One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
Don't Believe the Washington War Machine: Putin Is Not Going to Invade Another NATO Ally
Page 1 of 12 next> last>>
May 8, 2024 06:30:19   #
AuntiE Loc: 45th Least Free State
 
https://www.newsweek.com/dont-believe-washington-war-machine-putin-not-going-invade-another-nato-ally-opinion-1897533

Don't Believe the Washington War Machine: Putin Is Not Going to Invade Another NATO Ally | Opinion
By: By Rebekah Koffler former DIA

The primary reason for continuing to flow billions of dollars in cash and weaponry to Ukraine for what is clearly becoming another Afghanistan, is that if we don't, Putin will march through Europe, invading a NATO country such as Poland or the Baltics. In this case, the U.S. would have to deploy armed forces to fight off the Russians to defend the Europeans. These are the talking points that the Washington Establishment politicians and their fellow commentariat members in the media have been using to convince the American people to continue parting with their hard-earned money. In fact, even Speaker Mike Johnson, who as a rank-and-file Right-wing Congressman opposed the funding of Ukraine's war effort, recently signed off on another massive foreign aid package, $95 billion worth, the bulk of which is designated for Kyiv.

"I think that Vladimir Putin would continue to march through Europe if he were allowed," said Johnson, justifying the spending of another $61 billion on a what serious analysts assess as a unwinnable war. "I think he might go to the Baltics next. I think he might have a showdown with Poland or one of our NATO allies," asserted Johnson.

But is it true?

Evidence indicates that this justification for depleting U.S. treasury and weapons arsenal represents a lack of understanding of Putin's thinking and Russia's security strategy—and the incompetence of our national security apparatus. At worst, it is a lie fed to the American people for some other reason.

Here's why Putin is highly unlikely to invade a NATO nation:

Many in the West view Putin as a reckless dictator with imperial ambitions. As someone who spent her intelligence career studying and analyzing Putin's thinking and Russia's war-fighting doctrine and security strategy, I'm here to tell that while Putin is a typical Russian dictator, he is entirely rational.

Putin invaded Ukraine to enforce his version of the Monroe Doctrine, to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO, and to restore the strategic buffer zone on which Russia relied for its security for centuries. No sane military commander would allow an adversarial alliance to situate itself along more than 1,000 miles of its border.

Putin never made it a secret what his goals were for Ukraine as well as other former Soviet states, such as Belarus, Moldova, and Georgia. In every public speech or official writing, the Russian strongman clearly declared that post-Soviet nations, including Ukraine, were off limits for Western influence; accepting them into NATO would be crossing Russia's red line.

Moreover, every strategic planning document of the Russian Federation, such as its Foreign Policy Concept, National Security Strategy, Military Doctrine and the like, in every iteration since 2000 and in some cases since 1993, codify Moscow's strategic goals of re-integrating the post-Soviet neighbors into a supranational alliance that Moscow calls The Eurasian Union.

By contrast, no plans to "integrate" or take by force a NATO member nation have been declared in any Russia's official doctrinal documents or official speeches made by Putin or the Kremlin.

As a former Defense Intelligence Agency officer and one of top three analysts on Russian Doctrine & Strategy who worked with the CIA's National Clandestine Service, I had access to the most sensitive intelligence—including Top Secret intelligence, with code word sub-compartments and red stripes indicating for President's Eyes Only. There was no intelligence revealing or suggesting that Putin had designs on Europe beyond the post-Soviet states. We've conducted multiple wargames simulating a Russia-US/NATO war and in all of the scenarios, a local conflict between Russia and its post-Soviet neighbor escalated into a war with the U.S. and NATO. No scenario included Russia attacking a NATO country that it did not consider as part of its strategic buffer zone.

In fact, none of the Intelligence Community's annual threat assessments that are published at the unclassified level by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, including the one for 2024, include analysis suggesting that Putin would invade a NATO member.

