NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg welcomed Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba to NATO Headquarters on Tuesday for a meeting of the NATO-Ukraine Commission on the security situation in and around Ukraine.

“Russia’s considerable military build-up is unjustified, unexplained, and deeply concerning”, said the Secretary General.

He called on Russia to end this military build-up, stop its provocations and de-escalate immediately. The Secretary General also reiterated NATO’s unwavering support for Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity and he underlined that NATO will continue to provide significant political and practical support to Ukraine.

“We are seriously concerned by ongoing developments. And NATO is monitoring the situation very closely. In recent weeks, Russia has moved thousands of combat-ready troops to Ukraine’s borders.

The largest massing of Russian troops since the illegal annexation of Crimea in 2014. Over the last days, several Ukrainian soldiers have been killed in eastern Ukraine.

I want to express my condolences for the recent losses suffered by the Ukrainian Armed Forces. Russia’s considerable military build-up is unjustified, unexplained, and deeply concerning. Russia must end this military build-up in and around Ukraine. Stop its provocations. And de-escalate immediately.”

Read the full transcript of the joint press point here.

4.5 2 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
83 Comments
oldest
newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

dan
dan
20 days ago

Why does NATO even both? NATO won’t lift a finger to defend Ukraine just like they didn’t last time.

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
20 days ago
Reply to  dan

Would you have expected Russia to defend Iraq when the US invaded? Is NATO obliged to defend Ukraine or Georgia, or Taiwan?

Assist with training, supply arms and intelligence by all means, and let the Russians get bogged down. But do not start ww3 over a non NATO country.

Rogbob
Rogbob
20 days ago

Exactly. If Russia or China want to imitate our mistakes then by all means let them, and lets take full advantage of it.

Andrew D
20 days ago

I agree with you dan Assist them but let’s not have ww3 over the Ukraine there not even in NATO.Hate to say it but there’s a good deal of UK people don’t even know were the Ukraine is or even heard of it.🤔

captain p wash
captain p wash
20 days ago
Reply to  Andrew D

To be fair, Most people here have heard of UK Rain…… It’s the most talked about subject……. just sayin like !

Andrew D
20 days ago
Reply to  captain p wash

You keep me right captain 🍺

George Royce
George Royce
20 days ago
Reply to  captain p wash

*slow reluctant clap*

maurice10
maurice10
20 days ago
Reply to  George Royce

The burning question who is more prepared for action? Which side will be better coordinated for a rapid action? Has Russia got the upper hand here, if so, are we looking at another Sudetenland situation, plenty of rhetoric and posing but? Considering many NATO members are part of the EU and take several weeks to choose the canteen coffee, where do we really stand in terms of opposing Russia? As always folks, it will be down to the US and UK to decide how matters progress…..yes the UK who no longer believe in the might of heavy armour, yet may… Read more »

George Royce
George Royce
20 days ago
Reply to  maurice10

I honestly don’t believe we can depend on the USA either. Look at the last 20 years of its foreign policy. They have committed folly in Iraq and Afghanistan, and are now exiting in disgrace. Just like Vietnam. I think it’s high time we really stopped looking at the US as the leader of foreign policy. It may have the most muscle, but it doesn’t have a clue how to use it. CANZUK would open the door for the UK to rise to a superpower status once more, while having partners that are our kith and kin, smart, loyal and… Read more »

maurice10
maurice10
20 days ago
Reply to  George Royce

I commented recently about a possible compact of understanding between Germany and Russia, so you are correct about German dependency on the Bear. I simply can’t see how Germany can be committed to NATO, when its so dependant on Russia to exist as a modern industrial nation? Sadly, the EU is as maneuverable as bucket of porridge, and can’t be relied upon to quickly act on anything. Russia knows this, and I believe intends to flex its muscles where the chances of major international conflict are slight. The salami slicing of its foreign policy follows a similar path to that… Read more »

George Parker
George Parker
16 days ago
Reply to  George Royce

Well said George. Although the US is part of the anglosphere it has proven unreliable. Beijing Biden, the usurper currently squatting in the Whitehouse, has already sold out to China. Free elections are finished in the USA too. There will be no help coming from them in the foreseeable future.
Free from EU shackles we have growing room. And the Wuhan CCP Pandemic has given us the hunger to grow like never before. If Boris stops being a Doris and grows a pair. We could abolish the overseas aid budget and build, build build!

