More "De-escalation" - NATO Sends Five Warships To Baltic Sea

Tyler Durden's picture

The latest development out of NATO, which was already largely expected, must be part of the just announced elaborate de-escalation scheme.  From VOA:

NATO members are sending navy ships to the Baltic Sea to increase the security of the alliance's eastern European allies in response to the Ukraine crisis.


NATO's Maritime Command said Thursday it is sending four minesweepers and a support vessel to the Baltic Sea. The ships are from Norway, the Netherlands, Belgium and Estonia.


The alliance said Thursday it does not intend to escalate the situation in Ukraine, but rather to "demonstrate solidarity" and ramp up NATO's readiness.


NATO has made clear it does not want to get involved militarily in Ukraine, which is not a NATO member.

Ah yes, because the Geneva "de-escalation" statement explicitly did not mention anything about a military build up when it is solely for "solidarity demonstration" purposes, and not for "intimidation or provocation." At least we now know what loopholey, umbrella phrase the next Russian escalation in east Ukraine will be held under: "demonstrating solidarity" with ethnic Russians in the region.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Arius's picture

Somebody please call the russians to tell them not to worry about it ... just part of regular exercises ... or so

Haus-Targaryen's picture

Can someone somewhere start shooting already?! 

pods's picture

I think Merkel's phone is gonna ring soon and the other side is gonna whisper "Who runs Bartertown?"

All fun and games till your industry grinds to a halt.

NATO is gonna see that posturing works better when your supporting economies actually are running.


ApollyonDestroy's picture

This is all just too good to be true!

ApollyonDestroy's picture

And since today is obviously opposites-day, I'm just going to say I love naggers!

redpill's picture

Because the Russians are going to mine the Black Sea or something?

MarsInScorpio's picture



Because that's all they've got to work with . . .


Have you noticed all the carriers are in their home ports?


Because they are sitting ducks against any country with modern shore-based anti-shippiing missles. Carriers only work against countries using 1960s technology.


Cap Matifou's picture

And a slim chance the other vessels deployed will fare any better?

After mock attack: U.S. Navy completely demoralized
(The jammer of the SU-24 has switched of their systems, thus) 27 crew members of the destroyer are said to have submitted their resignations and have commented on their actions by saying they have no intention to put their lives in danger.

lakecity55's picture

The gay navy is not so gay anymore?

TheReplacement's picture

Yeah so they claim the Pentagon confirmed the story but there is nothing anywhere to confirm that claim. 

The story is made up or extremely heavily embellished.

Steaming_Wookie_Doo's picture

I read the article. This line struck me:

"Members of the crew had to be psychologically cared for and to recover from the suffered stress."

Just from being buzzed?! Really?? What an incredible bunch of pussies. Apparently war is only acceptable as a video game experience...


USA USA's picture

Remember the commercials:

"Navy, a global force for good"?

HardAssets's picture

The story sounds like b.s. to me.

Sailors quaking in their uniforms and requesting that they be allowed to resign because a jet flew overhead a few times ?  

Yeah, right.

Other accounts described the jets as 'unarmed' - so likely without weapons pods under their wings.

So were these so-called overly sensitive sailors just scared shitless from the noise from the jets ?

Even if you think its a bad idea for the US to escalate military operations in that region (I'm of that opinion) doesn't mean you believe every story out there. This sounds like the kinda ridiculous propaganda Tokyo Rose spouted during WW2. 

cro_maat's picture

Turkey does not allow aircraft carriers to transit the Bosphorus. This applies to Russia as well as the U.S.

I was on the LPH Inchon in the mid-80's and we anchored off of Istanbul. We were told expicitely that we could not sail further up the Bosphosus because we were a helicopter carrier. What is interesting is that the USSR at that time created a destroyer class that could launch planes (but was not classified as a "carrier") for the sole purpose of getting around the Turkish prohibition.

earleflorida's picture

'Turkey's Bosphorus Straits'

"Turkey, Russia tread cautious line over Ukraine"   7/14/14


 Ref: Map-- Sea of Marmara*

The 'Lausanne Convention' (Pre-Montreux Convention [Switzerland]) had allowed aircraft carriers...       ,but the 'Montreux Convention' superceded  this agreement on July 20,1936 [*note date-- Germany 1937-38]...  Important: The United States was not signatory, or is today... making it null-n-void,.. with only NATO being able to circumvent treaty/ convention. Ps. Turkey aided Germany as did Spain during WWII and somehow evaded the wrath of Russia? It had to do with Greece/ Cyprus/ Turks?!?

'Naval arms Control- 1936'      

as I've written about long ago, fwiw


Ref: Counterinsurgency [COIN] and [CT] Counterterrorism "Small Wars Journal"  Note: Korean War was the first ever backed by the United Nations (UN) and NATO during the Truman adm. (1945-53), and the rest is history?

The 'Baltic Sea' is counterproductive-- absolutely a global strategic embarrassment, as foolish as was Hitler's Germany [?USSA?] in 1939--  'invasions via encroachment'!

again jmo


Tengri Temujin's picture

Great links Earl, thanks a bunch, there was one good story on small wars journal of what Ceasar told his centurions...good stuff

Thanatos's picture


The 'Baltic Sea' is counterproductive-- absolutely a global strategic embarrassment

again jmo


Agreed. Imo.