If such intelligence existed, you can be sure that it would be declassified immediately. Wouldn't the powers that be want the American people to be on board with continuing to fund another forever war? The intelligence agencies, in the past several years, have routinely declassified even highly sensitive intelligence if it serves the purpose of the political class. They also routinely leak intelligence to left-leaning media, such as The Washington Post and the New York Times.

To the contrary, several U.S. intelligence assessments contradict the Washington Establishment's narrative that Putin would invade a NATO member. An invasion of a NATO country would undoubtedly trigger Article 5 Collective Defense, which would require the deployment of NATO forces to defend the invaded NATO member. Claims that Putin would want a war with NATO on his hands is unequivocally disputed by the following statement from the 2024 Annual Threat assessment by the intelligence community, that "Russia almost certainly does not want a direct military conflict with U.S. and NATO forces and will continue asymmetric activity below what it calculates to be the threshold of military conflict globally."

The following excerpts from the 2024 assessment entirely refute the idea that Russia has the military and economic capacity to invade a NATO country, triggering a war with NATO:

"Russia has suffered more military losses than at any time since World War II—roughly 300,000 casualties and thousands of tanks and armored combat vehicles."

"Moscow's military forces will face a multi-year recovery after suffering extensive equipment and personnel losses during the Ukraine conflict."

"The Russian military has and will continue to face issues of attrition, personnel shortages, and morale challenges."

"Russia's GDP is on a trajectory for modest growth in 2024 but its longer-term competitiveness has diminished in comparison to its pre-war outlook."

Finally, U.S. and NATO leaders knew as early as in 2013 and possibly earlier about Putin's plans to restore Russia's strategic security perimeter. As a former senior official in the U.S. intelligence community, I personally briefed President Obama's White House national security staff on Putin's plans and Russia's war-fighting strategy multiple times. I also briefed countless top U.S. military commanders and Pentagon officials, as well as NATO ministers and military leaders, including just months prior to Putin's invasion of Crimea in 2014.

As vice president at the time, the go-to person on Ukraine policy, and the architect of the failed Russia "reset" strategy, Joe Biden had to be made aware of those briefings. If anyone in the U.S. and NATO senior leadership thought that Putin would invade a NATO country, why didn't they beef up there defense spending prior to Russia's attack on Ukraine in 2022? To this day, the majority of NATO nations fail to spend the two percent of GDP guideline on defense.

Putin is clearly a typical Russian dictator and a bad dude. But he is not suicidal. Invading a NATO country is not part of his agenda.

If Washington elites are hell bent on continuing to fund another forever war, impoverishing ordinary Americans, as inflation is raging in our homeland, they should pick a more clever excuse.

Yet so many on this very site relentlessly swear and dev**e Putin will, not only take Ukraine, but plans on invading Europe. Of course, those same people will believe they know more, because DC told them so, than someone with years for experience in the DIA. What a group of dolts!!!

Reply
May 8, 2024 08:06:13   #
Coos Bay Tom Loc: coos bay oregon
 
AuntiE wrote:
https://www.newsweek.com/dont-believe-washington-war-machine-putin-not-going-invade-another-nato-ally-opinion-1897533

Don't Believe the Washington War Machine: Putin Is Not Going to Invade Another NATO Ally | Opinion
By: By Rebekah Koffler former DIA

The primary reason for continuing to flow billions of dollars in cash and weaponry to Ukraine for what is clearly becoming another Afghanistan, is that if we don't, Putin will march through Europe, invading a NATO country such as Poland or the Baltics. In this case, the U.S. would have to deploy armed forces to fight off the Russians to defend the Europeans. These are the talking points that the Washington Establishment politicians and their fellow commentariat members in the media have been using to convince the American people to continue parting with their hard-earned money. In fact, even Speaker Mike Johnson, who as a rank-and-file Right-wing Congressman opposed the funding of Ukraine's war effort, recently signed off on another massive foreign aid package, $95 billion worth, the bulk of which is designated for Kyiv.

