West and Russia are on course for war, says ex-Nato deputy commander


#1

theguardian.com/world/2016/may/18/west-russia-on-course-for-war-nato-ex-deputy-commander

**West and Russia are on course for war, says ex-Nato deputy commander

A startling claim that the west is on course for war with Russia has been delivered by the former deputy commander of Nato, the former British general Sir Alexander Richard Shirreff.

In a book published on Wednesday, 2017 War With Russia, Shirreff argues that the events in Crimea have destroyed the post-cold-war settlement and set the stage for conflict, in events that could begin to unfold next year.**

In a chilling scenario, he predicts that Russia, in order to escape what it believes to be encirclement by Nato, will seize territory in eastern Ukraine, open up a land corridor to Crimea and invade the Baltic states.

Shirreff, who was deputy supreme allied commander Europe from 2011 to 2014, is risking his reputation by making such a bold prediction. But he claims his narrative is closely modelled on his Nato experience of war-gaming future conflicts.
He says the events he predicts will begin to unfold next year unless steps are taken to avoid them.

He insists that retention of a nuclear deterrent is essential. “Be under no illusion whatsoever – Russian use of nuclear weapons is hardwired into Moscow’s military strategy,” he writes.

He describes Russia as now the west’s most dangerous adversary and says President Vladimir Putin’s course can only be stopped if the west wakes up to the real possibility of war and takes urgent action.

He also rounds on the UK for what he says is the emasculation of its conventional military capability on the assumption that the international scene will remain benign. He says Nato increasingly lacks the knowledge, capability and military hardware to match what he describes as Russia’s ever-improving conventional capability.


#2

See:

amazon.co.uk/dp/B01D8ZIOII/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1

You fail to read this book at your peril’ - Admiral James G Stavridis, US Navy, former Supreme Allied Commander Europe.

Closely modelled on his NATO experience of war gaming future conflicts, 2017 War With Russia is a chilling account of where we are heading if we fail to recognise the threat posed by the Russian president.

Written by the recently retired Deputy Supreme Allied Commander Europe and endorsed by senior military figures, this book shows how war with Russia could erupt with the bloodiest and most appalling consequences if the necessary steps are not taken urgently.

President Putin said: ‘We have all the reasons to believe that the policy of containment of Russia which was happening in the 18th, 19th and 20th century is still going on…’ And ‘If you press the spring, it will release at some point. Something you should remember.’

Like any ‘strongman’, the Russian president’s reputation for strength is everything. Lose momentum, fail to give the people what they want and he fails. The President has already demonstrated that he has no intention of failing. He has already started a lethal dynamic which, unless checked right now, could see him invade the Baltic states.

**Russia’s invasion and seizure of Georgia in 2008 was our ‘Rhineland moment’. We ignored the warning signs - as we did back in the 1930s - and we made it ‘business as usual’.

Crimea in 2014 was the President’s ‘Sudetenland moment’ and again he got away with it. Since 2014 Russia has invaded Ukraine. The Baltics could be next.**

Our political leaders assume that nuclear deterrence will save us. General Sir Richard Shirreff shows us why this will not wash.


#3

It should be remembered that Putin does not have control over Ukraine and Georgia. It should also be remembered that many people in Crimea do not like the malevolent Euromaidan. Ukraine has suffered through an illegal, unconstitutional coup that was precipitated by violent gangs of fascist Ukrainian nationalists.

NATO should just back down, and preferable commit apoptosis.

He insists that retention of a nuclear deterrent is essential. “Be under no illusion whatsoever – Russian use of nuclear weapons is hardwired into Moscow’s military strategy,” he writes

The use of nuclear weapons was hardwired into NATO’s strategy during the Cold War.


#4

Putin has annexed about a third of Ukraine, made it part of Russia. Part of Georgia is now part of Russia.

The revolt against the Putin puppet Yanushovych was broad-based. There was no coup. Yanukovych ran away to Putin when he was about to be indicted for his crimes, and even his own party voted to oust him as the traitor he was and declare new elections.

There is an Interpol warrant out for his arrest, but Russia won’t extradite him to answer for his crimes.

There are no NATO forces in Russian territory. And despite the fact that only Russia has invasion forces in European countries, some don’t want the west to defend itself against Russian aggression.


#5

Well it certainly seems to be what the West wants.

All their ‘predictions’ about Russia has led to nothing, of the sort happening, so far. Their interference and meddling in Ukraine (no doubt based on these ‘predictions’) has made the situation a lot worse, in Ukraine, due the escalation of civil violence with an alleged 5000 Ukrainians now dead.

All of which was triggered after the Kiev protests with the West’s public support, and the formation of the non-democratic coup government - all fully reported, with gusto, by the MSM. Needless to say, the current civil tragedy in Ukraine is not reported, in the MSM, anymore.

Quelle surprise!


#6

There is no such thing as “Russian aggression”. but there was an illegal, violent coup of Yanukovych and the pernicious influence of Ukrainian nationalists.

Russia did not invade Ukraine. It annexed Crimea, and most of the people their are content to be under the aegis of Russia. I certainly would be grateful to Russia instead of having to deal with the Euromaidan thugs if I were a resident of Crimea.

I do not think it is worth taking any aggressive posture, much less showing a resolve to use nuclear weapons against Russia, to save the despicable Euromaidan.

Sigh, they should have come up with something like “car wash” instead of trying to sound like a European heavy metal band.

People tend to ignore the violence of the Euromaidan in order to portray them as “peaceful protesters”.


#7

Unless you were Crimean Tatar, Catholic, Protestant, Orthodox-Kyiv Patriarchate, or in any form of disagreement with the new Crimean government…


#8

Let’s be clear here: I don’t think war between NATO and Russia is a good idea, and I certainly hope and pray it could be avoided.