The deployment of minesweepers (or mine-layers; many have both capabilities) in the Baltic is either a distraction, diversion or an attempt to create a triggering event with Russian naval craft (most probably submarines). The strategic value of this deployment is not obvious to me. I admit I am not a Naval strategist, but I am not fully ignorant of these matters either.

This just doesn't make sense from a strategic standpoint.

Are they sweeping the coast of Kaliningrad Oblast to take some pressure off the Ukrainian theater?

What else would they be needed for?

Lots of questions and not many answers. This must have some deeper significance or NATO leadership is cracking up and has no idea what they are doing anymore. 

Divided States of America's picture

The media is citing these NATO actions as DE-escalating so that they look like the good guys and when Russia decides to act, the media will label their actions as Escalating or RE-Escalating the tensions... Fuckin MSM

ApollyonDestroy's picture

And the completely retarded Americans will believe it! Fox News is their god

ApollyonDestroy's picture

Oh wait I forgot Fox doesn't consider themselves the msm

bob_stl's picture

No, they're fair and balanced... remember?

HardAssets's picture

Perhaps the US military (and their NATO lapdogs) should be very cautious about taking on an enemy more dangerous than goatherders:



Bindar Dundat's picture

Interestingly the goat herders kicked the Ruskies ass pretty good in the eighties.  mmmm....

Rakshas's picture

Rice farmers seem to be able to kick butt too ..........

HardAssets's picture

Not to mention a nation of farmers, tradesmen, shopkeepers, adventurers & pioneers from a colony in North America 239 years ago.




Tengri Temujin's picture

Now what are wel...

A nation ruled by a kleptocracy that grabs land abroad and home like in Nevada

A nation of drugdealers whose shops are run down streets

A nation of couchpotatoes fed propaganda by msm

Tengri Temujin's picture

Now what are wel...

A nation ruled by a kleptocracy that grabs land abroad and home like in Nevada

A nation of drugdealers whose shops are run down streets

A nation of couchpotatoes fed propaganda by msm

Kayman's picture

Chasing goat herders is a little bit different than fighting in a conventional playing field.

 Ask Adolph what a pissed off Russian fights like ?  Oh, I forgot Hitler blew his brains out and let the Fraus of Berlin be raped by the Russkies.



Volkodav's picture

Nyet...that is not what happened..

Random's picture

Yeah lol, I'll take your word for it.On one hand you want me to believe (spanning several days worth of comments) that there is a massive difference between the USSR and current day Russian Federation and on the other hand you spew this minimalistic bullshit trying to play down on the atrocities committed by the red army at the end of ww2 and well into the 50s all the way from Ukraine to Berlin, including all Eastern and Central Europe. Fuck you pizdetz!



Volkodav's picture

Not so much as you think...

Thanatos's picture

OODA - Brilliantly Captured.

This is the best simple example of "getting owned" by Boyd's loop that I have seen recently:


Boyd and his concepts are worth spending study time on.

navy62802's picture

They're also throwing around some random photo off of twitter of a document allegedly from pro-Russian forces requiring Jews to register. It's all a fucking game man. You just have to see through all the bullshit. This entire episode is a battle of covert action behind the scenes. I don't know what the desired end-game is, but I do know that 90% of the information we are getting in the US about the situation is total bullshit and government lies being spewed through media mouthpieces.

Winston Churchill's picture

The first casualty of war is the truth.
Always accuse the other side of what you are doing.I
would think the neo-nazis are the one doing it.
Pogram was a Ukrainian word before it became a Russian one.

navy62802's picture

You really can't make the shit up. And even if you did, no one would believe the story. It is surreal.

InjectTheVenom's picture

You didn't de-escalate that !

sushi's picture


Such a move by NATO would represent a violation of the Montreax Convention limit of 30,000 tons of non Black Sea state warships in the Black Sea.

Russia will see this as a provocation and a threat.

Better lay in a massive supply of popcorn.

USS Truxtun DDG-103 Displacement 9,200 tons

USS Donald Cook DDG-75 Displacement 8,900 tons

FR Dupleix D-641 Displacement 4,500 tons

FR Alize A-645 Displacement 1,600 tons (Supports combat divers)

FR Dupuy de Lome A-759 Displacement 3,100 tons

Total 27,300

Montreax Convention Limit 30,000

sushi's picture

The above warships are the non-Black Sea state warships presently in the Black Sea.

ParkAveFlasher's picture

Click bait hat tip to Tyler.  He's a born newsman, I tell ya.

sushi's picture

That's the problem with posting before the bottle of scotch is finished.

DoChenRollingBearing's picture




For those of you who still can drink...

Kayman's picture

You might as well be sending Dreadnoughts up the Mississippi for all the good they will do. The Black Sea is a Russian Lake.

lakecity55's picture

"Send your ships into the Black Sea, ZATO, we need moar fish habitats."

Fijiaaron's picture

Read the headline.  It's just fearmongering for the dyslexic.  The Baltic sea isn't anywhere near the Ukraine. (It is, however pretty close to Estonia, Norway, Netherlands, and Belgium.)