When Russia upholds international law by supporting the internationally recognized government of Syria, interfering with US-backed attempts at regime change there, Russia is vilified for its efforts.

Blogger Jmac January 05, 2017 1:54 AM  

"Jmac, if there was a military dispute between the US and Russia, the UNSC would be as useful as tits on a boar in resolving it."

My view is that any (direct) military dispute between two nuclear powers is going to be short, given the stakes.

The UNSC will be one tool both the US and Russia will use to attempt to resolve the conflict, especially since UN action preempts NATO action. Whether successful...well let's hope we don't have to find out.

Anonymous Shut up rabbit January 05, 2017 1:56 AM  

Don't worry, the petulant child-in-chief is such a strategic genius he's just awarded himself a medal!

Here's the latest selfie from bathhouse Barry...

He'd better get a move on; only 15 days to start WWIII before #pizzagate blows up.

Blogger Jmac January 05, 2017 2:22 AM  

"Not even close to true, even for international law to which the US is a signatory. The US violates international law whenever it believes doing so will be beneficial - see the toppling of governments in Iraq and Libya. When Russia upholds international law by supporting the internationally recognized government of Syria, interfering with US-backed attempts at regime change there, Russia is vilified for its efforts."

Good grief another one. All right, in the first place, the Libyan action was sanctioned by the UNSC, in Resolution 1973. Russia could have vetoed it but they didn't so it becomes guess what...law. The US enforced a no-fly zone which helped topple Qaddafi.

Iraq, the same argument could apply. Resolution 670 authorized the use of force against Iraq, Resolution 687 recalling the authorization for the use of force requires Iraq to dismantle its WMD programs, and 1441 recalling both 670 and 687 gave Iraq one final chance.

Some have argued, including the Bush administration, that that's a direct line, and no further resolutions were necessary to conduct military operations against Iraq in 2003. Others disagree, and say another resolution was needed.

It's a gray area, but one could say the Iraq war was "legal" but illegitimate, and there is a difference between legality and legitimacy. And I think you're confusing the terms.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash January 05, 2017 2:32 AM  

The UNSC will be one tool both the US and Russia will use to attempt to resolve the conflict, especially since UN action preempts NATO action. Whether successful...well let's hope we don't have to find out.
The only law in international relations is the law of tooth and claw. UN resolutions function ONLY to give leaders in weak Western states political cover to ignore their citizens.
Rusdia participates in UNSC to remove the political cover sought by weak Western politicians.

That's it. UN resolutions only matter in Europe and the Anglosphere, and then only to the extent that they allow Western politicos to do as they are told by the US.

UNSC is structurally incapable of affecting in any way a dispute between members with veto power.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash January 05, 2017 2:43 AM  

Oh, good grief.
No, the Lybia resolution did not become law. No one involved even pretended to pretend that it did. It was an exercise in pure power, acquiesced to by Russia, which had no dogs in that fight.

If the US were to violate a UN resolution, say by subverting a legitimate recognized government, what police would come to arrest them? What tribunal would dare to indict? Why would we even care?

Yes, there would be wailing and moaning, but what would be the legal effect?

Blogger Noah B The MacroAggressor January 05, 2017 3:17 AM  

There was no resolution authorizing regime change in Libya or Iraq. In both cases the UN gave an inch and the US took a mile. These aren't gray areas.

By contrast, Russian support of Syria did not require the UN's blessing because they are supporting the legitimate government in accordance with international law.

Blogger Jordan179 January 05, 2017 7:02 AM  

Tripwires. Obama is hoping to provoke an incident which will lead to a war with Russia.

Why, I do not know, though I have a number of ideas ranging from stupidity to deliberate malice on his part. Most likely, he is doing this in a last, desperate attempt to lash out at Putin for making fun of him, when he knows he only has a couple of weeks left in office in which to do it.

It's getting to the point where it would actually be better for the country if the US Armed Forces stopped obeying his orders, despite the Constitution.