George Royce
George Royce
16 days ago
Reply to  George Parker

I wouldn’t even say they are part of the Anglo-sphere. Just being able to speak English is a very low bar in my view. Their political structure is based on Ancient Rome. Even their national animal is the eagle. Their thinking on liberty and freedom is based on French revolutionary thought. And the majority of their ruling class is Irish Catholic, i.e. Reagan, JFK, Clintons, Biden, etc. So they’re a weird mix, but not Anglo-centric in my opinion. David Starkey has some magnificent insights into all of this. He is master of history and has said on many occaisions, the… Read more »

George Parker
George Parker
16 days ago
Reply to  George Royce

We will just have to differ on that one. We British come from the British isles. Recent political boundaries are irrelevant. Although English is the dominant language it is not the only one spoken in Great Britain. The anglosphere is not defined by language but it is symbolised by it. The original and ultimately victorious colonisers of America were all British. They named their settlements after the places they came from. Washington, York, Boston, etc. Or British royalty. The old families along the entire Appalachian mountains are Scots, Irish, English and kept their culture alive. We share much more than… Read more »

George Parker
George Parker
16 days ago
Reply to  maurice10

Lets hope so because GB has cut so much defence spending since 1991. HM. Gov has forgotten that it’s first duty is defence.
But Russia is not the USSR with countless reserves of armour. A, B and C class regiments operating all manner of AFVs back to T55/64. With the added numbers from Warsaw Pact satellite nations, rolling fwd like a steam roller. Then again, Ukraine is not far from the Rodina and it’s air cover.

George Parker
George Parker
16 days ago
Reply to  George Royce

You can get injection now, for the clap.

Andy a
Andy a
20 days ago

As much as I don’t believe it some would say Nato flirting with Ukraine started this as putin felt threatened and it broke promises made by nato at end of Cold War.
Why do I keep seeing us (nato) boasting of non violent transfers of tech? Are we not helping them with bang bang ?

dave12
dave12
20 days ago

Spot on DM, let Russia make the mistake.

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
20 days ago

It isn’t, on the face of it, a NATO problem. However, the Treaty of Budapest, which underwrote Ukraine giving up its nuclear weapons was guaranteed by UK, France, USA as well as the Russian federation. So, the problem is that a) the guarantors need to do something g otherwise treaties are empty – which could cascade to the NATO treaties being empty; and b) if UK, French or US assets are attacked in Ukrainian then NATO gets dragged in. So it isn’t as simple as staying in or out. We gave a guarantee when Russia was on its knees and… Read more »

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
20 days ago

The treaty of Budapest I was unaware of, thank you. Will have a read.
I was aware they’d given up nuclear capability, along with Kazakhstan.

Paul T
Paul T
20 days ago

On that note I wonder if Ukraine secretly managed to keep an Ace up it’s Sleeve………. just in case!.

Ron
Ron
20 days ago
Reply to  Paul T

No, all of the nuclear capability of the Ukraine was dismantald with American and Brits watching. I was in the Ukraine at the time rebuilding the national telecoms network. Even then there were issues with Ukrainian and Russian peoples, it was like we are independent now so you will not tell us what to do anymore, its my country not yours. I met several who came out of Russian jails because they wanted Ukranian independence, they were really anti Russian. What many people don’t know is even the language is diffrent as is the alphabet, Ukrainians speak Russian, but Russians… Read more »

Paul T
Paul T
18 days ago
Reply to  Ron

Noises coming out of Ukraine now are that if they fail to be accepted as a NATO member they will look to (re) aquire Nuclear Weapons.

ChariotRider
ChariotRider
20 days ago

Hi Supportive Bloke, I have just finished reading the Wiki page about the Treaty of Budapest and frankily, whilst I agree that the treaty ‘guaranteed’ Ukraine boarders, it only required the signatories to ‘consult’ on any situation that violated the terms. In short it was a toothless wonder. Clearly, Russia has violated Ukrainian boarders with the annexation of the Crimea. If NATO / USA was going to react that would have been the moment, but instead they just consulted. Also, the Treaty was not signed by China or France, they each signed a seperate even weaker agreements. Oddly, it was… Read more »

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
20 days ago
Reply to  ChariotRider

Ok faulty memory bank on France!

