Putin says Crimea takeover shows Russian military prowess

[OneCrazyDiamond]

Source: Reuters

MOSCOW, March 28 (Reuters) - President Vladimir Putin on Friday said Russia's takeover of Crimea showed off its military prowess, as his defence minister reported that the Russian flag was now flying over all military sites on the Black Sea peninsula.

In a Kremlin ceremony with senior security officials, Sergei Shoigu told Putin that all Ukrainian servicemen still loyal to Kiev have left the Crimea region, whose annexation by Moscow has led to the worst stand-off with the West since the Cold War.

"The recent events in Crimea were a serious test," Putin was shown on state television as saying in an echoing and glided Kremlin hall.

"They demonstrated both the completely new capabilities of our Armed Forces and the high morale of the personnel."

Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/28/ukraine-crisis-crimea-army-idUSL5N0MP2A320140328

---

Not literally though.

[Duckhunter935]

1. I thought they

were not Russians but just Crimean locals. That is what was put out. I am confused.

[MNBrewer]

2. Oops!!!

[Igel]

4. Some actually still are.

They announced withdrawals of Russian troops.

The Russian troops that some argued were never sent there.

It's a labelling problem. The only thing that matters are labels. Put a sticker on a pitbull that says "hummingbird" and somebody'll for sure try to put a hummingbird feeder at ground level to feed it and start looking for its nest. Heaven help the hummingbird that actually built a nest near the area. It'd find it squashed by a pitbull placed into it.

[Adrahil]

32. Well, ya see.... umm.... look over there! NEONAZIS!!!!!!

[msongs]

3. he invaded his own country lol. that really takes prowess nt

[Johnyawl]

5. BWAHAHAHAHA!

that was about on the same level of military prowess as the US invasion of Grenada.

[Benton D Struckcheon]

6. So I guess that means there was an invasion after all.

Imagine that. Who'da thunk it?

[davidpdx]

14. He does seem to want to have it both ways

Say there was no invasion and then claim military prowess.

[LisaL]

17. US called it an invasion.

So it wasn't?

[davidpdx]

18. Yes, and Russia claimed it wasn't using its military to take over Crimea

Now they are saying it is their "military prowess". To put it bluntly, Putin lied.

[freshwest]

20. Well, not literally as the OP says, but he praised their action, same thing, I guess... But...

...A deputy head of the Federal Security Service, Alexander Malevany, told Putin at the meeting active measures were being taken to counter what he called growing Western efforts to weaken the Russian state and curb Moscow's influence in its post-Soviet backyard.

The United States and NATO have voiced alarm over what they say are thousands of Russian troops massed near its western border with Ukraine. Putin has reserved the right to send troops into Ukraine, which is home to a large population of Russian-speakers in the east...

Putin has received permission from parliament to send the armed forces into Ukraine if necessary, raising concerns he could cite alleged threats to Russian-speakers in eastern regions as grounds for intervention there.

Nothing ambiguous there. The article has Putin doubling down on being the victim which justifies anything. Sounds familiar.

[muriel_volestrangler]

7. Next stop, eastern Ukraine:

A deputy head of the Federal Security Service, Alexander Malevany, told Putin at the meeting active measures were being taken to counter what he called growing Western efforts to weaken the Russian state and curb Moscow's influence in its post-Soviet backyard.
...
Despite signs that tensions with the West may be cooling as a status quo takes shape in Crimea, Malevany warned Putin at Friday's meeting that Moscow faces growing threats from the United States and its allies, who are trying to weaken Russia's influence on Ukraine.

"There has been a sharp increase in external threats to the state," he said. "The lawful desire of the peoples of Crimea and eastern Ukrainian regions is causing hysteria in the United States and its allies."

[TwilightGardener]

8. LOL--sure, if by prowess you mean invading a region you already have strong ties

with, most people speak your language, you have military bases in the area, and the opposing military is weak and knows that if it fires so much as a shot it will be suicide AND create pretext for a further invasion, or provoke civil war. PROWESS!!

[freshwest]

21. Prowess: The new definition of shooting fish in a barrel. n/t

[wall_dish]

9. Sure.

Now, what would happen when his Army and Navy came up against a combat experienced nation like the USA?
His so called vaunted Army would be in for an embarrassment.

[daleo]

15. A certain German leader of the 1940s thought the Russians would be a pushover too

It is dangerous to make these assumptions.

[wall_dish]

24. Not applicable.

NATO or the US have no intention of invading Russia, as Hitler did, Russia has limited force projection and combat capabilities beyond her own borders.

The US has world wide force projection in it's 10 carrier battle groups, it's military is battle tested, it's weapons system are modern and combat capable.

No, in a strictly conventional war outside of Russia's borders, the US would decisively wins.

[freshwest]

22. The USA and Russia have never fought each other directly, only by proxy. Too dangerous.

Although I get your point...

[wall_dish]

25. I agree.

And let's all hope to hell that both Russia and the USA never meet each other on the field of battle.

[freshwest]

31. Depends on who's got their finger on the button. We don't have Romney with the Bush crew scheming,

Last edited Tue Apr 1, 2014, 04:30 PM - Edit history (1)

and don't have John MdCain singing 'Bomb-bomb-bomb, bomb-bomb Iran' imitating the Beach Boys song to his sponsors:

This guy didn't like that...

And he's not interested in war with Russia or anyone else:

Not even Syria, as I recall:



The kind of war people imagine would not be worthwhile for us, Russia, China or the world. Some RWNJs believe they can bring Jesus back with a nuclear war. Best to keep the reins of power from their ands. Thanks and see you later.

[Bosonic]

23. Their military doctrine acknowledges their conventional military shortcomings

But alarmingly, uses nukes to "de-escalate" conventional military mismatches.

