Lithuania to reintroduce conscription

[United Marxist Nations]

Considering that Lytt was only using a military example, wouldn't this essentially just be baiting?

Not really, it's making fun of the example as presented (since Czechoslovakia put up no military resistance, making it a rather useless comparison point for a military invasion of Lithuania from the start, even ignoring the change in setting, time period, situation, and nations involved).

No it wasn't, you used purely political terms that are only relevant now. You never once referred to the military situation.

[Little Sealand]

I don't support it nor do i even understand it. Lithuania knows it has nothing to fear, its a member of the EU for christ sake. Russia isn't going to invade anything that is part of the EU.

Hey, Europe has done wierder things than letting allies get taken. Germany did violate the verilaisia howeveryouspellit treaty, and GB and France mostly just sat by.

[Lytenburgh]

"civl uprinsing"? What a charming turn of phrase, the Balkens! I take it you don't know much about Chechoslovacian rebellion of 1968, do you? You, probaly, imagine something along Zep Brannigans "Conquest of Hippies' Planet in Ghandi's Galaxi", right?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warsaw_Pac ... hoslovakia

Doesnt look like the Czechoslovak military was engaged, seeing as 108 civilians died.

Then again "Democratization" was probably a big no no, right? Silly Czechs.

I wonder, have you actually read it? USSR dispatched 500 000 troops (including 5000 tanks and APCs). It was primarily VDV operation it it's early stade. In less than 12 hour Red Army arrested "reformers govenment" and took Prague under controll. There were no military actions yes, because it all happened so fast (and effective) that Warsaw pact troops were abled to capture what they needed in less that 1 day.

Now, the Balkens, do you know how much it would take for NATO to react to something like that happening in Baltic states?

[Occupied Deutschland]

Not really, it's making fun of the example as presented (since Czechoslovakia put up no military resistance, making it a rather useless comparison point for a military invasion of Lithuania from the start, even ignoring the change in setting, time period, situation, and nations involved).

No it wasn't, you used purely political terms that are only relevant now. You never once referred to the military situation.

Sure I did: 'Glorious Soviet defenders of the People's Liberty' IE: Soviet (and pals) soldiers.

Besides that, there isn't much of a military situation to serve as a comparison point. This was the criticism being leveled. Because the Prague Spring was a civil uprising (with the government's support) against Soviet policies and desired methods of execution (both policy-wise and...otherwise). One can argue that, but then the argument is open to criticism regarding its...complete incorrectness. Czechoslovakia never staged a military campaign against the Soviets. They never intended to. They actively discouraged such plans and the 'Spring' was wholly focused around nonmilitary methods of achieving the goals. Comparing such to a military invasion of one of the Baltic states is ridiculous.

[Little Sealand]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warsaw_Pac ... hoslovakia

Doesnt look like the Czechoslovak military was engaged, seeing as 108 civilians died.

Then again "Democratization" was probably a big no no, right? Silly Czechs.

I wonder, have you actually read it? USSR dispatched 500 000 troops (including 5000 tanks and APCs). It was primarily VDV operation it it's early stade. In less than 12 hour Red Army arrested "reformers govenment" and took Prague under controll. There were no military actions yes, because it all happened so fast (and effective) that Warsaw pact troops were abled to capture what they needed in less that 1 day.

Now, the Balkens, do you know how much it would take for NATO to react to something like that happening in Baltic states?

I'm no NATO master, but with today's tech, NATO could learn about the invasion rather quickly.

[Lytenburgh]

If Lithuania didn't have an army, and only 1,000 NATO troops defended it, it would be a lot more appetizing to invade. Then why does Russia also need conscription?

1) Do you know af any country that in no uncertain terms threatened Lithuania with invasion?

2) Russia is currently working on transforming its entire army into professional fighting force.

[Lytenburgh]

The harsh reality called. She says: "No, they can't. Ever."

Lithiuania's popuations is 4 times lesser then Moscow's. Their military would be meglibile no matter what.

Then big boy Poland arrives

then the rest of NATO

seems like that "neglibile" military is on the side of "kicking your ass"

Oh, tell us, tell us about mighty Polish military! And it's response time! And NATO's! Because stupit Russian's won't take this into accoutn, right?!

