Russian Invasion Of Ukraine (Formerly: Democratic Malaise Draws Ukraine Eastwards)

[vector7]

Is It Time To Prepare For War?

Submitted by Tyler Durden on 03/12/2015 22:35 -0400

Submitted by Chris Martenson via PeakProsperity.com,

This report was initially released to PeakProsperity.com's paid subscribers earlier this week. Given the significance of the subject matter and the number of request from our enrolled members to share it more widely, we're making it available to all readers here.

For our paying subscribers, who have already read this, please see the new Part 2 companion to this report: How To Prepare For War.

From my perspective, the made-for-public Western news copy regarding Ukraine and Russia is childishly slanted and one-sided.

The level of so-called aggression by Russia cannot even remotely be compared to the United States' naked aggression against Iraq – a country that had not attacked the US, threatened the US, or had any WMD program (which even if it did, would still have not constituted a legitimate reason for invasion by another nation under existing international law.)

So there’s a heavy dose of “Do as we say, not as we do” when it comes to US pronouncements of ‘unacceptable aggression’ on the part of Russia. Predictably, Russia is less than pleased -- as in the way they would be if routinely lectured in the press by Captain Hazelwood on the importance of boating safety.

Despite Western claims, it is highly unlikely Russia has yet moved heavy equipment and troop concentrations across the Ukraine border -- because if they had, you’d for sure have seen pictures. Endless pictures of those troops and equipment on TV, morning, noon and night. You haven’t seen any pictures, so none likely exist, which means no Russian army troops or military armaments are yet in Ukraine.
But that has not stopped the US and NATO from accusing Russia of exactly those transgressions in nearly every single announcement and press release.

The latest hawkish salvo by General Breedlove was so over-the-top that Germany expressed public alarm:

Breedlove's Bellicosity: Berlin Alarmed by Aggressive NATO Stance on Ukraine

Mar 6, 2015

It was quiet in eastern Ukraine last Wednesday. Indeed, it was another quiet day in an extended stretch of relative calm. The battles between the Ukrainian army and the pro-Russian separatists had largely stopped and heavy weaponry was being withdrawn. The Minsk cease-fire wasn't holding perfectly, but it was holding.

On that same day, General Philip Breedlove, the top NATO commander in Europe, stepped before the press in Washington. Putin, the 59-year-old said, had once again "upped the ante" in eastern Ukraine -- with "well over a thousand combat vehicles, Russian combat forces, some of their most sophisticated air defense, battalions of artillery" having been sent to the Donbass.

"What is clear," Breedlove said, "is that right now, it is not getting better. It is getting worse every day."

German leaders in Berlin were stunned. They didn't understand what Breedlove was talking about. And it wasn't the first time. Once again, the German government, supported by intelligence gathered by the Bundesnachrichtendienst (BND), Germany's foreign intelligence agency, did not share the view of NATO's Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR).

The pattern has become a familiar one. For months, Breedlove has been commenting on Russian activities in eastern Ukraine, speaking of troop advances on the border, the amassing of munitions and alleged columns of Russian tanks. Over and over again, Breedlove's numbers have been significantly higher than those in the possession of America's NATO allies in Europe. As such, he is playing directly into the hands of the hardliners in the US Congress and in NATO.

The German government is alarmed. Are the Americans trying to thwart European efforts at mediation led by Chancellor Angela Merkel? Sources in the Chancellery have referred to Breedlove's comments as "dangerous propaganda." Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier even found it necessary recently to bring up Breedlove's comments with NATO General Secretary Jens Stoltenberg.
(Source)

Think about how truly and utterly bizarre this all is. It is literally not possible to hide “well over a thousand” combat vehicles from air and satellite surveillance, and everybody who knows anything at all knows this. How can Breedlove make such outlandish claims and expect anybody to think he’s anything other than daft?

What are reasonable intelligence analysts and diplomats in Germany, or anywhere for that matter, to make of any of this?

One uncomfortable pattern that fits is that the US has gotten used to lying overtly to get its way. All reasonable analysts who read the UNSCOM report on Iraq’s defunct WMD program back in 2002 (as I did) knew that Iraq did not have any such program as claimed by Colin Powell, Rumsfeld, Perle, Feith and the rest of the unbalanced individuals who rushed the world to a war of choice. The spin doctors of today will say that “bad intelligence” was to blame, but that too is a lie.

There was no bad intelligence, only bad people who made up false ‘intelligence’ and then foisted it upon the world. And it’s happening again.
To my mind, there’s no other way to interpret Breedlove’s comments; they are just too far outside of the bounds of what is a possible misinterpretation of data. Again, ‘more than a thousand’ pieces of heavy armor cannot be hidden from satellites, especially not in the open, flat country that is eastern Ukraine.

From a bit further in the Der Spiegel article we have this:

The experts contradicted Breedlove's view in almost every respect. There weren't 40,000 soldiers on the border, they believed, rather there were much less than 30,000 and perhaps even fewer than 20,000. Furthermore, most of the military equipment had not been brought to the border for a possible invasion, but had already been there prior to the beginning of the conflict. Furthermore, there was no evidence of logistical preparation for an invasion, such as a field headquarters.

Breedlove, though, repeatedly made inexact, contradictory or even flat-out inaccurate statements. On Nov. 18, 2014, he told the German newspaper Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung that there were "regular Russian army units in eastern Ukraine." One day later, he told the website of the German newsmagazine Stern that they weren't fighting units, but "mostly trainers and advisors."

He initially said there were "between 250 and 300" of them, and then "between 300 and 500." For a time, NATO was even saying there were 1,000 of them.

A short word for the phrase “flat out inaccurate statements” is lie. We might as well get used to calling things by their correct terms, it makes things easier to follow and understand.

The reason I bring all this up is because the bellicosity of a small band of war hawks in the US seem to be driving policy for the entire nation.

Back in 2002, it was a very small group operating out of the Office of Special Plans from a small corner of the pentagon under the direction of Donald Rumsfeld to generate the false intelligence used to ‘justify’ a truly unnecessary and ill-advised war.

This time it seems to be Vitoria Nuland, General Breedlove, and the usual assemblage of war hawks in the Senate and Congress.

But the risk cannot be denied. 2002 taught us all that the momentum of war can be initiated by obvious lies and a few dedicated people. That same risk is afoot today.

Will it come to pass? For the people of Ukraine it already has. For the people of Syria and Iraq, it already has.

The question is, will this spill over into a wider conflict that involves Europe and the US against Russia and whoever sides with Russia (*cough*cough* I’m looking at you, China).

As I predicted in the fall of 2014, things would continue to escalate before they deescalate. The moves are coming fast and furious now. The US has moved heavy armor into the region, right on Russia’s border:

US sends heavy armour to Baltic states to 'deter' Russia

Mar 9, 2015

Riga (AFP) - The United States on Monday delivered more than 100 pieces of military equipment to vulnerable NATO-allied Baltic states in a move designed to provide them with the ability to deter potential Russian threats.

