Nato Opens door to Sweden/Finland-How will this play in US Politics?

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

You clearly know nothing. Stop posting.

Learn the history of NATO.

Do you think we would allow the Warsaw Pact to put their military on our borders with Canada and Mexico?

Hypocrite.

Once again you illustrate your incredible stupidity!

What makes you think NATO has military forces permanently stationed in Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia?

Hint: We don't, you ******* moron!

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

The ability to invade their Neighbors without repercussions from NATO.,

That makes no sense. They cannot invade NATO now without repercussions. Again, what have they lost?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

There is no meritime pathway to Sweden that doesn't require crossing the North Sea dumbass, look at a map.

Hey shit for brains, you were talking about Finland, and I corrected your dumb ass!

"and Finland would not be a good place really to try to base troops in a buildup for a potential invasion due to the geography and weather conditions."

Remember that, shit for brains?

BTW, the word is "maritime".

 

[Big Bend Texas]

Hey shit for brains, yu were talking about Finland, and I corrected your dumb ass!

The same is true for Finland you idiot, look at a map.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Compare and contrast Russia’s military actions with the USA for the past 30 years.

Let's stick to NATO, fucktardo!

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

The same is true for Finland you idiot, look at a map.

OMG, how stupid can you be? Finland and Russia have a common border! Take a look at a ******* map.

Now, kiss my ass, apologize and stop being a fucktard like gipper!

 

[Big Bend Texas]

OMG, how stupid can you be? Finland and Russia have a common border! Take a look at a ******* map.

Now, kiss my ass, apologize and stop being a fucktard like gipper!

Do you really not understand what a maritime route is or anything else being discussed?

It would be very difficult for ships from the US or Western Europe to get to them in the winter or for their naval and transport forces be able to get out by sea in the event of a war.

Stop talking out of your ass and pretending you know it all. You don't.

Mass movement of troops, supplies, and equipment requires lots of ships unless you have a clear overland route and the US certainly doesn't have one nor does the rest of NATO that could make such a movement.

 

[eagle1462010]

Sure. Let them into NATO.

Russia isnt a member so their opinion means nothing or their threats.

 

[Esdraelon]

Yeah let’s keep provoking Russia because why not?

Having grown up in the 60s and 70s, it DOES seem like our current government is suicidally stuck on stupid. Pogo had it right all those years ago:
We have met the enemy and he is US...

 

[Big Bend Texas]

Apparently, they have nothing to fear from NATO if they do.

They have yet to invade a NATO member country.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Do you really not understand what a maritime route is or anything else being discussed?

It would be very difficult for ships from the US or Western Europe to get to them in the winter or for their naval and transport forces be able to get out by sea in the event of a war.

Stop talking out of your ass and pretending you know it all. You don't.

Mass movement of troops, supplies, and equipment requires lots of ships unless you have a clear overland route and the US certainly doesn't have one nor does the rest of NATO that could make such a movement.

Sweden or Norway is not an overland route?

Listen, dickhead! My avatar is somewhat closer to reality than most. I was a naval officer. In this case, I do know it all. You probably couldn't find enough water in your part of Texas to drown.

I have actually been to the area we are discussing. I served on a ballistic missile submarine that went NORTH of Finland. Also, Finland has a fleet of icebreakers keeping their ports open in winter.

How about we leave the warfighting to the professionals and stop talking out of your ass? You have done nothing but **** up your posts in this thread because you are a dumbass on this topic.

 

[Big Bend Texas]

Sweden or Norway is not an overland route?

Listen, dickhead! My avatar is somewhat closer to reality than most. I was a naval officer. In this case, I do know it all. You probably couldn't find enough water in your part of Texas to drown.

I have actually been to the area we are discussing. I served on a ballistic missile submarine that went NORTH of Finland. Also, Finland has a fleet of icebreakers keeping their ports open in winter.

How about we leave the warfighting to the professionals and stop talking out of your ass? You have done nothing but **** up your posts in this thread because you are a dumbass on this topic.

You can't get to either in the winter without traversing the North Atlantic.

You can't move mass amounts of men and equipment via submarine either.

During WWII we lost a massive amount of shipping due to weather and ice trying to supply Russia during the winter.

Stop talking out of your ass, you're an idiot.

 

[Esdraelon]

How will all the chicken hearts at home who are always scared we'll anger Putin handle it?

You seem convinced that pushing Putin into a corner is without risk. Why? What condition prevails just now that would convince you the little bastard WOULDN'T use a low-yield weapon or two to grab a strategic target inside Ukraine?
Better yet, what actions do you think would be appropriate if he DID drop say, a 1-5KT device as an airburst over Kyiv or Kharkiv or some other Ukrainian city? I base my caution on the fact that he decided to change Russia's nuclear weapons use policy back around 2000. He bowed to the reality that Russia alone could not afford to try to match the combined military power of the NATO alliance so he began building low yield weapons and creating a new policy for their use in CONVENTIONAL conflicts.

