Sat Jul 9, 2016, 12:22 AM

Canadian-led battle group will deploy to Latvia, part of NATO move to deter Russia

Source: CBC (Canada)

By Murray Brewster, CBC News Posted: Jul 08, 2016 4:00 AM ET Last Updated: Jul 08, 2016 5:36 PM ET

Canada will send a battle group of soldiers to Latvia by early 2017 as part of a NATO plan to counter fears of Russian aggression in eastern Europe, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau confirmed Friday.

The roughly 450 Canadians will form the nucleus of a robust multi-national combat battalion, part of a brigade to provide credible deterrence against further Russian expansionism in the region.

That number could fluctuate depending upon negotiations with other allies who are expected to help fill out the ranks for an open-ended mission, which Canada's chief of defence staff says raises the stakes for any nation thinking of interfering in the Baltics.
~
In addition, the Liberal government renewed a commitment to provide six CF-18 fighter jets for air policing duties over the Baltic states, a mission the air force last conducted in 2014.

The deployment of a navy frigate as part of NATO's standing task force — something that was first ordered by the former Conservative government — will continue as well.

Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/cananda-nato-baltic-troops-1.3669952

Deploying troops and weapons? Well that's not very polite, eh!

130 replies, 9075 views

Thread info Bookmark this thread Trash this thread

Reply to this thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

130 replies	Author	Time	Post
Canadian-led battle group will deploy to Latvia, part of NATO move to deter Russia (Original post)	Night Watchman	Jul 2016	OP
Message auto-removed	Name removed	Jul 2016	#1
There is an objective to all this and it is not "Russian Aggression"	newthinking	Jul 2016	#2
Before 2014 I probably would have agreed however Russia is in an expansionist mood	cstanleytech	Jul 2016	#3
..	Purveyor	Jul 2016	#4
just how much do you admire that guy, anyway?	uhnope	Jul 2016	#8
"Russian Aggression" is a myth	Cayenne	Jul 2016	#5
Russia took Crimea by force, with a fig leaf of Russian equipped & secretly manned 'Crimean' forces.	Bernardo de La Paz	Jul 2016	#9
Russia took Crimea by force?	uawchild	Jul 2016	#11
Unmarked Russian forces with local militias, before the referendum, against UN resolution.	Bernardo de La Paz	Jul 2016	#13
Avoidance noted	uawchild	Jul 2016	#14
Force is not always marked by death. No avoidance. Russia used force to take over the Crimea.	Bernardo de La Paz	Jul 2016	#17
Lol can't admit you might be wrong?	uawchild	Jul 2016	#18
The referundum was not a true and proper referendum so there was not "willingness of the majority".	Bernardo de La Paz	Jul 2016	#19
more McCarthyism here on DU?!?	uawchild	Jul 2016	#21
No accusation. Written carefuly, so read carefully. You're overly-sensitive & only u think u win. nt	Bernardo de La Paz	Jul 2016	#25
It's rampant McCarthyism n/t	uawchild	Jul 2016	#26
This message was self-deleted by its author	uhnope	Jul 2016	#42
Exactly. A vote under foreign occupation must ALWAYS be assumed to be illegitimate. nt	stevenleser	Aug 2016	#51
Wasn't Iraq worse than Crimea?	uawchild	Jul 2016	#15
No, didn't we have world support then?	treestar	Aug 2016	#58
I take your point	uawchild	Aug 2016	#59
They had a huge parade	Cayenne	Jul 2016	#22
lol	uawchild	Jul 2016	#24
Looks familiar, where have I seen that before?	stevenleser	Aug 2016	#56
my god. Putin lovers really do live in an alternate reality. nt	uhnope	Jul 2016	#16
Putin haters are dangerous to the peace.	Cayenne	Jul 2016	#28
+10000	AntiBank	Jul 2016	#34
drive-by one-liner Orwellian apologia	uhnope	Jul 2016	#41
Yep. nt	stevenleser	Aug 2016	#50
Killing is not required for one to wage an unprovoked war of aggression. See the Austrian anschluss	stevenleser	Aug 2016	#49
Sorry, but I do believe Austria, as a nation, joined the Third Reich willingly	uawchild	Aug 2016	#60
