Military Review

NATO under pressure from Russia can hardly maintain prestige (The New York Times, USA)

45
NATO under pressure from Russia can hardly maintain prestige (The New York Times, USA)


Six weeks before the start of an important summit meeting aimed at strengthening the containment policy with respect to Russia, which is gaining momentum, the alliance has yet to resolve many questions. First, find a country ready to lead the last of the four battalions to be deployed in Poland and the three Baltic countries.

But this, according to analysts, is perhaps the least of the problems.

Since the end of the Cold War, security concerns have never reached such a high level. While the migration crisis is exacerbating tensions between the countries of the continent, fears are heightening in the context of the Russian military offensive in the Crimea and in the east of Ukraine, as well as the bombing of Syria, which demonstrated the rapidly growing capabilities of Moscow. In addition, Russia has recently openly expressed the benefits of tactical nuclear weapons.

Despite growing threats, many European countries still resist decisive measures to strengthen the positions of NATO. Many still do not want to increase military spending, despite promises made in the past. Some - like, for example, Italy - are cutting them down. France is returning to its traditional skepticism towards the alliance, in which it sees the instrument of American policy and the encroachment on its own sovereignty.

And this is not to mention the statements of a potential Republican candidate Donald Trump that NATO is "outdated", that the allies are "being ripped off" the United States, and that if the alliance collapses, it will not particularly regret it. Although these words can be attributed to the bragging of the election campaign, they do reflect a growing reluctance in the United States to bear a disproportionately large share of the NATO burden on both their shoulders, both militarily and financially.

Now the main concern and one of the main elements of what NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg calls “the biggest strengthening of collective defense since the end of the Cold War” is the decision to deploy four combat battalions numbering up to a thousand soldiers in each of the countries bordering Russia.

While Great Britain, Germany and the United States agreed to each lead one battalion to include soldiers from other NATO allies and support the idea of ​​a multinational force, the leadership of the fourth has not yet decided how fast the NATO summit is approaching scheduled for July 8-9 in Warsaw.

The United States "is not considering the option of organizing two military units," said US Ambassador to NATO Douglas E. Lute. “We plan to prepare one and give our allies the opportunity to become more active” in the case of the other three.

But other major European countries, such as Italy and France, refused this offer. Italy reduced its military spending after two years ago in Wales committed itself to increase them. Its leaders claim that the country is already participating in the newly expanded Alliance of Rapid Reaction Forces.

And France, with the current socialist government having returned to more critical views of NATO and its American leadership, is already lacking during military campaigns in Mali, the Central African Republic, North Africa and Syria, not to mention patrolling its own streets because of the terrorist threat .

France is ready to help battalions with only 150 soldiers, NATO officials say, after all finally agreed with the idea of ​​further deployment in Poland, although initially this plan was taken hostile. Germany, six months ago, speaking out against these military units, eventually met halfway, but in exchange for efforts to resume dialogue with Russia. She also agreed to lead one of the battalions.

Thus, the search for the fourth leader continues. Mr. Stoltenberg is confident that by the beginning of the summit he will be found.

The deployment of forces is important because these combat battalions are not just cover troops, but are large enough and well equipped to cause significant damage to the invader. Then, it is possible to reinforce them with the expanded detachments of the rapid reaction forces and - another decision of NATO and America - they can deploy another US armored combat unit of about five thousand soldiers in Europe (a total of three) and deploy such heavy equipment in advance Tanks and artillery.

Poland demands that part of this weapon be located on its territory, but for the time being most of it will go to Germany, Belgium and the Netherlands, which have the necessary facilities and vehicles from the times of the cold war.

NATO, in fact, has just now begun to check the infrastructure (bridges, highways and railways) in the new member states in Central and Eastern Europe, having not considered it necessary first to draw up a plan for their rapid strengthening in the event of a Russian invasion. According to Mr. Lüt, preliminary deployment in Eastern Europe will now require major investments needed to build special new warehouses and infrastructure.

In brief about NATO

Poland, eager to send signals to Moscow, succeeded in advancing the construction of a new missile defense base, which coincided with the opening of a similar facility in Romania. Mr. Stoltenberg’s and Washington’s insistence that this type of missile defense system is not directed against Russian intercontinental ballistic missiles is not convincing Moscow.