I agree a moment was allowed to pass with Crimea.

ChariotRider
ChariotRider
20 days ago

For me the main issue that your question highlighted was the fact that NATO does not have the number of ships or subs necessary to properly defend the Altantic SLOC’s (Sea Line of Communication). The USN only has 80 to 90 escorts, so the tier one readiness ships are spread way too thinly across the globe. The Royal Navy has 17 escorts if we are being honest. Although the French have more escorts they are not all high end ships as the French have a number of patrol frigates that protect the few remaining sovereign overseas territories and they will… Read more »

George Royce
George Royce
20 days ago

Hear hear. Finally someone speaking some sense.

Although I feel for Ukraine, we cannot do all the fighting, all the time. It’s time countries around the world started to take responsibility for their own safety and security and not always rely on Daddy Westerner. We should help with training, which is more important than arms supplies. Help bring weaker forces up to scratch, supply intelligence and maybe arms, but Ukraine must stand up and fight for itself.

Expat
Expat
18 days ago

Isn’t the US obliged by law to protect Taiwan? And if so would a Chinese attack.on US bases in say Guam need a NATO response? Or perhaps that’s more like the Falklands where NATO didn’t interpret the attack as an attack on the UK

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
18 days ago
Reply to  Expat

Hmmmm. NATO did respond to 9/11, mostly symbolically.

I always took NATO to for defence of Western Europe.

George Parker
George Parker
16 days ago

As a BAOR veteran of the Cold War. I still consider it a diplomatic FU debacle of monumental proportions. The Warsaw Pact simply dissolved like morning mist, with a shot fired. Sun Tzu would have been proud. If only things had gone differently. That we wasted an opportunity to bring Russia back into the Western world is unforgivable. The goal was there for the taking. Politicians and big business interests blew it. Now, thirty years after the Cold War. Rather than todays debacle. We could have had Russia as a member of a huge military defensive alliance incorporating NATO. Stretching… Read more »

Paul T
Paul T
16 days ago
Reply to  George Parker

Did Russia have a genuine desire to be ‘brought’ into the Western Fold after the Cold War ended – id say they didn’t.

Andrew
Andrew
20 days ago
Reply to  dan

That’s the whole point of defence treaties Dan…. If you don’t have one, don’t count on other countries coming to your aid…

Stephen Ball
Stephen Ball
20 days ago
Reply to  Andrew

Think you’ll find that’s why Nato is getting involved, because of defence treaties.

Nigel Collins
Nigel Collins
20 days ago
Reply to  dan

The USA have made it very clear that they will be focusing their efforts in the Southern hemisphere and are already admitting they will not be able to deal with China alone by the end of this decade. That means we will be left to deal with Russia along with other European countries if incidents break out on two fronts at once. Given the amount of money we are spending on defence here in Europe and the fact that Russia and China are already conducting war games together, not to mention the fact that Russia is modernizing its forces too,… Read more »

Stephen Ball
Stephen Ball
20 days ago
Reply to  Nigel Collins

And this is a reason why you mention Nukes, nobody is stupid.

Nigel Collins
Nigel Collins
20 days ago
Reply to  Stephen Ball

Who mentioned Nukes?

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
20 days ago
Reply to  Nigel Collins

Ukrainian gave up its nukes….it had 30% (ish) of the USSR’s arsenal….

Frank62
Frank62
20 days ago
Reply to  Nigel Collins

“Southern Hehemisphre”???? China hasn’t taken Austrailia, yet!

I agree with your analysis though. Our weakness is a huge factor in the boldness of Russia & China today. Our “elite”‘s greed & callousness to its own people gave away so much manufacturing to China that we’ve ended up practically bankrolling the PLA.

Nigel Collins
Nigel Collins
20 days ago
Reply to  Frank62

Agreed, It’s clever how they do business!

Is China taking over the South Pacific? | 60 Minutes Australia

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3NF3y1ouJ64&t=613s

Frank62
Frank62
20 days ago
Reply to  Nigel Collins

I think NZ need to up their game for their own security.

Stephen Ball
Stephen Ball
20 days ago
Reply to  dan

Remember on another thread you said EU was strong, what is EU doing? If any EU member spoke up think you’ll find they are Nato member’s.