Blogger Jordan179 January 05, 2017 7:03 AM  

Let's hope that if Obama gives the order, the US Armed Forces stand ready to "respectfully" disobey him.

Blogger Jordan179 January 05, 2017 7:05 AM  

"Neocons?"

Hell no, this is Obama. Who is angry because Putin is laughing at him. This is no elaborate plan, this is Obama reacting like the man-child he truly happens to be.

Blogger bob kek mando ( NABTY ) January 05, 2017 9:35 AM  

127. Jmac January 05, 2017 1:04 AM
and then ask yourself why Qaddafi and his Line of Death are no longer around.



because Hillary and Obama conspired to murder him for bumbling towards a gold standard and displacement of the petro-Dollar as the world currency standard.



127. Jmac January 05, 2017 1:04 AM
If the UN were really toothless than why wield the veto at all?



now you're just being intentionally obtuse.

being able to "diplomatically" obstruct the military adventurism of the US ( the most powerful armed forces on the planet, which has invaded more nations than any other since the end of WW1 ) has a certain utility.

unless you LIKE being invaded by the US?


and yes, the UN *is* toothless. how long has Iran been under UN sanction? ( hint: it will be easier to count in decades ) North Korea?

why aren't Saudi Arabia and China likewise held to account for their "human rights" and "international law" violations?

Blogger Thucydides January 05, 2017 11:18 AM  

The "how" part is actually simple, SoF go in a recce teams to identify the locations of the launchers, command posts and support installations, then provide target data for strikes to eliminate these targets. The secondary role would be to take direct action against these installations should there be no time (i.e. indication of immediate launch) or to recover intelligence information (codebooks, examples of radios and cryptography gear etc.)

Don't think for a second the Russian SPETSNAZ don't have exactly the same mission set against us.

The real question isn't "can they do it", but rather "why should they do this" and "is it a good idea to do this at this time", and I think we all agree the answer is "no".

Anonymous Discard January 05, 2017 12:27 PM  

Those Green Berets better speak perfect Russian. Anybody think that Putin finding U.S. troops on Russian soil is not a problem? No, the Special Forces are not going to go snooping around to locate anything.

Blogger Resident Moron™ January 05, 2017 1:30 PM  

"Russia is a rival, not an enemy."

To an Emperor, they're the same thing.

Blogger JohnG January 05, 2017 2:35 PM  

@79 No, they've really given up on HUMINT - that would be the US Army. The Army abandoned interrogation in favor of sexier Military Source Operations (low level spy shize, or "here's $20 Mohammad, where are the bad guys?"), but made it a requirement for promotion and dumbed it down so everybody could pass the course. Now the Afghans/Arabs use our MSO people like ATM machines. As far as the CIA goes, their problem with HUMINT is that they're all gringos (don't look like the locals) and don't speak the language...and Source Ops requires a somewhat permissive environment.

@91 NATO isn't going to surround much of anything with their whopping 12 battalions.

@123 Actually SF is supposed to be able to get in behind the lines and neutralize nukes (tho SOF is stretched pretty damn thin right now), however this is more of a trigger. If something happens to them, it's grounds for escalation, kind of like the Russians all over Assad's bases.

Blogger JohnG January 05, 2017 2:37 PM  

>< *not* given up on HUMINT...

Blogger Jmac January 05, 2017 7:50 PM  

"because Hillary and Obama conspired to murder him for bumbling towards a gold standard and displacement of the petro-Dollar as the world currency standard."

I think you misunderstand what I mean. Qaddafi after he first came to power stated that Libya's territorial waters extended beyond the 12 mile limit, I think he went up to 200 miles. His Line of Death. This is what triggered the Reagan administration's attacks against Qaddafi, sailing US Naval vessels within 14-15 miles of Libya's coast, in freedom of navigation missions.

This provoked a response from Qaddafi, which led to several aerial battles in the '80s, which led to the West Berlin bombing, which led to the US bombing of Libya, which led to the Pan AM bombing, which led eventually to Qaddafi's demise. In the meantime though his Line of Death went away pretty quickly, thus even Qaddafi acceded to customary international law.