Moreover, France is skeptical about the situation, seriously concerned that the reaction time of the missile defense system will not allow the North Atlantic Council, the Assembly of Member States and their ambassadors who make NATO decisions on the basis of consensus, to exercise political oversight.

For the same reason, France reluctantly grants the supreme commander of NATO, whose position is always held by the American senior officer, extensive powers in a crisis, when, as others say, it is necessary to act immediately.

However, the original missile defense program, combined with new bases near the Russian borders (intermittently intermittent, so that they would not be called “permanent”) and expanded rapid reaction forces supposedly ready to deploy during 48 hours, all show how much Russia's recent actions have affected on the calculations of NATO.

NATO is trying to assure the most vulnerable members, such as the Baltic countries, Poland, and even their southern allies on the Black Sea, like Romania, Bulgaria and Turkey, that the alliance intends to fulfill its promise of collective defense. Missile defense is part of the response, along with naval exercises in the Black Sea and more consistent overflights made by reconnaissance aircraft.

As Mr. Stoltenberg notes, the influence of Russian politics has finally pushed European members of NATO to at least halt the decline in military spending that has been going on for decades. According to forecasts for the current year, he says, the European allies, as demanded by Washington, will generally increase military spending, although most of them still have defense spending not reaching the NATO-established figure of two percent of GDP.

Sixteen of the 28 member countries have increased their military spending in practice, and only Italy, Bulgaria and Croatia are still cutting them down, although they insist on the temporary nature of these reductions. “I know what moods prevail in Washington, and I understand them: Americans want Europeans to do more for the bloc, to contribute,” says Mr. Stoltenberg. “That was my main message in European capitals.”

Nevertheless, NATO faces another problem with Russia: how to deal with the new Russian military doctrine, which considers the usefulness of tactical nuclear weapons at the beginning of the conflict, as a means of intimidating the enemy intending to recapture the territory, followed by what planners call “ rapid de-escalation. "

Some member states believe that Russia already has nuclear weapons in Kaliningrad, a Russian enclave in the Baltic States, where it has already put nuclear warheads on display for all to see. Russia has not clarified the question of whether they were removed from there.

Conscious of the public horror caused by the potential use of nuclear weapons, Mr. Stoltenberg, Mr. Lut and others stress that NATO "remains a nuclear alliance" and that its deterrence is conceived as "uninterrupted", ranging from responses to cyber attacks by conventional weapons to if necessary, nuclear weapons.

NATO does not see its nuclear arsenal as a tool that can be used for any other purpose than political deterrence, said Stoltenberg. “But as long as there are nuclear weapons in the world,” he believes, “we must remain a nuclear alliance.”
Author:
Originator:
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/06/01/world/europe/nato-russia.html?referer=https://www.google.com/
45 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, daily additional materials that do not get on the site: https://t.me/topwar_ru

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Tusv
    Tusv 12 June 2016 12: 52
    +11
    during the Russian military offensive in the Crimea

    This is something. and we are offered to study American thinking?
    1. poquello
      poquello 12 June 2016 12: 57
      +6
      Quote: Tusv
      during the Russian military offensive in the Crimea

      ...

      the worse they call, the more money they will collect. Lord! Make contributions!
      1. Tusv
        Tusv 12 June 2016 13: 04
        +2
        Quote: poquello
        the worse they call, the more money they will collect. Lord! Make contributions!

        Well, I don’t feel sorry for the American money. I do not print. But the armed one is not an aristocrat who drinks champagne in the mornings (of course, in short, but the name of the great Dostoevsky novel is not in fashion here), worse than nuclear war
        1. cniza
          cniza 12 June 2016 14: 02
          +6
          Let them boil in their own .. pardon boiler, but we need to solve our problems and that's it.
          1. The comment was deleted.
          2. Simpsonian
            Simpsonian 12 June 2016 15: 29
            0
            They usually do it to others ...
      2. Major Yurik
        Major Yurik 12 June 2016 17: 16
        +4
        It is pointless to scare Russia, to warn about something from a position of strength! In a good way you can achieve much greater results, this is a historical fact, and so bark and threaten ..... fool
    2. CORNET
      CORNET 12 June 2016 13: 04
      +21
      I think in the future ...:
      Query on the wiki: NATO is a group of marauder countries that unleash petty conflicts to enrich and intimidate the developing world ..!
      Eliminated by Russia!
      But it will be so! The truth is ours ...
      1. dmi.pris
        dmi.pris 12 June 2016 13: 11
        +4
        I would add - provocate countries ... Well, as for the elimination, time will tell, I am skeptical about the elimination of NATO, because I still believe in reason. Nobody wants to die, a big war is unlikely. They will reconcile, calm down, start driving to Crimea to look at "polite people" and "polite fleet."
        Quote: CORNET
        I think in the future ...:
        Query on the wiki: NATO is a group of marauder countries that unleash petty conflicts to enrich and intimidate the developing world ..!
        Eliminated by Russia!
        But it will be so! The truth is ours ...
        1. zennon
          zennon 12 June 2016 15: 29
          +2
          Quote: dmi.pris
          I would add-provocateurs countries ..