The deliveries are intended to "demonstrate resolve to President (Vladimir) Putin and Russia that collectively we can come together," US Major General John R. O'Connor told AFP as he oversaw the delivery of the equipment in the port of Riga.

The delivery included Abrams tanks, Bradley fighting vehicles, Scout Humvees as well as support equipment and O'Connor said the armour would stay "for as long as required to deter Russian aggression".

The three former Soviet-ruled Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, all NATO and European Union members since 2004, have very little military hardware of their own.

(Source)

Because the Western press seems unable to understand these things from a neutral perspective, let’s imagine how the US might react if Russia were to move heavy armor into Mexico to help “deter US aggression.”

I think we all know the answer to that: the US would immediately react in a very threatened manner.

It needs to be pointed out that this is precisely the reason that NATO expansion was undertaken so aggressively back in the 1995–2005 period.

The potential for military action became much greater than if the foreign affairs of individual countries were managed independently by their own governments. Now, because of the NATO treaty, Europe and the US are obligated to military action if ever and whenever a perceived threat arises against any NATO member.

Of course, the chances of starting a conflict are immeasurably better if you taunt and parade yourself as close as possible to your intended adversary:

U.S. military vehicles paraded 300 yards from the Russian border

Feb 24, 2015

MOSCOW — U.S. military combat vehicles paraded Wednesday through an Estonian city that juts into Russia, a symbolic act that highlighted the stakes for both sides amid the worst tensions between the West and Russia since the Cold War.

The armored personnel carriers and other U.S. Army vehicles that rolled through the streets of Narva, a border city separated by a narrow frontier from Russia, were a dramatic reminder of the new military confrontation in Eastern Europe.

The soldiers from the U.S. Army’s Second Cavalry Regiment were taking part in a military parade to mark Estonia’s Independence Day.

(Source)

It's obvious that there are factions within the US military establishment that are not just preparing for war with Russia, but actively provoking tensions.

Which makes today’s news out of the EU all the more concerning because it shows a degree of coordination that now spans the Atlantic, and has jumped outside of the usual NATO military alliance and into the civilian bureaucracy of the EU:

Juncker calls for EU army, says would deter Russia

Mar 9, 2015

(Reuters) - The European Union needs its own army to face up to Russia and other threats as well as restore the bloc's foreign policy standing around the world, EU Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker told a German newspaper on Sunday.

Arguing that NATO was not enough because not all members of the transatlantic defense alliance are in the EU, Juncker said a common EU army would also send important signals to the world.

"A joint EU army would show the world that there would never again be a war between EU countries," Juncker told the Welt am Sonntag newspaper. "Such an army would also help us to form common foreign and security policies and allow Europe to take on responsibility in the world."

German Defence Minister Ursula von der Leyen welcomed Juncker's proposal: "Our future as Europeans will at some point be with a European army," she told German radio.

(Source)

It's telling that Juncker trotted out his proposal and immediately a German defense minister was at the ready to lend support. This means it's a serious proposal, and has already been circulated and vetted.

While we might disagree as to whether a common military would prevent future wars between EU countries, the thing about armies is that once you have one, there’s a tendency to want to use it.

They are very expensive to just have lying about. In times past, no country would think of keeping one assembled after a war because they have a bad habit of needing something to do, and if nothing is available externally, they have been known to turn their power inwards (see: Egyptian military coup. Also: US military industrial complex).

And how has Russia reacted to all this? In an escalate-y, predicable sort of way:

Russian legislator: EU’s common army, if created, to play provocative role

MOSCOW, 9 March. /TASS/. The European Union’s common armed forces, if they are ever created, may play a provocative role, first deputy chairman of the United Russia faction in the State Duma, Frants Klintsevich, told the media on Sunday.

"In the nuclear age extra armies do not provide any additional security. But they surely can play a provocative role," Klintsevich said, adding it was regrettable that such ideas had already met with some support.

"One should presume that a European army is seen as an addendum to NATO. And in this kind of situation Western politicians are not shy to accuse Russia of some aggressiveness," Klintsevich said.

(Source)

Russia went right for the nuclear trump card, noting that conventional forces do not really have a clearly defined role when nukes are on the table. That is, Russia has said (again!) very clearly that they have nukes, might use them, and do not appreciate being constantly threatened.

And yet here we are.

I mean, it was barely a week ago that a Russian military chief said this:

Russia says ready to reciprocate nuclear strike

Mar 1, 2015

A Russian military chief says the country's Strategic Missile Forces (SMF) are ready to defend the country against any possible “lightning-speed” nuclear strike.

“If we have to accomplish a task of repelling a ‘lightning-speed’ nuclear strike, this objective will be attained within a prescribed period,” Andrei Burbin, the SMF Central Command’s chief, was quoted by Russian media as saying on Saturday.

He voiced the SMF preparedness to deliver a retaliatory nuclear strike “unhesitatingly” if Russia comes under any assault.

Referring to the geographic position of Russia’s missile units, the major general said it will protect them from demolition by “any global strike,” adding that 98 percent of the SMF systems would be new in 2020.

The comments come against the backdrop of a recent boost in NATO’s military presence near Russia’s borders. In 2014, NATO forces held some 200 military exercises with the Western military block’s Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg promising that such maneuvers would continue.

(Source)

You’d think that with the stakes being so high that there would be obvious diplomatic efforts underway to try and defuse the situation and prevent any accidents from happening. But instead, we see the West consistently accusing Russia of aggressiveness while holding hundreds of military exercises and positioning its NATO equipment closer and closer to Russia’s borders.

Meanwhile Russia is busy saying to the world, Hey look: we still have a bunch of working nukes over here and we think you should keep that in mind.

Conclusion

I fear that I will have to issue an ALERT at some point over this entire matter. Again, an ALERT happens when I come into possession of information that causes me to personally take new or different actions.

I am seriously entertaining preparing for war, and as I’ve written before, the nature of this next war could involve everything from trade battles, to cyber attacks, to financial system assaults, a downing of the US electrical grid, to an actual shooting war -- perhaps one that escalates to a nuclear exchange.

When things are this obviously crazy, anything is possible.

It is my contention that the next shooting war will change the geopolitical landscape permanently and irrevocably for the US and the US dollar’s reserve currency status. Much of the weight carried by the US is because of its dominant military. But a military is only as powerful as its ability to project force; and that requires that you either walk to the conflict via a land bridge or you ship your heavy equipment over the seas.

Light skirmishes can be accomplished via air, but nothing too serious because it’s just not possible to fly in everything you need. Tanks are heavy.

So is food and fuel. Ammunition too. Moving a hundred thousand troops requires ships. Of which, clearly, the USA has many.

