Russo-Ukraine War 2017 (January-April)

**OUTLAW 09** · 01-04-2017

Azor...this goes back to a previous discussion of ours.....

Many in Moscow Now Think Using Nuclear Weapons is ‘Entirely Possible,’ Mlechin Says
http://windowoneurasia2.blogspot.com...-nuclear.html#

**Azor** · 01-04-2017

Originally Posted by OUTLAW 09

Azor...this goes back to a previous discussion of ours.....

Many in Moscow Now Think Using Nuclear Weapons is ‘Entirely Possible,’ Mlechin Says
http://windowoneurasia2.blogspot.com...-nuclear.html#

I don't find him particularly compelling. Research into nuclear weapons policy indicates that American and Russian/Soviet nuclear doctrine was and is almost wholly dependent upon their conventional power relative to one another.

Even when Kennedy's administration turned away from Eisenhower's New Look/First Offset/Massive Retaliation doctrine, not much changed operationally until the Nixon era, because it took decades (at least 20 years) for the United States to develop a credible Flexible Response.

Only during the late 1970s did it become apparent that technological advancement could allow US conventional forces to "fight outnumbered and win" against quantitatively superior Warsaw Pact, Chinese and North Korean forces.

Despite Reagan's confrontational rhetoric, he was the first US president not dependent upon nuclear weapons when it came to the Soviets.

Look at the nuclear saber-rattling done by Eisenhower (to end the Korean War), Kennedy (to end the Cuban Missile Crisis), Nixon (to deter Soviet forces from entering the Yom Kippur War and to pressure the Soviet Union and China to stop aiding North Vietnam) and Ford (to signal displeasure to North Korea).

Putin's nuclear saber-rattling coincides completely with: (a) official acceptance of the Russian military's weaknesses, and (b) a sense that the West is expanding and needs to be contained.

Irrespective of one's moral views regarding the United States and the Soviet Union/Russia, the fact is that both saber-rattled when they felt on the defensive and unable to challenge the other.

Removed from the context of the Soviet Union being a genocidal and aggressive power, Eisenhower's deployment of nuclear weapons was not only provocative but bordering on lunacy.

Galeotti noted that no Russian general believes that "nuclear de-escalation" is even feasible. It's all part of Putin's show; his brinkmanship that mimics what US presidents did in the 1950s-1970s. Unfortunately, Mlechin serves as an unwitting mouthpiece to convince the West that Putin is a "madman" and therefore cannot be confronted anywhere lest he set off the bomb.

**OUTLAW 09** · 01-05-2017

Originally Posted by Azor

I don't find him particularly compelling. Research into nuclear weapons policy indicates that American and Russian/Soviet nuclear doctrine was and is almost wholly dependent upon their conventional power relative to one another.

Even when Kennedy's administration turned away from Eisenhower's New Look/First Offset/Massive Retaliation doctrine, not much changed operationally until the Nixon era, because it took decades (at least 20 years) for the United States to develop a credible Flexible Response.

Only during the late 1970s did it become apparent that technological advancement could allow US conventional forces to "fight outnumbered and win" against quantitatively superior Warsaw Pact, Chinese and North Korean forces.

Despite Reagan's confrontational rhetoric, he was the first US president not dependent upon nuclear weapons when it came to the Soviets.

Look at the nuclear saber-rattling done by Eisenhower (to end the Korean War), Kennedy (to end the Cuban Missile Crisis), Nixon (to deter Soviet forces from entering the Yom Kippur War and to pressure the Soviet Union and China to stop aiding North Vietnam) and Ford (to signal displeasure to North Korea).

Putin's nuclear saber-rattling coincides completely with: (a) official acceptance of the Russian military's weaknesses, and (b) a sense that the West is expanding and needs to be contained.

Irrespective of one's moral views regarding the United States and the Soviet Union/Russia, the fact is that both saber-rattled when they felt on the defensive and unable to challenge the other.

Removed from the context of the Soviet Union being a genocidal and aggressive power, Eisenhower's deployment of nuclear weapons was not only provocative but bordering on lunacy.

Galeotti noted that no Russian general believes that "nuclear de-escalation" is even feasible. It's all part of Putin's show; his brinkmanship that mimics what US presidents did in the 1950s-1970s. Unfortunately, Mlechin serves as an unwitting mouthpiece to convince the West that Putin is a "madman" and therefore cannot be confronted anywhere lest he set off the bomb.

Azor...here is the core problem with dealing with Putin...his inner circle and yes even the Russian FM Lavrov.....when one preaches nothing but their very own propaganda "kool aid" for the last two years focused on why they are clashing with the West...then at some point one begins to truly believe that "kool aid" meaning you are in fact a superpower fully capable of dictating your will .....you lose totally sight of the true ground reality and mistakes then occur in judging exactly what the West will or will not do...that is the inherent problem with propaganda..trying to keep leaders immune from it so they can make valid and sane assumptions in their decision making process....AND IMHO they are on the verge of actually "believing" that they could in fact get away with a tactical nuclear first strike...at least on the senior leadership circle around Putin....this does not include the military which will always do what the Putin circle dictates....

