Some 2,000 soldiers would be sent in the “initial stage” of the operation, Sergey Naryshkin said
France is preparing its forces for deployment to Ukraine, the head of Russia's Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) Sergey Naryshkin claimed in a statement on Tuesday. Paris allegedly seeks to send as many as 2,000 troops to Ukraine, he said.
French President Emmanuel Macron said last month that he “cannot exclude” the possibility of Western soldiers being sent to aid Kiev in its fight against Moscow, branding Russia an “adversary” while denying Paris was “waging war” against it.
In the statement on Tuesday, the SVR chief said the French Armed Forces had become “concerned” about the rising number of French [mercenary] nationals dying in Ukraine.
The casualty level has supposedly surpassed a “psychological threshold” and could trigger protests, the statement said, adding that Macron’s government was concealing this information and “delaying” the moment it would have to be revealed.
According to the spy chief, the French military is worried about the government’s plans to send the contingent to Ukraine, considering that such an operation would be difficult to conduct without Russia noticing.
The French soldiers would indeed become “a legitimate priority target for attacks by the Russian Armed Forces,” Naryshkin said.
The claims come as the chief of staff of the French Army, Gen. Pierre Schill, said in an interview on Tuesday that France is prepared to take part in the “toughest engagements” militarily, and is ready to face any international developments. He added that Paris could assemble a division of 20,000 troops within 30 days and an army of 60,000 by joining with divisions from other NATO allies.
Russian President Vladimir Putin has also claimed this week that Western mercenaries, including French nationals, are dying in Ukraine “in large numbers.” Commenting on a potential NATO deployment to Ukraine, the president also warned that this would be “one step shy of a full-scale World War III.”
(non-archived link: https://www.rt.com/news/594517-france-prepare-deploy-troops-ukraine/)
the French Armed Forces had become “concerned” about the rising number of French [mercenary] nationals dying in Ukraine.
Rest in piss, bozos. Just another reason for masses around the world to be grateful to Russia, for culling the combined forces of fascism and imperialism of the west and their Ukranian puppets.
Western militaries are problematic and guilty enough (as an understatement), but western mercenaries? These are not people signing up out of deluded/misguided notions of "defending their country," these are the lowest of the low, utter scumbags, especially those mercenaries who join the cause of the Banderite state, who almost certainly are all either Nazis or sympathetic/tolerant of them.
The two feds who downvoted your post will clock off at 5pm having this be the only thing they did at work today.
God, this just keeps getting more depressing.
I wish Soviet Union had never collapsed.
Why depressing? If the West wants to accelerate their complete destruction, and a few thousand frogs leap gleefully to their death, I say let them. As long as they keep trickling into their deathtrap and not flooding with poise and planning and coordination, the West is ironically just bleeding themselves on Russian bullets.
Because it's not just about the West losing.
It means more and more unnecessary deaths and suffering, it could even mean that all of humanity dies and suffers as a result once nukes come into play, and I think that's really depressing when it's easily avoidable.
That's very fair, I guess I see it as more war and unnecessary death are already on the itinerary, the Western hegemony seems to refuse to die quietly, so I hope the final act plays out with them foolishly wasting 1% of their forces at a time instead of resolutely commiting all forces and causing an even more devastating conflict all around. As someone said above, the French may be a useful vassal the to US in a future war with China, so them wasting their forces prematurely and possibly without glowing blessing from the US is all good things.
Yeah, I feel that, let's just hope none of us glow anytime soon.
I was downplaying inevitable Russian casualties with French involvement, I apologize. I just hope this wicked beast collapses as soon as possible.
Macron currently:
Show
Surely this won't end badly. On another note, if it really happens, the French are going to get destroyed yet again which will free most of their colonies in Africa, they won't be able to do anything after that meaning that also French Guiana and whole bunch of oversees territories can get freed also.
Even if it went intitially decent for them, they cannot possible divert their forces both to Russia and to Africa. Africa frees itself, another source of funding for Western empire gone, another nail in the coffin. There's no winning, this is Nazi Battle of the Bulge latewar desperation.
I applaud your optimism, but I remain skeptical that this will go so well, at least at first. I can see France sending more troops or getting other countries involved.
Well shit.
Here we go. France trying to get nuked. And once again Salami-slicing tactics, 2000 at first and if Russia doesn't respond there they'll send more if those don't produce an immediate effect on the battlefield.
Doctrine dictates it's time for Russia to escalate. Russia could I suppose try taking out more transport and infrastructure links, destroy rail at Ukraine's borders, take out rail bridges to force troop movements by road though that just slows down the inevitable it also means they can't come in on civilian transport so unnoticed. Probably not enough. Need to target whatever staging base they're coming from and/or send a message by bombing NATO directly and showing they're not off limits if they want to participate. Though I am unsure conventional weapons will do anything but make Macron angry, it may be the the fact we are that the point that only a nuclear illustration will sober the west and Macron may be so deranged he will only double down in the face of that and use French nuclear weapons. I don't know how effective Russia's S-500 systems might be at taking down French ICBMs but I know Russia's arsenal absolutely outnumbers France's small number and if they get to that point France will be obliterated.