"I think that Vladimir Putin would continue to march through Europe if he were allowed," said Johnson, justifying the spending of another $61 billion on a what serious analysts assess as a unwinnable war. "I think he might go to the Baltics next. I think he might have a showdown with Poland or one of our NATO allies," asserted Johnson.

But is it true?

Evidence indicates that this justification for depleting U.S. treasury and weapons arsenal represents a lack of understanding of Putin's thinking and Russia's security strategy—and the incompetence of our national security apparatus. At worst, it is a lie fed to the American people for some other reason.

Here's why Putin is highly unlikely to invade a NATO nation:

Many in the West view Putin as a reckless dictator with imperial ambitions. As someone who spent her intelligence career studying and analyzing Putin's thinking and Russia's war-fighting doctrine and security strategy, I'm here to tell that while Putin is a typical Russian dictator, he is entirely rational.

Putin invaded Ukraine to enforce his version of the Monroe Doctrine, to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO, and to restore the strategic buffer zone on which Russia relied for its security for centuries. No sane military commander would allow an adversarial alliance to situate itself along more than 1,000 miles of its border.

Putin never made it a secret what his goals were for Ukraine as well as other former Soviet states, such as Belarus, Moldova, and Georgia. In every public speech or official writing, the Russian strongman clearly declared that post-Soviet nations, including Ukraine, were off limits for Western influence; accepting them into NATO would be crossing Russia's red line.

Moreover, every strategic planning document of the Russian Federation, such as its Foreign Policy Concept, National Security Strategy, Military Doctrine and the like, in every iteration since 2000 and in some cases since 1993, codify Moscow's strategic goals of re-integrating the post-Soviet neighbors into a supranational alliance that Moscow calls The Eurasian Union.

By contrast, no plans to "integrate" or take by force a NATO member nation have been declared in any Russia's official doctrinal documents or official speeches made by Putin or the Kremlin.

As a former Defense Intelligence Agency officer and one of top three analysts on Russian Doctrine & Strategy who worked with the CIA's National Clandestine Service, I had access to the most sensitive intelligence—including Top Secret intelligence, with code word sub-compartments and red stripes indicating for President's Eyes Only. There was no intelligence revealing or suggesting that Putin had designs on Europe beyond the post-Soviet states. We've conducted multiple wargames simulating a Russia-US/NATO war and in all of the scenarios, a local conflict between Russia and its post-Soviet neighbor escalated into a war with the U.S. and NATO. No scenario included Russia attacking a NATO country that it did not consider as part of its strategic buffer zone.

In fact, none of the Intelligence Community's annual threat assessments that are published at the unclassified level by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, including the one for 2024, include analysis suggesting that Putin would invade a NATO member.

If such intelligence existed, you can be sure that it would be declassified immediately. Wouldn't the powers that be want the American people to be on board with continuing to fund another forever war? The intelligence agencies, in the past several years, have routinely declassified even highly sensitive intelligence if it serves the purpose of the political class. They also routinely leak intelligence to left-leaning media, such as The Washington Post and the New York Times.

To the contrary, several U.S. intelligence assessments contradict the Washington Establishment's narrative that Putin would invade a NATO member. An invasion of a NATO country would undoubtedly trigger Article 5 Collective Defense, which would require the deployment of NATO forces to defend the invaded NATO member. Claims that Putin would want a war with NATO on his hands is unequivocally disputed by the following statement from the 2024 Annual Threat assessment by the intelligence community, that "Russia almost certainly does not want a direct military conflict with U.S. and NATO forces and will continue asymmetric activity below what it calculates to be the threshold of military conflict globally."

The following excerpts from the 2024 assessment entirely refute the idea that Russia has the military and economic capacity to invade a NATO country, triggering a war with NATO:

"Russia has suffered more military losses than at any time since World War II—roughly 300,000 casualties and thousands of tanks and armored combat vehicles."

"Moscow's military forces will face a multi-year recovery after suffering extensive equipment and personnel losses during the Ukraine conflict."

"The Russian military has and will continue to face issues of attrition, personnel shortages, and morale challenges."

