Latest

NATO Announces War Plan Against Russia

NATO unveil war plan against Russia

NATO have formally outlined their plans for going to war with Russia, saying that if Russia counter their attempts to surround the country with troops, they will respond with an all-out war. 

Rinf.com reports:

On May 18th, Britain’s Guardian headlined “West and Russia on course for war, says ex-Nato deputy commander” and reported that the former deputy commander of NATO, the former British general Sir Alexander Richard Shirreff (who was Supreme Allied Commander in Europe from 2011-2014), expressed outrage that Britain isn’t urgently preparing for war against Russia, and also reported that “He describes Russia as now the west’s most dangerous adversary and says Putin’s course can only be stopped if the west wakes up to the real possibility of war and takes urgent action. … In a chilling scenario, he predicts that Russia, in order to escape what it believes to be encirclement by Nato, will seize territory in eastern Ukraine.” (That’s the Donbass region, where there has been a civil war.)

This encirclement by NATO is, apparently, about to be expanded: Shirreff will now be satisfied by NATO, even if not by its member the UK, of which Shirreff happens to be a citizen. New Europe bannered the same day, “NATO lays down the cards on its Russia policy”, and reported that, “In two distinct pre-ministerial press conferences on Wednesday [May 18th], the General Secretary of NATO Jens Stoltenberg and the US Ambassador to NATO, Daglas Lute, introduced the Russia agenda to be covered. Both NATO leaders said that the Accession Protocol Montenegro is signing on Thursday is a strong affirmation of NATO’s open door policy, mentioning explicitly Georgia. ‘We will continue to defend Georgia’s right to make its own decisions,’ Stoltenberg said.” Georgia is on Russia’s southwestern flank; so, it could be yet another a nuclear-missile base right on Russia’s borders, complementing Poland and the Baltics on Russia’s northwestern flank. (The U.S. itself has around 800 military bases in foreign countries, and so even Russia’s less-populous eastern regions would be able to be obliterated virtually in an instant, if the U.S. President so decides. And President Obama is already committed to the view that Russia is by far the world’s most “aggressive” enemy, more so even than international jihadists are.)

According to the New Europe report, Stoltenberg announced that where the 1997 NATO-Russia Agreement asserts that

The member States of NATO reiterate that they have no intention, no plan and no reason to deploy nuclear weapons on the territory of new members, nor any need to change any aspect of NATO’s nuclear posture or nuclear policy — and do not foresee any future need to do so. This subsumes the fact that NATO has decided that it has no intention, no plan, and no reason to establish nuclear weapon storage sites on the territory of those members, whether through the construction of new nuclear storage facilities or the adaptation of old nuclear storage facilities. Nuclear storage sites are understood to be facilities specifically designed for the stationing of nuclear weapons, and include all types of hardened above or below ground facilities (storage bunkers or vaults) designed for storing nuclear weapons.

the agreement is effectively terminated, and, “Largely as a result of the Crimean annexation, the repeated violations of the Minsk ceasefire agreement, and the demands of eastern flank member states, boots on the ground will increase considerably in the region, if not ‘substantially’,” along Russia’s northeastern flank, in Poland and the Baltics. Furthermore, “Poland has already said that it regards this agreement ‘obsolete’.” So, General Stoltenberg is taking his lead on that from the Polish government.

According to both Russia and the separatist Donbass eastern region of the former Ukraine, the violations of the Minsk II agreement regarding Donbass are attacks by Ukrainian government forces firing into Donbass and destroying buildings and killing residents there, however NATO and other U.S. allies ignore those allegations and just insist that all violations of the Minsk II accords are to be blamed on Russia. That is also the position advanced by Shirreff, who thinks that Russia has no right to be concerned about being surrounded by NATO forces.

Consequently, regardless of whether or not the Minsk II violations are entirely, or even mainly, or even partially, due to Ukrainian firing into Donbass, NATO appears to be gearing up for its upcoming July ministerial meeting to be an official termination of its vague promises, which NATO had made in the 1997 NATO-Russia agreement (technically called the “Founding Act on Mutual Relations, Cooperation and Security between NATO and the Russian Federation signed in Paris, France, 27 May 1997”).

That document said “NATO and Russia do not consider each other as adversaries. They share the goal of overcoming the vestiges of earlier confrontation and competition and of strengthening mutual trust and cooperation.”

In this regard, it was — though in public and written form, instead of merely private and verbal form — similar to the promises that the West had given to Soviet then Russian President Mikhail Gorbachev in 1990, which have already been rampantly violated by the West many times and without apology.

The expectation and demand is clearly that Russia must allow itself to be surrounded by NATO, and to do this without complaint, and therefore also without taking military countermeasures, which NATO would call yet more “aggression by Russia.” Any defensive moves by Russia can thus be taken by the West to be unacceptable provocation and justification for a “pre-emptive” attack against Russia by NATO.

That would be World War III, and it would be based upon the same accusation against Russia that the Republican candidate for the U.S. Presidency, Mitt Romney, had stated when he was running against Barack Obama: “This is, without question, our number one geopolitical foe.” Perhaps the West here intends the final solution of the Russian problem.

