Should we permanently station troops and equipment in Eastern NATO countries?

2015-12-04T16:20:02-05:00

Above is a picture of Russian (separatist ;-) armor in Ukraine.

Currently, U.S. and some other NATO countries rotate company/battalion size combat elements through the Baltics, Poland, and Romania. A brigade size mechanized equipment will be prepositioned in storage in several countries.

The elements of the anti-ballistic shield are being built in Romania, Poland, and possibly Slovakia or Czech Republic (which infuriates Putin).

Would this be enough to deter Russia from further encroachment in Ukraine and to temper its appetite for Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and Moldova. In case of the conflict, should we send our (and NATO) soldiers to die for Poland or Romania?

Response by SGM Steve Wettstein made Dec 7 at 2015 8:49 PM

2015-12-07T20:49:03-05:00

CW4 Private RallyPoint Member I voted Yes. The reasons for this are monetary and if you are permanent, you build a better rapport with the host nations military. Instead of a 6-9 month rotation send them on a 12 month unaccompanied tour.

Response by CW4 Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 13 at 2015 10:54 PM

2015-12-13T22:54:52-05:00

In the Northeast of Poland there is a geographical feature called Suwalki Pass. Kinda modern Fulda Pass or Danzing Corridor. Control of this area would give Russia an unabated access to its Baltic land aircraft carrier, Kaliningrad District, through Belorussia. It would cut of three NATO countries Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania from the rest of the NATO and probably overrun within 72 hrs to one week.
NATO Commander thinks it could be one of the four spots in the world that could start WWIII. While Russia could take it in 72 hrs, NATO would need two weeks to respond. Mind you that while Poland is the only country able to respond in time, there are no NATO bases or units in Poland that could do anything about it. That is why the Ukraine conflict is not over. It just disappeared from our infotainment media.
I can understand why a farmer in Kansas or Nebraska might not give rats on what's going on over there but the inability of NATO and US to respond in time would have been the end of NATO and European Union. Sort of each one for himself we are already seeing when some European countries are dealing directly with Russia.
You might say, what do we care? But that is exactly when Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia invaded Poland in 1939. This could have been prevented with support of America, which was then nonexistent. That is why I posted a question about stationing serious armor in Poland, which in turn could force Putin to have a second thought about just rolling over the Baltic republics.