We are now at that point on the Russia side........and we in the West keep making the same basic mistake when we judge Putin's actions....the West led by the US have totally misread him since Crimea...his invasion of eastern Ukraine and exactly what he wants in Syria.....

**OUTLAW 09** · 01-05-2017

Originally Posted by Azor

I don't find him particularly compelling. Research into nuclear weapons policy indicates that American and Russian/Soviet nuclear doctrine was and is almost wholly dependent upon their conventional power relative to one another.

Even when Kennedy's administration turned away from Eisenhower's New Look/First Offset/Massive Retaliation doctrine, not much changed operationally until the Nixon era, because it took decades (at least 20 years) for the United States to develop a credible Flexible Response.

Only during the late 1970s did it become apparent that technological advancement could allow US conventional forces to "fight outnumbered and win" against quantitatively superior Warsaw Pact, Chinese and North Korean forces.

Despite Reagan's confrontational rhetoric, he was the first US president not dependent upon nuclear weapons when it came to the Soviets.

Look at the nuclear saber-rattling done by Eisenhower (to end the Korean War), Kennedy (to end the Cuban Missile Crisis), Nixon (to deter Soviet forces from entering the Yom Kippur War and to pressure the Soviet Union and China to stop aiding North Vietnam) and Ford (to signal displeasure to North Korea).

Putin's nuclear saber-rattling coincides completely with: (a) official acceptance of the Russian military's weaknesses, and (b) a sense that the West is expanding and needs to be contained.

Irrespective of one's moral views regarding the United States and the Soviet Union/Russia, the fact is that both saber-rattled when they felt on the defensive and unable to challenge the other.

Removed from the context of the Soviet Union being a genocidal and aggressive power, Eisenhower's deployment of nuclear weapons was not only provocative but bordering on lunacy.

Galeotti noted that no Russian general believes that "nuclear de-escalation" is even feasible. It's all part of Putin's show; his brinkmanship that mimics what US presidents did in the 1950s-1970s. Unfortunately, Mlechin serves as an unwitting mouthpiece to convince the West that Putin is a "madman" and therefore cannot be confronted anywhere lest he set off the bomb.

An interesting fact behind this comment......

Nixon (to deter Soviet forces from entering the Yom Kippur War

Nixon did nothing but pass information to the Soviets in the form of sat photos...the nuclear threat came directly from the Israeli side...and then vice versa later in Yom Kippur.

As the Egyptian Army was advancing and the Israeli's were retreating and it did not look so hot for the IDF.....the Israeli's parked a few nuclear devices on the runway of a major IDF airfield near Tel Aviv just in time for a US spy satellite pass.....and the US "got the message"....and then passed that to the Soviets....urging them to reign in the EA.........

THEN when the IDF was on the verge of encircling the entire EA and causing a sound defeat the Soviets alerted an elite Soviet Airborne Div and were loading an Soviet elite Airborne Regt (the US picked up via NSA/ASA the alert status) on a well known Soviet airfield in full view of a passing US spy sat....that info was passed to the Israeli's via photos by Nixon and the IDF if you really check the open media pulled up short of a total win and allowed the EA to make it back across the Suez.......

During those years even during US/NATO exercises all Soviet spy sats were fully tracked and their crossing times over the exercise areas were published well in advance of any exercise....and during the crosses...vehicles went under cover and all comms were throttled back...

BTW....on the day of the EA attack across the Suez and for the next four days....at midnight on a specific LW radio frequency there was a constant of messages in English for example...."Nate's mother is asking Nate to call home as she is sick".....for hours.....and then they were repeated one more time...

This was the IDF calling up their strategic reserves scattered around the world to come home and merge with the IDF...and a number of US Army tank officers suddenly left their US units in Germany......took emergency leave and departed Europe to fight in the IDF tank units.

**OUTLAW 09** · 01-05-2017

Confirmed. End of story. Wait for the leak.
https://twitter.com/odhcpd/status/816932334754811904#…

Rumour has it #Ukraine hackers have got hold of #Russian army satellite intel database of their presence in Ukraine.

Bloody Ukrainian "hacktivists" who seem to refuse to surrender. That's very unpleasant.
Let see how the story gets spun or forgotten by Western MSM...

BTW...this Ukrainian group is just as good if not better than the Russian state sponsored hackers....

**OUTLAW 09** · 01-05-2017

Le Pen's office reacts to possible ban on entry to Ukraine for her comments that the Russian actions in Crimea were legal.
http://www.unian.info/politics/17114...-ukraine.html#

Russia's #RVSN #РВСН added 2,000 contract soldiers in 2016; now has 18,000 contractees in its ranks.
http://bit.ly/2idQIOV

The difficulties encountered in hacking....never talked about by Trump and company....

How to save the princess in 8 programming languages
https://toggl.com/programming-princess#…

**OUTLAW 09** · 01-05-2017

UCA hackers got data on payments to these soldiers. - Russian Ministry of Defense financing terrorism. Not "soldiers on their own"

BUT WAIT this particular professional full time contract Russian soldier is now inside eastern Ukraine based on his on Russian VK social page....