NATO warns Russia over Georgia move

[Norge]

"Nato has warned Russia that its recent troop build-up in Georgia's two breakaway regions undermines its neighbour's territorial integrity.
Russia's moves in Abkhazia and South Ossetia were raising tensions in the area, a Nato spokesman said.
Moscow has accused Georgia of preparing to invade Abkhazia, and says it is also boosting Russian peacekeeping forces there and in South Ossetia.
Tbilisi has described the Russian move as "irresponsible".
"The steps that have been taken [by Russia] and the rhetoric have increased tensions and undermined Georgia's territorial integrity," Nato spokesman James Appathurai said."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7375736.stm

A very strong and very public warning. I can not remember the last time Nato has been this overt in their dealings with Russia and with so little debate. Do you believe NATO would be involved (directly or indirectly) if this situation escalates?

[Lawrence of Arabia]

I highly doubt it, they will moan over and over again, but that's probably it.

[pajomife]

Is a Russian response to undermined Serbia territorial integrity,by Nato country's.

They said they do it, after Kosovo proclaimed independence and they do.

And now ?A Nato air strike against Russia?I doubt.Economic sanctions?Just if Nato countries wants the Russian gas supply's cut off.

So,better to shout the mouth,and leave of those bombastic and pompous,proclamations and warnings.

[removeduser_487563287433]

The situation will not escalate, I think. For all its posturing Russia is not conceivably a match for NATO, and Georgia has promised not to use force (and as a NATO candidate and very close to America, is certain to keep it).

[NakedBarbarian2]

I think its mainly a case of Russia trying to show the rest of the world that it is still one of the big boys...

In any case i don't see Russia actually attacking Georgia, tho i also don't see NATO throwing any sort of military weight against Russia either.

[Panzerbear]

Do you believe NATO would be involved (directly or indirectly) if this situation escalates?

I cant wait .

i also don't see NATO throwing any sort of military weight against Russia either

NATO has no military weight against Russia. we will nuke their asses into 12th century, if we have to. so nobody is going to try anything funny.

all together, the situation is just a BS word exchange. nobody is going to do anything, just shaking the empty air. if anyone, Russia is least interested in any armed conflicts around its borders. and their peacekeepers are there to insure no such conflict is possible in the first place. Georgians will never have balls to attack Russians, that would be both political and economic suicide for their country and NATO will not endorce such move.

[Logik]

@ Czar man that was funny. you'll nuke them into the 12th century. i almost fell of my chair when i read that. but you are right Nato is weak and they don't have the real strength to do anything. even though to me all of this is a bunch of BS from both sides.it is all talk.

[Osceola]

@ Czar man that was funny. you'll nuke them into the 12th century. i almost fell of my chair when i read that. but you are right Nato is weak and they don't have the real strength to do anything. even though to me all of this is a bunch of BS from both sides.it is all talk.

Whats so funny bout it? Remember man, this is the country that "misplaced" 75,000 nukes right after the fall of the Soviet Union. If they had that many they could afford to lose, I honestly doubt their lacking in nuclear firepower.

Besides .Czar, shouldn't we let the whole nuke thing slide. I hate to sound like a naive hippie, but c'mon. Lets just not open Pandora's Box shall we?

[Norge]

I cant wait .



NATO has no military weight against Russia. we will nuke their asses into 12th century, if we have to. so nobody is going to try anything funny.

Considering the state of Russian missile technology, you'd have a 50% chance of nuking yourself in the process.

I nearly fell of my chair when I saw this picture...

It is Georgian territory, its internationally recognised as being within Georgias borders. Even Russia doesnt recognise Abkhazia as an independent country.

[Panzerbear]

Considering the state of Russian missile technology, you'd have a 50% chance of nuking yourself in the process.

in your wet dreams .

It is Georgian territory, its internationally recognised as being within Georgias borders. Even Russia doesnt recognise Abkhazia as an independent country.

and that is why Norwegians will deliver the Georgians from evil. oh wait.

[Holger Danske]

in your wet dreams .

.Czar, so far you're the only one here having wet nationalistic dreams, so please cut the lame Kremlish attitude and, if possible, post something that is worth reading... Again, the latter might just be too much to ask for.

because it exists?

So does NATO's arsenal, and if the Russians are stupid enough to use their nuclear weapons, then they'll better prepare for some mutual thermal nuclear loving... M.A.D - you gotta love it.

Nuclear weapons aside, Russia just isn't capable of winning a war against US and the european members. And NATO is not interested in war with Russia as it is a Defensive Alliance!

both Britain and France have very insignificant nuclear arsenal, they are out of the picture if the hits the fan.

A couple of hundred warheads will destroy a lot and kill millions of Russians. So calling their arsenals insignificant just goes to show your utter ignorance...

[CrimsonGuard]

Considering the state of Russian missile technology, you'd have a 50% chance of nuking yourself in the process.

I assume you are expert in Russian missile technology to make such statement?

It is Georgian territory, its internationally recognised as being within Georgias borders. Even Russia doesnt recognise Abkhazia as an independent country.

So? What aggression are we talking about here?

I just love those small pictures not showing anything at all.

[The Super Pope]

NATO has no military weight against Russia. we will nuke their asses into 12th century, if we have to. so nobody is going to try anything funny.

all together, the situation is just a BS word exchange. nobody is going to do anything, just shaking the empty air. if anyone, Russia is least interested in any armed conflicts around its borders. and their peacekeepers are there to insure no such conflict is possible in the first place. Georgians will never have balls to attack Russians, that would be both political and economic suicide for their country and NATO will not endorce such move.

NATO would defeat Russia, no question of it. Russia has nukes? Guess what? So do Britain, France and the US. Even if (and this is very unlikely) we do go to war, no-one is going to chuck nukes around.
NATO military equipment is far better than Russia's, in a stand up fight Russia would lose

[Panzerbear]

NATO would defeat Russia, no question of it.

NATO (and the rest of the world for that matter) will NOT survive a war against Russia. please stop kidding my slippers.

NATO military equipment is far better than Russia's, in a stand up fight Russia would lose

no it wont. you cant even win in Iraq / Afghanistan (i.e. backward 3rd world countries with 50+ years of technology gap and vastly uneducated enemy) for christ's sake.
once Germans and their Axis allies were also quite confident they will break Russia in half in less than half a year .

PS: we will turn off all oil and gas supplies to the outside world and you will surrender before the war is even over . 250 bucks per barrel of oil FTW.

[The Super Pope]

NATO (and the rest of the world for that matter) will NOT survive a war against Russia. please stop kidding my slippers.



no it wont. you cant even win in Iraq / Afghanistan (i.e. backward 3rd world countries with 50+ years of technology gap and vastly uneducated enemy) for christ's sake.
once Germans and their Axis allies were also quite confident they will break Russia in half in less than half a year .

Yes, because counter-insurgency and conventional war are the same thing. Russia will not defeat the uS alone, regardless of NATO

[Panzerbear]

Yes, because counter-insurgency and conventional war are the same thing. Russia will not defeat the uS alone, regardless of NATO

please. US will be out of the picture in less than an hour. quit your mental :wub:. you seem to forget that even though Russia lost its status of superpower, it still has enough nuclear arsenal (and means to deliver it) to annihilate the world... twice.

if you guys are willing to test our defenses - PLEASE feel free to invade us .

hell even in conventional war, US will suffer so many thousands of casualties per month that it will be a political suicide of any US president who will be foolish enough to start a war against Russia. needless to say, mandatory draft, economic bankruptcy, major world oil/gas crisis, and so on and so forth. please stop kidding yourselves. Russia is not some kind of Zimbabwe, which you can invade and get away with it. we have entire male population who has been at least through 2 years worth of mandatory military training + military who has spent last 5 decades in wars all over the world.

[CrimsonGuard]

Yes, because counter-insurgency and conventional war are the same thing. Russia will not defeat the uS alone, regardless of NATO

US will not defeat Russia alone regardless of anything. Neither will win, it is impossible to provide enough supplies and troops in order to invade giants like US and Russia today.

[Erebus Pasha]

NATO (and the rest of the world for that matter) will NOT survive a war against Russia. please stop kidding my slippers.

You are no longer the USSR anymore - stop kidding yourself. The Russian State would couldn't cope with a war on that scale. NATO would survive but Russia as it is now wouldn't.

no it wont. you cant even win in Iraq / Afghanistan (i.e. backward 3rd world countries with 50+ years of technology gap and vastly uneducated enemy) for christ's sake.
once Germans and their Axis allies were also quite confident they will break Russia in half in less than half a year .

The Afghans beat the might of the USSR or did you forget about that. The Russians would get the arses kicked as soon as they crossed into Poland and Hungary.

PS: we will turn off all oil and gas supplies to the outside world and you will surrender before the war is even over .

And destroy your economy in the process.

[Panzerbear]

The Afghans beat the might of the USSR or did you forget about that.

lol!!! Afghans havent won A SINGLE singificant battle. withrawal of Soviet troops from Afghanistan was purely a political decision by Gorbatchev and Soviet lost "only" 16,000 of soldiers in that war (which is like 5% of Soviet Army strength).

how could I forget about propagandist statements? right.

The Russians would get the arses kicked as soon as they crossed into Poland and Hungary.

lol who the needs to cross into Poland and Hungary??? its cheaper to buy them off. Cold War is over, get over it.

And destroy your economy in the process.

and yours. guess who will have how much to loose.

[cegorach]

.
NATO has no military weight against Russia. we will nuke their asses into 12th century, if we have to. so nobody is going to try anything funny..

Yep, Soviet-Empire.com is waiting with open arms...



@CrimsonGuard

Quote:
Originally Posted by Norge
"General Winter" has done a good job in defending Russia... Can't say the same about the average Russian soldier though.
Poorly trained, poorly armed, poor tactics - The most recognizable traits of a Russian soldier troughout thousands of years.

Gosh, read some history man... First off "thousands" is not appliable to Russia, since Russia as country formed in 16th century. Secondly the quality of Russian troops varies very much depending on what time in history you look at.

I fully agree. For example XVIIth century reforms are usualy not remembered at all or wholly overshadowed by 'Peter the Great - master of the universe' fans.

I would dare to say that Russian army in late XVIIIth and early XIXth century was really good and with a number of really competent commanders. In addition in a number of wars in earlier years the Russians managed to keep some really decent fighting force, but were usually outfought by their enemies.

Right now, though the military of Russia is hardly any danger , except when defending its homeland, but that can be said about most of armies.


Personally I cannot see anyone except the Chinese who has any possible reason to attack the RF.

Obviously the Georgians are playing the 'military tension' card right now and I must admit they are in win/win situation. Whatever they do there is a strong possibility the Russian govrnment or their high commanders will do something stupid. For long years now the RF is a master in shooting its own foot when it comes to relationship with certain neigbours of them.

Latest stupidity is the suggestion made by them that it was a NATO fighter which shot this UFV - how a Bulgarian/Polish/Hungarian/Slovak Mig 29 got there and why only they can say.

Of course it is just a proof how confused and how chaotic responses are made coming from the authorities of the RF, but that it is when you are sending imbeciles abroad - especially the 'clever' ambassador to the NATO.

Of course specialists and experts ignore rubbish coming from certain people, but the reputation of Russia suffers, its opponents are getting more ammo for free and in a way whatever Russian diplomacy achieves it is expected to bury on its own later.




P.S. Of course I mean security issues, not energy because here the RF plays the game from quite well to very well.