US scares Europe with ‘mythical’ Russian threat to justify military costs – Russian envoy to NATO

[mike2000 is back]

In fact I concur with @MarkusS ,even if my opinion doesn't count,I have the right to say mine. (Which most of the French agree).
We do not see Russia as a threat,in fact we want to increase our ties with this country,we want to have equal relations with Russia just like with the US and everyone.
We have much to loose if we choose to make Russia "our ennemy".
It's easy for the US to tell the Europeans to put sanctions on Russia when this country hasn't (like much of European countries) Russia as one of its primary trade partner and hasn't Russia as top supplier of hydrocarbures.
Who gives a sh*t about Ukraine ?
In fact,eastern Europe is Russia's sphere of influence and background,just like Africa is to France.
I can't blame them in fact. @vostok
-
@Steve781 @mike2000 is back @Atanz @Blue Marlin
Now,do you think the British military officers will send their young soldiers to die against Russia for countries they couldn't put on a map ?
@MarkusS Do you think Italian military officers will send their young soldiers to die against Russia for countries they couldn't put on a map ?
The same question can be asked to America.
I don't think they will dare to enter a full scale war that would probably turn nuclear for irrelevant countries like Latvia,Estonia and whatsoever.
There must be paranoid people thinking Russian tanks will roll over all Europe,lol.

You seem to completely miss the point im trying to make.
I am not talking about your feelings/opinion bro(which with all due respect is irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. lol ). Neither i'm I talking about any dreams of russian tanks rolling over European mainland bar britain like it did during the Soviet period. Lol

I'm talking about the reality of geo politics, i.e public opinion/feelings has NEVER determine how a country carries out its foreign policy, forge alliances or goes to war. It has never been the case in history never will it be the case now or in future.

For example you think your government asked your opinion before cancelling the multi billion dollar mistral deal it had already signed with Russia? Lol. Why do you think your government cancelled the deal if they didnt see Russias annexation/aggression in crimea as a dangerous precedent/threat to Europe? lol

Similarly, our governnment in the U.K/U.S has never asked the public before forging their foreign policy or going to wars when our interests are threatened. No single country in the world does. If they did then we won't even have the E.U today in the first place. Lol Since there are some people all over Europe who are against the E.U, yet does their government give a shit? NOPE. So you should all get your facts straight bro.

Huh......... my brother @MarkusS seems to think Italy's government is unique and special and will ask Italian people how to carry out its foreign policy or go to war unlike other primitive countries like U.S/U.K etc lol. Good for him.

In that case I don't understand why Italy remains in NATO, since Italy owes its 'loyalty' to nobody, yet she has no intention of ever leaving NATO on the contrary its increasing its commitment. Italy signed a treaty bound agreement to defend any member country who comes under attack. Nobody forced Italy's or France's government to sign such a treaty and they are FREE to leave if they dont like the agreement they signed, nobody is holding them back from doing so.

Moreover U.S/British troops etc have fought and died in Afghanistan and Iraq, and are presently involved in Syria and Lybia countries which are farrrrrrrrr away from us, what makes you people think we won't protect and honour our defence bound treaty if a NATO country which is far closer to us was attacked? Lol The reason NO COUNTRY has never dared attacked a NATO member is because they know the implications of doing so. Any COUNTRY who thinks NATO will seat by and watch while one of its member comes under attack/invasion is free to try and see for themselves.

Finally, @Markus , @Vauban i'm 100% sure that if France or Italy was to come under attack, there are also some people like you in Britain, U.S and Germany who will be saying NOT OUR BUSINESS. But that doesn't means our government won't sent in troops to help like we did during WWII.
@Blue Marlin , @Steve781 , @waz, @Atanz

Of course. I was being reductive. I would though include the German's in the Anglo-Saxon bracket. If you know your history you will be aware where they came from.

I see the modern order largely continuation of the WW2 alliance between USA and UK. The primary drivers and victors on the western flank of Europe went on to draw the post WW2 order. Thus my referance to Washington and London.

Here they are chillin and basking at their success. Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Winston Churchill

Even though its true the world war II western order was largely based on the U.S/U.K Anglo saxon vision/order, you shouldnt forget our other important European brothers.