"Russia's GDP is on a trajectory for modest growth in 2024 but its longer-term competitiveness has diminished in comparison to its pre-war outlook."

Finally, U.S. and NATO leaders knew as early as in 2013 and possibly earlier about Putin's plans to restore Russia's strategic security perimeter. As a former senior official in the U.S. intelligence community, I personally briefed President Obama's White House national security staff on Putin's plans and Russia's war-fighting strategy multiple times. I also briefed countless top U.S. military commanders and Pentagon officials, as well as NATO ministers and military leaders, including just months prior to Putin's invasion of Crimea in 2014.

As vice president at the time, the go-to person on Ukraine policy, and the architect of the failed Russia "reset" strategy, Joe Biden had to be made aware of those briefings. If anyone in the U.S. and NATO senior leadership thought that Putin would invade a NATO country, why didn't they beef up there defense spending prior to Russia's attack on Ukraine in 2022? To this day, the majority of NATO nations fail to spend the two percent of GDP guideline on defense.

Putin is clearly a typical Russian dictator and a bad dude. But he is not suicidal. Invading a NATO country is not part of his agenda.

If Washington elites are hell bent on continuing to fund another forever war, impoverishing ordinary Americans, as inflation is raging in our homeland, they should pick a more clever excuse.

Yet so many on this very site relentlessly swear and dev**e Putin will, not only take Ukraine, but plans on invading Europe. Of course, those same people will believe they know more, because DC told them so, than someone with years for experience in the DIA. What a group of dolts!!!
https://www.newsweek.com/dont-believe-washington-w... (show quote)


I do not trust Putin one iota . He does not dare invade another country .

Reply
May 8, 2024 08:35:22   #
JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida
 
Coos Bay Tom wrote:
I do not trust Putin one iota . He does not dare invade another country .


Putin, IMO will not invade a NATO country. His economy can't afford it, Even though the Biden administrations stupid policies have enriched him.
https://www.politico.com/news/2022/02/25/biden-going-easy-russia-energy-00011822

If we were allowed to drill more we could take up the slack these sanctions cause.

Reply
May 8, 2024 09:33:34   #
NotMAGA Loc: Upstate NY - in a very red county
 
If anyone has friends in Poland, ask them what is going on there and has been for several months. They don't trust Putin one bit either - and are gearing up for their country to be attacked if he wins in Ukraine.

Reply
May 8, 2024 11:15:31   #
Milosia2 Loc: Cleveland Ohio
 
AuntiE wrote:
https://www.newsweek.com/dont-believe-washington-war-machine-putin-not-going-invade-another-nato-ally-opinion-1897533

Don't Believe the Washington War Machine: Putin Is Not Going to Invade Another NATO Ally | Opinion
By: By Rebekah Koffler former DIA

The primary reason for continuing to flow billions of dollars in cash and weaponry to Ukraine for what is clearly becoming another Afghanistan, is that if we don't, Putin will march through Europe, invading a NATO country such as Poland or the Baltics. In this case, the U.S. would have to deploy armed forces to fight off the Russians to defend the Europeans. These are the talking points that the Washington Establishment politicians and their fellow commentariat members in the media have been using to convince the American people to continue parting with their hard-earned money. In fact, even Speaker Mike Johnson, who as a rank-and-file Right-wing Congressman opposed the funding of Ukraine's war effort, recently signed off on another massive foreign aid package, $95 billion worth, the bulk of which is designated for Kyiv.

"I think that Vladimir Putin would continue to march through Europe if he were allowed," said Johnson, justifying the spending of another $61 billion on a what serious analysts assess as a unwinnable war. "I think he might go to the Baltics next. I think he might have a showdown with Poland or one of our NATO allies," asserted Johnson.

But is it true?

Evidence indicates that this justification for depleting U.S. treasury and weapons arsenal represents a lack of understanding of Putin's thinking and Russia's security strategy—and the incompetence of our national security apparatus. At worst, it is a lie fed to the American people for some other reason.