  • IBeGrammarin

    Putin is certainly between a rock and a hard place.
    For all of his efforts, to avoid war, the force of the opposing narrative and its intended outcome, will eventually provoke Putin toward terrible action.
    There is no way out of this.
    I hope that Putin will heed the counsel of his military, by ridding the Russian government of its Washington Consensus, and do what must be done, if Russia intends to survive the zionistas.
    If Russia succeeds in crushing the zionistas and their NATO dogs of war, America will benefit tremendously from it, as will other nations.
    One thing that I am absolutely certain of:
    Putin will not stand down.

  • commonlaw

    NATO=inbred idiots -stop with your corruption.

  • Rob

    Putin will not back down and to be honest if it was you responsible for all your fellow country men would you allow NATO to surround you with missiles and military equipment.
    Putin is very smart but a fool by any means these ZIONISTS governments need to be stopped and PUTIN is the only man to do it.
    Honestly I hope he does we will all go through hell but benefit a lot more in the long run.
    GO Russia

  • Rob

    Thats from Dublin Ireland too

  • Anna Szenfeld

    what ‘problem’ are they fucking talking about?! how surrounding one country by another should not be taken as an act of aggression?! WTF?! who the hell buy this load of bull? it’s only an excuse to start new war so some dickhead can stuff his pockets!!!! WAKE UP PEOPLE!!!!

  • New Deal

    This article is a load of crap.

    • JohnR

      Indeed!

  • Leigh Reed II

    This is completely asinine!!!! Russia is not the monster we were led to believe growing up!!! Natori is full of fucking retards!!!! Do you blame Russia for feeling threatened and trying to defend itself?

  • davidr

    Russia! Russia! Russia!

  • Gunnar Forsgren (<- in photo)

    Imagine if Russia had not annexed Crimea. The U.S had plans for Ukraine. Deepening of relations and opening up to NATO forces on Crimea. That would mean weapons directed towards Russia on arm length distance. That would have lead to unbearable security conflicts and likely war as a result of NATO restricting russian access to their Black Sea fleet and all that would follow. This would have been unsolvable without Russia blowing the U.S out of there, right out World War 3. And how would Europe have benefited out of that ? We need to be thankful Russia thinks some chess moves in advance and work for Peace. The situation would have otherwise become “unsolvable”. No wonder the U.S is furious about Crimea and try all they can to punish Russia over its move. Had instead the U.S not been meddling in Ukraine he annexation would have not occurred. Their plans were obvious to the Russians.

  • Anthony Papagallo

    Nato soldiers are mercenary contractors, kill a few thousand of them and make it clear how much blood they must give for every inch of Russian land they walk on, and they’ll turn their guns on their own leaders soon enough.

  • Anthony Papagallo

    Nato soldiers are mercenary contractors, pieces of meat just trying to survive until their next payday, kill a few thousand of them by burning them alive, tearing off their arms and legs and disembowelling them, and make it clear how much blood they must give for every inch of Russian land they walk on, and they’ll turn their guns on their own leaders soon enough.

  • RSABOERSEUN

    I do not see Putin having bases all over the world, I do not see Putin Threatening any other Country, I do not see putin attacking and destroying other countries destroying their way of life, turning once thriving economies in Terrorist hell Holes, I do not see Putin Threatening his own people. What I do see is America doing all those things. I see America surrounding Russia not the other way around, I hear the US threatening and constantly pushing Russia’s buttons….. So lets be fair Russia is not the agressor the US is.

  • Rob Bear

    Why am I so very suspicious about this? Doesn’t quite add up.

  • http://alanfolsom-joethephilosopher.com/joe/Joe1.html Alan Folsom

    Most American and UK leaders are degenerates. They take their marching orders from Israel, the primary source of criminal insanity.

  • JohnR

    One major problem: most of Russia’s neighbours have requested NATO help: the Baltic States, Poland, Finland, Sweden, Bulgaria, Romania, Georgia and of course the Ukraine. About the only exception is Belarus. They are all sick of Russian bullying, intimidation and do not trust her….centuries of conflict, distrust and domination. Putin is a megalomaniac psychopath, obsessed with ‘Russian greatness’, and resentment at the collapse and failure of the Soviet Union, and jealous hatred of the West…..nationalist sentiments which were major factors in two World Wars. It’s time he matured out of all that. He has alternatives….go the Chinese way of the last 30 odd years and develop and sustain economic wealth. But not the corruption he has succumbed to (now the richest man in the world?).

    • Distressed7

      All this may be true to a certain degree. However, as a Lithuanian American I see America as a collective of megalomaniacs. I further see NATO as its international clone, and more than antagonistic in its efforts to subjugate the world to its horrid New World Order.
      Just take a nice long look at America’s Operation Enduring Insanity in the Mid East.

  • Distressed7

    The United States is clearly the aggressor. This is no different than if Russia had military bases in Canada, and Mexico and was fomenting civil unrest in Montana.
    This time though, we are going to take more serious hits than our wonderful Brotherhood of the Pentagon wants to admit.
    The US and Great Britain are going down. Russia will emerge out of this a more powerful nation than ever seen.