But ships are no longer useful in the modern world, as France rather embarrassingly proved to the US recently:

US supercarrier ‘sunk’ by French submarine in wargames
Mar 6, 2015

The French Ministry of Defence has revealed one of its attack submarines pulled of an astounding upset during recent war-games in the North Atlantic.

The Aviationist blog spotted an article on the French defence force’s website — quickly withdrawn — which told how one of their submarines, the “Saphir” tackled the might of the United States’ navy off the coast of Florida.

At the core of the surface force was the enormous aircraft carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt and its powerful strike wing of 90 combat aircraft and helicopters.

Clustered protectively about it was several advanced cruisers and destroyers, and its own guardian submarine.

In one element of the war games, the Saphir was tasked with the role of being the “bad guy”.

Its mission: To seek, locate and exterminate the US naval force.

The exact details of how it achieved this embarrassing outcome is not known.

Somehow, the French submarine must have been able to slip between the defensive sensor patchwork of patrol aircraft, helicopters, warships and submarines to line up a shot on the $13 billion monstrosity.

There she lurked as a fictitious political crisis evolved in the world above.

On the final day of the exercise, the order finally came.

Sink the Theodore Roosevelt.

This 30-year-old Saphir proceeded to do. Along with most of the escorting warships.

(Source)

Yes, a single 39-year old submarine managed to sneak into the protective ring of an entire aircraft carrier group and go through a mock firing of its entire complement of torpedoes against the entire set of targets.

Oops.

Besides the embarrassment for the US crews involved, this proves an important point: ships are no match for submarines. And there are a lot of submarines out there on both sides. Offensive anti-ship technology in the form of advanced submarine torpedoes, as well as missiles fired from land or aircraft, have advanced by enormous leaps and bounds since WWII.

The US has never faced an adversary with such technology in open warfare. But Russia and China (and even Iran) are stocked to the gills with such weapons.

By provoking Russia, the US risks exposing the fact that it cannot really project power all across the globe anymore because it cannot possibly ship things to and fro with impunity. Once that calculus changes, everything changes -- with King Dollar right at the top of the list.

Whether that comes to pass, I am finding the risk of a major conflict between NATO/EU and Russia to be high and seemingly growing higher with every passing week. Such are the times in which we live.

It leaves me asking if it’s time to begin preparing for war, which means being ready for the worst.

I truly wish that this were not how things were unfolding, but seeing General Breedlove and Victoria Nuland get away unchallenged with their blatant falsehoods is giving me a serious case of déjÃ* vu.

We’ve been here before. And we know that the war hawks seem to get their way, for reasons that remain murky at best. Only this time they have a real, legitimate and dangerous foe in their sights.

In Part 2: How To Prepare For War, we investigate the risks associated with the most likely forms of conflict should things escalate from here: trade war, energy war, financial war, cyberwar, grid-down sabotage, shooting war and nuclear war.

While any of these developments will be grim at best, there are a surprising number of steps you can take today that will reduce your vulnerability to each off these. And in most cases, the investment of material and time will have persisting value even if (hopefully) the current global tensions de-escalate.

But as we often say, the time to prepare for crisis is in advance. Given the risks, why wouldn't you start taking at least a few precautions now?
Click here to read Part 2 of this report (free executive summary, enrollment required for full access)

[Ryan Ruck]

I like Zero Hedge but after reading that I think "Tyler Durden" needs to stay in his own lane, namely economics, and not feature such poor analysis on his site lest he discredit it. He'd be much better off sourcing such things to a group like Stratfor which can adeptly handle geopolitical analysis.

[vector7]

Russia starts nationwide show of force

By Reuters
Published: 06:55 EST, 16 March 2015 | Updated: 06:55 EST, 16 March 2015

By Thomas Grove

MOSCOW, March 16 (Reuters) - More than 45,000 Russian troops as well as war planes and submarines started military exercises across much of the country on Monday in one of the Kremlin's biggest shows of force since its ties with the West plunged to Cold War-lows.

President Vladimir Putin called the Navy's Northern Fleet to full combat readiness in exercises in Russia's Arctic North apparently aimed at dwarfing military drills in neighbouring Norway, a NATO member.

"New challenges and threats to military security require the armed forces to further boost their military capabilities. Special attention must be paid to newly created strategic formations in the north," Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu said, quoted by RIA news agency.

Shoigu said the order came from Putin, who has promised to spend more than 21 trillion roubles ($340 billion) by the end of the decade to overhaul Russia's fighting forces.

Putin made his first public appearance since March 5 on Monday, an absence from view that had fuelled feverish speculation over his health as well as his grip on power. He was meeting Kyrgyz President Almazbek Atambayev at the Constantine Palace outside Russia's second city of St. Petersburg.

Norway is currently holding its "Joint Viking" drills involving 5,000 troops in Finnmark county, which borders Russia in the resource-rich Arctic circle where both countries are vying for influence.

Russia's drills would include nearly 40,000 servicemen, 41 warships and 15 submarines, RIA repprted.

Tensions between Russia and Europe worsened last year, leading eight northern European nations to promise to boost cooperation to counter an increase in Moscow's military activity.

NATO made new allegations last week that Russia was arming separatists in east Ukraine, where more than 6,000 people have been killed in nearly a year of fighting.

The West and Kiev accuse Russia of supplying arms and soldiers to support the pro-Russian separatists. Moscow denies the claims.

NATO says it counted more than 100 intercepts of Russian planes into members' airspace last year, three times more than in 2013. The intercepts have forced civilian planes to change their courses and Britain scrambled Typhoon interceptor planes after two long-range bombers flew over the English Channel.

Norway said its military drills had been planned before the Ukraine crisis.

"However, the current security situation in Europe shows that the exercise is more relevant than ever," Lieutenant General Haga Lunde said in a statement.

The Russian exercises are due to last for much of the week during which Russia will celebrate its annexation of the Ukrainian peninsula of Crimea, carried out with the help of special forces.

Other drills involved 5,000 troops in Russia's eastern military district, while another exercise included another 500 troops from Russia's troubled North Caucasus region of Chechnya, the site of two separatist wars, wires reported.

The exercises were meant to focus on fighting Islamist insurgents, whose movement to create a Muslim state has spread across the predominantly Muslim North Caucasus, fuelled by religion and anger at local abuse of power. ($1 = 62.2530 roubles) (Reporting by Thomas Grove, Editing by Elizabeth Piper and Angus MacSwan)

Sputnik @SputnikInt · 7h
#Putin orders Northern Fleet to full alert
for combat readiness exercise
http://bit.ly/1GKrXPL



Sputnik @SputnikInt · 5h
#Russia starts large-scale communications drills in 9 regions
http://bit.ly/1x7JtOv
#military



Sputnik @SputnikInt · 5h
#Russia begins #airforce tactical drills in Siberia
http://bit.ly/1x7LVEz #military

[vector7]

Julia Ioffe@juliaioffe · 2h2 hours ago "We were told to take any symbols and insignia off our uniforms." Soldiers who took Crimea a year ago speak. https://meduza.io/en/feature/2015/03/16/i-serve-the-russian-federation…

(translated) A Russian "spy plane" has flown over Romanian frigate "Regina Maria", which was taking part in a NATO naval exercise in Black Sea. Taking part at this exercise, from US Navy there is USS Vicksburg missile cruiser. Also, other ships from Canada, Turkey, Germany, Italy.

