Why I oppose a “show of force” towards Russia
The other day, I posted an article about NATO leaders advocating for a “show of force” in regards to Russia’s annexation of the Crimea. On it’s face, it looks like a good idea. I agree with those who say that we HAVE to do SOMETHING to stop the Russians from annexing a bunch of other countries like Germany did in the century, but having been on some of those “show of force” operations, I know the untenable position in which the troops are placed.
For example, of the East German border, I was armed with just a .45 as the Border NCO. It was unloaded and the ammo was locked in a box in the jeep. My troops who were patrolling the actual border were in the same position – they had a minimum amount of ammo that was locked in their patrol vehicle. We weren’t allowed to drive our armored vehicles within sight of the opposing troops, so as not to provoke them. We kept our unloaded rifles (we couldn’t even have an unloaded magazine in the rifle) slung over our shoulder so we wouldn’t accidentally point it at the opposition while on patrol.
The East German and Soviet troops we saw weren’t under the same restrictions. They stuck their rifles through the firing ports of the towers and observed our patrols through the rifle sights. Once, when I was with just my driver and my unloaded pistol, they sort of surrounded us and tried to influence me to cross the border.
Even during Desert Storm, we weren’t allowed to load our weapons until we crossed the Iraq border. We were a few hundred meters from the border and had unloaded weapons to patrol the perimeter of our forward base. When we were in Iraq before the ground war, they made us stop before we crossed back into Saudi Arabia and unload our weapons – while we were still in Iraq. WHile we parked in a coil to unload our weapons, a tank company that was attached to us was attacked with a single FROG missile from the Iraqis.
Remember just a few months ago, the troops in Afghanistan weren’t allowed to have their loaded weapons around our “allies” so they wouldn’t be offended – resulting in a spate of “green-on-blue” attacks and the deaths of more than 60 US personnel. It took the Pentagon months of that before they finally decided that the troops could have their weapons loaded in a combat zone.
A show-of-force would really be nothing but a show, no force involved. And the Russians aren’t Iraqis or East German border guards.
While I agree that there needs to be some sort of response to the Russians, a hollow force parked between them and Poland or the Baltic States is not the answer.
Category: Politics
Jonn I agree with you. If we are going to do the “show of force” program…again. There is a right way and a messed up way to do it. The messed up way ends in American deaths and potential war. I just have no faith in the current Administration to do it the right way and protect our troops. Given that…my vote is, stay away.
A show of force is worthless when the other guys know you’re not going to kick their teeth in and choke them with their own rifle sling….it ends up being ‘all blow and no show’….
Just my two cents.
In this case Putin knows that Obama is all hat and no cattle. Personally I would like to see one of the occupied Crimean naval bases disappear in a cloud of smoke about 0300 some morning, but that might be seen as provocation.
Agreed, CWO5USMC. A “show of force” when you’re unwilling or unable to follow-through is nothing but a bluff.
Bluffing only works if your opponent thinks you actually might have a winning hand.
In this case, the opponent knows that Dear Leader doesn’t even have a pair.
Which is also why sanctions will also fail, and why Vlad will be emboldened to make additional land grabs…
Agreed. A show of force is inconsequential without the actual wherewithal to do something more if the show of force fails to achieve the desired effect.
While I hate to see Putin have his way, the US no longer possesses the international “juice” to do anything more than wag it’s finger and say, “bad dog.”
Preezy Choomer and a “show of force”… never happen during this presidency. Andorra could declare war on us, and Bronco Bama would be more worried about who’s playing at the next White House shindig…
Until our perfumed princes learn what “force” means and what it looks like, we shouldn’t attempt to show any.
Yes, our “Community Organizer-in-Chief” would be better at setting up a 5K fun run to support the Ukraine than a show force backed up with credible force.
‘Show of force’ and ‘bodaprez’ = oxymoron.
Stay out of it.
A show of force in crude terms is saying my dick is bigger than yours, Then proving it.
Not mine is bigger than yours, but im going to keep it in my pants so as not to offend you.
Yet another reason to worry that the Glorious Leader is going to land us in a shooting war with the Russians through sheer ineptitude.
Putin knows he has the US and Europe over a barrel on this.
1. He can cut off the Northern Distribution Network at any time putting our forces in AFG in jeopardy. He could possibly even encourage the Paks to shut down thier border at the same time.
2. Western Europe still depends on Russia for natural gas. They are working on weaning themselve from Russian sources but they aren’t there yet.
3. He has watched Europe and the US gut their military forces. He probably started thinking about this when Europe had to scream for US help over Libya. The European forces were almost zero balance on key munitions when Obama committed the US to the operation. He knows we don’t have the forces for a credible “Show of Force”.
The only real deterrent that would give Putin pause at this point is for Europe to start a major expansion of thier military capabilities. This means expanding the size of their ground, naval, and air forces and showing Putin that yes we will confront you. Until that happens, Putin pretty much has a free hand.
Never happen, because Europe was dependent on US military might for decades, which meant they didn’t need a defense budget and could blow all their money on socialist programs. Don’t expect them to cut any social programs to pay for new defense spending, because we have all seen what happens when austerity measures are proposed.
Europe and the US are paper tigers that aren’t in a position to do anything about anyone. Putin has been planning this for a very long time, while Europe and the US were more interested in internal social issues, he was setting the stage. When he saw who was being elected in the US and Europe, he knew the time was ripe.
