NATO Fighter Jet Presence Triples In Baltic States

Tyler Durden's picture




 

With even the Ukraine authorities no longer denying civil war has broken out, the next two escalation steps are clear: first Russia, whose involvement is now just a matter of time and tactics, and then NATO.

Both of these two events are not quantized, and instead have been proceeding in gradual steps, with Russian involvement allegedly facilitating the local resistance militias, both with weapons and funding, if not personnel. NATO has also not been sitting on its hands, and while the US has so far been instrumental in providing naval support in the Black Sea with two warships patrolling just off Russian naval territory, it has been NATO's task to defend the skies in the regions neighboring Russia.

The clip below explains that in response to Russia no longer following the globalist playbook, NATO has tripled its air policing mission assets guarding the skies over the Baltic region.

In the video: Danish fighter jets land in Estonia, while Poland and the United Kingdom take over guarding the skies in Lithuania, tripling the NATO air policing mission strength in the Baltic region.

0
Your rating: None
 

- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Sun, 05/04/2014 - 21:37 | 4727145 DirkDiggler11
DirkDiggler11's picture

Maverick to Goose - "this shit's all coming in too fast"

Sun, 05/04/2014 - 21:42 | 4727152 markmotive
markmotive's picture
World War 3: The Crimean Crisis - Ukraine, Russia, the European Union and the United States

http://www.planbeconomics.com/2014/03/world-war-3-crimean-crisis-ukraine...

Sun, 05/04/2014 - 22:09 | 4727214 y3maxx
y3maxx's picture

...Beware of Russian Bear. It has one paw across Ukraine, but where are the other three?

Sun, 05/04/2014 - 23:53 | 4727410 Solarman
Solarman's picture

LOL, China and Chechnya

Mon, 05/05/2014 - 03:09 | 4727581 _ConanTheLibert...
_ConanTheLibertarian_'s picture

Where's LOL ?

Mon, 05/05/2014 - 10:44 | 4728298 Ms. Erable
Ms. Erable's picture

Left of Lithuania.

Sun, 05/04/2014 - 22:32 | 4727266 angel_of_joy
angel_of_joy's picture

This is mainly posturing. Something for domestic consumption and to assuage the nervous fits of Russia's NATO neighbors.

Nothing that a few good AA batterries won't solve. You don't even need the latest and greatest to shoot them down like fat (though fast) turkeys. We are talking about planes made almost 40 years ago, for God's sake !

NATO is fully aware that Russia is no Serbia or Irak, and that they'll never enjoy air superiority in the area, to play their favorite game...

Sun, 05/04/2014 - 23:21 | 4727344 nightshiftsucks
nightshiftsucks's picture

Yeah they haven't upgraded the electronic or anything else during those 40years.

sarc/ Just another stupid fuck.

Sun, 05/04/2014 - 23:26 | 4727353 ObamaDepression
ObamaDepression's picture

Its not the planes you can see that you worry about, its the B2's and F22's that you worry about.

Sun, 05/04/2014 - 23:43 | 4727392 rtalcott
rtalcott's picture

And the claim is the S-400s radars and passive sensors can find, track and allow the S-400 to get close enough to destroy a B2 or F22....it remains to be seen what works and what doesn't....how lucky do you feel today?

Sun, 05/04/2014 - 23:59 | 4727418 Solarman
Solarman's picture

Pretty lucky, if you know anything about capabilities.  do you think for a minute those battaries will be just fine waiting for the jets?  This war will be a drone war.  america will go wherever it wants to, and the Russians know it.  We won't risk a nuke war though.

Mon, 05/05/2014 - 00:26 | 4727447 Telemakhos
Telemakhos's picture

Standard doctrine has been that anti-aircraft emplacements and enemy air forces both get wiped out by an initial barrage of cruise missiles.  This was the main (overt) US contribution to the Libyan war.  It's been a notable feature of US warfighting for some time.  Cruise missiles are hard to defend against, they don't expose your pilots or aircraft to risk, and they quickly give you (nearly) uncontested air superiority.  Plus, nobody but the Americans can afford to use them in bulk, so they're very much a signature item of US warfighting.  If the US were to attack Russia, the standard opening move would be to send not cruise missiles (which one might consider a kind of drone, if one wants).

Part of the Soviet bankruptcy and collapse was bloating of their military budget due to trying to field a defense against American cruise missile technology of the time.  It's not clear whether the S400 can successfully defeat a tomahawk, let alone a barrage of them, although it is designed for that (see http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/russia/1999/FTS19990505000617.htm ).  Defense against US cruise missile technology is largely theoretical, because the US hasn't really engaged the Russians or Chinese, the only people who can really compete with the US in this arena.  It would be a learning experience for both sides, and that's a deterrent to conflict in and of itself.  Not to mention the holocaust that could ensue if Russia retaliates with a nuclear launch.