 

[flamer84]

None of these countries have ever helped us when we were seeking help (such as after the Paris attacks) but are begging us to deploy our troops on their soil....
I won't talk about some hypocrites buying American jets with European money....
We must maintain warm relations with the Russians and everything will be fine.

Who buys American jets with European money ?

I'm sry mate but that's a ridiculous statement,every defence purchase was made with state money,EU funds are strictly monitored ,you can't use them like that and usually end up back in EU pockets.We can have a lenghty discussion about this.

As for Euro jets,i would love the Typhoon /Rafale in Romanian colours but we've paid 900 million $ for 12 F16 MLU jets.Same Euro jets would have costed 2.7-3 billion....way out of our league.

 

[vostok]

America vs Russia 30 years ago

And now

It is all about Russian agression...

 

[Vergennes]

Who buys American jets with European money ?

I'm sry mate but that's a ridiculous statement,every defence purchase was made with state money,EU funds are strictly monitored ,you can't use them like that and usually end up back in EU pockets.We can have a lenghty discussion about this.

As for Euro jets,i would love the Typhoon /Rafale in Romanian colours but we've paid 900 million $ for 12 F16 MLU jets.Same Euro jets would have costed 2.7-3 billion....way out of our league.

Didn't the Poles buy American F16s with the European money ?

America vs Russia 30 years ago
View attachment 300263
And now
View attachment 300264
It is all about Russian agression...

What we need is to tell the US troops to get out from Europe (just like they get out from France) and build an European defence and why not in cooperation with Russia.
Sadly,we lack the will.

Who buys American jets with European money ?

I'm sry mate but that's a ridiculous statement,every defence purchase was made with state money,EU funds are strictly monitored ,you can't use them like that and usually end up back in EU pockets.We can have a lenghty discussion about this.

As for Euro jets,i would love the Typhoon /Rafale in Romanian colours but we've paid 900 million $ for 12 F16 MLU jets.Same Euro jets would have costed 2.7-3 billion....way out of our league.

What about the SAAB Gripen ?

Saab first proposed the Gripen to Croatia in 2007, with a proposal for 12 aircraft (10 single-seat C-model aircraft and 2 two-seat D-model aircraft) that was valued at then EUR700 million.

http://www.janes.com/article/55522/sweden-announces-gripen-bid-for-croatia

@A.P. Richelieu

 

[flamer84]

Didn't the Poles buy American F16s with the European money ?

No.As i've said,that is impossible and find the claim ridiculous,probaly spread by pro Russia propaganda.

What about the SAAB Gripen ?

When you buy something you also consider geopolitical circumstances.Sweden,a military non alligned country who can easily be strong armed in a conflict by Russia not to provide spares vs US,the biggest NATO country who also deploys troops in Romania.Not a hard one to pick.

What we need is to tell the US troops to get out from Europe (just like they get out from France) and build an European defence and why not in cooperation with Russia.

Ukraine fiasco demonstrated that Western countries are not serious in confronting the Russian threat.Good luck in cooperating with Russia and them treating you as partners which they'll do...up to a point where it suits them.

 

[anon45]

What we need is to tell the US troops to get out from Europe (just like they get out from France) and build an European defence and why not in cooperation with Russia.
Sadly,we lack the will.

Good, just goes to show your opinion is not only not popular among the public, its not popular among policy makers. They know that doing this would not only damage France economically, it would leave France in a much worse situation internationally, and when it comes to France's own security.

After-all if you choose to not only break off your alliance with the US, but are also taking a hostile approach to American interests, you are now a front-line state, only across the pond too.

Not very secure wouldn't you say?

But you would still do this why?

It makes no sense, just anti-Americanism for the sake of anti-Americanism, and leaves France poorer all around, and with both a smaller sphere of influence, and lesser capability to project power.(because since you are actively working against the US, we are now actively working against you)

The reason France acts as it does is not because of lack of will, its because it is in France's interests to do so, just like antagonizing the US is not done not because of lack of will, but because it is NOT in France's interest to do so.

 

[mike2000 is back]

America vs Russia 30 years ago
View attachment 300263
And now
View attachment 300264
It is all about Russian agression...