And to think only a day ago I seriously thought Macron was probably just posturing including leaking threats. We're speeding towards WW3 and all thanks to France, who would have thought. Maybe if we're lucky the US will grab his arm and stop him because dead irradiated vassals aren't very useful but who knows. It could all yet still be part of a ploy to get concessions but Russia needs to treat it like full intent.
I honestly doubt that Russia will use nuclear weapons. Right now, the war is going rather well for them. If things continue as they are, Russia will probably win sometime next year.
More NATO troops being sent in is an issue for Russia, but the collective west is unable to produce and send enough equipment to Ukraine (especially artillery shells). Furthermore, there are already a lot of NATO troops and CIA agents in Ukraine.
It is unclear how much this will benefit Ukraine. Even if Macron goes ahead with this escalation, Russia is still in a favorable position where it can bleed the west.
it may be the the fact we are that the point that only a nuclear illustration will sober the west
It would also be the perfect justification for escalation.
It would also be the perfect justification for escalation.
I don't want nukes flying but I think we need to admit all possible actions have their downsides. That this is a kind of trap where if Russia under-acts it's taken as weakness and an excuse for continued involvement, if they over-act they claim it's proof of their maliciousness and aggression and it's used to justify escalation. All actions on this gameboard have blow-back from the reactionary fascist Europeans. In this case more countries joined NATO. If they hadn't acted the cost would be higher. Escalation is baked in until the west accepts a loss and they're not there yet.
I admit there may be nothing that can sober them. I don't claim to know the right moves here but this slow and gradual escalation is not waking their leaders up enough. They continue to talk of this going on for years, of their arms production matching Russian parity. I think seriously some of them have delusions Ukraine can win, they can hold them off for another 18 months, get them higher production capacity and defeat Russia.
There is a danger of falling for their salami-slicing tactics though and we must see the big picture and their attitudes.
We're speeding towards WW3
On the contrary I think we’re going in the other direction.
This all started out as a revived Cold War. Then there was the WW2 phase before WW1-style trench warfare set in. Now Macron is bringing back le Grand Armée.
I think we’re speed running back to Hastings.
Though I am unsure conventional weapons will do anything but make Macron angry, it may be the the fact we are that the point that only a nuclear illustration will sober the west and Macron may be so deranged he will only double down in the face of that and use French nuclear weapons.
Russia kind of has to use nukes here because if they don't NATO is just going to increase troops to Ukraine little by litte and will obviously use Ukraine, at first, and their own forces later to attack inside Russia as well, but will Russia really do it? Or at least something close to it?
I remember them not doing much when the colonialists used one of Russia's planes as a shield to attack Syria. They did get the colonialists to stop attacking the north of Syria after that I think but will they continue not doing much in this case too or will they finally show where the red line is?
I tend to agree. Though I will also mention that the problem with using nuclear weapons is it's a bigger slap in the face to the west than non-nuclear. There would be a feeling among some of these deranged liberals that they're letting Russia get away with using nukes (whereas now the claim is they're letting them get away with nuclear blackmail so there kind of is no winning with these irrational people who seem high on their own supply of propaganda) and that it demands a response in kind or else Euro-liberals will forever live in the shadow of that and then more hand-wringing and pitiful weeping about how Europe is a garden and it's worth dying over.
I'm just concerned once you get to this point of troops there, that there are increasingly no off-ramps short of intelligence agencies or the military murdering their own leaders to stop them. Because the political leaders won't back down under normal circumstances. Once they've committed it's a matter of their pride, their next election, and in their mind national pride, liberal pride, rules based order pride. And backing down is seen as a humiliation, a capitulation. I admit things would change if Russia could suppress entirely or nearly entirely France's nuclear strike capability and say air-burst a nuclear weapon outside Paris to intentionally cause an EMP effect to bring down the power grid and electronics but not directly kill that many people. Something to really bring home the war to the people and politicians and terrify them of their lives without spilling tons of blood that needs avenging as it were. But I just don't know. This is getting scary.
I admit things would change if Russia could suppress entirely or nearly entirely France’s nuclear strike capability and say air-burst a nuclear weapon outside Paris to intentionally cause an EMP effect to bring down the power grid and electronics but not directly kill that many people.
The first part is what I was just thinking about as well. Avoiding a nuclear strike by using conventional strikes while striking nukes to really send the message, and if they can destroy enough of if it they can just say that MAD doesn't work between them anymore and ask for terms for peace, like France getting out of NATO or something like that.
But about the EMP that could be a good idea, specially considering the damage that could cause to the EU's economy if it destroys many factories and such. Althou I'm not sure how much damage it would do to nearby countries as I think the it needs to be blown up quite high up and has a big range but I might be mistaken.