In the end, Russia's nuclear capabilities, not their SAM, are the deciding factor: the US (and by extension NATO) will not risk attacking Russia directly.  I'll agree with an earlier poster who said that the new deployments are for show, but they're also a defense... just not a valid tool for an offensive campaign.  No one's going to be testing Russia's air defense systems while they can nuke the US.

Mon, 05/05/2014 - 01:23 | 4727499 angel_of_joy
angel_of_joy's picture

Two points:

1) Modern SAMs are highly mobile. They need about 30 minutes of preparation for a full salvo, and that goes for their mobile radar units too. Cruise missiles are both expensive and inneficient against such targets, plus they would invite for immediat and direct retaliatory (non nuclear) strikes against US targets (ships, airfields, missile sites). Remember the Serbian War ? There was a reason why that air campaign had never been fought under 15,000 ft.

2) Drones are extremely vulnerable to electronic warfare and are not a viable strike option unless you are targeting some goat shepherds in a desert. See Iran and, most recently, Crimea. However, the very first victims in such a conflict would the recon & com sats including the GPS system. Things will get settled long before any intention of nuclear strike. The heydays of total American battlefield dominance (aka Irak War 1&2) are gone, and not coming back.

As a general idea, a SAM is cheaper than a cruise missile and significantly cheaper than an aircraft (or a sophisticated drone). ROI heavily favors AA missiles, which is why cheap drones are increasingly prefered as an alternative to piloted planes. In a way, it's the same situation as in the old battle of projectile vs. armour. The cheapest option always wins.

People should stop watching silly movies (or play equally silly console games) and imagine that those things are for real. Much more could be gained by reading books... history in particular.

 

Mon, 05/05/2014 - 05:25 | 4727627 snip777
snip777's picture

Exactly! Remember what happend in 1999 in Ygoslavia? F-117 the most expensive and the most advansed aircraft at that time was shootdown by S-125 which is very very old. Russia has more that 2000 S-300 systems and few S-400 just around Moscow. And each S-300/S-400 unit are covered by short or medium range SAM (TOR-M2 and Pantsir-S1).

This makes any attack on Russia by air worthless.

Mon, 05/05/2014 - 07:50 | 4727760 pelican
pelican's picture

20 years ago a cruise missle was 1+ million a piece.  I wonder what the price is today.

Mon, 05/05/2014 - 00:31 | 4727454 rtalcott
rtalcott's picture

You are dreaming....drones will be quickly toast and yes they (the S-400 system) can defend themselves.  The Russians have put a significant amount of talent, time and money into a few key technologies/systems aimed at taking out US technology...this includes systems to defeat stealth....the US OTOH has been spending for the not so GWOT as well as everything else and our MIC has been taking the money and not much more...against a real opponent things will not go as smoothly as against Iraq or Libya....the toys won't work as well...Stealth is a scam...

Mon, 05/05/2014 - 00:51 | 4727473 HardlyZero
HardlyZero's picture

What ?  

There are less than 200 of F22 made, and the closest are in Elmendorf Alaska.  They would never be sacrificed.

Some visited Japan from Hawaii. 

The F22 are US home defense mostly.

They protect the East Coast, Alaska and Hawaii.

The B2s would never be used unless they were carrying very large weapons...and only if it was a serious WWIII scenario.

 

Probably see B1s and B52s for any bombing, F18s, F16s, F15s for air supreriority.

B2s and F22s won't show unless it goes big time.

If this goes hope the Hogs show up...one last time.

Mon, 05/05/2014 - 03:14 | 4727583 BorisTheBlade
BorisTheBlade's picture

That if you consider Lybia and Iraq good examples of any kind of military dominance. Iraq mostly surrounded by US allies: Saudi, Qatar, Bahrain, UAE all have given its territory to station troops, build logistics etc. Plus Iraq was starved with sanctions economically before the miltary campaign to put up any meaningful resistance.

Lybia - a small country up against a coalition, lightweight vs several middleweights supported by a heavyweight. And even that took nearly a year to finish.

I don't know who in their right mind would plan to start a conflict in Russia's backyard and hope to win. Frankly, I don't think it's a about technology gap, which is questionable between Russia and US. Neither I think it is a plan. Rather, create a zone of instability along the Russia's border and provoke a military intervention. After that, an Afghanistan scenario whereby US arms and trains 'freedom fighters' and foments anti-Russian sentiment. Not gonna work either: Right Sector will be at some point outlawed the same way Muslim Brotherhood was in Egypt with the same reason: it is one thing to overthrow a government and the other thing is to govern yourself. Radicals are good for the first part and absolutely useless for the second. I suspect the longer US supports various radical movements in other countries, the harder will be blowback in the end.