[Little Sealand]

If Lithuania didn't have an army, and only 1,000 NATO troops defended it, it would be a lot more appetizing to invade. Then why does Russia also need conscription?

1) Do you know af any country that in no uncertain terms threatened Lithuania with invasion?

2) Russia is currently working on transforming its entire army into professional fighting force.

All the more reason to try to get your military up to tip top shape if any invasion will happen, it's best to prepare as soon you get word, than when its knocking on your door.

[Lytenburgh]

I am not really in support of conscription.

But for a small country within the range of Russia's military invasion (unlikely at the future), it's an acceptable decision.

Why? How will it help said "small country within the range of Russia's military invasion"?

[United Marxist Nations]

No it wasn't, you used purely political terms that are only relevant now. You never once referred to the military situation.

Sure I did: 'Glorious Soviet defenders of the People's Liberty' IE: Soviet (and pals) soldiers.

Besides that, there isn't much of a military situation to serve as a comparison point. This was the criticism being leveled. Because the Prague Spring was a civil uprising (with the government's support) against Soviet policies and desired methods of execution (both policy-wise and...otherwise). One can argue that, but then the argument is open to criticism regarding its...complete incorrectness. Czechoslovakia never staged a military campaign against the Soviets. They never intended to. They actively discouraged such plans and the 'Spring' was wholly focused around nonmilitary methods of achieving the goals. Comparing such to a military invasion of one of the Baltic states is ridiculous.

Which is obviously intended as a joke on the "Peoples' Self Defense Forces" which you are always so quick to mock.

So, then, you admit that the entire rest of the post had nothing whatsoever to do with what Lytt was saying?

[Lytenburgh]

I wonder, have you actually read it? USSR dispatched 500 000 troops (including 5000 tanks and APCs). It was primarily VDV operation it it's early stade. In less than 12 hour Red Army arrested "reformers govenment" and took Prague under controll. There were no military actions yes, because it all happened so fast (and effective) that Warsaw pact troops were abled to capture what they needed in less that 1 day.

Now, the Balkens, do you know how much it would take for NATO to react to something like that happening in Baltic states?

I'm no NATO master, but with today's tech, NATO could learn about the invasion rather quickly.

Do you know what is the projected NATO's reaction time?

[Dr Freud]

Presumably the threat that Lithuania is reacting to here is not a full scale invasion from Russia - an unlikely scenario given the presence of NATO forces would invite the possibility of a major war and would turn Russia into a full scale pariah state, neither of which I expect control of Lithuania is worth.

Where a conscript army could be useful is if one day a small scale "self defence" militia suddenly popped up and tried to sieze control over part of Lithuania.

[Lytenburgh]

All the more reason to try to get your military up to tip top shape if any invasion will happen, it's best to prepare as soon you get word, than when its knocking on your door.

"Get into shape" = "introducing conscription" to a level that won't affect survival chances of your country at all?

[United Marxist Nations]

1) Do you know af any country that in no uncertain terms threatened Lithuania with invasion?

2) Russia is currently working on transforming its entire army into professional fighting force.

All the more reason to try to get your military up to tip top shape if any invasion will happen, it's best to prepare as soon you get word, than when its knocking on your door.

Russia isn't planning on attacking NATO, that would be strategically stupid, It wants to modernize its forces to be able to deter NATO expansion without threatening nuclear arms.

[Occupied Deutschland]

Sure I did: 'Glorious Soviet defenders of the People's Liberty' IE: Soviet (and pals) soldiers.

Besides that, there isn't much of a military situation to serve as a comparison point. This was the criticism being leveled. Because the Prague Spring was a civil uprising (with the government's support) against Soviet policies and desired methods of execution (both policy-wise and...otherwise). One can argue that, but then the argument is open to criticism regarding its...complete incorrectness. Czechoslovakia never staged a military campaign against the Soviets. They never intended to. They actively discouraged such plans and the 'Spring' was wholly focused around nonmilitary methods of achieving the goals. Comparing such to a military invasion of one of the Baltic states is ridiculous.