Dern
Dern
20 days ago
Reply to  Stephen Ball

To be fair, the only memebers of the EU who are not in NATO are long standing Neutral Powers who have no interest one way or another in a conflict: Sweden, Finland, Austria and Ireland.

Stephen Ball
Stephen Ball
20 days ago
Reply to  Dern

You forgot Malta.

Nigel Collins
Nigel Collins
20 days ago
Reply to  Stephen Ball

Who are you referring too exactly Stephen in this thread?

captain p wash
captain p wash
20 days ago
Reply to  dan

“Both” was a prolific Cricketer, truth be told.

AJP1960
20 days ago
Reply to  dan

NATO won’t defend Ukraine because Ukraine isn’t a member. HOWEVER, Ukraine has boarders with NATO countries so it is extremely relevant

Lordtemplar
Lordtemplar
20 days ago

Ukraine’s govt dug its own hole by outlawing russian in schools in predominantely russian speaking areas.
Let Ukraine get themselves out of this situation.
I do not care about getting into conflict over Ukraine.
Historically it’s always been under russian influence and only became a country in 1953 when Kruschev gave them “independence” but still part of the Warsaw Pact.

Last edited 20 days ago by Lordtemplar
Stephen Ball
Stephen Ball
20 days ago
Reply to  Lordtemplar

Bit like France has said ban the full face veil for Muslim’s.

Lordtemplar
Lordtemplar
20 days ago
Reply to  Stephen Ball

What does this have to do with anything I said?

Stephen Ball
Stephen Ball
20 days ago
Reply to  Lordtemplar

Well no Nato member or EU member has said anything. Apart from Turkey.

dave12
dave12
20 days ago
Reply to  Lordtemplar

Rubbish the Ukraine has been Under Russian influence with no choice, hence the Ukrainians kicking out a Russian puppet leaders in 2014. NATO does not have too put troops on the ground just supply the Ukraine with the means to fight.

Lordtemplar
Lordtemplar
20 days ago
Reply to  dave12

I suggest you open a history book and you will learn that Russia has been the dominant influence in that area for many centuries

Last edited 20 days ago by Lordtemplar
dave12
dave12
20 days ago
Reply to  Lordtemplar

Thats like saying the UK has a right to invade the Republic of Ireland as we had influence there for centuries and they speak English lol thats a rubbish argument.
Oh I know some of Ukraine’s past hard to Ignore Stalins forced 1932 famine on the Ukraine people causing 12 million deaths.

Last edited 20 days ago by dave12
Lordtemplar
Lordtemplar
20 days ago
Reply to  dave12

FYI the UK is in Northern Ireland 😉

Frank62
Frank62
20 days ago
Reply to  dave12

Isn’t that exactly what Putin is doing towards the Ukraine?

dave12
dave12
20 days ago
Reply to  Frank62

Yes frank that was my point I was trying too explain to Lordtemplar.

john melling
john melling
20 days ago
Reply to  Lordtemplar

So when Russian backed rebels took over Crimea and Dombass,
They straight away banned people from talking Ukrainian, especially in schools.
Russian kids beating up Ukrainian kids and worse

Its called tit for tat



Barry Larking
Barry Larking
20 days ago

Call Putin’s bluff. Oh, wait …Biden!

Watcherzero
Watcherzero
12 days ago
Reply to  Barry Larking

Done! The Russians have blinked and started pulling back.

Mr Bell
Mr Bell
20 days ago

And this is the time we make more defence cuts? Its madness and has to not only stop but be reversed. We need to ramp up defence spending but more importantly actual military power and numbers urgently. I know covid has economically weakened us, you might say as it was intended to do, but we will recover. Just need to make sure we are still living in a free and democratic country and not a nuclear wasteland when we recover from cv19. There are extreme dangers with Putin and Xi being in power. They are both adventurist dictators that care… Read more »

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
20 days ago
Reply to  Mr Bell

Actually the latest analysis is that it won’t have had that much effect on UKPLC but is actually a disaster for China as it is making everyone question the need for tat, long lead offshoring as well as the fundamental weakness of the Chinese debt syndrome which is held up with sticky tape and very questionable figures – all borrowed from Blue Peter.

