US Plans to Arm, Train Ukraine National Guard

[mystery-ak]

http://www.newsmax.com/PrintTemplate.aspx/?nodeid=586433


Newsmax
US Plans to Arm, Train Ukraine National Guard
Friday, August 1, 2014 11:20 PM

By: REUTERS

The Obama administration has notified Congress of its plans to train and arm the Ukrainian national guard next year, the Pentagon said on Friday, as Washington continues to intensify its response to Moscow's support for rebels in eastern Ukraine.

"The Defense Department and State Department have notified Congress of our intent to use $19 million in global security contingency fund authority to train and equip four companies and one tactical headquarters of the Ukrainian national guard as part of their efforts to build their capacity for internal defense," Pentagon spokesman Rear Admiral John Kirby told reporters.

The training, which requires congressional approval, would occur at a location within Ukraine that hosts multilateral exercises, Kirby said. The trainers would be provided by U.S. Army Europe and by the California National Guard, he added.

While Kirby did not link the training to the West's deepening standoff with Russia over Ukraine. The announcement comes as the United States and other Western nations seek to tighten pressure on Moscow after the July 17 downing of a Malaysian airliner over rebel-held territory in Ukraine by what Western nations say was a Russia-supplied missile.

Earlier on Friday, President Barack Obama urged Russian leader Vladimir Putin to stop supporting separatists in eastern Ukraine and to seek a diplomatic end to the crisis. . Washington and European nations announced new sanctions against Russia earlier this week.

While the United States has repeatedly slammed Russia's troop buildup along the border with Ukraine and its support for the rebels, the Obama administration has limited military assistance to non lethal aid such as medical supplies and helmets.

Also on Friday, the United States pledged about $8 million in new aid to bolster the Ukrainian border guard service.

[Chieftain]

Next year, eh??  I'm underwhelmed as I am sure the Ukrainians are.

Besides, they know better than to put that many soldiers in one spot....makes too good of a target for a Russian artillery rocket battery.....

 

[PzLdr]

First we tip off the towel heads when we're leaving Iraq. Now we're doing the same in Afghanistan. And then we'll give the Russian military a timetable to work in for Ukraine before the year is up.

But they may not need it. We're going to train a BATTALION? To face the Russian Army? Talk about pissing up a rope.

[EC]

Next year, eh??  I'm underwhelmed as I am sure the Ukrainians are.

Besides, they know better than to put that many soldiers in one spot....makes too good of a target for a Russian artillery rocket battery.....

 

AKA a "regrettable accident."

[Chieftain]

AKA a "regrettable accident."

You see that possibility as well??  Good.  It isn't just me.

I'm really concerned about the odds of an "unfortunate nuclear incident" involving some "rebel" decapitating the Ukrainian government with a tactical nuclear weapon.  The Soviets made plenty of those too, and I have no doubts about the existence of a truck portable device that would redefine the term "truck bomb".  The US has proven to be toothless, and Putin may will figure the odds are favorable toward getting away with it and taking over all of Ukraine during "rescue operations" after the detonation.

[EC]

The Russians are nobodies fools and are hugely pragmatic. I would expect an attack on any group being trained, and a full battalion is one hell of a juicy target. Any commander worth his salt would at least consider it - and the time and place will be known well in advance, considering this administrations inability to keep it's mouth shut about anything.

On the nuke side of things - I am not sure. It's within the bounds of possibility, but I'd say remote possibility. They wouldn't have any deniability at all - nukes have very distinct isotope signatures, depending on which country made them. There is a reason that, even during the height of the cold war, Broken Arrows from either side were routinely reported to the opposition. It were to prevent misunderstandings if a third part group got hold of one of them.

Plus, they are not exactly plug and play, as you well know. Satchel nukes do have a manual trigger, which always struck me as rather ironic, but anything bigger has so many safeties it's ridiculous. Might be worth dropping Atomic Cow a PM to the thread - he knows his shit when it comes to nukes.

[Oceander]

Next year, eh??  I'm underwhelmed as I am sure the Ukrainians are.

Besides, they know better than to put that many soldiers in one spot....makes too good of a target for a Russian artillery rocket battery.....

 

Spotted that too.

[Oceander]

You see that possibility as well??  Good.  It isn't just me.

I'm really concerned about the odds of an "unfortunate nuclear incident" involving some "rebel" decapitating the Ukrainian government with a tactical nuclear weapon.  The Soviets made plenty of those too, and I have no doubts about the existence of a truck portable device that would redefine the term "truck bomb".  The US has proven to be toothless, and Putin may will figure the odds are favorable toward getting away with it and taking over all of Ukraine during "rescue operations" after the detonation.

It seems to me that detonating a nuke would be too much, even for Putin.  Obuttocks might not react, but I think that a nuclear attack on Ukraine by Russia - there would be no doubt whose weapon it was - would finally wake up Germany, France and the UK.

On the other hand, a serious accident at one of the nuclear power plants built by the Soviets might provide useful cover.  The one at Khmelnitskiy might be appealing: its reactors were designed and built (mostly) by the Soviets and it sits to the west of Kiev, meaning that any significant release from the reactors would create a plume that passed over Kiev.

An accident like that would thoroughly disrupt the Ukrainian government, and who better to come in and take control of a disabled Soviet reactor - and the surrounding areas - than the Russians?  A release plume wouldn't even have to be that radioactive, it would just need to contain enough radioactive material to cause a panic in Kiev and surrounding areas.  And a reactor disaster would give the Russians more plausible deniability than would the detonation of an undeniably Russian nuke.

[SPQR]

It seems to me that detonating a nuke would be too much, even for Putin.  Obuttocks might not react, but I think that a nuclear attack on Ukraine by Russia - there would be no doubt whose weapon it was - would finally wake up Germany, France and the UK.

On the other hand, a serious accident at one of the nuclear power plants built by the Soviets might provide useful cover.  The one at Khmelnitskiy might be appealing: its reactors were designed and built (mostly) by the Soviets and it sits to the west of Kiev, meaning that any significant release from the reactors would create a plume that passed over Kiev.

An accident like that would thoroughly disrupt the Ukrainian government, and who better to come in and take control of a disabled Soviet reactor - and the surrounding areas - than the Russians?  A release plume wouldn't even have to be that radioactive, it would just need to contain enough radioactive material to cause a panic in Kiev and surrounding areas.  And a reactor disaster would give the Russians more plausible deniability than would the detonation of an undeniably Russian nuke.

I doubt they really care. They talk the talk. They need Russian natural gas to keep them from freezing over.