Here's why Putin is highly unlikely to invade a NATO nation:

Many in the West view Putin as a reckless dictator with imperial ambitions. As someone who spent her intelligence career studying and analyzing Putin's thinking and Russia's war-fighting doctrine and security strategy, I'm here to tell that while Putin is a typical Russian dictator, he is entirely rational.

Putin invaded Ukraine to enforce his version of the Monroe Doctrine, to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO, and to restore the strategic buffer zone on which Russia relied for its security for centuries. No sane military commander would allow an adversarial alliance to situate itself along more than 1,000 miles of its border.

Putin never made it a secret what his goals were for Ukraine as well as other former Soviet states, such as Belarus, Moldova, and Georgia. In every public speech or official writing, the Russian strongman clearly declared that post-Soviet nations, including Ukraine, were off limits for Western influence; accepting them into NATO would be crossing Russia's red line.

Moreover, every strategic planning document of the Russian Federation, such as its Foreign Policy Concept, National Security Strategy, Military Doctrine and the like, in every iteration since 2000 and in some cases since 1993, codify Moscow's strategic goals of re-integrating the post-Soviet neighbors into a supranational alliance that Moscow calls The Eurasian Union.

By contrast, no plans to "integrate" or take by force a NATO member nation have been declared in any Russia's official doctrinal documents or official speeches made by Putin or the Kremlin.

As a former Defense Intelligence Agency officer and one of top three analysts on Russian Doctrine & Strategy who worked with the CIA's National Clandestine Service, I had access to the most sensitive intelligence—including Top Secret intelligence, with code word sub-compartments and red stripes indicating for President's Eyes Only. There was no intelligence revealing or suggesting that Putin had designs on Europe beyond the post-Soviet states. We've conducted multiple wargames simulating a Russia-US/NATO war and in all of the scenarios, a local conflict between Russia and its post-Soviet neighbor escalated into a war with the U.S. and NATO. No scenario included Russia attacking a NATO country that it did not consider as part of its strategic buffer zone.

In fact, none of the Intelligence Community's annual threat assessments that are published at the unclassified level by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, including the one for 2024, include analysis suggesting that Putin would invade a NATO member.

If such intelligence existed, you can be sure that it would be declassified immediately. Wouldn't the powers that be want the American people to be on board with continuing to fund another forever war? The intelligence agencies, in the past several years, have routinely declassified even highly sensitive intelligence if it serves the purpose of the political class. They also routinely leak intelligence to left-leaning media, such as The Washington Post and the New York Times.

To the contrary, several U.S. intelligence assessments contradict the Washington Establishment's narrative that Putin would invade a NATO member. An invasion of a NATO country would undoubtedly trigger Article 5 Collective Defense, which would require the deployment of NATO forces to defend the invaded NATO member. Claims that Putin would want a war with NATO on his hands is unequivocally disputed by the following statement from the 2024 Annual Threat assessment by the intelligence community, that "Russia almost certainly does not want a direct military conflict with U.S. and NATO forces and will continue asymmetric activity below what it calculates to be the threshold of military conflict globally."

The following excerpts from the 2024 assessment entirely refute the idea that Russia has the military and economic capacity to invade a NATO country, triggering a war with NATO:

"Russia has suffered more military losses than at any time since World War II—roughly 300,000 casualties and thousands of tanks and armored combat vehicles."

"Moscow's military forces will face a multi-year recovery after suffering extensive equipment and personnel losses during the Ukraine conflict."

"The Russian military has and will continue to face issues of attrition, personnel shortages, and morale challenges."

"Russia's GDP is on a trajectory for modest growth in 2024 but its longer-term competitiveness has diminished in comparison to its pre-war outlook."

Finally, U.S. and NATO leaders knew as early as in 2013 and possibly earlier about Putin's plans to restore Russia's strategic security perimeter. As a former senior official in the U.S. intelligence community, I personally briefed President Obama's White House national security staff on Putin's plans and Russia's war-fighting strategy multiple times. I also briefed countless top U.S. military commanders and Pentagon officials, as well as NATO ministers and military leaders, including just months prior to Putin's invasion of Crimea in 2014.