          Poland, eager to send signals to Moscow, was successful in advancing the construction of a new missile defense base, which coincided with the opening of a similar facility in Romania. The persistent assurances of Mr. Stoltenberg and Washington that such missile defense systems are directed against Russian intercontinental ballistic missiles are not convincing Moscow.

          That is, they say that these objects are directed against us, but we do not believe in this? Cool ...
      2. Sid.74
        12 June 2016 13: 12
        +6
        NATO does not see its nuclear arsenal as a tool that can be used for any other purpose than political deterrence, said Stoltenberg.

        - "we believe, willingly believe" ... yes
        Hiroshima and Nagasaki burst into tears after these wonderful words ... yes

        They even understand the extent to which the generals of NATO and cheap politutki from the US government and Brussels came to senility.
        Huffington Post: Russia crept too close to NATO's “peaceful exercises”
        NATO’s “freedom-loving” conducts exclusively “peaceful” military exercises, which, however, at the slightest mistake can cause an aggressive reaction from Russia, which is so brazenly located near the maneuvers, says the satirical material published by the American edition of the Huffington Post. The author advises to stop playing expensive war games and finally spend trillions of dollars on something useful.

        https://russian.rt.com/inotv/2016-06-10/Huffington-Post-Rossiya-podobralas-slish
        came
    3. lelikas
      lelikas 12 June 2016 13: 34
      +4
      Quote: Tusv
      This is something. and we are offered to study American thinking?

      Moreover, their own doctrine provides for the use of nuclear weapons and over the past few decades, in principle, has not changed. But as soon as we just mentioned something like that, everyone was intimidated to death.
    4. The comment was deleted.
    5. siberalt
      siberalt 12 June 2016 14: 18
      +3
      If NATO is already a member of the nuclear club, then why doesn't it have a seat in the Security Council? Neither France nor Great Britain is pushing its nuclear heads in Europe.
    6. Finches
      Finches 12 June 2016 14: 22
      +7
      Today, I wrote to another branch that we pay little attention to the fact that in all NATO exercises in Eastern Europe and the Baltic states, civilian departments responsible for logistics, road networks for various purposes and health take an active part in working out issues of interaction with the military! I want to remind this of a small episode from history - as Brauchitsch and Jodl testify, Hitler initially believed that the war against the USSR would begin in the autumn of 1940. However, Hitler later abandoned this plan: Germany was not yet ready for war with the USSR. Because there were no necessary prerequisites for Poland: railways, barracks, bridges were not prepared, communications were not established, airfields were not built. Right now, NATO is doing this in Eastern Europe - the same thing Hitler did before the invasion!
  2. oleg-gr
    oleg-gr 12 June 2016 12: 53
    +4
    The authority of NATO is ruined first of all by small parasites, playing the role of a local punks, behind which there is a bruiser. They pull up, provoke and are ready to sit out in the bushes if a mess begins. It just won’t work out. All pogroms and defeats will take place on their territory in the first place.
    1. cap
      cap 12 June 2016 13: 44
      +1
      Quote: oleg-gr
      The authority of NATO is ruined first of all by small parasites, playing the role of a local punks, behind which there is a bruiser. They pull up, provoke and are ready to sit out in the bushes if a mess begins. It just won’t work out. All pogroms and defeats will take place on their territory in the first place.


      Especially since:

      "NATO faces another Russia-related problem:
      as dispense with the new Russian military doctrine, which considers the usefulness of tactical nuclear weapons at the beginning of a conflict, as a means of intimidating an enemy intending to recapture territory, followed by what planners call "quick de-escalation."

