It’s Time to Reopen a Base on Iceland

Cold War era station at Keflavik Airbase, Reykjavik. Source.

In recent months, Russian probing and aggression against NATO has grown both more aggressive and more frequent.

While NATO should be treated as a unitary whole and not an alliance of tiers, recent Russian aggression has targeted not only Scandinavia and the Baltics, but also Great Britain and the United States.

The Russian navy has recently grown so bold as to shadow U.S. aircraft carriers and other ships as they leave port and enter international waters.

The Russian submarine fleet is also growing: the Russian navy will upgrade ten nuclear submarines within the next five years. Alas, many NATO countries have let their capabilities slide.

Great Britain, for example, recently had to request U.S. assistance to search for a Russian submarine suspected of infiltrated its waters off Scotland.

Such Russian belligerence will only become worse if Russian strongman Vladimir Putin concludes President Barack Obama’s snubs toward NATO suggest ambivalence and weakness…

h/t Marvin

Share
  • Everyone Else

    “Lies coming out of Washington that portray Putin as the grand aggressor are nothing new; for about a year they have formed a constant stream, from the lips of the Vice President, the Secretary of State, and in a milder form from the President himself. As a result the idea of Russian aggression has become close to an article of faith in Northern Europe’s mainstream media.”

    http://www.unz.com/article/nato-and-the-two-central-conflicts-of-the-ukraine-crisis/

    • eMan14

      I can’t say I agree with the article’s assessment. Putin is very much pursuing an aggressive posture. He does sense weakness in the leadership of the West. And he’s acting on it. Obama has a fluid red line philosophy in his foreign relations.

      • Everyone Else

        “A quick review of some of the recent headlines will help readers to grasp the scale of the conflict that is cropping up below the radar:

        “US, Bulgaria to hold Balkans military drills”, “NATO Begins Exercises In Black Sea”, “Army to send even more troops, tanks to Europe”, “Poland requests greater US military presence”, “U.S. Army sending armored convoy 1,100 miles through Europe”, “Over 120 US tanks, armored vehicles arrive in Latvia”, “US, Poland to Conduct Missile Exercise in March – Pentagon”

        “Get the picture? There’s a war going on, a war between the United States and Russia.

        “Notice how most of the headlines emphasize US involvement, not NATO. In other words, the provocations against Russia originate from Washington not Europe. This is an important point. The EU has supported US-led economic sanctions, but it’s not nearly as supportive of the military build up along the perimeter. That’s Washington’s idea and the cost is borne by the US alone. Naturally, moving tanks, armored vehicles and artillery around the world is an expensive project, but the US is more than willing to make the sacrifice if it helps to achieve its objectives”

        http://www.unz.com/mwhitney/washingtons-war-on-russia/

        • Minicapt

          Looks like the FSB is paying well these days.

          Cheers

        • Clausewitz

          Oh look, someone taught him how to cut and paste.

    • tom_billesley

      Jottings of a useful idiot.
      http://www.karelvanwolferen.com/jottings/
      Strategic bombers flying up the English Channel are just sightseeing.

    • Clausewitz

      I think the appropriate Tom Clancy book you’re looking for is “Red Storm Rising”.

  • David Murrell

    The author of the Commentary article might have read the late Tom Clancy’s novel, “Red Storm Rising”:
    http://www.amazon.com/Red-Storm-Rising-Tom-Clancy/dp/042510107X/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1427371802&sr=1-1&keywords=red+storm+rising

    In the first chapters in the book, an elite Russian paratroop division, in a surprise, lands on Iceland and quickly takes it over, giving the Russians a key tactical advantage in controlling the Northern Atlantic.

    • Clausewitz

      Still my favourite Clancy book. Even after I’ve read them all. Where’s Ding Chavez when you really need him.

  • Hard Little Machine

    I don’t see the Icelanders permitting such a thing. The country doesn’t have an armed forces, is semi officially neutral and doesn’t want much to do with either NATO or the EU.

    • DD_Austin

      Countries that have armed forces don’t need permission of countries that don’t have armed forces.

      • Hard Little Machine

        Obama opening a military base w/o the country’s permission? To confront an opponent Obama claims does not exist?

  • Raymond Hietapakka
  • Everyone Else

    Listen folks.I don’t have a horse in this race, nor do I have a royal road to the truth.

    I noticed a ton of anti-Putin articles in the mainstream media, and ran across the links I posted showing an obverse view of reality. All I’m doing is trying to keep more than one interpretation in my mind at once.

    How do we know who’s fomenting what between Russia and the Ukraine (AND USA & NATO)?

    One thing for sure, apparently the Crimeans are happier being part of Russia than Ukraine. Here’s a current article from FORBES:

    ——————–
    ONE YEAR AFTER RUSSIA ANNEXED CRIMEA, LOCALS PREFER MOSCOW TO KIEV

    “The U.S and European Union may want to save Crimeans from themselves. But the Crimeans are happy right where they are.”

    “One year after the annexation of the Ukrainian peninsula in the Black Sea, poll after poll shows that the locals there — be they Ukrainians, ethnic Russians or Tatars are mostly all in agreement: life with Russia is better than life with Ukraine.”

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2015/03/20/one-year-after-russia-annexed-crimea-locals-prefer-moscow-to-kiev/
    ——————–

    PS. The last time a ran across such a slew of ONE-SIDED mainstream media reporting on an issue I hadn’t thought much about before, was when NATO bombed the Serbs, thereby handing Islam its first country in Europe.