Personally I would be surprised if any of this happens. The West's weapons, armor, style of fighting, psychology, and availability of willing and able recruits has already been exposed again and again as laughably bad. They have spent the last half century bullying vulnerable countries, occupying and fighting insurgencies, they are completely out of their element fighting a near-peer adversary. Their technology is overpriced, overengineered junk. They are running out of money and all of their industry and access to raw resources has been outsourced over the decades across the world, much of which supports Russia implicitly or explicitly. Like all fascists they are irrational, arrogant, narrow sighted, cowardly, and cultish. The cost for all these factors have been the terrible casualty rate inflicted not just on the Ukranian army but on all the mixed NATO mercenaries and NATO officials who have been training, arming, and supporting the Ukranians.
If the war drums rolled loud and an overwhelming coalition of NATO formed and resolutely plunged headfirst into war with Russia, the scenario would be much more contentious and unstable. However, if they are hindered by their own nominally war weary populaces, and can only give a few thousand at a time, treading softly because they are scared shitless of the consequences, they are doing nothing but weakening themselves at a rate that Russia can easily absorb.
I appreciate your optimism, but like an injured gazelle, the west is still dangerous.
More like an injured, rabid dog...yes, i agree. Especially in a more nuclear discussion.
try taking out more transport and infrastructure links, destroy rail at Ukraine’s borders, take out rail bridges to force troop movements by road
Military might want to do that, it might be sensible. But the bourgeoisie running the country won't let them. Same reason the oil and gas and ammonia pipes are still operational
NATO article 5 doesn't cover aggression. If France sends troops and they get attacked/killed other NATO countries are under no obligation to step in. This is Macron attempting to look tough since Russia targeted and killed with a missile strike those French mercenaries who were at a hotel/residence in Kharkov (iirc).
This also doesn't give France casus belli to attack Russia since it's France volountarily sending troops to an active war zone.
This will be a huge fiasco and it will weaken France. What it will do is pave the way for Le Pen to become the president of France.
pave the way for Le Pen to become the president of France.
There could also legit be a military coup. A lot of people would support it (for the worse). Either case I would recommend any leftist residing in France to not wait for the first wave of arrestations to conceal their activities.
That's 2k official troops, right? Plus logistics and support personnel. Plus however many foreign legion
You'll know by noticing a bigger number of Africans on the battlefield
If Russia blows those 2000 guys at once maybe Macron will think twice before sending more. Or not, who knows.
It wouldn’t just be the French, would it? That means it has some NATO consensus?
Not necessarily. Not like other members of NATO are going to physically stop them or condemn them for it obviously but it's not under the banner of it. Right now many other members seem more skeptical of this.
The only one who can make NATO jump and march is the US. France and other members can launch their own military operations but the bloc as a whole won't engage unless the US agrees. The US could probably veto France on this but they might have to lean on them more than they'd like and may be unwilling to do that and catch the blame when people talk after Ukraine falls and the US wants to engineer the blame to lie at the feet of the Russians of course, the Ukrainians who will be said to have not done enough, and Europe who will be blamed for not having bigger arms manufacturing capability and not spending 2% of GDP on military as NATO requires. The US will use that to force austerity and higher military spending while creating a zone of cheaper labor that's more amenable to signing up to die for the USA in the pacific against China in the near future.
Of course the deranged baltic nations are and have ever only been advocating a #nukerussianow strategy because they're extremely racist little dogs and have to bark loudly to feel important. But the bigger members who actually matter like Poland, Germany, UK are kind of waffling on what they want. They haven't backed Macron and in fact downplayed this when he first suggested it. The US almost certainly has little interest in getting directly involved at this point. They're saving their stuff for China. Whether they allow, impede, or indifferently shrug at their European vassals expending themselves on Russia in this fight is another matter.
Things could of course evolve. All bets are off if the French send tens of thousands of troops pouring in there and the Russians respond. Anything could happen at that point and the US would rather not lose its European vassals so it could be WW3.
Not like other members of NATO are going to physically stop them or condemn them for it obviously but it’s not under the banner of it.
Doubt this could be happening without the blessing of the boss. The fact it's "not under nato banner" means little - it's the same attempt at "plausible deniability" as everything else. Oh sure NATO isn't directly involved in the war, they're just supplying weapons, munitions, logistics, training, intelligence data, weapon operators. But suuure, they're not involved directly. Same shit here
I never claimed NATO was not involved in Ukraine. That is not in dispute by anyone of good faith. Obviously the US is intimately involved but Russia has no interest in nuking Rammstein air base or something because they're providing them intelligence. They're very carefully trying to manage this and have been at every step trying to avoid widening the conflict or even having it with their withdrawal from Kiev early in the war as a show of good faith for the peace process.
Fact is Euros have some independence just like Isn'treal does. They can buck their master a bit on exact details of the plan and France more than others given what's happened in Africa to its neo-colonies has more reason to be angry and gloomy about the effects of a loss here. US could put them back in line but they probably don't think it's a problem for the plan if a few thousand French die in Ukraine.
Update on this (further confirmation): https://lemmygrad.ml/post/4032520