Blogger Jmac January 05, 2017 8:21 PM  

"now you're just being intentionally obtuse.

being able to "diplomatically" obstruct the military adventurism of the US ( the most powerful armed forces on the planet, which has invaded more nations than any other since the end of WW1 ) has a certain utility.

unless you LIKE being invaded by the US?

and yes, the UN *is* toothless. how long has Iran been under UN sanction? ( hint: it will be easier to count in decades ) North Korea?

why aren't Saudi Arabia and China likewise held to account for their "human rights" and "international law" violations?"

I hope I'm not going too fast for you. I'll explain my comment more slowly and maybe you'll understand it. UNSC resolutions fall under two broad categories, Chapter VII resolutions which can invoke the use of force for noncompliance and Chapter VI, which do not. Chapter VII resolutions are usually the ones that get vetoed, because they do have teeth, and states do recognize the authority that the UNSC has. Even Russia, which is why it keeps its veto power.

As for North Korea and Iran, yes they were punished with sanctions, which is one method the UNSC uses, and in Iran's case it seemed to have worked successfully. In fact sanction were lifted I believe. As for North Korea, they know full well the power of the Security Council since the original Korean War was a UN action. They are also now probably the most isolated state in the world due to their proliferation issues.

Granted it isn't a perfect system, states still hold the doctrine of sovereignty sacrosanct so internal matters such as Chinese, and Saudi Arabian violations of human rights aren't going to get a hearing. There are other inconsistencies as well, but what legal system is perfect?

It's still a work in progress, but for the most part states recognize the legitimacy of the UNSC, and at least make a show of abiding by UNSC resolutions. So to say with a rhetorical wave of the hand that the UN is toothless isn't a valid argument.

Blogger Jmac January 05, 2017 8:38 PM  

Snidely Whiplash wrote:The UNSC will be one tool both the US and Russia will use to attempt to resolve the conflict, especially since UN action preempts NATO action. Whether successful...well let's hope we don't have to find out.

The only law in international relations is the law of tooth and claw. UN resolutions function ONLY to give leaders in weak Western states political cover to ignore their citizens.

Rusdia participates in UNSC to remove the political cover sought by weak Western politicians.

That's it. UN resolutions only matter in Europe and the Anglosphere, and then only to the extent that they allow Western politicos to do as they are told by the US.

UNSC is structurally incapable of affecting in any way a dispute between members with veto power.


No, UN resolutions do matter, which is why Israel got upset with the most recent resolution on settlements. Also, why Iran has acquiesced on its weapons program, and why South Africa is no longer an apartheid state.

Getting back to my original point now lost in all this discussion on international law is that a UNSC Resolution, carefully worded, would, according to the North Atlantic Charter, preempt NATO action against Russia. It is likely that such a resolution would benefit both sides since nuclear weapons are involved.

So get rid of your anit-UN bias and try to see things from the Russian perspective: Do you want to fight a nuclear war with the US? Now look at it from the American side: Do you want to fight a nuclear war with Russia over the Baltics? No? How do you find a quick resolution? What authority will preempt NATO action?

Think about it. This is all theoretical but in line with what the NATO treaty says.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash January 06, 2017 10:35 PM  

What authority will preempt NATO action?
You imply a disparity between NATO and the US government which does not exist. The US is the master of the NATO puppet. Whatever tune the US calls, NATO dances. Every single time. You seem to think it possible that NATO will want a war when the US does not. That is a contradiction of the identity principle.

Blogger Jmac January 07, 2017 3:24 AM  

Snidely Whiplash wrote:What authority will preempt NATO action?

You imply a disparity between NATO and the US government which does not exist. The US is the master of the NATO puppet. Whatever tune the US calls, NATO dances. Every single time. You seem to think it possible that NATO will want a war when the US does not. That is a contradiction of the identity principl


I never said NATO would want the war. The US would need some face saving measures to halt NATO action once they realize how far the Russians are willing to go: Enter the Security Council.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts