Moscow: US must pack its stuff and get out of Europe

[Dogmaphobe]

Shane MacGowan’s cousin/brother…

View attachment 585800

Gotta love the Pogues, though.

 

[ClaireH]

There won't be mutual assured destruction, if the Russians destroy 90% of the US nuclear arsenal.
Already discussed in the military forum:

Russia is a Super Power: Opinion on The Hill

Sure they do Knowing the retaliation would be equally severe Mutually Assured Destruction what will the US do if Russia nukes 10 US military bases abroad? In the Middle East for example.. and says that any nuclear strike against Russian territory will lead to full scale nuclear destruction of...

www.usmessageboard.com

There will not be mutual assured destruction if we do not let anonymous falsehoods spread as if they were factual. In order for truth to “win the day”, consistent efforts are needed to call out deception as it plays out daily.

 

[Siberian]

I translated the article and what you have posted in your title has nothing to do with the article nor even suggested, as you’ve stated.

Most readers are very well aware of direct intentions of propaganda misdirection. I would suggest that any poster interested in actual facts as opposed to war monergering falsehoods, translate the article and you will find what I have found.

On second thought, I will save readers the legwork; here is the translated article: coming back with it shortly

you obviously did not read the text of the Russian ultimatum, which today Russia another time confirmed it was not going to give up.

I did not give the quote, the quote would be "NATO must pack and withdraw to 1997 border lines), but summing up - what I said is exactly what Russia means.

If you don't understand what Russia says it is rather your problem, next step the West will have to deal with more thorough explanation.


Russia proposes the US to get not only out of Europe, but elsewhere where Russia finds it bothering her... The US must be limited to its teritory. And prior to negotiations Russia speaks the language it never used before, at all. It means Russia CAN AFFORD ITSELF such language, it has something if it promises to intimidate the US.

You seem not to understand what is going on.


Article 5

The Parties shall refrain from deploying their armed forces and armaments, including in the framework of international organizations, military alliances or coalitions, in the areas where such deployment could be perceived by the other Party as a threat to its national security, with the exception of such deployment within the national territories of the Parties.

The Parties shall refrain from flying heavy bombers equipped for nuclear or non-nuclear armaments or deploying surface warships of any type, including in the framework of international organizations, military alliances or coalitions, in the areas outside national airspace and national territorial waters respectively, from where they can attack targets in the territory of the other Party.

....

Article 6

The Parties shall undertake not to deploy ground-launched intermediate-range and shorter-range missiles outside their national territories, as well as in the areas of their national territories, from which such weapons can attack targets in the national territory of the other Party.

(lol, do you want me to explain to you where these missiles of Russia and America can be deployed?)


Article 7

The Parties shall refrain from deploying nuclear weapons outside their national territories and return such weapons already deployed outside their national territories at the time of the entry into force of the Treaty to their national territories. The Parties shall eliminate all existing infrastructure for deployment of nuclear weapons outside their national territories.

The Parties shall not train military and civilian personnel from non-nuclear countries to use nuclear weapons. The Parties shall not conduct exercises or training for general-purpose forces, that include scenarios involving the use of nuclear weapons.

 

[Plow Boy]

Here is the referenced article translated in English to avoid the OP’s misrepresentation of statements.
Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov, who arrived at the Russian-American talks on security guarantees, said that NATO would no longer be able to "push back" Russia to a secondary role in European and international politics: it was time for the North Atlantic alliance to return to the 1997 borders.

“Even a layman understands that demanding concessions from Russia in a situation where NATO has been striving, as they say, to“ push back ”our country and transfer it, if not to the role of a subordinate, then in any case to a secondary role in the European and international politics will no longer be able to do this with direct damage to our security. It's all in the past. And earlier it didn’t work very well, but now it’s just put an end to it, ”he told TASS.

He added that "NATO needs to collect money and go to the borders of 1997."

According to Ryabkov, Moscow will continue to persistently present arguments in support of its position on security guarantees; the rather tough position of the United States on this matter does not throw the Russian side out of balance.

“The position of the United States is quite tough; by all indications, it has completely closed in on the position that our neighbors in the West, direct neighbors in the West from the so-called Bucharest Nine have been working on over the past weeks. And, of course, the NATO Secretariat adds, as they say, fire, sometimes it burns with fire on this topic. But we have seen something different, and, as a matter of fact, it does not throw us off balance. We will persistently explain the logic and present arguments in support of our position, ”the diplomat said.

Ryabkov noted that Russia in Geneva is ready to conduct an article-by-article analysis of its proposals on security guarantees with the United States, but Moscow has great doubts about Washington's readiness for such a conversation.

Earlier Ryabkov said: it is highly likely that in Geneva Russia will face the reluctance of the United States and NATO to really perceive Moscow's position, but it will not give in to pressure and will not make concessions.

If Russia went into the Ukraine today, President Biden and the US would ultimately do nothing. There is too much to lose for the US to worry about the Ukraine, IMHO.

 

[Siberian]

USMB readers- do not fall for this false propaganda by this war mongering poster. I am getting ready to translate the article once I can get onto my computer or advise a quick read/translation for yourself. The OP is spreading falsehoods and his purpose for doing so has already been mentioned on the thread.

better start with translation of the text of Russian ultimatum
to judge if I amwarmongering

and since when making the US stick to its territory is warmongering?

 

[braalian]

Newsflash: Russia lost its Superpower status 30 years ago.

 

[beagle9]

Russia better be careful with how thin it spreads itself. Ukraine, Kazakhstan, and now they figure Russia is strong enough to take on NATO too. Bring it.

You think Russia and China won't Allie themselves together ?? Of course they will, along with other communist nefarious characters if a large scale war was to break out. We have got to get our act back together before it's to late. This weakness can cause one or two things, either them to jump us or our fear in them with us thinking that they might do so (because of our weakness),
causes us to jump them.

 

[ClaireH]

you obviously did not read the text of the Russian ultimatum, which today Russia another time confirmed it was not going to give up.

I did not give the quote, the quote would be "NATO must pack and withdraw to 1997 border lines), but summing up - what I said is exactly what Russia means.

If you don't understand what Russia says it is rather your problem, next step the West will have to deal with more thorough explanation.


Russia proposes the US to get out of Europe. And prior to negotiations it speaks the language it never used before, at all. It means Russia CAN AFFORD ITSELF such language.

You seem not to understand what is going on.


Article 5

The Parties shall refrain from deploying their armed forces and armaments, including in the framework of international organizations, military alliances or coalitions, in the areas where such deployment could be perceived by the other Party as a threat to its national security, with the exception of such deployment within the national territories of the Parties.

The Parties shall refrain from flying heavy bombers equipped for nuclear or non-nuclear armaments or deploying surface warships of any type, including in the framework of international organizations, military alliances or coalitions, in the areas outside national airspace and national territorial waters respectively, from where they can attack targets in the territory of the other Party.

....

Article 6

The Parties shall undertake not to deploy ground-launched intermediate-range and shorter-range missiles outside their national territories, as well as in the areas of their national territories, from which such weapons can attack targets in the national territory of the other Party.

(lol, do you want me to explain to you where these missiles of Russia and America can be deployed?)


Article 7

The Parties shall refrain from deploying nuclear weapons outside their national territories and return such weapons already deployed outside their national territories at the time of the entry into force of the Treaty to their national territories. The Parties shall eliminate all existing infrastructure for deployment of nuclear weapons outside their national territories.

The Parties shall not train military and civilian personnel from non-nuclear countries to use nuclear weapons. The Parties shall not conduct exercises or training for general-purpose forces, that include scenarios involving the use of nuclear weapons.

Please direct my attention to the part where you have stated that “US must pack its stuff and get out of Europe”. I have already read that document you just posted regarding the agreement with provisions in how to avoid war, not start one.

Your thread is an obvious attempt to warmonger; you can call it and color it whatever you want, but your OP stated something that wasn’t in the article you linked. I strictly mentioned the discrepancy.


“seeking to avoid any military confrontation and armed conflict between the Parties and realizing that direct military clash between them could result in the use of nuclear weapons that would have far-reaching consequences, reaffirming that a nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought, and recognizing the need to make every effort to prevent the risk of outbreak of such war among States that possess nuclear weapons,”…. Where is this implied stance that Russia is telling the United States to get out of Europe? Or do you consider the mention that “there will be no US military posts within Russian territory”to be telling the US to get out of Europe, that’s nothing new. That’s not telling the United States to pack up either, it’s just a sovereign nation defending its borders nothing more. Stop trying to make it more than what it is, that’s my point.

The only point in which we might find partial agreement is regarding training wars on borders. That’s always been a sticky point, all over the globe between various countries.

 

[Silver Cat]

There will not be mutual assured destruction if we do not let anonymous falsehoods spread as if they were factual. In order for truth to “win the day”, consistent efforts are needed to call out deception as it plays out daily.

That's what we call "wishful thinking" and "self-comforting". Right now Administration do nothing to prevent war, to win war or to alleviate consequences of the war. All what they do is mumbling about "the sole purpose" and "nuclear disarmament".

 

[CarlinAnnArbor]

Anyway, I presume we can congradulate our American friends with American age being over

Only as long as the Vegetable and his Democrats are in power. Qell see China flexing their murderous muscle too. Thanks Biden

 

[Siberian]

Please direct my attention to the part where you have stated that “US must pack its stuff and get out of Europe”. I have already read that document you just posted regarding the agreement with provisions in how to avoid war, not start one.

Your thread is an obvious attempt to warmonger; you can call it and color it whatever you want, but your OP stated something that wasn’t in the article you linked. I strictly mentioned the discrepancy.


“seeking to avoid any military confrontation and armed conflict between the Parties and realizing that direct military clash between them could result in the use of nuclear weapons that would have far-reaching consequences, reaffirming that a nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought, and recognizing the need to make every effort to prevent the risk of outbreak of such war among States that possess nuclear weapons,”…. Where is this implied stance that Russia is telling the United States to get out of Europe? Or do you consider the mention that “there will be no US military posts within Russian territory”to be telling the US to get out of Europe, that’s nothing new. That’s not telling the United States to pack up either, it’s just a sovereign nation defending its borders nothing more. Stop trying to make it more than what it is, that’s my point.

The only point in which we might find partial agreement is regarding training wars on borders. That’s always been a sticky point, all over the globe between various countries.

oh, I noticed there is only 1 link in my initial post, while I inserted 2 links, including this one.

where there is a quote of Ryabkov


Мы будем вынуждены в отсутствие необходимых и срочных договоренностей по правовым гарантиям обращаться к другим средствам для обеспечения нужного баланса, если хотите, для устрашения оппонента — не в плане создания неких угроз, а в плане сдерживания

which means - in case of absence of agreement on guarantes to Russia it will turn to intimidation...

am I wrong? or is it me who is warmongering?
again, where is warmongering at all, I would call it peace keeping

Рябков предупредил об иных средствах «устрашения» для сдерживания угроз

НАТО обращается к неделимости безопасности только «в формате своего «междусобойчика», но «ложно понятое укрепление собственной безопасности Западом» обернется его ослаблением, считает дипломат, прибывший на переговоры в США

www.rbc.ru

 

[Oddball]

Russia is an icebox in the winter and a marsh in the summer, the land itself has limited them. There’s not much that can be done to improve on that, except to invade the south and I mean the Middle East. I can look at a map and see that is inevitable. Too many riches and spoils down there, but oil is what will drive it.

Doesn't change the fact that barring a few truly moronic strategic blunders by Hitler, the war could have turned out very different.

 

[Oddball]

Russians are actually making demands on The United freaking States of America?!!? Oh, that's sure laughable. Good grief, don't they realize that one Mr. Joe Biden is now our president??

He'll have to get Xi's approval, first.

Which means that the demands will be met, is a way that makes Murca look as weak as possible.

 

[Siberian]

Where is this implied stance that Russia is telling the United States to get out of Europe? Or do you consider the mention that “there will be no US military posts within Russian territory”to be telling the US to get out of Europe, that’s nothing new. That’s not telling the United States to pack up either, it’s just a sovereign nation defending its borders nothing more.

especially for you I underlined the provisions making the US stick to its territory in all kinds of military activity which can pose any threat to Russia.

i. e. almost any activity, all US heavy bombers, most US ships....

and not just out of Europe, actually from almost everywhere in Eurasia.

 

[braalian]

Russia can’t play with the big boys anymore.

Maybe they can intimidate France or England or something.

 

[Zincwarrior]

Poland needs a crash course nuclear program pronto.

 

[Siberian]

Which means that the demands will be met, is a way that makes Murca look as weak as possible.

actually, no, ultimatum is made so far out of acceptability for the US to give Russia an excuse to slap American cheek.
I will be greately surprised if Russia doesn't present some new weapons or mlitary measures in a week or two.

the US must demonstrate its incooperability and then will be publicly humiliated.
Then, will be humiliated another time after they have to accept Russian proposals.

2 humiliations may be a better cure for America than just one

 

[Rogue AI]

Does Putin really think that is what a Hunter Biden laptop is worth? Russians did steal one not so long ago.

 

[Silver Cat]

Russia can’t play with the big boys anymore.

Maybe they can intimidate France or England or something.

Of course she can. Not only to play, but, under some circumstances - even to win.

 

[gulfman]

It's time we surrendered.Biden is good at it.No war,no bombs.Better red than dead.Surrender to Russia before we have to surrender to China.