Obviously, Russia is now even remotely less aggressive(she still tries to expand despite its weakened post soviet state ) than during its soviet era days simply because we broke it down and brought down the Soviet Union to its knees. Its not like you have a choice. Lol If you had the power, economy and influence the U.S has today as a superpower you will still be doing exactly the same thing if not worse. judging by your actions/expansion despite being far weaker.
To be honest, any COUNTRY that has the power and capabilities will expand its influence and territory as much as it can. . Only a fool will think otherwise. Lol

Dont get me wrong though, I don't have anything against Russia's expansion and annexation of other country's territories from Ossetia georgia, to Ukraine crimea etc, since I know RUSSIA is merely protecting its own country's interests, any country including Great Britain will do the same if we were in Russia's shoes. Lol Its kind of similar to China expending its influence and territory in SCS simply because they now have the capabilities to do so and expand their influence. I have nothing against that.

However, in Russia's case its interests clashes with ours, this is where we have issues with them. If Russia was expanding in Asia, we wouldn't care one bit. JUST like we dont care much about Chinese expansion in SCS/Asia. lol. So its for this reason that we have a conflict of interests with Russia, as far as she keeps having expansion ambitions in Europe, threatening other Baltics, Scandinavian and european countries, sending nuclear submarines and bombers close to european shores. Etc. As they say actions speak louder than words. So the so called 'Russian envoy' to NATO just said what every other envoy will say to defend his country, a British envoy will say the same thing for Britain, the hell even Syrian envoy says the same thing about Assad to defend his government.

Didn't the Poles buy American F16s with the European money ?



What we need is to tell the US troops to get out from Europe (just like they get out from France) and build an European defence and why not in cooperation with Russia.
Sadly,we lack the will.



What about the SAAB Gripen ?



http://www.janes.com/article/55522/sweden-announces-gripen-bid-for-croatia

@A.P. Richelieu

GREAT BRITAIN will be the one LEADING this European Defence right?
If so im all for it, to hell with the U.S.
@Blue Marlin , @Atanz , @waz

 

[Vergennes]

.

I didn't say we must cut all ties with the US,I just said that our country should have the same warm relations with Russia,just like it has with the US on every levels.
I also say that we should be more independant vis-à-vis the US and participe ourselves in our defence instead of hosting foreign troops in our soil and counting on the US for our defence.
The US is imposing on us to sanction Russia,but it's not going to affect you because you don't have Russia as one of your top trade partner...
Ask the farmers of the European Union what they think about the sanctions against Russia....
We have much to loose making Russia our ennemy.

GREAT BRITAIN will be the one LEADING this European Defence right?
If so im all for it, to hell with the U.S.

@Blue Marlin , @Atanz , @waz

Pointless as only France and Britain (out of 28 !) are the one ready to defend the Union's interest overseas when they are threatened.

No.As i've said,that is impossible and find the claim ridiculous,probaly spread by pro Russia propaganda.

The purchase made public on 27 December, of 48 combat aircraft F-16 by Poland to replace its old Soviet Mig, has made an the effect of a cold shower in Europe.
A few days after the Copenhagen summit confirmed the next entry of this country into the EU, this announcement gives the unpleasant impression that "the European financial aid to Poland will serve to the prosperity of US arms companies" and finally that "the enlargement of Europe is the enlargement of the US in Europe" (Philippe de Villiers).

The story of secret negotiations that led to the signing of this contract of $ 3.5 billion shows the total economic war, that the United States is leading against the "old Europe".

It perfectly illustrates the effectiveness of American methods to export, based both on the political, economic and financial blackmail, and direct espionage.

http://archives.polemia.com/article.php?id=73

You should read the rest,and it's not "Russian propaganda".

Ukraine fiasco demonstrated that Western countries are not serious in confronting the Russian threat.Good luck in cooperating with Russia and them treating you as partners which they'll do...up to a point where it suits them.

What should have we done ? Start a war over Ukraine ? Is Russia going to unleash their tanks all over Europe ?

 

[mike2000 is back]

I didn't say we must cut all ties with the US,I just said that our country should have the same warm relations with Russia,just like it has with the US on every levels.
I also say that we should be more independant vis-à-vis the US and participe ourselves in our defence instead of hosting foreign troops in our soil.
The US is imposing on us to sanction Russia,but it's not going to affect you because you don't have Russia as one of your top trade partner...
Ask the farmers of the European Union what they think about the sanctions against Russia....
We have much to loose making Russia our ennemy.