If he is seen to be losing this war and worse, to be backing down, it isn't just his political career that will be in peril.

 

[Big Bend Texas]

You seem convinced that pushing Putin into a corner is without risk. Why? What condition prevails just now that would convince you the little bastard WOULDN'T use a low-yield weapon or two to grab a strategic target inside Ukraine?
Better yet, what actions do you think would be appropriate if he DID drop say, a 1-5KT device as an airburst over Kyiv or Kharkiv or some other Ukrainian city? I base my caution on the fact that he decided to change Russia's nuclear weapons use policy back around 2000. He bowed to the reality that Russia alone could not afford to try to match the combined military power of the NATO alliance so he began building low yield weapons and creating a new policy for their use in CONVENTIONAL conflicts.

If he is seen to be losing this war and worse, to be backing down, it isn't just his political career that will be in peril.

He's not being pushed into any corners, he's just being prevented from invading Western and Northern Europe.

NATO would be violating it's own charter if it invaded a peaceful country.

Putin knows this.

An appropriate response would be a nuke of similar size detonated over Moscow or St. Petersburg which he would then retaliate against and very soon we've got a global exchange of nuclear weapons. Russia ceases then to exist as the country it is today.

That's why MADD has worked since Russia developed it's first nuke.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

You can't get to either in the winter without traversing the North Atlantic.

You can't move mass amounts of men and equipment via submarine either.

You're an idiot.

You don't know that we have caverns in Norway stockpiled with all the equipment needed. All you do is move the bodies required by air!

I also served on an amphibious helicopter assaults carrier that could transport the better part of a Marine Expeditionary Unit and all of their helicopters, trucks, and Humvees in the cargo decks.

There are a few idiots in this thread. I am not one of them.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

You seem convinced that pushing Putin into a corner is without risk. Why? What condition prevails just now that would convince you the little bastard WOULDN'T use a low-yield weapon or two to grab a strategic target inside Ukraine?
Better yet, what actions do you think would be appropriate if he DID drop say, a 1-5KT device as an airburst over Kyiv or Kharkiv or some other Ukrainian city? I base my caution on the fact that he decided to change Russia's nuclear weapons use policy back around 2000. He bowed to the reality that Russia alone could not afford to try to match the combined military power of the NATO alliance so he began building low yield weapons and creating a new policy for their use in CONVENTIONAL conflicts.

If he is seen to be losing this war and worse, to be backing down, it isn't just his political career that will be in peril.

Three letters, M-A-D! Look it up if you don't get it!

 

[Big Bend Texas]

He bowed to the reality that Russia alone could not afford to try to match the combined military power of the NATO alliance so he began building low yield weapons and creating a new policy for their use in CONVENTIONAL conflicts.

It's no longer a conventional conflict once a nuke has been used.

 

[Big Bend Texas]

You don't know that we have caverns in Norway stockpiled with all the equipment needed. All you do is move the bodies required by air!

I also served on an amphibious helicopter assaults carrier that could transport the better part of a Marine Expeditionary Unit and all of their helicopters, trucks, and Humvees in the cargo decks.

There are a few idiots in this thread. I am not one of them.

I know you are now blowing smoke out of your ass. You'd still need ships to move mass amounts of men and there's absolutely no evidence we've got "Mass amounts" of anything stored in either country in caves or in old salt mines which would be corrosive as hell on any exposed metal.

There's only 2,200 men in an MEU which would be a tiny drop in the bucket of what would be needed to help counter a Russian invasion.

Stop talking out of your ass.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

I know you are now blowing smoke out of your ass. You'd still need ships to move mass amounts of men and there's absolutely no evidence we've got "Mass amounts" of anything stored in either country in caves or in old salt mines which would be corrosive as hell on any exposed metal.

There's only 2,200 men in an MEU which would be a tiny drop in the bucket of what would be needed to help counter a Russian invasion.

Stop talking out of your ass.

Will you please STFU! Who the **** said anything about salt mines? Uh, YOU DID, dumbass!

Cave-Dwellers: Inside the US Marine Corps Prepositioning Program-Norway

Deep within a Norwegian hillside, thousands of US Marine Corps combat veterans await their next assignment.

www.defensenews.com

I guess these ******* thing are figments of my imagination! They sure look like Humvees to me!

The caves they are stored in have constant temperature and humidity. Corrosion is not an issue. Norwegian civilians maintain the equipment.

Now, go slither back under that rock in the desert of Texas until you learn some respect for your betters!

 

[kyzr]

Compare and contrast Russia’s military actions with the USA for the past 30 years.

The US military has never invaded another country to keep the land and resources.
The US builds coalitions, like when we threw Saddam out of Kuwait.
The US removed Saddam from power and set Iraq free from his brutality.
The US went into AFG to eliminate AQ, and then mistakenly tried to build a democracy.

Putin took Crimea, and invaded Ukraine to make it part of Russia.