Which is obviously intended as a joke on the "Peoples' Self Defense Forces" which you are always so quick to mock.(1)

So, then, you admit that the entire rest of the post had nothing whatsoever to do with what Lytt was saying?(2)

1) I...actually did not think of that whatsoever. I gurantee you, if I had, I likely would have used something much closer. This was just standard mockery at Soviet propaganda, not modern Russian propaganda (this was why 'People's' was in the possessive singular case as opposed to a plural, though that's probably a rather lame grammatical joke to make).

2) Sure it did. It was mocking an incorrect comparison and a false understanding of the course of events.

[Little Sealand]

All the more reason to try to get your military up to tip top shape if any invasion will happen, it's best to prepare as soon you get word, than when its knocking on your door.

"Get into shape" = "introducing conscription" to a level that won't affect survival chances of your country at all?

Every soldier counts,

But the fact that I've been debating this for an hour makes me question my sanity.

But you seem to be looking at a point from where it doesn't make sense because no matter what you do, Russia would steamroll you in real life and there no use even trying?

[Valaran]

All the more reason to try to get your military up to tip top shape if any invasion will happen, it's best to prepare as soon you get word, than when its knocking on your door.

"Get into shape" = "introducing conscription" to a level that won't affect survival chances of your country at all?

To be honest, this sounds like someone's a little upset that other post Soviet states suddenly don't like the prospect of Russian agression. I wonder what could have brought that on?

[Dain II Ironfoot]

I don't support it nor do i even understand it. Lithuania knows it has nothing to fear, its a member of the EU for christ sake. Russia isn't going to invade anything that is part of the EU.

Hey, Europe has done wierder things than letting allies get taken. Germany did violate the verilaisia howeveryouspellit treaty, and GB and France mostly just sat by.

They are also a NATO member though.
Russia simply isn't that stupid to invade Lithuania, more likely that Lithuania is so stupid to be afraid of Russia.

[Iwassoclose]

But you seem to be looking at a point from where it doesn't make sense because no matter what you do, Russia would steamroll you in real life and there no use even trying?

Yes, that is exactly his stated stance.

[United Marxist Nations]

Presumably the threat that Lithuania is reacting to here is not a full scale invasion from Russia - an unlikely scenario given the presence of NATO forces would invite the possibility of a major war and would turn Russia into a full scale pariah state, neither of which I expect control of Lithuania is worth.

Where a conscript army could be useful is if one day a small scale "self defence" militia suddenly popped up and tried to sieze control over part of Lithuania.

A self-defense militia of what? And seizing which territory? Lithuania isn't like the Ukraine where there was a massive Russian community localized to a few provinces; Lithuania's Russian population is small and much more spread out. There are a few cities where they make up a large minority, but only one tiny place where they make up the majority. Unless I am reading this map incorrectly:

[United Marxist Nations]

Which is obviously intended as a joke on the "Peoples' Self Defense Forces" which you are always so quick to mock.(1)

So, then, you admit that the entire rest of the post had nothing whatsoever to do with what Lytt was saying?(2)

1) I...actually did not think of that whatsoever. I gurantee you, if I had, I likely would have used something much closer. This was just standard mockery at Soviet propaganda, not modern Russian propaganda (this was why 'People's' was in the possessive singular case as opposed to a plural, though that's probably a rather lame grammatical joke to make).

2) Sure it did. It was mocking an incorrect comparison and a false understanding of the course of events.

2) No it wasn't, because Lytt was solely talking about it in military terms, and you talked in mostly political terms. If you wanted to mock his incorrect comparison, you should have mocked his actual comments instead of making up a political position about the event to proscribe to him and then mocking that.

[Lytenburgh]

For all of you screaming "NATO STRONK!" I have a little somehting penned by the "Bloomberg":

NATO's Response to Putin's Odd War Games Won't Be Fast

(Bloomberg) -- As the Kremlin’s warplanes probe the edges of NATO airspace, the alliance says its forces are ready if the Russians come. Political leaders will need a little longer to issue the marching orders...

Who will order the North Atlantic Treaty Organization to strike back is less clear. The 28 governments in the U.S.-led alliance will all want a say, potentially slowing the deployment of a 5,000-man rapid-reaction force being set up to defend eastern Europe.

NATO’s commander “does not have peacetime operational control and would have to wait for allied governments to make a decision,” said John R. Deni, a professor at the U.S. Army War College’s Strategic Studies Institute in Carlisle, Pennsylvania. The concern is “something less than a very clear attack, an obvious assault, tanks crossing the border. That would require time for the alliance to figure out what’s going to happen. Depending on the nature of the crisis, that delay could be substantial...”