Pointless as only France and Britain (out of 28 !) are the one ready to defend the Union's interest overseas when they are threatened.




http://archives.polemia.com/article.php?id=73

You should read the rest,and it's not "Russian propaganda".




What should have we done ? Start a war over Ukraine ? Is Russia going to unleash their tanks all over Europe ?

Yes you are right, France and Britain are currently the only European powers with the military capabilities, industry, will, bases and influence to defend Europe's interests overseas around the world. However, there should be a leader at the forefront, so naturally Britain should be the leader of this European military right? Giving we have more bases/influence overseas.

If so im all for it as I said before, if not then we are back to square one.

 

[Vergennes]

Yes you are right, France and Britain are currently the only European powers with the military capabilities, industry, will, bases and influence to defend Europe's interests overseas around the world. However, there should be a leader at the forefront, so naturally Britain should be the leader of this European military right? Giving we have more bases/influence overseas.

If so im all for it as I said before, if not then we are back to square one.

What if France AND Britain are the leaders of this force ?

Don't forget we can jointly project our power overseas if needed.

@Atanz @Blue Marlin

 

[flamer84]

You should read the rest,and it's not "Russian propaganda".

Yes it is and it's a lot of rubish.Why do they even mention EU agricultural funds in a piece about fighter jets ? Just to propagate the myth of EU 'free' money while the 2 things are completely unrelated.It was just a knee jerk reaction to the Poles buying F16 instead of Mirages,and who can blame Poland ? They seemed right now when Hollande and Merkel are kow towning to Putin.

Why didn't France not even pitched the Rafale instead of a retiring jet like the Mirage2000? Maybe because they had an agreement with Russia and the Poles knew about it ?

 

[mike2000 is back]

What if France AND Britain are the leaders of this force ?

Don't forget we can jointly project our power overseas if needed.

@Atanz @Blue Marlin

Well France can be our right hand man.
Thats the only way it can work, since if thereare two countries with equal say/lead then thete will come a time where the union will face issues/problems and will stop functioning as both countries might have other intentions or conflict of interests. Fir example what will happen if British interests are threatened by Russia in say Cyprus where a have our most important naval base in the Mediterranean sea facing east of Suez , Syria and the Middle East?lol I'm sure France's support wont be as firm as that of the U.S . Lol
Its for this reason France is our 2nd most important ally AFTER the U.S, since our geo political interests aligned perfectly with that of the U.S in almost all fields.

 

[Vergennes]

Yes it is and it's a lot of rubish.Why do they even mention EU agricultural funds in a piece about fighter jets ? Just to propagate the myth of EU 'free' money while the 2 things are completely unrelated.It was just a knee jerk reaction to the Poles buying F16 instead of Mirages,and who can blame Poland ? They seemed right now when Hollande and Merkel are kow towning to Putin.

Why didn't France not even pitched the Rafale instead of a retiring jet like the Mirage2000? Maybe because they had an agreement with Russia and the Poles knew about it ?

The Poles were interested in the ;

-F-16
-Mirage 2000-5mk2
-Gripen

The Mirage 2000-5mk2 is an improved version of the Mirage 2000-5 (The Mirage 2000-5 entered operational service in 1997)

Dassault further improved the Mirage 2000-5, creating the Mirage 2000-5 Mark 2 which is currently the most advanced variant of the Mirage 2000. Enhancements to offensive systems included a datalink for the targeting of MICA ER missiles, the addition of the Damocles FLIR targeting pod, and a newer, stealthier Thales RDY-2 all-weather synthetic aperture radar with moving target indicator capability, which also grants the aircraft improved air-to-ground capability.
The avionics were further updated with higher resolution color displays, an optional Topsight helmet-mounted display, and the addition of the Modular Data Processing Unit (MDPU) designed for the Rafale.
A new Thales Totem 3000 inertial navigation system with ring laser gyroscope and GPS capability was added, providing much greater accuracy, higher reliability, and shorter alignment time than the older ULISS 52 navigation system which it replaced.
Other upgrades included the addition of an on-board oxygen generation system (OBOGS) for the pilot and an ICMS 3 digital countermeasures suite.

Further planned upgrades will include Thales AIDA visual identification pod, a GPS receiver, MIDS datalink, new long-range sensors, and the Topsight E helmet-mounted display. Other technology developed for the Rafale will also be integrated into the Mirage 2000, including infrared and optical sensors for IFF and targeting.