Unfortunately I have to agree. The politicians are too in love with the power and votes they get from social programs. I am afraid we are in for a long period of world instability that we won’t be able to stop.
Not to mention that Europe expanding their military capabilities cannot be regarded as a long-term good thing, especially with the imminent collapse of the Euro (no way that one will hold out much longer). With the current economy there and the economic collapse that scenario could create, combined with the ethnic tensions existing in abundance all over Europe, it seems Europe will follow what history dictates its tendency in these situations is-shift far to the right and adopt a militant, ultranationalist stance. The European nations have never really learned how to get along; they cooperate out of a desire to unite in order to be a rival to the US in the case of France and Germany, as well as the fact that the US has a large de facto peacekeeping force there to ensure order and prevent us from having to go overseas to finish another one. And when and if that happens, I want the current balance of power with weak European militaries, not the 1930s.
“Western Europe still depends on Russia for natural gas. They are working on weaning themselves from Russian sources but they aren’t there yet.” Uhhh, I don’t think so. During the cold War, the Europeans had the North Sea. The Russian oil fields were not developed and even if they had been, the Russians would have kept the oil for political reasons. At least they would have until the mid-1980s when their economy went into the crapper, closed the door, and made unpleasant sounds. Europe imports about 30% of their natural gas from Russia through about a dozen pipelines — five of which go through the Ukraine. That is about 105 billion cubic meters per year. They import slightly more from Norway. I see news stories about Europe getting off Russian gas but they are mostly recent, apparently provoked by the Ukraine crisis, and do not report any real effort to do anything. For the moment, let’s assume that the US wanted to step in and export LNG to Europe. As far as I can tell, there is one objective issue and one subjective issue. Objectively, the far east pays more for LNG than Europe and the large ships that carry it are tied up taking gas to the far east. Europe has terminals for ships to tie up to and pipelines to distribute but the terminals are not busy because the ships go elsewhere. Subjectively, I think that it would be foolish for the US to export natural gas. There is a limited supply and I think that we need what we can produce for our own uses. Making the oil companies rich does not put money in my pocket or keep me warm in 20 years. I am really torn about the Ukraine. A close friend was born and raised in eastern Ukraine and he has an attitude. Except for slowing down the Russian bear, I don’t see much US national interest in the Ukraine. The current administration is mentally unprepared to send troops into harms way — when faced with force, they don’t know what to do —… Read more »
My point was that Europe can still be hurt by Russia cutting off enegery supplies to Europe. Rendering a show of force moot. Russia could get away with it by with marginal economic impact(my opinion) by expanding thier shipments to China. They are in the process of building a pipeline to China already. Europe actually started diversifying its energy sources back in 2007 (see links below) after the natural gas shortages in 2006 and again in 2009 that were caused by Russia cutting off shipments to Ukraine. While the Russians were not trying to impact Europe, there were significant impacts especially during the winter of 2009. At one point Europe was up to about 50% reliance on Russian natural gas. Since then the reduction has been between 30% (as you pointed out)and 14% depending on which studies you look at. There has been increased emphasis in the last month. Kinda hard to do effective sanctions (which I am still skeptical about) why needing to continue imports from Russia. What I didn’t see before till I read it today is that the EU is developing contingencies to supply natural gas to Ukraine on the assumption that Putin will cut off shipments as part of his annexation of the Crimea. https://csis.org/publication/russia-eu-gas-relationship-partnership-necessity http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2007/11/europes-strategic-dependence-on-russian-energy http://www.npr.org/blogs/parallels/2014/03/21/292369163/can-europe-wean-itself-off-russian-gas http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financialcrisis/10715577/Europe-scrambles-to-break-gas-dependence-on-Russia-offers-Ukraine-military-tie.html I wholly agree on your assessment of the current administration’s mental prepardness. These people vastly underestimated Putin and assumed that it was safe to cut the military and rely only on diplomacy and economics to deal with problems. Frankly I don’t want us involved in a land war in Asia. I see too many downsides especially if the Europeans continue thier current socialist policies. As to where next? The move that makes the most strategic sense from my view point is for Putin to annex Eastern Ukraine to the Dneiper River. This would allow him to cement his control of the energy pipelines through Ukraine; ease his logistics for control of the Crimea; with a mostly sympathetic population (cynical about how sympathetic); and little chance of significant impact from the West. I don’t think he will do it… Read more »
If you are going to mess with the first team…you’d better be ready. From what I see, we are not.
Show of force?
In the Russian backyard? There will not be another war on the plains of Eastern Europe, any conflict that erupts there between the super powers ends with most of the world dead and much of what’s left alive wishing it was dead….it might be a good thing for the planet to rid itself of humans at some point.
A Show of Force is something really easy to do with someone else’s sons and daughters. If we are going to do something it should either be all in or all out. The only thing we should show is the error of their ways.
I look at it this way. If the non-Russian Ukranians are keeling over and unwilling to spill their blood, I’ll take the French playbook on this sort of thing.
Henceforth any term at infers that Obama is a leader are banned. This goofus is the farthest thing from a leader ever to occupy the office. The new terms are as follows. Dear Leader will be supplanted by Dear Reader. Great Leader is replaced by Great Reader. Leadership attached to his name will become Readership. That is all.