      Think turn on the gentlemen's head!
  3. poquello
    poquello 12 June 2016 12: 53
    +1
    I did not understand why such an article name and a paratrooper in the photo
    1. Sid.74
      12 June 2016 13: 07
      +2
      Quote: poquello
      I did not understand why such an article name and a paratrooper in the photo

      These are the remnants of the authority of the NATO bloc, after the Russian pressure is put on it! smile
      1. poquello
        poquello 12 June 2016 13: 14
        +1
        Quote: Sid.74
        Quote: poquello
        I did not understand why such an article name and a paratrooper in the photo

        These are the remnants of the authority of the NATO bloc, after the Russian pressure is put on it! smile

        so he fell, we did not help him
        1. Sid.74
          12 June 2016 14: 08
          +3
          Quote: poquello
          so he fell, we did not help him

          What, do not see the hand of the Kremlin? No, and she is ..! To you, any Polish, Ukrainian or Lithuanian journalist will confirm.winked
    2. Amurets
      Amurets 12 June 2016 13: 12
      +4
      Quote: poquello
      I did not understand why such an article name and a paratrooper in the photo

      But what is incomprehensible? There is not enough battalion here and they are looking for where to get it.
      “France is ready to help the battalions with only 150 soldiers, NATO officials say after everyone finally agreed on the idea of ​​a further deployment in Poland, although the plan was initially hostile. Germany, which had opposed these military units six months ago, eventually met halfway, but in exchange for efforts to resume dialogue with Russia. She also agreed to lead one of the battalions. >> But to ask Russia: "Take yours back, they are embarrassed." And they are also afraid that Russia may send them where the American cowboy did not chase his mustangs. The Russian language is rich, you can never return from there.
      1. poquello
        poquello 12 June 2016 13: 22
        +2
        Quote: Amurets
        Quote: poquello
        I did not understand why such an article name and a paratrooper in the photo

        But what is incomprehensible? There is not enough battalion here and they are looking for where to get it.
        “France is ready to help the battalions with only 150 soldiers, NATO officials say after everyone finally agreed on the idea of ​​a further deployment in Poland, although the plan was initially hostile. ...

        and who wants to feed Poland, with Nata without Nata, they would impose on Poland all the costs of keeping Nata on the territory of Poland and normally, or is it like the first three months "free"
        1. NDR-791
          NDR-791 12 June 2016 13: 39
          +1
          The fact of the matter is that at first it is free, and then - "Allocate two percent of the budget for the purchase of military equipment." This is the standard command. Only they offer to buy the same F-35, which still does not fly properly (and it is not known whether it will fly?), While the consumption is already going through the roof. Well, at least Poland, they even have a "submarine fleet". And the Tribaltik will throw off 2%, and buy armored vehicles for the presidents, just enough at such prices.
        2. Amurets
          Amurets 12 June 2016 13: 53
          +1
          Quote: poquello

          and who wants to feed Poland, with Nata without Nata, they would impose on Poland all the costs of keeping Nata on the territory of Poland and normally, or is it like the first three months "free"

          Donald Trump also offers such a development option. There is nothing for the Yankees to contain European parasites, he believes.
  4. Dr. Bormental
    Dr. Bormental 12 June 2016 12: 54
    +3
    Tired of this circus already with amers ... they themselves intimidate Russia with all of them, and then they sell weapons to the same fools ... I don’t understand anything, can only dumb people live in Europe?
    1. NDR-791
      NDR-791 12 June 2016 13: 55
      +1
      That's what I think: it's not what they say there, but what they tell us here! "Ay-yay, what are the byaki, teachings are being carried out in Poland, hee-hee their Hummers have landed !!!" There is no real agreement between our Defense Ministry, the Foreign Ministry and the press. The information is presented in the key - ah they are all loshars, we drive them with a garbage can. But we are not driving! underestimating the enemy, and especially overestimating one's own strength - is like death. Our media are doing just that, and with enthusiasm. And without specifics. Nobody bothers the press to say tomorrow (for example!) “The US nuclear submarine, namerek, has occupied a patrol area in the Barents Sea, this was reported by a representative of the GRU (with the last name) referring to a schoolboy from Vladivostok. How the student learned about this is unknown. that the boat really should be there at that time, and let them have a headache, where is the student from ... But the real coherence of the Ministry of Defense and the media - let them prove it with their brains creaking.
    2. 33 Watcher
      33 Watcher 12 June 2016 14: 44
      +1
      Quote: Dr. Bormental
      Tired of this circus already with amers ... they themselves intimidate Russia with all of them, and then they sell weapons to the same fools ... I don’t understand anything, can only dumb people live in Europe?

