NATO versus Russia, Romania avoids close call
Given the Russian attacks on the main Ukrainian ports from which they export their goods, the Ukrainians relied on ports further to the west. These ports were close to the Romanian border. During a recent Russian drone attack on these ports, Romanian territory was hit. Romania is a NATO country. After initially denying the hit, the Romanian government put out a statement that those drones were intended to hit Ukrainian targets, indicating that the Russians did not intend to attack a NATO country.
From the New York Post:
Ukraine on Monday accused Russia of hitting NATO member Romania with kamikaze drones — which Bucharest “categorically” denied despite apparent photographic proof.
The Iranian-made “Shahed” drones, aimed at the Ukrainian port of Izmail on the Danube River, fell across the banks and detonated on the Romanian side, Ukraine’s foreign ministry claimed while sharing images of a giant fire from the attack.
“According to Ukraine’s state border guard service, last night, during a massive Russian attack near the port of Izmail, Russian ‘Shakheds’ [sic] fell and detonated on the territory of Romania,” the ministry’s spokesman, Oleg Nikolenko, wrote on Facebook.
“This is yet another confirmation that Russia’s missile terror poses a huge threat not only to Ukraine’s security, but also to the security of neighboring countries, including NATO member states,” he claimed.
Nikolenko shared a photo showing a column of fire rising above the site of the explosion visible from across a river.
The Romanian Defense Ministry, however, swiftly refuted Ukraine’s claim.
“The Ministry of Defense categorically denies information from the public space regarding a so-called overnight situation during which Russian drones would have fallen in Romania’s national territory,” the ministry said.
“At no time did Russia’s means of attack generate direct military threats on Romanian national territory or waters.”
In response to Romania’s denial, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba repeated to reporters that Kyiv had photographic evidence of the drone strike.
Under NATO’s Article 5 and its common defense pledge, an attack on one member of the 31-nation alliance is considered an attack on them all.
The New York Post has the rest of the article.
Category: International Affairs, Russia, Ukraine
Putin is putting in extra hours to starve the world.
Are the Russians intentionally trying to expand the war or are they really that inept?
One argument I hear is that Putin is losing, and would prefer to lose to NATO than to the Ukraine to save face, that doesn’t make sense since a lose to NATO risks regime change.
In this case, it would be Ukraine that benefits the most. The movie “The Mouse That Roared” was supposed to be a comedy.
They’re inept. The Russians see this as a “must win” situation, as they see Belarus and Ukraine similar to how China sees Taiwan. Ukraine’s wanting to join the EU, and NATO, requires it to westernize both politically and economically, which would drift it further from Russia and reduce the chances that the two countries would reunify as in the USSR days. Losing is not an option for the Russians, though they have accused NATO of sending NATO troops into Ukraine, wearing Ukraine Army uniforms, to explain away instances where the Russians had been routed.
You really want WWIII over an errant missile that hit an empty farm field?
Heck, at least the Gulf of Tonkin had an “actual” attack on US warships
Nobody here is advocating such, even those who are pushing to send weapons to Ukraine do not want World War III. It’s more prudent to show that the hits occurred as a result of the Russians missing their intended targets, which has occurred frequently to the point that they’ve had to compensate by using larger volumes of fire than necessary to destroy their targets in Ukraine. Unless there is clear indication that the Russians intended to strike a NATO country, and as long as there is evidence that the hit was collateral, the result of ineptness (Russia) the result of electronic warfare (UKR), etc., then the explanation is going to be towards the latter.
These claims by Ukraine in an attempt to expand the war for their benefit further provides proof that Kiev is not worth one red American cent much less one drop of American blood because the Ukrainian leadership is mad.
The leadership that is mad is not in Kyiv, but in Moscow. I posted an article here, last year, that featured a retired Russian “colonel general” who spelled out the real reason to why Russia was contemplating an invasion (this letter occurred before the invasion of February, 2022). The retired Russian officer pointed out the internal problems that Russia was facing (a motivator for the invasion), had pointed out that the Ukrainians rejected the Russian model (their shift towards wanting to couple their economy with that of western Europe), as well as Russia’s continued decline to include ceasing its existence.
This officer argued that neither Ukraine nor NATO were threats, that there was no need for Russia to invade, that Putin should resign, and that Russia’s veterans and civilian population support this officer’s call to avoid war and for Putin to step down.
The Ukrainians who have had their lives disrupted, to include having to bury loved ones in mass graves in locations outside of regular gravesites, would disagree with your assessment. The calls for Russians to stand trial for war crimes are justified.
Russians raping/killing civilians in Germany and Austria in ’45 wasn’t vengence; that’s just how they usually roll invading other countries.
So Romania’s denial there was a strike and failure to even protest, once they admitted it, shows Russia how easy it is to strike just a little bit farther afield (e.g. in Romania) if they want.
A more appropriate response would have been “we accept this as accidental, but it happened and we expect Russian apologies and recompense. Because we assume Russia will be far more careful in future, any additional “accidents” will require an Article 5 response.”
Who knows what to believe coming out of this part of the world. Either way, it does not bode well for the innocents caught in the midst of the madness Glad we got some of our own out.
Prepare
Yep, this whole bunch of nonsense is doing nothing but dividing the divided. What news we get pits us right-leaning individuals against each other. From Day One, a lot of Americans supported Ukraine. Hardly anyone on the Left supported the Russian view of this war. Now, it seems like we have pro-Ukraine, anti-Ukraine, pro-Russian, anti-Russian, and “why the hell do we even care” types like me.
I don’t like bringing up War is a Racket all the time, but here’s the summary:
“War is a racket. It always has been. It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives. A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of the people. Only a small ‘inside’ group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes.”
The likely reality is this: Putin had his reasons for invading and Zelentsky has his for not conceding to a better equipped and more powerful country (am I allowed to say that?). Both are benefiting personally at the risk of political loss if they come out on the losing side. What matters to me, as an American, is that we are sending billions of dollars in aid to a non-aligned nation.
Here’s my take, we have aging war supplies built up over decades of direct military intervention and conflict. Those supplies have shelf lives, so why not do the “greater good” and donate them? They’ll have to be replaced, and the rich men north of Richmond know that it’s just a few contracts, some kickbacks for the politicians, and a few guaranteed board slots for Milley, Austin, and their friends. We’ll resupply ourselves eventually.
Oh, and if that damned Putin keeps messing up, it will be our kids and grandkids going over to die…
Russians targeting with Iranian missiles… what could go wrong?
https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1698757602669174904
Anybody else see this yet?
Anybody remember when two Ukrainian missiles landed in Poland and killed two Poles?
It is probably simpler than that in that the Romanians are pussies with a dinky little shitty army and don’t want to make waves with the Ruskies, who also have a shit army but much larger.
How dare you insult our gallant NATO allies?! Do you not realize how vital Romania, Montenegro, Finland, Albania, etc. are to the survival of Western Civilization and Life As We Know It? The oceans alone cannot protect us from being overrun by hordes of _____; we place our fate in the hands of Croatia, etc., with complete confidence that their martial abilities and heroism are the last, best, hope of mankind.