The purpose of CIA Director John Ratcliffe’s visit to Moscow this week was to warn Russia not to attack NATO member states, according to multiple people familiar with the matter, amid U.S. intelligence assessments that Russia could try to test NATO.
The purpose of CIA Director John Ratcliffe’s visit to Moscow this week was to warn Russia not to attack NATO member states, according to multiple people familiar with the matter, amid U.S. intelligence assessments that Russia could try to test NATO.
The last time a CIA director had direct talks with his Russian counterpart, it was to warn the Russians not to use nuclear weapons in Ukraine. The last time before that, it was to warn the Russians not to invade Ukraine.
Russia is presumably behind the incidents in Leipzig and Rome earlier this month, which constitute direct attacks on NATO military assets and are a severe escalation of the conflict.
In addition Russia has placed ballistic missile launchers in Belarus, has started bombing the border crossing between Moldova and Ukraine, has started engaging in routine airspace violations into NATO territory, all while laying the political groundwork for a massive and forced mobilization.
It seems very reasonable that Ratcliffe’s visit is in response to either the recent attacks or new intelligence pointing to further escalation.
Is Russia even capable of a massive mobilization against NATO? They had to use NK soldiers in Ukraine.
Yes, with the operative word being mobilization
Russia would need to conscript soldiers, which they tried to do a few years ago to disastrous results – public pushback forced them to walk it back
That’s why they want NATO involved, it allows them to say mobilization is needed because NATO is threatening the homeland
It’s a balancing act. They want to provoke NATO enough to sell the story of NATO threatening the homeland, but not so much that Russia actually has significant fighting against MATO
Putin feels he needs a military victory, and is taking increasingly large gambles to get it
Watch closely, because the US is following a similar path, just a few years behind
I’m capable of bitch slapping a cop it still doesn’t make it a good idea.
The massive part is what I was focusing on.
Putin has to keep doubling down or he is done for.
Just like Trump.
The good news is that, if one goes, we’ll very soon be rid of the other as well.
I was speaking online to a Russian acquaintance living in Germany, she said people do not understand that Russia will never give up…ever. She saw that as a badge of pride
They were not capable of taking Ukraine in 3 days, but they still tried unfortunately. More important than what they can do, is what they think they can do. And more than that, is what they might want to/see as benefitial to do, whether it might succeed or not. And by “they” in this case, I really just mean Putin.
Had it not been for US, they might have taken Ukraine.
VDV getting annihilated at Hostomel airport is a direct result of US warning Ukraine that the Tank column was effectively a feint and that they needed to hold that airport at all costs.
Like Bibi and Trump, he’s cooked as soon as he leaves office. Not that we’ll see any direct benefit.
That didn’t and won’t stop them from throwing people into the grinder and terrorise the civilians.
That’s not how Russia fights NATO. It’s done with “asymmetric tactics” – terrorism, basically.
Sadly, the CIA director doesn’t seem to be super convincing so far…