The F16 block 52+ that is actually equipping the PAF is a variant of the F16 block 50/52 that entered service in late 1991.

The first Block 50/52 F-16 was delivered in late 1991; the aircraft are equipped with improved GPS/INS, and the aircraft can carry a further batch of advanced missiles: the AGM-88 HARM missile, JDAM, JSOW and WCMD. Block 50 aircraft are powered by the F110-GE-129while the Block 52 jets use the F100-PW-229.

F16 block 52+

This variant's main differences are the addition of support for conformal fuel tanks (CFTs), a dorsal spine compartment, the APG-68(V9) radar, an On-Board Oxygen Generation System (OBOGS), and a JHMCS helmet.

@flamer84 I can understand your hostility to Russia,just like the Poles,Estonians etc. because of your country's history. This is understandable.

 

[MarkusS]

You seem to completely miss the point im trying to make.
I am not talking about your feelings/opinion bro(which with all due respect is irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. lol ). Neither i'm I talking about any dreams of russian tanks rolling over European mainland bar britain like it did during the Soviet period. Lol

I'm talking about the reality of geo politics, i.e public opinion/feelings has NEVER determine how a country carries out its foreign policy, forge alliances or goes to war. It has never been the case in history never will it be the case now or in future.

For example you think your government asked your opinion before cancelling the multi billion dollar mistral deal it had already signed with Russia? Lol. Why do you think your government cancelled the deal if they didnt see Russias annexation/aggression in crimea as a dangerous precedent/threat to Europe? lol

Similarly, our governnment in the U.K/U.S has never asked the public before forging their foreign policy or going to wars when our interests are threatened. No single country in the world does. If they did then we won't even have the E.U today in the first place. Lol Since there are some people all over Europe who are against the E.U, yet does their government give a shit? NOPE. So you should all get your facts straight bro.

Huh......... my brother @MarkusS seems to think Italy's government is unique and special and will ask Italian people how to carry out its foreign policy or go to war unlike other primitive countries like U.S/U.K etc lol. Good for him.

In that case I don't understand why Italy remains in NATO, since Italy owes its 'loyalty' to nobody, yet she has no intention of ever leaving NATO on the contrary its increasing its commitment. Italy signed a treaty bound agreement to defend any member country who comes under attack. Nobody forced Italy's or France's government to sign such a treaty and they are FREE to leave if they dont like the agreement they signed, nobody is holding them back from doing so.

Moreover U.S/British troops etc have fought and died in Afghanistan and Iraq, and are presently involved in Syria and Lybia countries which are farrrrrrrrr away from us, what makes you people think we won't protect and honour our defence bound treaty if a NATO country which is far closer to us was attacked? Lol The reason NO COUNTRY has never dared attacked a NATO member is because they know the implications of doing so. Any COUNTRY who thinks NATO will seat by and watch while one of its member comes under attack/invasion is free to try and see for themselves.

Finally, @Markus , @Vauban i'm 100% sure that if France or Italy was to come under attack, there are also some people like you in Britain, U.S and Germany who will be saying NOT OUR BUSINESS. But that doesn't means our government won't sent in troops to help like we did during WWII.
@Blue Marlin , @Steve781 , @waz, @Atanz



Even though its true the world war II western order was largely based on the U.S/U.K Anglo saxon vision/order, you shouldnt forget our other important European brothers.

You still dont get it. Its a parasitic relationship. We free surf on this wave as long as possible. If your soldiers die for us, im totally fine with this. But not the other way around.

Does our government ask the people? No, we have a populist government and always had. Italy never had a really stable government. They change opinion within days and always try to look what the majority want.

At the moment NATO servs us well. The moment it costs more as it brings we will drop out and may even side with the enemy when we can profit with this.

We are allied with the winning side. The moment you start losing the war you will lose us as well.

We signed a Treaty with no further obligation. Its written on paper.

If russia attacks you and russia starts winning and we side with russia...what will you do? Send your horsefaced queen to bite us?

P.s.: Its spelled Libya.

 

[boomslang]

Europe has more than the U.S. to be 'scared' of. They just let tons of terrorists in, will give then money and then Europe will start blowing up. Oh, that's right, it ALREADY DID start blowing up. Never mind.....