Mon, 05/05/2014 - 00:56 | 4727484 Drifter
Drifter's picture

"We won't risk a nuke war though."

No nuke war needed, no any war needed.

All Russia has to do is sit back and watch China launch their new pan-asian gold-backed currency and trade settlement system.

Then everybody sits back and watches America collapse in its own footprint. Sorta like WTC7.

Mon, 05/05/2014 - 02:13 | 4727545 Joenobody12
Joenobody12's picture

A nuclear war is a good thing for the USSA. Just make sure there are warheads aimed at those states that kept on sending the neocons to capital hill. Wipe them mother fuckers out and we start over again. 

Mon, 05/05/2014 - 02:50 | 4727572 Oliver Jones
Oliver Jones's picture

Drones can be neutralised easily enough if you take out enough satellites. Kessler Syndrome will take care of the rest.

China has already demonstrated its ability to destroy satellites at will, and given US reliance on Russian rocket engines, it's pretty hard to imagine Russia not having this capability also.

Sun, 05/04/2014 - 21:40 | 4727146 nmewn
nmewn's picture

OMG the Danes!!!

Sun, 05/04/2014 - 21:43 | 4727158 Grande Tetons
Grande Tetons's picture

Ty Webb: Don't be obsessed with your desires Danny. The Zen philosopher Basha once wrote, 'A flute with no holes, is not a flute. A donut with no hole, is a Danish.' He was a funny guy.

Sun, 05/04/2014 - 21:53 | 4727182 nmewn
nmewn's picture

lol...and a golfball is just an object, one desires to get into a hole with the least amount of strokes.

Medical or otherwise.

Ohhhmmm ;-)

Mon, 05/05/2014 - 01:06 | 4727494 IridiumRebel
IridiumRebel's picture

Ty: You do drugs Danny?
Danny: Everyday.
Ty: Good....so what's the problem?

Sun, 05/04/2014 - 22:23 | 4727246 Ms. Erable
Ms. Erable's picture

Danish fighter jets? You mean they have more than one?

Sun, 05/04/2014 - 22:31 | 4727264 nmewn
nmewn's picture

Give me control of a nation's money and I care not how many jets they have ;-)

Sun, 05/04/2014 - 21:43 | 4727155 Omen IV
Omen IV's picture

so what can they do with the air assets?

at close encounters with ground based mobile launchers how do you keep them in the air - the copters were shot down pretty cheap in the east  this weekend

Mon, 05/05/2014 - 01:43 | 4727521 angel_of_joy
angel_of_joy's picture

Make their pilots look really cool among the local ladies ?

Sun, 05/04/2014 - 21:45 | 4727161 PrayingMantis
PrayingMantis's picture

Not Another Terrorist Organization

Sun, 05/04/2014 - 21:59 | 4727165 Ignatius
Ignatius's picture

Back in the 80s I saw this water color on a coffee shop wall and it was of a little boy holding open the front door of his suburban home and in the distance, over his shoulder, one could see the Cossacks, swords drawn and full-out charging toward him on horseback.  The painting was called "Boy holds door for Ghengis Khan".

I wish I'd bought that painting.

Sun, 05/04/2014 - 22:01 | 4727196 nmewn
nmewn's picture

That was sublime, on many levels ;-)

Sun, 05/04/2014 - 22:16 | 4727230 ghengis86
ghengis86's picture

I thought it a nice gesture

Sun, 05/04/2014 - 22:33 | 4727268 nmewn
nmewn's picture

It was.

Deep, in more ways than one...its why we congregate here ;-)

Mon, 05/05/2014 - 02:21 | 4727548 RichardP
RichardP's picture

"Boy holds door for Ghengis Khan"

Maybe sublime, but not for me.  I don't get it.  Is GK inside the house, coming out through the door held by the boy (implying that he got there first)?  Going to single-handedly fight off the encroaching hoards?  Or is he on horseback with the hords in the distance, expected to eventually come through the door just because the boy is holding it open (oriental leading the Cossacks)?  Or some other alternative I've not thought of.  Are his parents home?  Is the boy's sister involved in this in any way?  Inquiring minds can't focus on the sublime because of all of the unanswered questions.

Mon, 05/05/2014 - 10:40 | 4728283 DiogenesTheCynic
DiogenesTheCynic's picture

Damn it! I couldn't find an image search for that one!

 

Tue, 05/06/2014 - 11:44 | 4732059 Ignatius
Ignatius's picture

Neither could I, just a memory now.

Sun, 05/04/2014 - 21:47 | 4727166 Seize Mars
Seize Mars's picture

They want war. And they'll have it!