People have debated that point, but it's irrelevant.	stevenleser	Aug 2016	#61
it was YOUR example of a bloodless invasion	uawchild	Aug 2016	#62
That's right it was. And the point stands. nt	stevenleser	Aug 2016	#63
Not according to slews of historians	uawchild	Aug 2016	#65
The historians all agree that the anschluss was a war crime, just like Crimea. That's my point.	stevenleser	Aug 2016	#66
The historians do not all agree	uawchild	Aug 2016	#67
Yes they do all agree that it was a war crime. Sorry you don't get to make stuff up	stevenleser	Aug 2016	#68
Don't move goal posts, your point was debunked	uawchild	Aug 2016	#69
A straw man is not a debunking, its a logical fallacy. My point stands.	stevenleser	Aug 2016	#70
before wasting more of your time	uhnope	Aug 2016	#71
thank you for taking on a DUer defending Nazi war crimes comparable to Putin's takeover of Ukraine	uhnope	Aug 2016	#72
[reply made moot after post edited]	Bernardo de La Paz	Aug 2016	#77
sorry, Bernardo, I was not referring to Steve but to his interlocutor.	uhnope	Aug 2016	#78
If I hadn't read Orwell's notes on Nationalism, I wouldnt believe it or understand from where it	stevenleser	Aug 2016	#80
Ad hominem attacks and uhnope?	uawchild	Aug 2016	#82
Nope, my arguments to you are my arguments to you. I was talking with uhnope and	stevenleser	Aug 2016	#83
uhnope. Steven Steven Steven	uawchild	Aug 2016	#84
And you were talking about being ad-hominem? This is the problem with all your arguments	stevenleser	Aug 2016	#85
Don't like me laughing at your new Bestie?	uawchild	Aug 2016	#86
He didn't lie, he was right on. That's what you did. nt	stevenleser	Aug 2016	#87
Wow, you have hit rock bottom.	uawchild	Aug 2016	#88
I've already laid it out for you several times. You are so determined to defend Putin you dont see	stevenleser	Aug 2016	#89
"You are justifying both the Austrian Anschluss" That's a flat out lie.	uawchild	Aug 2016	#90
So a war crime is OK if Putin does it but not if the Third Reich does it. OK, I stand corrected.	stevenleser	Aug 2016	#91
And the CONCESSION of DEFEAT finally comes	uawchild	Aug 2016	#92
Yes, YOUR defeat. Your hypocrisy on war crimes is laid bare for all to see. nt	stevenleser	Aug 2016	#93
No apology for saying I defended NAZI WAR CRIMES? Ok...	uawchild	Aug 2016	#94
Yeah, um, you are defending Putin's war crimes. I don't apologize to those who engage in apologia	stevenleser	Aug 2016	#96
Are those goal posts shifting made of straw? lol	uawchild	Aug 2016	#99
Nope, while you have created straw men, I have been saying the same thing since my first	stevenleser	Aug 2016	#100
YOU JUST EDITED OUT THE PART YOU GOT CAUGHT LYING ABOUT. lol	uawchild	Aug 2016	#102
Nope, I was confused about your support for the same war crime in one case and not another.	stevenleser	Aug 2016	#103
Still not intellectually honest enough to apologize?	uawchild	Aug 2016	#104
Still not intellectually honest enough to admit you are supporting a war crime?	stevenleser	Aug 2016	#106
You are desperately trying to change the subject. You should be apologizing instead.	uawchild	Aug 2016	#109
Nope, once again, that has been my point since my first response to you.	stevenleser	Aug 2016	#110
Sorry you don't get to slip away while making false accusations	uawchild	Aug 2016	#111
Thats right, you don't get to slip away after being an apologist for Putin's war crimes.	stevenleser	Aug 2016	#112
Still waiting for your apology	uawchild	Aug 2016	#113
What apology? You are in fact an apologist for war crimes. Own it. nt	stevenleser	Aug 2016	#114
You really should just apologize	uawchild	Aug 2016	#115
Nope, I noted very specifically for which war crimes you are an apologist. nt	stevenleser	Aug 2016	#116
Yep, I noted specifically what false accusation you should apologize for. n/t	uawchild	Aug 2016	#119
And I noted that no apology is necessary, the confusion on that point is your fault. nt	stevenleser	Aug 2016	#120
It's important you apologize to not cheapen real accusations of anti-semitism	uawchild	Aug 2016	#121