... Most of the 75,000 U.S. soldiers still in Europe are stationed in the west and the south -- far from the alliance’s potential eastern flashpoints.

Real Danger

U.K. Defence Secretary Michael Fallon warned Feb. 18 of a “real and present danger” of undercover operations against the Baltics, the Telegraph newspaper reported. Latvia’s defense minister, Raimonds Vejonis, said while that probability is “very low,” Russia’s leaders “are quite unpredictable and we have to be ready to react to different scenarios.”

Dedicated by its founding treaty in 1949 to countering an “armed attack,” NATO is poorly equipped to fend off an invasion that doesn’t look like one. Military men openly wonder whether their political bosses would be caught napping. Speaking at Royal United Services Institute in London on Feb. 20, U.K. General Adrian Bradshaw, the alliance’s deputy supreme commander, said an “ambiguous” attack would make “collective decisions relating to the appropriate responses more difficult.” ...

Reaction Force

After years of American pressure on Europe to boost defense spending and do more for its security, European governments agreed in Wales to field the bulk of a rapid-reaction force that could send its first units to the front lines within 48 hours, complete the deployment within a week and eventually grow to 30,000 troops.

An interim force made up of German, Dutch and Norwegian troops force is in training. As of 2016, leadership of the brigade-size land force will rotate among Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Poland and Spain. Backed by air, sea and special operations units, its capability will be gradually increased until reaching full readiness in 2017.

What happens if deterrence fails remains to be worked out.In the first hours of a conflict, the democratic notion that war is too important to be left to generals could put NATO at a tactical disadvantage. Ioan Mircea Pascu, a former Romanian defense minister now in the European Parliament, predicts that “real serious decisions would have to be taken, and will be taken, as they were in the EU on the sanctions.” ...

NATO’s militaries are run from a headquarters in southern Belgium, traditionally under the command of an American officer, currently U.S. Air Force General Philip Breedlove. As defense ministers debated alliance reinforcements on Feb. 5 in Brussels, a senior official told reporters that Breedlove’s forces will be under political control “at all times.”

What that means in practice will be discussed by defense ministers in June. One option is to give the military command the peacetime right to call snap exercises of the readiness force. Emergency powers are trickier, especially in case of a “hybrid” infiltration.

“It makes no sense to have a rapidly deployable brigade if you can’t take political decisions on a commensurate timeline,” U.S. Ambassador to NATO Douglas Lute said Feb. 11 on a media conference call. “This too is an element of the readiness action plan which has not yet been decided.”

[Dr Freud]

Presumably the threat that Lithuania is reacting to here is not a full scale invasion from Russia - an unlikely scenario given the presence of NATO forces would invite the possibility of a major war and would turn Russia into a full scale pariah state, neither of which I expect control of Lithuania is worth.

Where a conscript army could be useful is if one day a small scale "self defence" militia suddenly popped up and tried to sieze control over part of Lithuania.

A self-defense militia of what? And seizing which territory? Lithuania isn't like the Ukraine where there was a massive Russian community localized to a few provinces; Lithuania's Russian population is small and much more spread out. There are a few cities where they make up a large minority, but only one tiny place where they make up the majority. Unless I am reading this map incorrectly:

There's no requirement that says a local majority needs to exist for an uprising to take place.

[Lytenburgh]

Every soldier counts,

But the fact that I've been debating this for an hour makes me question my sanity.

But you seem to be looking at a point from where it doesn't make sense because no matter what you do, Russia would steamroll you in real life and there no use even trying?

Yes.

How about, given the fact that no one is threatening to invade Lithuania, just admit that conscription here would be silly?

[United Marxist Nations]

A self-defense militia of what? And seizing which territory? Lithuania isn't like the Ukraine where there was a massive Russian community localized to a few provinces; Lithuania's Russian population is small and much more spread out. There are a few cities where they make up a large minority, but only one tiny place where they make up the majority. Unless I am reading this map incorrectly:

There's no requirement that says a local majority needs to exist for an uprising to take place.

Without one though, I would think such an uprising would fizzle out pretty quickly.