On some Romanian TV station they said it was an Ilyushin IL-20 plane at 3.000 meters altitude. http://www.ziare.com/stiri/avion/avi...r-nato-1353221

[vector7]

Russia planning to send nuclear-capable bombers to Crimea, missiles to Poland border

Vladimir Isachenkov, Associated Press | March 17, 2015 2:24 PM ET
More from Associated Press


Alexander Zemlianichenko / AP file In this 2013 file photo, Russian Iskander missiles make their way through Red Square during a rehearsal for the Victory Day military parade in Moscow. Russia plans to station state-of-the art missiles to its westernmost Baltic exclave and deploy nuclear-capable bombers to Crimea as part of massive war games intended to showcase the nation's resurgent military power amid bitter tensions with the West over Ukraine.

MOSCOW — Russia plans to station state-of-the art missiles in its westernmost Baltic exclave and deploy nuclear-capable bombers to Crimea as part of massive war games to showcase its resurgent military power amid bitter tensions with the West over Ukraine.

The Russian military exercises this week range from the Arctic to the Pacific Ocean and involve tens of thousands of troops, the Defence Ministry said Tuesday.

The Iskander missiles will be sent to the Kaliningrad region that borders NATO members Poland and Lithuania as part of the manoeuvres, said a Defence Ministry official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he wasn’t authorized to comment publicly.

The official also said Russia will deploy long-range, nuclear-capable Tu-22M3 bombers to Crimea, the Black Sea peninsula that Russia annexed from Ukraine a year ago.


AP file photoIn this June, 2001 file photo a Russian Tu-22M3 bomber takes off from an undisclosed location in Russia.

In a statement, the Defence Ministry said the Baltic Fleet, the Southern Military District and the Airborne Forces have been brought to the highest stage of combat readiness and have started moving to shooting ranges as part of the drills.

The wide-ranging exercise started Monday, when President Vladimir Putin ordered the Northern Fleet and other military forces on combat alert as part of the exercise in the Arctic. Other units in the Pacific region, southern Siberia and southwestern Russia also launched drills.

The Iskander missiles deployment to Kaliningrad reflects Moscow’s readiness to raise the ante in response to NATO moves to deploy forces closer to Russia’s borders. The missiles, which are capable of hitting enemy targets up to 500 kilometres with high precision, can be equipped with a nuclear or a conventional warhead. From Kaliningrad, they could reach several NATO member states.

Polish Prime Minister Ewa Kopacz interpreted the move as an attempt by Russia to pressure EU nations as they consider possible new sanctions against Russia over Ukraine.

“Russia is making this gesture before the European Council meeting,� she said. “It is trying to influence European Council decisions concerning extending or adding new sanctions.�

Foreign Minister Edgars Rinkevics of Latvia, which holds the EU presidency, said Tuesday he did not expect “a discussion of new sanctions or any decisions� when EU leaders meet Thursday in Brussels.

Igor Sutyagin, a Russia expert at the Royal United Services Institute, said beefing up forces in the Baltic exclave was a top priority for the Russian military.
Iskander missiles already had been sent briefly to Kaliningrad during December’s military manoeuvrs, but were pulled back afterward.

U.S. Air Force Gen. Philip Breedlove, NATO’s supreme commander in Europe, has termed Russia’s “threats to deploy nuclear-capable Iskander-M missiles in Kaliningrad� part of what he called the Kremlin’s “pattern of continuing behaviour to coerce its neighbours in Central and Eastern Europe.�

The Kremlin, in its turn, has voiced concern about U.S. plans to beef up its military presence near Russia’s borders. Later this month, U.S. troops are holding joint exercises with forces from EU nations Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania.

Four Polish NATO MiG-29s flew training missions in Lithuania on Monday, under the command and control of an alliance AWACS surveillance aircraft in a small corridor between Belarus and the Kaliningrad region. The mission — described as ’routine’ by NATO officials — prompted the Russian military in Kaliningrad to scramble half a dozen fighter jets to monitor the exercise.

Monday’s AWACS mission was flying from Oerland airbase, near Trondheim in Norway. The AWACS flights were part of efforts to reassure NATO members in eastern Europe, in particular the Baltic states, which are concerned about Russia’s intentions amid the Ukrainian crisis.

Polish Defence Minister Tomasz Siemoniak said Tuesday that a battery of U.S. anti-aircraft Patriot missiles will be coming to Poland later this month for a major exercise. He previously said 10,000 foreign troops will be taking part in NATO exercises in Poland this year, the highest number ever.

[American Patriot]

Missiles to the border of Poland. So the Polish SAW this coming.

[vector7]

John Schindler@20committee · 1h1 hour ago We've entered the Twilight Zone here: Russian ambassador threatens Denmark with nuclear weapons. http://www.dn.se/nyheter/varlden/rysslands-ambassador-varnar-danmark/…

HR @Stefan_LaurellAir Force Freak@AirForceFreak74 · 4h4 hours ago
Multiple RUAF planes in Gulf of Finland.

US military convoy parades through Eastern Europe
March 22, 2015 - A convoy of US military vehicles, mostly IAV Stryker APCs, is touring through Estonia, Lithuania, Poland, Latvia, the Czech Republic to Germany in a symbolic show of force and solidarity with Eastern European allies “that live closest to the Bear.”


Operation ‘Dragoon Ride’ kicked off Saturday in Poland, Lithuania and Estonia and will see the US Army’s 2nd Cavalry Regiment covering some 1,100 miles to Vilseck, Germany by April 1. Soldiers from 3rd Squadron, 2nd Cavalry Regiment, will also participate in the military “exercise.”
http://rt.com/news/242953-us-military-parade-europe

[vector7]

NATO Launches "Wide-Scale" War Games Near Russian Border, Creates "Line Of Troops"

Submitted by Tyler Durden on 03/21/2015 19:00 -0400

Washington looks to be throwing more than the full faith and credit of the US government behind Ukraine. On the heels of news that the US is set to guarantee a Ukrainian international bond issue (while Greek pensioners implicitly subsidize the country’s natural gas exports), NATO is in the midst of conducting large scale military maneuvers along the Russian border in a move Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov says encourages “Kiev to pursue a military solution.” Over the course of 10 days, NATO will parade 120 combat vehicles across the region in an effort to prove how quickly the West can confront perceived Russian aggression. Here’s more from Military News:

The [Russian] ministry warned that it hopes Europe "does see the risk of unconditionally following advice from U.S. generals and will not opt for approaches that will rule out the risk of a slide towards a military confrontation between Russia and NATO."