I tried to warn you but you had to find out the hard way!	uhnope	Aug 2016	#95
I'm like a cat who likes playing with a caught mouse. Except in this case, the mouse kills itself at	stevenleser	Aug 2016	#97
yep...and then they thought they won! unbelieveabe. n/t	uhnope	Aug 2016	#98
English may not be their first language. Their first language is probably written in Cyrillic	stevenleser	Aug 2016	#101
Have you heard SoS Kerry lately?	Cayenne	Jul 2016	#20
Yes, the West does not readily recognize the Russian annexation of Crimea	Bernardo de La Paz	Jul 2016	#23
NATO is explicitly planning a war	Cayenne	Jul 2016	#27
I just explained why NATO is not planning a war.	Bernardo de La Paz	Jul 2016	#29
Yes they are, Syria is going to get hot	Cayenne	Jul 2016	#30
Use your head please. Neither NATO nor the US will start a war with Russia as the risk is to great	cstanleytech	Jul 2016	#31
There is no "war of expansion".	Ghost Dog	Jul 2016	#35
Uh huh tell that to the Ukrainian government. nt	cstanleytech	Jul 2016	#37
A quarter of Georgia has been occupied, and Crimea has been annexed.	NuclearDem	Aug 2016	#55
SU-24 shootdown	Cayenne	Jul 2016	#36
At first I thought you were being serious. Now I know you are joking.	stevenleser	Aug 2016	#64
I am sorry to see Robert Frost's poem	locks	Aug 2016	#46
Fences are different from walls. You can talk through fences, but not walls. . . . nt	Bernardo de La Paz	Aug 2016	#48
Poetry is different from literalism.	LanternWaste	Aug 2016	#53
I expect all out war in the ME right around October.	roamer65	Jul 2016	#33
yup	Cayenne	Jul 2016	#40
Crimea's importance to Russia may have peaked.	amandabeech	Aug 2016	#57
No they did not.	JackRiddler	Aug 2016	#73
Your post is internally contradictory.	Bernardo de La Paz	Aug 2016	#79
NATO in Ukraine is their red line	Cayenne	Aug 2016	#118
When do you think your war is going to happen? What evidence do you have other than speculation?	Bernardo de La Paz	Aug 2016	#125
Kerry laid out Aug 1	Cayenne	Aug 2016	#126
Ha ha ha haaa har!	Bernardo de La Paz	Aug 2016	#127
If "Russian Agression" is a myth, Canada would not be doing this.	displacedtexan	Aug 2016	#47
Yeah, why bother to figure anything out for yourself.	JackRiddler	Aug 2016	#75
No doubt, you have peer-reviewed, objective evidence to support this creative allegation	LanternWaste	Aug 2016	#52
Ask Ukraine or Georgia if they think it's a myth.	NuclearDem	Aug 2016	#54
I like to think you're joking.	tavernier	Aug 2016	#105
How dumb to announce stratigic battle	Jnclr89	Jul 2016	#6
Wrong. Very smart to announce deployment so that nobody makes any false moves in reaction	Bernardo de La Paz	Jul 2016	#10
The strategic plan really is	uawchild	Jul 2016	#12
How many Crimeas and Ukraines are necessary ...	JustABozoOnThisBus	Jul 2016	#44
How many Iraqs and Afghanistans	uawchild	Jul 2016	#45
Godspeed.	uhnope	Jul 2016	#7
Emphasis on "little" as that number of troops is more symbolic than anything. nt	cstanleytech	Jul 2016	#32
of course	Night Watchman	Jul 2016	#38
I would not say the west couldnt win such a war rather it probably would	cstanleytech	Jul 2016	#39
that's hyperbole--there's no "nuclear tripwire".	uhnope	Jul 2016	#43
Yay! Turn Latvia into a battlefield on the basis of neocon fantasy!	JackRiddler	Aug 2016	#74
you sound like Trump	uhnope	Aug 2016	#76
Oh, I am wounded.	JackRiddler	Aug 2016	#107
how about I sound like McCartney?	uhnope	Aug 2016	#129
1st problem with your post is that Russia is no longer communist or even socialist.	stevenleser	Aug 2016	#81
WOW! YOU ARE SO DAMN SMART!	JackRiddler	Aug 2016	#108
Nope, just correcting a simple mistake in your post. Not a big deal. nt	stevenleser	Aug 2016	#117
jeez this sure became a meltdown thread for them Putinistas, didn't it?	uhnope	Aug 2016	#122
More negative nationalism on display. As Orwell noted it makes people nutty	stevenleser	Aug 2016	#128
Post removed	Post removed	Aug 2016	#123
be careful when you wage war of the weak wiki links	uhnope	Aug 2016	#124
Interesting.	Quantess	Aug 2016	#130

