What we learned in Crimea
By David Ignatius, Published: March 18
From the photographs we’ve seen of the Russian special operations, or Spetsnaz, troops that intervened in Crimea, several things are obvious: They are secretive, moving without insignia and often covering their faces; they’re disciplined and they’re decisive.
The diplomatic response to the Russian intervention is continuing. But Pentagon officials are beginning to assess the military “lessons learned.” The bottom line is that Russia’s move into Crimea was a study in the speedy deployment of special operations forces to achieve a limited objective.
“What has been most striking to me so far has been the apparent levels of discipline, training and cooperation among the Russian forces,” noted Paul Saunders, executive director of the Center for the National Interest, in an interview this week with the military blog War on the Rocks.
The Russians deployed quickly in the hours surrounding reports of their initial movement on Feb. 26. Two days later, when President Obama warned that there would be “costs” for invading Crimea, the Russian forces were already in place and the intervention was nearly a fait accompli.
(More here.)
From the photographs we’ve seen of the Russian special operations, or Spetsnaz, troops that intervened in Crimea, several things are obvious: They are secretive, moving without insignia and often covering their faces; they’re disciplined and they’re decisive.
The diplomatic response to the Russian intervention is continuing. But Pentagon officials are beginning to assess the military “lessons learned.” The bottom line is that Russia’s move into Crimea was a study in the speedy deployment of special operations forces to achieve a limited objective.
“What has been most striking to me so far has been the apparent levels of discipline, training and cooperation among the Russian forces,” noted Paul Saunders, executive director of the Center for the National Interest, in an interview this week with the military blog War on the Rocks.
The Russians deployed quickly in the hours surrounding reports of their initial movement on Feb. 26. Two days later, when President Obama warned that there would be “costs” for invading Crimea, the Russian forces were already in place and the intervention was nearly a fait accompli.
(More here.)
Powered by Blogger
2 Comments:
what we learned on Crimea is the same thing we learned on Syria. That Obama's 'red line' rhetoric is nothing more than a Bugs Bunny/Yosemite Sam skit where Bugs draws a line in the sand and dares Sam to step over it. And Sam steps over it. And Bugs draws another line in the sand and dares Sam to step over it. And Sam steps over it. And on and on the cartoon goes.
Obama is a paper tiger and there is nothing the US can do. He is reduced to reminding Putin that he is in violation of international law. That'll show Vlad.
Beyond that, when you are $17 TRILLION in debt and stretched to the max with the military all over the world and you reduce your military strength to pre-WWII levels, these will severly limit you ability to back up your words with actions.
Not that I want US military action in Crimea - far from it: the US needs to stay the hell out - but Obama got himself in trouble with his cowboy rhetoric and he looks like a fool. I am reminded of the old saying 'better to keep your mouth shut and appear a fool rather than open your mouth and remove all doubt'. This is part of Obama's delusion. He sees the world as he thinks it ought to work, not as it actually does work.
We also learned that Putin is not afraid of our community activist of a President.
Post a Comment
<< Home