While the U.S. Army acknowledges the convoy's movement is "a highly visible demonstration of U.S. commitment to its NATO allies," Lt. Gen. Ben Hodges, the commander of U.S. Army Europe, insists "the focus should be on what is the desired end state, and can we get there using diplomatic and economic pressure and support."

So basically, the US is saying the following: “...although we’re intent on showing just how quickly we can deploy our forces in the event an armed confrontation becomes necessary, we hope you’ll see this for what it is which is our best effort demonstrate that we long for a peaceful solution.” We’ll let you judge for yourself how committed the West is to a peaceful resolution (note the US soldier teaching the small child how to fire a high caliber weapon):



And the US is particularly proud of the fact that it has created a wall of troops along the Russian border:



Meanwhile, US officials don’t understand why anyone would see this as hypocritical. As RT reports, the US State Department’s press official Jeff Rathe “would disagree” with the notion that the US is conductig precisely the types of exercises for which it has previsously condemned Russia:

When asked why the US was condemning Russian exercises inside Russia, State Department press official Jeff Rathke told RT no such statement had ever been made.

While the US has not criticized every military drill conducted by the Kremlin, last August State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki said Russia’s aviation exercises are “provocative and only serve to escalate tensions.”

“Wouldn’t US and NATO maneuvers on Russian borders, at a time when the West and Russia are at odds over the crisis in Ukraine, also “raise tensions?” asked AP diplomatic correspondent Matt Lee.

“We would disagree with that,” replied Rathke.

Indeed.
In the meantime, Moscow isn’t particularly pleased with Denmark’s eight month old move to join NATO’s missile defense shield, as Russia’s Ambassador to Denmark Mikhail Vanin subtly warned that joining the effort would subject Danish ships to strikes by Russian nuclear missiles and besides, the effort would ultimately be in vain as Moscow has nukes capable of infiltrating the West’s defenses. Here’s more from The Telegraph:

“I don’t think that Danes fully understand the consequence if Denmark joins the American-led missile defence shield. If they do, then Danish warships will be targets for Russian nuclear missiles,” said Mikhail Vanin, the Russian ambassador to Denmark, to the Jyllands-Posten newspaper.

“Denmark would be part of the threat against Russia. It would be less peaceful and relations with Russia will suffer. It is, of course, your own decision - I just want to remind you that your finances and security will suffer. At the same time Russia has missiles that certainly can penetrate the future global missile defence system,” Mr Vanin said.

* * *
It would certainly appear from the above that geopolitical tensions in Eastern Europe are now running at a fever pitch and with Washington prone to adopting an extra defensive position thanks to what appear to be shifting economic alliances among its staunchest allies, we wouldn’t expect the posturing to die down on either side in the foreseeable future.

[vector7]

Top Russia Scholar Stephen Cohen: War between NATO and Russia a Real Possibility

• Round Table on "Defining a new security architecture for Europe that brings Russia in from the cold" was held in Brussels on March 2.
• The organizer of the event was the American committee for East West Accord.
• Three key presenters were American scholars Professor John Mearsheimer and Professor Steve Cohen, and publisher-editor of The Nation, Katrina Vanden Heuvel.
• Q&A session was conducted by VIP guest panel which included five Members of the European Parliament from Left, Center and Right party groupings, two ambassadors and other senior diplomats from several missions, a senior member of the EU External Action Service, and Professor Richard Sakwa, author of the recently published Frontline Ukraine.
• The first speech at the roundtable was delivered by John Mearsheimer, which we wrote about previously.

TV Sun, Mar 22 | 16108 137



We are in deep trouble...

Same author

Leading American Scholar John Mearsheimer: The West Blew It Big Time and Irreversibly Endangered European Security

Wed, Mar 18 | 41 4732
Stratfor Chairman Straight-Talking: US Policy Is Driven by Imperative to Stop Coalition between Germany and Russia

Tue, Mar 17 | 71 5823
Ukraine's Neo-Nazis Are the Most Dangerous in Europe

Mon, Mar 16 | 11 3970


Professor Stephen Cohen is one of the most respected authorities on Russia among American and Western scholars. He is an American scholar of Russian studies at Princeton University and New York University. His academic work concentrates on modern Russian history and Russia's relationship with the United States.

The key points of Cohen's extraordinary speech:

• The possibility of premeditated war with Russia is real; this was never a possibility during Soviet times.
• This problem did not begin in November 2013 or in 2008, this problem began in 1990's when the Clinton administration adopted a "winner-takes-all" policy towards post-Soviet Russia.
• Next to NATO expansion, the US adopted a form of a negotiation policy called "selective cooperation" - Russia gives, the US takes.
• There is not a single example of any major concession or reciprocal agreement that the US offered Russia in return for what it has received since the 90s.
• This policy has been pursued by every president and every US Congress, from President Clinton to President Obama.
• The US is entitled to a global sphere of influence, but Russia is not entitled to any sphere of influence at all, not even in Georgia or Ukraine.
• For 20 years Russia was excluded from the European security system. NATO expansion was a pivot of this security system and it was directed against Russia.
• Putin started as a pro-Western leader, he wanted partnership with the US, provided helping hand after 9/11 and saved many American lives in Afghanistan.
• In return he got more NATO expansion and unilateral abolition of the existing missile treaty on which all Russian security was based.
• Putin is not an autocrat, he's maybe very authoritarian as an ultimate decider, but he is answerable to other power groups.
• Putin is not anti-Western, or as Khodorkovsky said, he is more European than 99 percent of Russians. He has become less pro-Western and particularly less pro-American.
• Since November 2013, Putin has became not aggressive but reactive. For this he has been criticized in circles in Moscow as an appeaser (that is, soft, not tough enough).
• We (opposing academics) don't have effective political support in the administration, the Congress, political parties, think tanks or on university campuses. This is unprecedented situation in American politics. There's no discourse, no debate and this is failure of American democracy.
• There is ongoing extraordinary irrational and nonfactual demonisation of Putin. No Soviet leader was so personally vilified as Putin is now.
• The solution is federation to unite Ukraine without Crimea, which is not coming back, free trade with both the West and Russia and no NATO membership for Ukraine.
• This guarantees must be in writing, not oral premises like they gave to Gorbachev, and must be ratified by the UN.
• The Kiev regime is not a democratic one, but an ultra-nationalistic one. Poroshenko is a diminishing president.
• Unless the Kiev regime changes its approach to Russia or unless the West stops supporting Kiev unconditionally, we are drifting towards war with Russia.