There is the other problem that China doesn’t have ultra dirt cheap labour anymore.

Nigel Collins
Nigel Collins
20 days ago

I wonder if the taskforce will be flying the Blue Peter as it leaves port on its journey south!

Andrew D
20 days ago
Reply to  Mr Bell

Well said your words are bang on 👍

Sean
Sean
20 days ago
Reply to  Mr Bell

Except that defence cuts aren’t being made. The U.K. has increased its defence spending.

Paul T
Paul T
20 days ago
Reply to  Sean

In effect spending more to get less !.

Sean
Sean
20 days ago
Reply to  Paul T

So you’d rather have more, outdated and useless and irrelevant equipment than what’s actually needed for modern combat? Presumably you’d like to see us buying dozens of Swordfish for our carriers instead of fewer F35s…

Paul T
Paul T
20 days ago
Reply to  Sean

Certainly not, there is always a Middle Way – an Equipment Plan that is Affordable and Sustainable, more resistant to the Pressures of government changes and the Treasury – remember ‘ better is the enemy of good enough’.

Frank62
Frank62
20 days ago
Reply to  Sean

We may spend more technically but we’ve got the smallest army & navy for centuries & have just cut the army even more. We get very bad value for money so that most value disappears into profits for the big corporations lining the (offshore)pockets of those who pull the strings of our lamentable governments.

Sean
Sean
20 days ago
Reply to  Frank62

And you have proof of this alleged corruption?… Thought not. Presumably you bemoan the lack of horses for our cavalry regiments too. The navy is growing in numbers and capability. As for the army, the fewer poor squaddies we put in harms way the better. Ideally eventually in the future we won’t have any in the front line, with androids taking their place. In the short term, as an island nation we don’t need a big army. Barring someone achieving what Hitler, Napoleon, and King Philip failed to do, any ground forces fighting the U.K. will be doing is on… Read more »

Frank62
Frank62
20 days ago
Reply to  Sean

We haven’t got into the state of recent decades where the richest get away with nominal taxes & offshoring wealth, states shrinking quality & quantity of services, including cuts that practically dismantle defences by accident. Successive governments have allowed this to happen & only occasionaly cry crocodile tears, tinkering with the edges rather than resolving it properly & fairly. Trade agreements were narrowly defeated in the last decade which would’ve allowed corporations to sue the UK if they did anything that they felt harmed their buisnesses. If we are democracies then the rich & powerful dictating everything to suit themselves… Read more »

Sean
Sean
20 days ago
Reply to  Frank62

Yeah, like we need to go to war against either China or Russia without any allies 🤦‍♂️ I don’t need to blind myself with sci-fi, I work for one of the world’s leading technology design companies. Much of what I see in our labs would be regarded as sci-fi by you. As for taxes, well you’re completely befuddled. The main issue is due to corporations offshoring profits to the likes of Luxembourg and Ireland; ie Amazon, Google, Apple, etc. You can blame a certain Jean Claude Junker as PM of Luxembourg for that. You’re completely wrong with regards to the… Read more »

Captain P Wash
Captain P Wash
20 days ago
Reply to  Sean

But cutting Ships, Planes, Tanks, Armoured Vehicles, Helicopters, Man Power, Patrol/Intel Aircraft and the like. What is planned for the future can easily be cut too.

Sean
Sean
20 days ago
Reply to  Captain P Wash

Don’t recall any ships, or planes being cut. Ok the the Type 23’s are being taken out of service, because they’re knackered and being replaced with Type 26’s and Type 31’s. And there’s no reduction in numbers there.
Yes anti-mine vessels are being replaced by drones. Damn good thing to, rather than putting our sailors in danger.
Warriors upgrades not going ahead is a good thing, it was turning into another Nimrod fiasco.
Yes we don’t have a standing army the size of the PLAN. Because we don’t need one 🤦‍♂️

Captain P Wash
Captain P Wash
19 days ago
Reply to  Sean

2 Type 23’s being cut before any T26’s let alone 31’s are built, 20 plus Typhoons, All T1 Hawks, A third of CH2’s, all Warriors, another few thousand Army Personnel, Fewer Wedgetails, Puma, Bell, Gazelle all cut, 48 F35B’s not the original 138, C130’s cut, Mine Hunters…. this is all on top of previous cuts which have been going on for many many Decades. Do you Recall anything now ?