Why Russia calls a limited nuclear strike "de-escalation"

In 1999, at a time when renewed war in Chechnya seemed imminent, Moscow watched with great concern as NATO waged a high-precision military campaign in Yugoslavia. The conventional capabilities that the United States and its allies demonstrated seemed far beyond Russia’s own capacities. And because the issues underlying the Kosovo conflict seemed almost identical to those underlying the Chechen conflict, Moscow became deeply worried that the United States would interfere within its borders.

By the next year, Russia had issued a new military doctrine whose main innovation was the concept of “de-escalation”—the idea that, if Russia were faced with a large-scale conventional attack that exceeded its capacity for defense, it might respond with a limited nuclear strike. To date, Russia has never publically invoked the possibility of de-escalation in relation to any specific conflict. But Russia’s policy probably limited the West’s options for responding to the 2008 war in Georgia. And it is probably in the back of Western leaders’ minds today, dictating restraint as they formulate their responses to events in Ukraine.

Game-changer. Russia’s de-escalation policy represented a reemergence of nuclear weapons’ importance in defense strategy after a period when these weapons’ salience had decreased. When the Cold War ended, Russia and the United States suddenly had less reason to fear that the other side would launch a surprise, large-scale nuclear attack. Nuclear weapons therefore began to play primarily a political role in the two countries’ security relationship. They became status symbols, or insurance against unforeseen developments. They were an ultimate security guarantee, but were always in the background—something never needed.

Then a very different security challenge began to loom large in the thinking of Russia’s political leaders, military officers, and security experts. That challenge was US conventional military power. This power was first displayed in its modern incarnation during the Gulf War of 1990 and 1991—but the game-changer was the Kosovo conflict. In Yugoslavia the United States utilized modern, high-precision conventional weapons to produce highly tangible results with only limited collateral damage. These conventional weapons systems, unlike their nuclear counterparts, were highly usable.

http://thebulletin.org/why-russia-calls-limited-nuclear-strike-de-escalation

[olddad56]

10. If he really wanted to show military prowess, he would illegally invade a sovereign state like Iraq.

and kill a few hundred thousand innocent people. That would prove that he is a war criminal of the stature of Bush and Cheney.

[LisaL]

16. But of course.

[SunSeeker]

11. Yeah, like Reagan invading Grenada showed US military prowess.

[chrisa]

12. One of the Russian soldiers got a hang nail. It was horrible!

Then, the coffee in one of the convoys got cold. Disastrous stuff.

[blackspade]

13. Military prowess?

More like it underscores the restraint and professionalism of the Ukrainian armed forces.

[davidpdx]

19. I'd say yes and no

They were obviously smart in putting down their arms because there was such a huge mismatch in power that it would have been a massacre. I'm sure they had conflicted feelings about what was happening as well as worrying whether the rest of their country would be invaded. I agree overall through they were brave and had to do a bit of swallowing their own pride in laying down their arms.

[Jefferson23]

26. Push that nationalism Putin, not too many better at it than you are. n/t

[wercal]

27. The responses on this thread are interesting

Shouldn't we be worried about what Putin is up to? What will be his next move? What is his end game?

Well he has at least 60k men from this army on the Ukrainian border (some estimates are even higher). Putin has said he is not interested in invading Ukraine (or any more of it). What will he do with this army?

I imagine he will stir up trouble in Ukraine...use operatives inside the country (remember those snipers during the demonstrations that seemed to shoot people on both sides) to agitate the new government. Try to get a response out of them...try to get them to commit some atrocity against an ethnic Russian...and presto, he invades to 'protect' the ethnic Russians in Ukraine.

[dipsydoodle]

30. he has at least 60k ?

Got any pictures to confirm that ?

[wercal]

33. Troops and Equipment

Not sure how informative a picture is, but here's a few:





US estimates 40k....Ukraine estimates 88k...Russia says 8.5k - for a 'training exercise'.

Lots of wooded area, so its hard for outsiders to know for sure, so its just estimates. But clearly a lot of troops have been on the move into the area.

[ladjf]

28. Huh? Is he delusional? nt

[Octafish]

29. Carlyle Group well represented on Reuters board.

http://www.reuters.com/finance/stocks/companyOfficers?symbol=CG.O

"Money trumps peace."

[OneCrazyDiamond]

34. ?

Your link is to the Carlyle Board.

Here is Thompson Reuters

http://www.reuters.com/finance/stocks/companyOfficers?symbol=TRI.N


What am I missing?

[Octafish]

35. Lawton Fitt of Carlyle Group sits on Reuters board.

Don't know what you think, but perhaps it helps Carlyle Group get good press.

Lawton W. Fitt

Ms. Fitt is a member of the Board of Directors of our general partner. Ms. Fitt is a director of Thomson Reuters Corporation, Ciena Corporation, and The Progressive Corporation. Ms. Fitt served as Secretary (CEO) of the Royal Academy of Arts in London from October 2002 to March 2005. Prior to that, Ms. Fitt was an investment banker with Goldman, Sachs & Co., where she became a partner in 1994 and a managing director in 1996. She retired from Goldman, Sachs in 2002. Ms. Fitt is a former director of Reuters PLC, Frontier Communications and Overture Acquisitions Corporation. She is also a trustee or director of several not-for-profit organizations, including the Goldman Sachs Foundation and the Thomson Reuters Foundation. Ms. Fitt received her bachelor's degree from Brown University and her MBA from the Darden School of the University of Virginia.

SOURCE: http://www.carlyle.com/about-carlyle/team/lawton-w-fitt

Board of Reuters: http://thomsonreuters.com/about-us/board-of-directors/