[vector7]

raging.me@raging545 · 5h5 hours ago Convoy of app 12 #Russia(n) tanks enter #Horlivka WITHIN #Minsk2 (JOKE) Security Zone http://www.5.ua/ato-na-shodi/Vnochi-do-Horlivky-zaishla-cherhova-kolona-rosiiskykh-tankiv--Shkiriak-74165.html… #Ukraine pic.twitter.com/pdCMrKQv4h

[vector7]

max seddon@maxseddon · 5h5 hours ago Donetsk rebel eagerly recounts Russian generals' key role in the Ukraine conflict. "I thought everybody knew!" Oops. http://www.bbc.co.uk/russian/international/2015/03/150325_donetsk_rebel_interview…

[vector7]

Russian Strategic Missile Forces to Begin Exercise

MOSCOW (Sputnik) — Russian Strategic Missile Forces' counter-terrorist exercise will start on Tuesday as part of inspection of the southeastern Orenburg Missile Army, the Defense Ministry's press service said in a statement Monday.

The complex inspection is carried out from March 30 to April 11 in line with the Strategic Missile Troops combat readiness training program.


© Sputnik/ Ramil Sitdikov
Russia’s Strategic Missile Forces Check Combat Readiness During Drills

"During the inspection, special attention will be paid to the exercise that will be conducted under supervision of the Strategic Missile Forces Commander-in-Chief and will take place between March 31 and April 4," the statement published on Russia's Defense Ministry official website read. The main aim of the exercise is to improve the operational performance of commanders and staff officers throughout the chain of command, and enhance practical skills within task forces, units and elements in case of an imminent threat or an actual terrorist attack, according to the statement.

The Orenburg Missile Army is equipped with RT-2PM Topol (NATO reporting name SS-25 Sickle) and R-36М Voyevoda (NATO reporting name SS-18 Satan) intercontinental ballistic missile systems.

The Russian Defense Ministry has announced plans to conduct at least 4,000 military exercises throughout the country in 2015.

Read more: http://sputniknews.com/military/2015...#ixzz3VyB83VTD



Russia Begins Large-Scale Air Defense Drills in Siberia

© Sputnik/ Igor Zarembo
Russia14:30 30.03.2015(updated 16:08 30.03.2015)

Large-scale air defense drills have started in Russia's Eastern Military District, according to the Russian Defense Minister's press service.


© AFP 2015/ Sergey Venyavsky
Russian Marines Kick Off Live Fire Drills in Crimea


The Russian Defense Minister's press service reported on Monday that large-scale air defense exercises have got under way in Russia's Eastern Military District.

"The drills are taking place at special firing ranges in the Primorye Territory and Buryatia, where the servicemen will be tasked with destroying about 50 various targets," the press service said.


"To implement the task, the troops will use a spate of the short-range surface-to-air missile systems, such as the Osa, the Tor and the Strela-10.

Additionally, the drills will see the Tunguska self-propelled anti-aircraft missile system, the man-portable air defense systems Igla and Verba, as well as the new generation long-range air defense missile systems Triumf and Favorit," the press service said.


It added that during the war games, the troops will, in particular, drill the units in repelling a massive missile and air strike by a simulated enemy.


The press service declined to elaborate on the exact number of servicemen involved in the exercises, but said that they will see the participation of air defense, aviation, radio-radar, electronic warfare, reconnaissance and motor rifle units stationed in Buryatia and the Primorye Territory, as well as the Trans-Baikal, Khabarovsk, Kamchatka, Amur and Sakhalin regions.

[American Patriot]

World | Thu Apr 23, 2015 1:00pm EDT Related: World
Pentagon denies 'ridiculous' claim U.S. troops in Ukraine combat zone





(Reuters) - The Pentagon on Thursday denied Russian allegations that U.S. troops are in the conflict zone in eastern Ukraine, calling Moscow's claims a "ridiculous attempt to shift the focus" from its own activities in the region.


"Russia continues to supply lethal weapons, training and command and control support for armed separatists in eastern Ukraine, in blatant violation of Moscow's Minsk commitments and Ukraine's sovereignty," said Eileen Lainez, a Pentagon spokeswoman.


Lainez said the Pentagon has been clear that it has a few hundred troops training Ukrainian guardsmen in the western part of the country near Poland.

[vector7]

Companion Posts and Threads:
'Hello, space station? NASA here. Can you put us through to Moscow?'
The United States is OUT OF THE SPACE BUSINESS
As Obama redirects Space Missions to Russia, They Begin Building Space Based Weapon
Putin stakes claim to Arctic
World War Three Thread....
Russian Invasion Of Ukraine (Formerly: Democratic Malaise Draws Ukraine Eastwards
Leaked US Ambassador Ukraine Call
Russian analyst predicts decline and breakup of U.S.
Obama administration says Russia could join NATO
Russia’s disruptive role in finalizing the separation of the US from its Allies
President Obama seeks Russia deal to slash nuclear weapons
Obama quietly begins giving Oil-rich parts of Alaska to Russia
COMMUNISTS KNEW IN 1992 that BARACK WOULD BE PRESIDENT
Is Barack Obama a real Manchurian candidate?
Big Rise In Russian Military Spending Raises Fears Of New Challenge To West
The Rise of the Second Soviet Empire
Russia scrambles to build 5000 new bomb shelters by 2012 for strategic nuclear strike
Russia Test-Launches New Missile - RS-24






Vladimir Putin's ally issues chilling warning to the West: 'Tanks don't need visas'

• 22:57, 25 May 2015
• By Will Stewart

Deputy premier Dmitry Rogozin - seen by some as a future Kremlin president - claimed the West was now scared of Moscow's military muscle


Warning: Dmitry Rogozin has spoken about the West in aggressive terms

One of Vladimir Putin's closest aides has issued a chilling warning to the West: "Tanks don't need visas".

Deputy premier Dmitry Rogozin - seen by some as a future Kremlin president - claimed the West is now scared of Moscow's military muscle.

His outspoken words come as the West remains at loggerheads with Russia over Putin's seizure of Crimea, and alleged military strongarm tactics in eastern Ukraine.

Vowing to exploit the vast mineral riches of the Arctic, Rogozin claimed that America and Euorpe "are afraid of Russia".

The West is "afraid of the fact that we have started looking around, at our enormous territory", which, he argued, reached far north of existing frontiers in the Arctic.

In overall charge of Russia's space and defence industries, he told a TV show that Russia would develop "our huge EurAsia", exploiting vast mineral wealth under the Arctic ice.



Warning: Vladamir Putin has been flexing his military muscles of late Even though international bodies have yet to approve Russia's claim to the oil, gas and other natural resources, Rogozin, 51, vowed: "It is our territory, it is our shelf, and we'll provide its security.

And we will make money there."

He threatened the West: "I have always joked about it, that they will not give us visas.