As vice president at the time, the go-to person on Ukraine policy, and the architect of the failed Russia "reset" strategy, Joe Biden had to be made aware of those briefings. If anyone in the U.S. and NATO senior leadership thought that Putin would invade a NATO country, why didn't they beef up there defense spending prior to Russia's attack on Ukraine in 2022? To this day, the majority of NATO nations fail to spend the two percent of GDP guideline on defense.

Putin is clearly a typical Russian dictator and a bad dude. But he is not suicidal. Invading a NATO country is not part of his agenda.

If Washington elites are hell bent on continuing to fund another forever war, impoverishing ordinary Americans, as inflation is raging in our homeland, they should pick a more clever excuse.

Yet so many on this very site relentlessly swear and dev**e Putin will, not only take Ukraine, but plans on invading Europe. Of course, those same people will believe they know more, because DC told them so, than someone with years for experience in the DIA. What a group of dolts!!!
https://www.newsweek.com/dont-believe-washington-w... (show quote)


How nice of you to stick up for C*******ts Russia. !!!
Putin sends you his Love ❤️ 💗 💕!!!!!!
Tool of the day award goes to you. !!!!!

Reply
May 8, 2024 11:23:00   #
JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida
 
Milosia2 wrote:
How nice of you to stick up for C*******ts Russia. !!!
Putin sends you his Love ❤️ 💗 💕!!!!!!
Tool of the day award goes to you. !!!!!


It's your preferred party enriching Russia dummy.

Reply
May 8, 2024 11:26:17   #
Milosia2 Loc: Cleveland Ohio
 
JFlorio wrote:
It's your preferred party enriching Russia dummy.


I have never defended Russia .
They have and continue to be enemies of the USA. !!!

Reply
May 8, 2024 11:30:49   #
JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida
 
Milosia2 wrote:
I have never defended Russia .
They have and continue to be enemies of the USA. !!!


Adversaries is more accurate, but you’ll never get it. I also do not defend Russia but I know when an administration is weak and encouraging war as this present administration is.

Reply
May 8, 2024 11:38:12   #
Milosia2 Loc: Cleveland Ohio
 
JFlorio wrote:
Adversaries is more accurate, but you’ll never get it. I also do not defend Russia but I know when an administration is weak and encouraging war as this present administration is.


Adversaries.
Nah.

Enemies !!!
Putin is waiting for you to allow the United States to Drop into his hand like a plum !!!!
Enemies !!!
Even if they are white !!!!!
Maybe this November , eh ?
C****e pig loving scum , the maga.

Reply
May 8, 2024 11:42:32   #
JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida
 
Milosia2 wrote:
Adversaries.
Nah.

Enemies !!!
Putin is waiting for you to allow the United States to Drop into his hand like a plum !!!!
Enemies !!!
Even if they are white !!!!!


You're lucky stupid doesn't cause pain or you'd want put down. China (Biden's best buddy) is much more dangerous to us but you don't care because they allow you to buy cheap Chinese crap at Walmart with your SNAP card.

Reply
May 8, 2024 11:43:33   #
Milosia2 Loc: Cleveland Ohio
 
JFlorio wrote:
Adversaries is more accurate, but you’ll never get it. I also do not defend Russia but I know when an administration is weak and encouraging war as this present administration is.


As long you get your info from Putin. ,
You allow Putin.
-as a Putin sympathizer , you are unable to be a true American .!!!!!

Reply
May 8, 2024 11:49:33   #
JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida
 
Milosia2 wrote:
As long you get your info from Putin. ,
You allow Putin.
-as a Putin sympathizer , you are unable to be a true American .!!!!!


LOL! You are truly an idi**. Just because someone doesn't agree with how we are supporting this war effort doesn't make them a Putin sympathizer. That's what someone too stupid to debate would say. I think Biden is a thug and murderer. So what?
Biden is indirectly supporting Putin with his energy policy and lack of sanctions. He's more of a Putin sympathizer than I am.