Response to Night Watchman (Original post)

Name removed Message auto-removed

Response to Name removed (Reply #1)

Sat Jul 9, 2016, 12:45 AM

newthinking (3,982 posts)

2. There is an objective to all this and it is not "Russian Aggression"

The trouble is that it is playing a very dangerous game in the process.

Canadian-led battle group will deploy to Latvia, part of NATO move to deter Russia

2. There is an objective to all this and it is not "Russian Aggression"

3. Before 2014 I probably would have agreed however Russia is in an expansionist mood

4. ..

8. just how much do you admire that guy, anyway?

5. "Russian Aggression" is a myth

9. Russia took Crimea by force, with a fig leaf of Russian equipped & secretly manned 'Crimean' forces.

11. Russia took Crimea by force?

13. Unmarked Russian forces with local militias, before the referendum, against UN resolution.

14. Avoidance noted

17. Force is not always marked by death. No avoidance. Russia used force to take over the Crimea.

18. Lol can't admit you might be wrong?

19. The referundum was not a true and proper referendum so there was not "willingness of the majority".

21. more McCarthyism here on DU?!?

25. No accusation. Written carefuly, so read carefully. You're overly-sensitive & only u think u win. nt

26. It's rampant McCarthyism n/t

51. Exactly. A vote under foreign occupation must ALWAYS be assumed to be illegitimate. nt

15. Wasn't Iraq worse than Crimea?

58. No, didn't we have world support then?

59. I take your point

22. They had a huge parade

24. lol

56. Looks familiar, where have I seen that before?

16. my god. Putin lovers really do live in an alternate reality. nt

28. Putin haters are dangerous to the peace.

34. +10000

41. drive-by one-liner Orwellian apologia

50. Yep. nt

49. Killing is not required for one to wage an unprovoked war of aggression. See the Austrian anschluss

60. Sorry, but I do believe Austria, as a nation, joined the Third Reich willingly

61. People have debated that point, but it's irrelevant.

62. it was YOUR example of a bloodless invasion

63. That's right it was. And the point stands. nt

65. Not according to slews of historians

66. The historians all agree that the anschluss was a war crime, just like Crimea. That's my point.

67. The historians do not all agree

68. Yes they do all agree that it was a war crime. Sorry you don't get to make stuff up

69. Don't move goal posts, your point was debunked

70. A straw man is not a debunking, its a logical fallacy. My point stands.

71. before wasting more of your time

72. thank you for taking on a DUer defending Nazi war crimes comparable to Putin's takeover of Ukraine

77. [reply made moot after post edited]

78. sorry, Bernardo, I was not referring to Steve but to his interlocutor.

80. If I hadn't read Orwell's notes on Nationalism, I wouldnt believe it or understand from where it

82. Ad hominem attacks and uhnope?

83. Nope, my arguments to you are my arguments to you. I was talking with uhnope and

84. uhnope. Steven Steven Steven

85. And you were talking about being ad-hominem? This is the problem with all your arguments

86. Don't like me laughing at your new Bestie?

87. He didn't lie, he was right on. That's what you did. nt

88. Wow, you have hit rock bottom.

89. I've already laid it out for you several times. You are so determined to defend Putin you dont see

90. "You are justifying both the Austrian Anschluss" That's a flat out lie.

91. So a war crime is OK if Putin does it but not if the Third Reich does it. OK, I stand corrected.

92. And the CONCESSION of DEFEAT finally comes

93. Yes, YOUR defeat. Your hypocrisy on war crimes is laid bare for all to see. nt

94. No apology for saying I defended NAZI WAR CRIMES? Ok...

96. Yeah, um, you are defending Putin's war crimes. I don't apologize to those who engage in apologia

99. Are those goal posts shifting made of straw? lol

100. Nope, while you have created straw men, I have been saying the same thing since my first

102. YOU JUST EDITED OUT THE PART YOU GOT CAUGHT LYING ABOUT. lol

103. Nope, I was confused about your support for the same war crime in one case and not another.

104. Still not intellectually honest enough to apologize?

106. Still not intellectually honest enough to admit you are supporting a war crime?

109. You are desperately trying to change the subject. You should be apologizing instead.

110. Nope, once again, that has been my point since my first response to you.

111. Sorry you don't get to slip away while making false accusations

112. Thats right, you don't get to slip away after being an apologist for Putin's war crimes.

113. Still waiting for your apology

114. What apology? You are in fact an apologist for war crimes. Own it. nt

115. You really should just apologize

116. Nope, I noted very specifically for which war crimes you are an apologist. nt

119. Yep, I noted specifically what false accusation you should apologize for. n/t

120. And I noted that no apology is necessary, the confusion on that point is your fault. nt

121. It's important you apologize to not cheapen real accusations of anti-semitism

95. I tried to warn you but you had to find out the hard way!

97. I'm like a cat who likes playing with a caught mouse. Except in this case, the mouse kills itself at

98. yep...and then they thought they won! unbelieveabe. n/t

101. English may not be their first language. Their first language is probably written in Cyrillic

20. Have you heard SoS Kerry lately?