"They will put us on a sanctions list - but tanks do not need visas."

An ardent Russian nationalist - who faced US and EU sanctions over the Ukraine crisis - told Russian viewers referring to Moscow's latest high-tech tank: "We should not look at anybody or be offended, we should just go. We are one big Armata."

The Arctic would be the scene of "serious economic collisions in the 21st century", he warned, with the US and Canada among countries with competing claims for the undersea riches.

But Rogozin, who has enjoyed fast-track promotion under Putin, warned corruption not the West was his country's biggest enemy.



Russian Tanks: "They don't need visas" according to a potential Putin successor "I have always said before and keep repeating our real enemy is not NATO, nor aliens, but our corruption."

He boasted about Russian atomic capability declaring: "Our nuclear shield is strong, it is so strong that I would say it is more powerful than anyone else's.

"This is why Russia today can ensure its strategic security, not only going face to face with the USA, but also face to face with the whole Western coalition."

Moscow's firepower displayed on Red Square recently was an armoury the West saw as "an ideal they should strive for", he alleged.

He blamed recent humiliating failures in Russian space launches on corruption.

He claimed "up to 100" space officials had been arrested for diverting money into personal accounts and other crimes.

"These are managers who were caught stealing," he said, vowing to clean up the sector.

[MinutemanCO]

[American Patriot]

Lol

[Ryan Ruck]

I was so busy looking at the details of the tank's equipment I completely missed the TC's expression until you posted that.

That is too damn funny!

[Ryan Ruck]

Exclusive: Russia Masses Heavy Firepower On Border With Ukraine - Witness

May 27, 2015


Tanks are seen on a freight train shortly after its arrival at a railway station in the Russian southern town of Matveev Kurgan, near the Russian-Ukrainian border in Rostov region, Russia, May 26, 2015. Picture taken with a mobile phone.

Russia's army is massing troops and hundreds of pieces of weaponry including mobile rocket launchers, tanks and artillery at a makeshift base near the border with Ukraine, a Reuters reporter saw this week.

Many of the vehicles have number plates and identifying marks removed while many of the servicemen had taken insignia off their fatigues. As such, they match the appearance of some of the forces spotted in eastern Ukraine, which Kiev and its Western allies allege are covert Russian detachments.

The scene at the base on the Kuzminsky firing range, around 50 km (30 miles) from the border, offers some of the clearest evidence to date of what appeared to be a concerted Russian military build-up in the area.

Earlier this month, NATO military commander General Philip Breedlove said he believed the separatists were taking advantage of a ceasefire that came into force in February to re-arm and prepare for a new offensive. However, he gave no specifics.

Russia denies that its military is involved in the conflict in Ukraine's east, where Moscow-backed separatists have been fighting forces loyal to the pro-Western government in Kiev.

Russia's defense ministry said it had no immediate comment about the build-up. Several soldiers said they had been sent to the base for simple military exercises, suggesting their presence was unconnected to the situation in Ukraine.

Asked by Reuters if large numbers of unmarked weaponry and troops without insignia at the border indicated that Russia planned to invade Ukraine, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said during a conference call with reporters:

"I find the wording of this question, 'if an invasion is being prepared', inappropriate as such."

The weapons being delivered there included Uragan multiple rocket launchers, tanks and self-propelled howitzers -- all weapon types that have been used in the conflict in eastern Ukraine between Kiev's forces and separatists.

The amount of military hardware at the base was about three times greater than in March this year, when Reuters journalists were previously in the area. At that time, only a few dozen pieces of equipment were in view.

Over the course of fours days starting on Saturday, Reuters saw four goods trains with military vehicles and troops arriving at a rail station in the Rostov region of southern Russia, with at least two trainloads traveling on by road to the base.

A large section of dirt road leading across the steppe from the Kuzminsky range to the Ukrainian border had been freshly repaired, making it more passable for heavy vehicles.

The road leads to a quiet border crossing typically only used by local residents. On the other side is Ukraine's Luhansk region, which is controlled by separatists and has been the scene of intense fighting.

MARCHING ORDERS

Valentina Melnikova, a human rights campaigner who works closely with families of Russian servicemen, said she had information that Rostov region was being used as a staging post for troops on their way to Ukraine.

She said the information came from the mother of a serviceman stationed in the town of Totskoye, in the Orenburg region near Russia's border with Kazakhstan.

Melnikova said the serviceman heard from commanders that "they are going to be transferred to Rostov region after May 20 and then to Ukraine. They signed papers about non-disclosure of information and about acting voluntarily.

"Of course it was an order. How could it be voluntarily? They are servicemen," said Melnikova, who runs the Moscow-based Alliance of Soldiers' Mothers Committees.

Her account could not be independently verified by Reuters.

In some cases where Russian citizens have been captured in Ukraine by forces loyal to Kiev, Russian officials have said they were there of their own accord and were either on leave from the armed forces or had quit the military.

More military hardware trundles into the Matveev Kurgan railway station on goods trains every day.

A train that pulled in on Tuesday was carrying 16 T-72 tanks, and a number of military trucks.

A local woman who was at the station with a pre-school age girl looked at the tanks on flat-bed rail cars, sighed, and said: "Nothing surprises me any more."

Over the four days, trains arrived delivering a total of at least 26 tanks, about 30 Uragan launchers, dozens of trucks as well as several armored personnel carriers and self-propelled howitzers.

On two occasions, after the trains had been unloaded, reporters followed the column of vehicles to the firing range -- a location that has already been linked indirectly to the fighting in Ukraine.

Bellingcat, a British-based group of volunteers who use social media to investigate conflicts, analyzed postings by Russian soldiers on social network accounts, including geo-location tags on photos, and concluded that some of those in Ukraine had earlier been at the Kuzminsky range.

A former Russian soldier said last year, when he was on active military service, that he underwent training at the range and was later sent up to the Ukrainian border. Once at the border he was ordered to fire Grad rockets, although he said he could not be certain they were fired into Ukraine. He also said some members of his unit had crossed into Ukraine.

"That's a very big firing range. We studied for two weeks, we had a quick course. After that we got the order and went to the border," said the former soldier, who did not want to be identified because the operation has not been made public.

[Ryan Ruck]

Note, this is not from some tin foil website. This is from The Washington Times.

Russia Using Mobile Crematoriums To Hide Dead Troops In Ukraine, U.S. Lawmakers Say

May 26, 2015

U.S. lawmakers say they have seen evidence from reliable sources that Russia is using mobile crematoriums to hide its involvement in eastern Ukraine’s unrest.

House Armed Services Committee Chairman Mac Thornberry of Texas and Rep. Seth Moulton of Massachusetts, a Democrat colleague on the committee, made the claims in an interview with Bloomberg News.