Sun, 05/04/2014 - 21:47 | 4727169 Lumberjack
Lumberjack's picture

In the meantime in the Central Republic of Africa…

 

Central African Republic: In Bangui, UN Peacekeeping Chief Discusses Roll-Out of Central African Republic Mission

http://allafrica.com/stories/201405040004.html?aa_source=mf-hdlns

 

The head of United Nations peacekeeping operations continued today his visit to the Central African Republic (CAR), where he met a range of stakeholders and pledged that "no effort will be spared" towards full deployment of a newly mandated 12,000-strong UN mission to help stabilize the crisis-riven country.

------------------

Note: France already has feet on the ground there.

Sun, 05/04/2014 - 21:54 | 4727184 DirkDiggler11
DirkDiggler11's picture

Honestly, I will admit my ignorance, I don't know where the CAR even is. I do know one thing, if France already has boots on the ground there, then the CAR has ( or probably past tense, had) Gold.

Mon, 05/05/2014 - 01:07 | 4727495 Rock On Roger
Rock On Roger's picture

Central Africa Republic is

In central africa.

Sun, 05/04/2014 - 22:12 | 4727220 kchrisc
kchrisc's picture

Why?:

a. __: Gold

b.__: Oil and Gas

c.__: Pipeline route

d.__: All of the above.

 

Mon, 05/05/2014 - 00:55 | 4727483 Telemakhos
Telemakhos's picture

The US has boots on the ground there too.  It's a hellhole where Muslims and Christians are killing each other: the Christians took the capital in December and ousted the Muslim government.  In fact, it's the archetypal African hellhole.  If you take all the stereotypes of barbarity that you read in Joseph Conrad and news footage of atrocities that you've seen about African hellholes, and roll it into one country, you'd have the Central African Republic.  It's the kind of place that gives Africa a bad name.

Off in one particularly barbaric corner of the hellhole, where there's no pretence of order or human dignity, Joseph Kony and a small band called the Lord's Resistance Army, maybe 250 strong, are being pursued by a team of Americans, 5000 Africans of various nationalities, and some contingent from the army of the CAR iteslef, some of them even armed, for what that's worth.  Some of them have been at it since 2012, and in March we just sent 150 more troops to help the search.  Not that it helps: Mistah Kurtz himself probably couldn't run Kony to ground.

In the rest of the nation, about the size of Texas, the Muslims and Christians keep killing each other or asking for international help to at least segregate the country, which the locals find preferable to continuing to kill each other, at least in the intervals between slaughters.

Yes, they have both oil and gold, as well as diamonds and uranium.  They're also one of the poorest countries on Earth.  Funny how that works out: resource-export is rarely profitable for the exporting nation.  The oil is in the north, in a region that, as far as quick research shows, is controlled by Chad on behalf of the CAR.  The capital of the region, Birao, was burned to the ground in 2007.  The uranium, gold, and diamonds are located elsewhere, as far as maps go, but the rest of the country is in little better condition than Birao, except that at least there's someone occupying Birao.

The UN might be underestimating things if they think that 12,000 troops are going to solve the problem.  After all, there are 5,000 people looking for Kony and his 250 men alone.

Sun, 05/04/2014 - 21:51 | 4727177 TammanyBrawl
TammanyBrawl's picture

At least Riga's Blond Parade will be safe. Odessa, not so much. (Sorry guys; I know we promised to guarantee the integrity of your borders, you're not officially in the NATO clubm)

Sun, 05/04/2014 - 21:51 | 4727178 Robot Traders Mom
Robot Traders Mom's picture

Mr Obvious: "The military industrial complex will come out the victor, again..."

www.TopTheNews.com

Sun, 05/04/2014 - 21:51 | 4727179 Uber Vandal
Uber Vandal's picture

Is it just me, or did all of this just seem to happen after Davos, you know that "RESET" thing?

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-01-20/rich-and-powerful-flock-davos-n...

Nah, just a coincidence, for sure.

 

Sun, 05/04/2014 - 21:55 | 4727181 freeasabee1
freeasabee1's picture

Just nuke the whole planet, its a failed experiment anyways. Too bad I had kids when I was young and stupid, could have saved them from this shit hole.

Mon, 05/05/2014 - 02:24 | 4727555 RichardP
RichardP's picture

I think he loves his children most who leaves them unborn.

Sun, 05/04/2014 - 21:59 | 4727195 Kirk2NCC1701
Kirk2NCC1701's picture

Countdown to FF and Sarajevo moment is ON.

BTW, how much for Baltic States?  ;-)

Sun, 05/04/2014 - 22:04 | 4727200 nmewn
nmewn's picture

Before or after Putin puts hotels on them? ;-)

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!