Reply
May 8, 2024 11:50:44   #
Milosia2 Loc: Cleveland Ohio
 
AuntiE wrote:
https://www.newsweek.com/dont-believe-washington-war-machine-putin-not-going-invade-another-nato-ally-opinion-1897533

Don't Believe the Washington War Machine: Putin Is Not Going to Invade Another NATO Ally | Opinion
By: By Rebekah Koffler former DIA

The primary reason for continuing to flow billions of dollars in cash and weaponry to Ukraine for what is clearly becoming another Afghanistan, is that if we don't, Putin will march through Europe, invading a NATO country such as Poland or the Baltics. In this case, the U.S. would have to deploy armed forces to fight off the Russians to defend the Europeans. These are the talking points that the Washington Establishment politicians and their fellow commentariat members in the media have been using to convince the American people to continue parting with their hard-earned money. In fact, even Speaker Mike Johnson, who as a rank-and-file Right-wing Congressman opposed the funding of Ukraine's war effort, recently signed off on another massive foreign aid package, $95 billion worth, the bulk of which is designated for Kyiv.

"I think that Vladimir Putin would continue to march through Europe if he were allowed," said Johnson, justifying the spending of another $61 billion on a what serious analysts assess as a unwinnable war. "I think he might go to the Baltics next. I think he might have a showdown with Poland or one of our NATO allies," asserted Johnson.

But is it true?

Evidence indicates that this justification for depleting U.S. treasury and weapons arsenal represents a lack of understanding of Putin's thinking and Russia's security strategy—and the incompetence of our national security apparatus. At worst, it is a lie fed to the American people for some other reason.

Here's why Putin is highly unlikely to invade a NATO nation:

Many in the West view Putin as a reckless dictator with imperial ambitions. As someone who spent her intelligence career studying and analyzing Putin's thinking and Russia's war-fighting doctrine and security strategy, I'm here to tell that while Putin is a typical Russian dictator, he is entirely rational.

Putin invaded Ukraine to enforce his version of the Monroe Doctrine, to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO, and to restore the strategic buffer zone on which Russia relied for its security for centuries. No sane military commander would allow an adversarial alliance to situate itself along more than 1,000 miles of its border.

Putin never made it a secret what his goals were for Ukraine as well as other former Soviet states, such as Belarus, Moldova, and Georgia. In every public speech or official writing, the Russian strongman clearly declared that post-Soviet nations, including Ukraine, were off limits for Western influence; accepting them into NATO would be crossing Russia's red line.

Moreover, every strategic planning document of the Russian Federation, such as its Foreign Policy Concept, National Security Strategy, Military Doctrine and the like, in every iteration since 2000 and in some cases since 1993, codify Moscow's strategic goals of re-integrating the post-Soviet neighbors into a supranational alliance that Moscow calls The Eurasian Union.

By contrast, no plans to "integrate" or take by force a NATO member nation have been declared in any Russia's official doctrinal documents or official speeches made by Putin or the Kremlin.

As a former Defense Intelligence Agency officer and one of top three analysts on Russian Doctrine & Strategy who worked with the CIA's National Clandestine Service, I had access to the most sensitive intelligence—including Top Secret intelligence, with code word sub-compartments and red stripes indicating for President's Eyes Only. There was no intelligence revealing or suggesting that Putin had designs on Europe beyond the post-Soviet states. We've conducted multiple wargames simulating a Russia-US/NATO war and in all of the scenarios, a local conflict between Russia and its post-Soviet neighbor escalated into a war with the U.S. and NATO. No scenario included Russia attacking a NATO country that it did not consider as part of its strategic buffer zone.

In fact, none of the Intelligence Community's annual threat assessments that are published at the unclassified level by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, including the one for 2024, include analysis suggesting that Putin would invade a NATO member.