“The Russians are trying to hide their casualties by taking mobile crematoriums with them. They are trying to hide not only from the world but from the Russian people their involvement,” Mr. Thornberry said, Bloomberg reported.

Mr. Moulton backed the allegation. Both men have traveled to Ukraine.

“We heard this from a variety of sources over there, enough that I was confident in the veracity of the information. … The fact that they would resort to burning the bodies of their own soldiers is horrific and shameful,” Mr. Moulton told Bloomberg.

U.S. Army Europe Commander Ben Hodges said in March that he estimated Russia had 12,000 soldiers in Eastern Ukraine. His assessment was made just weeks after the U.K. Joint Delegation to NATO released images of Russian SA-22 surface-to-air missile systems it said were operating in Ukraine.

Russia has repeatedly denied any involvement in eastern Ukraine.

[Ryan Ruck]

I suppose this is just Obama demonstrating his flexibility.

Very interesting...

U.S. Told Ukraine to Stand Down as Putin Invaded

August 21, 2015

As Russian President Vladimir Putin's forces took over Ukraine's Crimean peninsula in early 2014, the interim Ukrainian government was debating whether or not to fight back against the "little green men" Russia had deployed. But the message from the Barack Obama administration was clear: avoid military confrontation with Moscow.

The White House's message to Kiev was advice, not an order, U.S. and Ukrainian officials have recently told us, and was based on a variety of factors. There was a lack of clarity about what Russia was really doing on the ground. The Ukrainian military was in no shape to confront the Russian Spetsnaz (special operations) forces that were swarming on the Crimean peninsula. Moreover, the Ukrainian government in Kiev was only an interim administration until the country would vote in elections a few months later. Ukrainian officials told us that other European governments sent Kiev a similar message.

But the main concern was Russian President Vladimir Putin.

As U.S. officials told us recently, the White House feared that if the Ukrainian military fought in Crimea, it would give Putin justification to launch greater military intervention in Ukraine, using similar logic to what Moscow employed in 2008 when Putin invaded large parts of Georgia in response to a pre-emptive attack by the Tbilisi government. Russian forces occupy two Georgian provinces to this day.

Looking back today, many experts and officials point to the decision not to stand and fight in Crimea as the beginning of a Ukraine policy based on the assumption that avoiding conflict with Moscow would temper Putin's aggression. But that was a miscalculation.Almost two years later, Crimea is all but forgotten, Russian-backed separatist forces are in control of two large Ukrainian provinces, and the shaky cease-fire between the two sides is in danger of collapsing.

"Part of the pattern we see in Russian behavior is to test and probe when not faced with pushback or opposition," said Damon Wilson, the vice president for programming at the Atlantic Council. "Russia's ambitions grow when they are not initially challenged. The way Crimea played out, Putin had a policy of deniability, there could have been a chance for Russia to walk away."

When Russian special operations forces, military units and intelligence officers seized Crimea, it surprised the U.S. government. Intelligence analysts had briefed Congress 24 hours before the stealth invasion, saying the Russian troop buildup on Ukraine's border was a bluff. Ukraine's government -- pieced together after President Viktor Yanukovych fled Kiev for Russia following civil unrest -- was in a state of crisis. The country was preparing for elections and its military was largely dilapidated and unprepared for war.

There was a debate inside the Kiev government as well. Some argued the nation should scramble its forces to Crimea to respond. As part of that process, the Ukrainian government asked Washington what military support the U.S. would provide. Without quick and substantial American assistance, Ukrainians knew, a military operation to defend Crimea could not have had much chance for success.

"I don't think the Ukrainian military was well prepared to manage the significant challenge of the major Russian military and stealth incursion on its territory," said Andrew Weiss, a Russia expert and vice president for studies at the Carnegie Endowment, told us. This was also the view of many in the U.S. military and intelligence community at the time.

There was also the Putin factor. In the weeks and months before the Crimea operation, Russia's president was stirring up his own population about the threat Russian-speakers faced in Ukraine and other former Soviet Republics.

"They did face a trap," said the Atlantic Council's Wilson, who was the senior director for Europe at the National Security Council when Russia invaded Georgia in 2008. "Any Ukrainian violent reaction to any of these unknown Russian speakers would have played into the narrative that Putin already created, that Ukraine's actions threaten Russian lives and he would have pretext to say he was sending Russian forces to save threatened Russians."

The White House declined to comment on any internal communications with the Ukrainian government. A senior administration official told us that the U.S. does not recognize Russia's occupation and attempted annexation of Crimea, and pointed to a series of sanctions the U.S. and Europe have placed on Russia since the Ukraine crisis began.

"We remain committed to maintaining pressure on Russia to fulfill its commitments under the Minsk agreements and restore Ukraine's territorial integrity, including Crimea," the senior administration official said.

Ever since the annexation of Crimea in March, 2014, there have been a group of senior officials inside the administration who have been advocating unsuccessfully for Obama to approve lethal aid to the Ukrainian military. These officials have reportedly included Secretary of State John Kerry, his top Europe official, Victoria Nuland, Defense Secretary Ashton Carter, and General Philip Breedlove, the supreme allied commander for NATO.

Obama has told lawmakers in private meetings that his decision not to arm the Ukrainians was in part due to a desire to avoid direct military confrontation with Russia, one Republican lawmaker who met with Obama on the subject told us. The U.S. has pledged a significant amount of non-lethal aid to the Ukrainian military, but delivery of that aid has often been delayed. Meanwhile, Russian direct military involvement in Eastern Ukraine has continued at a high level.

Even former Obama administration Russia officials acknowledge that Ukraine's decision last year to cede Crimea to Moscow, while making sense at the time, has also resulted in more aggression by Putin.

"Would a devastating defeat in Crimea serve the interest of the interim government? Probably not," said Michael McFaul, who served as ambassador to Russia under Obama and is now a scholar at Stanford University's Hoover Institution. But nonetheless, McFaul said, the ease with which Putin was able to take Crimea likely influenced his decision to expand Russia's campaign in eastern Ukraine: "I think Putin was surprised at how easy Crimea went and therefore when somebody said let's see what else we can do, he decided to gamble.”

The Obama administration, led on this issue by Kerry, is still pursuing a reboot of U.S.-Russia relations. After a long period of coolness, Kerry's visit to Putin in Sochi in May was the start of a broad effort to seek U.S.-Russian cooperation on a range of issues including the Syrian civil war. For the White House, the Ukraine crisis is one problem in a broader strategic relationship between two world powers.

But for the Ukrainians, Russia's continued military intervention in their country is an existential issue, and they are pleading for more help. While many Ukrainians agreed in early 2014 that fighting back against Russia was too risky, that calculation has now changed. The Ukrainian military is fighting Russian forces elsewhere, and Putin is again using the threat of further intervention to scare off more support from the West. If help doesn't come, Putin may conclude he won't pay a price for meddling even further.