But let me also be clear that I know many Ukrainians in the part of Ukraine that would be necessary to any “land bridge” to Crimea – Mariupol, Melitopol, Kherson Oblast… They’re terrified of Russian troops invading their area. Terrified. They want peace, and they want their area to remain part of Ukraine. But the saber-rattling continues, and so they continue to be terrified that their regions will be invaded.


#9

Would those people accept greater autonomy for Donetsk or Luhansk? Would they accept repeal of the “Holodomor” denial laws and the ban on Soviet symbols? Would they accept great trade with the Custom’s Union?


#10

I disagree a bit with the general’s predictions.

Russia is not interested in annexing eastern Ukraine. Donetsk and Luhansk are destroyed, and they were in bad shape economically before the war. They needed a huge investment to modernize their mines. They had incredible corruption problems that made them not financially viable. Russia has not pushed for annexation for these reasons. They are content to leave them as an independent territory/quasi state like Transnistria as a buffer. Ukraine too is not as interested in keeping them as you might think.

Whether they’ll invade the Balkans or not is unknown, but I think it’s very unlikely. Russia has never invaded a NATO country. They have poked around their airspace and made threats, but NATO is still the largest military force in the world. While Latvia has a large Russian speaking minority in the east, they do not want to be part of Russia. It’s not worth a war with NATO to grab a tiny piece of Latvia.

Kazakhstan might be one to watch. Their pro-Russian leader is old and when he dies, Kazakhstan will have to choose between a pro-Russian leader or someone else. They have a large Russian minority and we could see a repeat of Donetsk/Luhansk there too if Russia doesn’t get its way.

The most likely hotspot is Georgia. South Ossetia is going to have a referendum in August about joining Russia. We know that Russia has been moving the border closer to the Baku-Supsa oil pipeline. My guess is they;ll occupy South Ossetia to ensure the referendum goes their way and to prevent Georgia from trying to hold it.


#11

There are many things in this post that are untrue.

Crimea did not want to become part of Russia. It wasn’t until the Russian military was standing outside the voting booths with AKs that the support mysteriously increased. In 2011 only 25% of Crimeans were in favor of separatism. According to Putin’s own Council for Development of Civil Society and Human Rights, only 22.5% of Crimeans voted in favor of separatism. The idea that the Crimeans are in favor of joining Russia is an outright lie. Good source for further reading: journal.georgetown.edu/spotlight-on-16-1-inequality-the-ukraine-invasion-and-public-opinion/

The violence in the Euromaidan was perpetrated by the government first, on November 30th. At 4 AM, the Berkut special police force was sent to clear the square and did so brutally. This was the start of the violence, as the savage treatment of protesters brought even larger crowds to protest against the regime. It’s ironic that Putin used the example of a Russian being killed on the Maidan as justification for annexing Crimea to “protect” ethnic Russians. That Russian was shot by the Yanukovich government because he was a protester.


#12

Do you not think that after the events of the Euromaidan, joining Russia would be more preferable for many in Crimea than remaining in Ukraine. There was less turmoil during 2011, and not much of a reason to join Russia…

The Berkut was likely initially excessive, but still Yanukovych is the victim of a violent coup.


#13

The research I have done supported the view that Crimeans generally disapproved of the Euromaidan and supported Yanukovich, but were not at all in favor of joining Russia, either before or after annexation. This pro-Yanukovich sentiment does not imply that they want to be annexed, though Russia obviously made that claim repeatedly.

Yanukovich is no victim. When you have snipers shooting at unarmed protesters and police dragging them off to be tortured, they will come back the next day with guns. This is exactly what happened. It actually mirrored the timeline of the Egytian revolution of 2011. The Egyptian protesters had a modest presence on January 25th, but after so many of them were shot, the numbers swelled massively on January 28th in response to the government violence, leading to violence and overthrow.


#14

Time to pop an old VHS tape of Red Dawn on and shout ‘Go Wolverines’, at this point methinks…


#15

The Maidan snipers were not from the security forces.

robertlindsay.wordpress.com/2014/07/19/ukie-fascist-false-flag-1-maidan-snipers/
robertlindsay.wordpress.com/2014/10/05/the-truth-about-the-maidan-riots-part-of-the-cia-coup-that-overthrew-the-ukrainian-government/
robertlindsay.wordpress.com/2015/02/14/bbc-finally-comes-clean-sort-of-about-the-maidan-massacre/


#16

More likely Red Dawn with the roles reversed.


#17

That guy is way, way off the deep end with no sources and facts that are obviously false, such as 80% of the protesters being Nazis.

Timothy Snyder has a very good 3 part series about this. The two releveant ones are blow.
nybooks.com/daily/2014/03/01/ukraine-haze-propaganda/
nybooks.com/daily/2014/03/07/crimea-putin-vs-reality/


#18

Well the Russians have huge experience with partisan style warfare so that would prove…interesting. :wink:


#19

Social media are so extensive that it is more difficult than ever to get away with secret menoeuvers.


#20

If these figures are to be believed :rolleyes:, then why has the 75% not gone out and rebelled and rioted, in Crimea. All there has been, in Crimea since, is annual celebrations.

As stated numerous times, if even a handful of ‘enslaved’ Crimeans grouped together (with financial support from outside that would be readily available) and started rioting, etc… under order, they’d have NATO, the EU and who knows how many other countries at their beck and call to ‘liberate’ them, from the bad, nasty Ruskies! :rolleyes:

It’s not the dark ages especially with social media, ease of travel, etc… NATO/EU and others would readily assist IF that is what the Crimeans really wanted.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.