If such intelligence existed, you can be sure that it would be declassified immediately. Wouldn't the powers that be want the American people to be on board with continuing to fund another forever war? The intelligence agencies, in the past several years, have routinely declassified even highly sensitive intelligence if it serves the purpose of the political class. They also routinely leak intelligence to left-leaning media, such as The Washington Post and the New York Times.

To the contrary, several U.S. intelligence assessments contradict the Washington Establishment's narrative that Putin would invade a NATO member. An invasion of a NATO country would undoubtedly trigger Article 5 Collective Defense, which would require the deployment of NATO forces to defend the invaded NATO member. Claims that Putin would want a war with NATO on his hands is unequivocally disputed by the following statement from the 2024 Annual Threat assessment by the intelligence community, that "Russia almost certainly does not want a direct military conflict with U.S. and NATO forces and will continue asymmetric activity below what it calculates to be the threshold of military conflict globally."

The following excerpts from the 2024 assessment entirely refute the idea that Russia has the military and economic capacity to invade a NATO country, triggering a war with NATO:

"Russia has suffered more military losses than at any time since World War II—roughly 300,000 casualties and thousands of tanks and armored combat vehicles."

"Moscow's military forces will face a multi-year recovery after suffering extensive equipment and personnel losses during the Ukraine conflict."

"The Russian military has and will continue to face issues of attrition, personnel shortages, and morale challenges."

"Russia's GDP is on a trajectory for modest growth in 2024 but its longer-term competitiveness has diminished in comparison to its pre-war outlook."

Finally, U.S. and NATO leaders knew as early as in 2013 and possibly earlier about Putin's plans to restore Russia's strategic security perimeter. As a former senior official in the U.S. intelligence community, I personally briefed President Obama's White House national security staff on Putin's plans and Russia's war-fighting strategy multiple times. I also briefed countless top U.S. military commanders and Pentagon officials, as well as NATO ministers and military leaders, including just months prior to Putin's invasion of Crimea in 2014.

As vice president at the time, the go-to person on Ukraine policy, and the architect of the failed Russia "reset" strategy, Joe Biden had to be made aware of those briefings. If anyone in the U.S. and NATO senior leadership thought that Putin would invade a NATO country, why didn't they beef up there defense spending prior to Russia's attack on Ukraine in 2022? To this day, the majority of NATO nations fail to spend the two percent of GDP guideline on defense.

Putin is clearly a typical Russian dictator and a bad dude. But he is not suicidal. Invading a NATO country is not part of his agenda.

If Washington elites are hell bent on continuing to fund another forever war, impoverishing ordinary Americans, as inflation is raging in our homeland, they should pick a more clever excuse.

Yet so many on this very site relentlessly swear and dev**e Putin will, not only take Ukraine, but plans on invading Europe. Of course, those same people will believe they know more, because DC told them so, than someone with years for experience in the DIA. What a group of dolts!!!
https://www.newsweek.com/dont-believe-washington-w... (show quote)


Be careful you don’t step in it ,
It’s propaganda !!!!!!

Reply
May 8, 2024 13:34:50   #
AuntiE Loc: 45th Least Free State
 
Milosia2 wrote:
As long you get your info from Putin. ,
You allow Putin.
-as a Putin sympathizer , you are unable to be a true American .!!!!!


About the author:

Rebekah has served as DIA’s Senior Intelligence Analyst for Russian Doctrine and Strategy for over eight and a half years, from July 2008 to December 2016. During her tenure, she did commendable jobs in briefing the White House, NATO, and Pentagon about Russian affairs. In addition, she has also led the red team during war games conducted by the U.S. military forces.

Somehow I think she may be a better source of information than are you.

Reply
May 8, 2024 13:36:15   #
AuntiE Loc: 45th Least Free State
 
Milosia2 wrote:
Be careful you don’t step in it ,
It’s propaganda !!!!!!


So Newsweek and a former DIA officer are Russia propagandists.

You truly are as stupid as your comments appear.

Reply
Page 1 of 12 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.