      They just don’t know who they’re more afraid of. laughing
  5. krops777
    krops777 12 June 2016 13: 30
    +4
    Tired of this circus already with amers ... they themselves intimidate Russia with all of them, and then they sell weapons to the same fools ... I don’t understand anything, can only dumb people live in Europe?


    They’re not stupid, they don’t have much to do, the noose in the form of various obligations immediately begins to drag out.
  6. Stas157
    Stas157 12 June 2016 13: 40
    +2
    All contacts with countries that deploy military infrastructure and missile defense systems on our borders must be cut off. And also to declare that in case of fears and any stirs of NATO on this infrastructure, a preventive strike will be delivered immediately to tactical nuclear weapons. Still conduct explanatory work with the population of these countries that nuclear weapons are aimed at them.
    Well, what kind of degenerates do you need to be in order to voluntarily substitute your countries, your families for a possible nuclear strike for the interests of others! Interests for an ocean ally, who will also throw on occasion!
    1. akims
      akims 12 June 2016 15: 28
      +2
      As one such degenerate said: I have a hairdresser in Brussels.
      This means that he is there more often than at home.
      I spoke with Poles and Bulgarians recently from such comrades.
      They all have children sent further west. Some - in the states, some in the South Caucasus, some with the Germans. Patriots are very specific. Yuri Mukhin wrote very well about Polish patriotism. The most important thing is to get away on time!
      Somewhere like that.
  7. shinobi
    shinobi 12 June 2016 13: 42
    +1
    In general, what do strategists think of this grief? Here, at the level of the kitchen strategy, it’s clear that if they start to force me a little (NATO), I’ll grab a sharp-cutting thread (NF) from the table. they don’t want to. But at the same time they want the rest of the rules to be respected. From a dead donkey ears. Moreover, now the charges are clean, the precipitation gives a little in comparison with the same Hiroshima. The missiles get where they need to, ± 2 meters.
  8. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 12 June 2016 14: 06
    +1
    What kind of military alliance is this that a battalion cannot scrape together for deployment in Poland? Do they respect Russia so much? And our army that "battalions" are going to defend what we do not need the Baltic states and Poland. At the same time, they leave only 60 hours before our tanks leave the German border. What do they think of themselves?
  9. cheap trick
    cheap trick 12 June 2016 14: 50
    +3
    Bbc komentaras: "taip anglai nebego nuo romenu laiku". Cnn komentaras: "jei rusai puls pabaltiji, nato ne tai kad neateis padeti, jie net nespes pabegti is pabaltijo"

    not the topic of course, but very funny! I translate from the Lithuanian statement of the BBC.
    so the British did not run from the time of the Romans. if the Russians attack the Baltic, then NATO will not only not be able to help, they will not even have time to escape from the Baltic.
    concerns yesterday's football.
  10. Antiprogressor
    Antiprogressor 12 June 2016 15: 25
    0
    It is necessary to make a maidan in Mexico, to put the stubborn Mexican nationalists at the head, to tear Canada apart from Quebec, as the pope of the current prime minister, Monsieur Pierre Trudeau, sometimes threatened to do. Well, and place 4 Special Forces battalions in Cuba and Nicaragua (closer to Panama). Knock down China to move the Nicaraguan Canal as soon as possible ...
    In general, America is something strongly fascinated by Europe. Somehow, she would have been an American in her ... well, in general, you understand!
  11. Abbra
    Abbra 12 June 2016 15: 26
    0
    I like the title of the article. "Authority" ... WAS THERE?
  12. Simpsonian
    Simpsonian 12 June 2016 15: 32
    0
    In short, this parity is very easy to compare, and it will not be in favor of the Russian Federation. Author Steven Erlanger calms us down and speaks to our teeth.
  13. Senior manager
    Senior manager 12 June 2016 15: 36
    +1
    The task of the Yankees is simple - to start hostilities with the wrong hands and on foreign territory with Russia. And they successfully solve it, though with a creak. It didn’t work with horses, it will work with triebaltamia, Poles. Fushington really counts on the war, as a means of overcoming the crisis, nothing personal, only to maintain influence in the world and increase denyushku. They don’t think about otvetka, hope that they will fly by?
  14. t118an
    t118an 12 June 2016 16: 45
    +1
    This militant rhetoric of the West has already reached. It seems that we returned in 1939. But neither the USSR attacked Europe, and Europe, led by Germany, attacked us. The EU must have forgotten the lessons, but history will remind them.
    here's another .... I.V. Stalin saved a good half of humanity by acquiring nuclear weapons for the USSR! ...
  15. avg-mgn
    avg-mgn 12 June 2016 17: 07
    +1
    Quote: Dr. Bormental
    in Europe, really only stupid live?