Sean
Sean
19 days ago
Reply to  Captain P Wash

Equipment that isn’t useable or obsolete, so not cuts. Or do you want to kill needlessly our servicemen by sending them into the frontline in obsolete and dangerous vehicles and aircraft? 🤷‍♂️ I suppose you would’ve bemoaned the scrapping of our men o’ war when we started building Dreadnoughts… The Mine Hunters are being replaced by Mine Hunting UAVs. The final number of F35B’s not yet set but it is more than 48, we never ordered 138 which was the aspiration before UAVs and Tempest were even thought of. The Warriors were obsolete and their life extension programme was turning… Read more »

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
19 days ago
Reply to  Sean

Hi Sean Some of what you say I’d agree with. There needs to be a balance between quality and quantity, too often there isn’t IMO in areas that really matter. They are airpower, the RN, and artillery and enablers for the army. But you mention details. The devil is always in the detail. The Mine hunting replacements while more advanced and welcome cannot self deploy. No sign of dedicated mother ships to launch them as yet, meaning other valuable assets do it which could be in use elsewhere. And the RN’s MCMV have used remote systems for years, it is… Read more »

Sean
Sean
19 days ago

I’d bet money that the additional T32 frigates will end up replacing the mine-hunters, acting as motherships for the newly purchased anti-mine UAVs. In theory the mine hunters has secondary roles as OPV’s, instead we’ll have frigates that can fulfil the anti-mine role. Given the cost and limited number of vessels the RN can have, having fewer specialist classes is a prudent move if the capability is as good as or better than previous specialist classes. F35B aspiration was over the 50 year lifetime of the programme. Now we can honestly ask will there actually be any manned combat aircraft… Read more »

Frank62
Frank62
20 days ago
Reply to  Mr Bell

Agreed.

Frank62
Frank62
20 days ago

If Putin is allowed to take the Ukrine, the Baltics will probably be next. The irony is that if Russia treated Ukraine well (& honoured its treaty with her before the Crimea ceasure & Donbass) then Ukraine would’ve been a good friend of Russia. That the majority of Ukrainians want to keep their independance & freedom says it all. The weakness of NATO, all European members having savagely cut back their forces over the last 30 years & mostly still looking how to get away with even less, has only enabled dangerous dictators to succeed. Apathy is fine until the… Read more »

Nigel Collins
Nigel Collins
20 days ago

Everything could be on hold for now, fingers crossed.Biden blinked’ “In Putin’s game of brinkmanship, Biden blinked first,” argues journalist Konstantin Eggert, after Joe Biden made his first call to the Kremlin and proposed meeting Mr Putin “in the coming months”. It’s just weeks after the US president agreed with an interviewer that Russia’s leader was “a killer”. President Biden’s new move is now a new topic of debate – disaster prevention or a mistaken concession – but in the run-up to a summit, the risk of major military action by Russia certainly fades. “That would be really unstatesmanlike: a… Read more »

Mark B
Mark B
19 days ago

If NATO is not there to deter aggression then what is it for?

If NATO can help keep the peace in the region is that not in everyone’s interests?

Sometimes it is in the interests of NATO countries to disrupt attacks in surrounding Countries?

In my humble view the NATO plan should reflect the best strategy now, not what might have happened in the past.

Paul T
Paul T
18 days ago
Reply to  Mark B

Surely the basis of NATO is to deter aggression to fellow NATO Members – admittedly the lines get blurred sometimes but its influence cannot be used as a fallback for Countries that aren’t members.

George Parker
George Parker
16 days ago

As a BAOR veteran of the Cold War. I still consider it a diplomatic FU debacle of monumental proportions. That we wasted a chance to bring Russia back into the Western world fold. That followed by sucking up to a blatantly neo-Nazi faction in Ukrainian government, was akin to poking a wounded bear with a cattle prod. Russians remember WWII differently to us. They have 27,000,000 reasons to fear a fascist government on their border, a stones throw from Moscow. Not the current definition of fascists – anyone opposed to extreme left policies. Real Hitler, Goebbels, Heydrich want to be… Read more »

Watcherzero
Watcherzero
12 days ago

Russians appear to have blinked first, started pulling out their land forces.