Estonia wants NATO to station more troops to help repel Russia......as long as they are white



Today, facing a new threat from self-assured Russia, NATO is considering sending a battalion of 500 to 1,000 each to Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. The troops will consist of American, British and German soldiers.

About 500 NATO troops are currently stationed in Estonia, and while Estonians welcome foreign defenders with open arms, they do not like the faces of certain NATO soldiers—in particular, those which are darker in skin color than the “European” stereotype embraced by the noisy minority in Estonia.

There is a history of friction between the local population of all three Baltic countries and the NATO troops stationed there, which began on March 29, 2004, when the former Soviet republics joined NATO. That day, when NATO opened its door to these new allies, the first fist fight between locals and NATO soldiers erupted in front of a bar in the Lithuanian town of Siauliai—former home to the mighty Soviet military base.

In October that year, two black Dutch NATO troops were beaten and robbed. A driver’s license, mobile phone and a wallet with 6 euros in it were taken as trophies.

Two black Belgian soldiers were attacked by a mob of youngsters in Siauliai in front of a hotel where the NATO troops lived. Both were airfield technicians in charge of maintenance of F-16 jets stationed there to protect the Lithuanian air space. The men were taken to the hospital, where one was treated for open wounds to the head and the other was released with bruising.

In 2005 in Vilnius, capital of Lithuania, two black American NATO soldiers were attacked in front of a local casino, resulting in severe injuries to both of the soldiers—their faces smashed and their teeth knocked out. American authorities expressed the hope that it was not a “racist attack,” and Lithuania assigned police patrols to any sites frequented by NATO soldiers.

In 2015, during the Independence Day parade, while African-American troops wearing NATO uniforms marched on the main street of Estonia’s capital, local racists shouted all kinds of racial slurs, including, “Go back to your grandparents in Nigeria!”

The situation has become so intolerable that the Estonian Air Force Supreme Commander Jaak Tarien addressed it publicly on his Facebook page last October, apologizing on behalf of his countrymen to his NATO counterparts.

He wrote that his fellow Estonians, with their racist attitude toward dark-skinned NATO soldiers serving in the country, made him feel both ashamed and embarrassed.

Well, actually its relatively possible to detect stealth technology. Certain wavelength of radar waves, using different radar transmitter and receiver stations all can possibly detect stealth aircraft.

You can also look for disturbances the aircraft causes in the atmosphere rather than looking for the aircraft itself. You can potentially use a Schlieren telescope to detect the movement of atmospheric disturbances as a stealth aircraft moves through the atmosphere.


A photograph of a fighter jet's atmospheric disturbances taken from a Schlieren telescope

Basic radar computers and tech are also increasing in complexity and capability, so its entirely possible even basic modern radars can already detect older 1980's-level stealth technology.

Haha even Dutch investigative team cannot say for certain who MH17 shot down. And I would prefer their report over some random blogger's word.

Soviet and China style air forces are very big on ground radar-controlled fighter deployments. So they have the advantage of having a bigger picture than individual fighter squadrons acting on it alone without AWACS. So ground controller can potentially 'see' better and have a clearer view of the situation than its fighters the air and guide them to their targets accordingly.

History has shown many examples of 'obsolete' fighters taking on state-of-the-art fighters and shown at least parity with them, with the help of ground controllers.

Good thing for China is that they are (for now) limiting their battlefield only up to the second island chain. This is so they can better concentrate its resources to deploy to that space intsead of being spread out over a wider area. They probably have zeroed every long-range weapon they have onto that sector.



People have wondered why they haven't spread out into a more global role. I say they currently feel they are still not ready, so for now they are concentrating everything they have in that relatively small part of the pacific ocean. When they have better equipment and more numbers, I'll bet they will spread out then.

I don't know if it's because of the distance or what, but that Tornado looks hella small.

Their tactics are still shit though. How in hell do they park the tank on top of the rise there on full view of everybody? And where's the covering infantry?

Speaking of field-testing a new tank......Reminds me of the Sino-Soviet border skirmish at Zhenbao island at Ussuri river in 1969. The Soviets got one of their brand-new T-62 tanks stuck in the mud near the river. Predictably the chinese tried to capture it and the Soviets tried to recapture or at least destroy it. Both sides fought tooth and nails to capture that one single tank, stuck in the mud, for a full week (15.3.1969-21.3.1969).

Finally the PLA managed to capture the tank though, with the help of frogmen and learned many of its secrets. They eventually developed the Type 69 MBT line from that one tank. So a happy ending?

Those Russian military advisors should really kick those Syrian forces' asses into attention. With some semblance of proper discipline and tactics, they could've had a much better situation than they are now in.

Should've used the surrounding buildings as cover for the tank though. The most obvious avenues of approach in the surrounding terrain should also be especially watched and patrolled by the infantry, as they are usually the most accessible and open route to attack. Tactics 101.

p.s: also,probably after 5 years of attrition would have significantly degraded the professional officer and NCO corps, so lowering the standards of the SAA. Using barely trained and undisciplined militias as combat support isn't helping things either.

Probably scared tank will brew up like their older T-62 and T-72s. If the few SAA T-90s are such prized assets, I think at least must install 1 Russian crew inside each T-90 tank, to make sure the tank is operated correctly and the surrounding infantry could be deployed in a proper manner.