    I don’t know what language to translate into?
  16. pvv113
    pvv113 12 June 2016 17: 44
    +1
    Poland, eager to send signals to Moscow, was successful in promoting the construction of a new missile defense base, which coincided with the opening of a similar facility in Romania

    Vain attempts. The latest Russian development reduces the effectiveness of NATO missile defense to zero
    In Russia, the Yu-74 glider, a hypersonic aircraft that aroused the Pentagon’s glitch, was successfully tested, since it completely “kills” the entire US missile defense system.

    eer.ru/a/article/u123259/10-06-2016/52336?utm_campaign=transit&utm_source=mirtes
    en & utm_medium = news & from = mirtesen
    1. iouris
      iouris 13 June 2016 00: 58
      0
      Horseradish knows it - it is necessary to simulate in different conditions, but everything is simple for you.
      I think that soon the missile defense will be near Tallinn and Murmansk.
  17. iouris
    iouris 12 June 2016 17: 51
    0
    NATO must be dissolved, then the question will disappear.
  18. Anchonsha
    Anchonsha 12 June 2016 18: 17
    0
    As a "film screening" and as a frightening influence, so that the Poles do not jump belligerently, you need to fuck across Poland with rockets from the Black Sea, as was done against the bandits in Syria. This is a very lousy proposal, but it will stop the Pshek, Balts and Merikans from stirring up military hysteria against us.
  19. Yuri Y.
    Yuri Y. 12 June 2016 21: 50
    0
    It seems that all the same their main goal is not war. Whatever they call it, "containment policy." Keeping a mongrel for whipping up hysteria. Under the guise of attendants they will chop, the military-industrial complex and others like them, and Europe to the leg. If we ran with spears, yes there was a war (well, different Papuans, Iran, Libya, etc. type, they don't have a perfect bomb). They have already been told that with modern technology, they will not stand aside (overseas).
  20. erik cartman
    erik cartman 13 June 2016 07: 44
    0
    Quote: siberalt
    If NATO is already a member of the nuclear club, then why doesn't it have a seat in the Security Council? Neither France nor Great Britain is pushing its nuclear heads in Europe.

    The French need to shove something unnecessarily, while the Britons have nuclear heads, or rather, the carriers are mostly American. And they are already in Europe. On the topic: it seems that most of all in Poland, the Poles advocate the deployment of the American contingent. Some pluses: it will satisfy someone and earn money on this. And then around from local only zhopshniki remained.
  21. Ros 56
    Ros 56 13 June 2016 08: 29
    +2
    Of course, dear all your comments have the right to life. But let's reason logically, out of 28 NATO members they cannot find curators for 4 battalions, laughter and that's all. Further, the task of these battalions is to deter Russian aggression until reinforcements approach. And the reinforcements approach according to their plans is 30-120 days. And to live these battalions, according to my estimates, taking into account their number of 1000 people and taking into account our capabilities, a maximum of half an hour, well, an hour on the strength. Those who do not perish will run away with square eyes. So it turns out that all this chatter about the battalions is aimed at knocking out money from all these members to purchase weapons from the stripes. Yes, I almost forgot. Given the theater of operations - the presence of a large number of rivers and streams, bridges, railways and highways, plus private ownership of many sections and the destruction of all this infrastructure by our forces, those 4 battalions will never wait for help. Perhaps someone will not agree with me, this is his right. hi request
  22. TsUS-Air Force
    TsUS-Air Force 13 June 2016 09: 37
    +1
    in the 80s, the arms race sucked the USSR economy and ruined it. now we will suck the economies of small NATO countries laughing