Neredzu, nedzirdu, neteikšu

vara bungas: Kārtējo reizi jākonstatē, ka AM ar stratēģisko komunikāciju ir švaki. Paši sevi iedzina stūrī pieņemot, ka Helme piesauktais “plāns B” ir fikcija, pārpratums nevis 3B  sabiedrību “piespiešana dialogam”. Kamēr LV  noliedz  problēmu, EE  formulē, kas ir “plāns B”. Ticu, ka paies neilgs laiks un LV AM būs čempioni B-plānošanā.

“[..]Министр обороны Латвии — о словах Хельме: не слышал ни о каком плане B! [..]”

avots

“[..] Kunnas gave an example from several U.S. think tanks, whose authors claim that a balance of power is actually the guarantee of peace. This is “plan B”.

“Plan B really should be for the allies, but especially for the three Baltic states including us, to achieve a real balance of power with Russian military forces in its western military district,” Kunnas noted.

Kunnas listed three Russian armies, and one army corps, in towards “mainland” Russia and in the Kaliningrad exclave, quoting the Jamestown Foundation’s suggestion that the U.S. should restore its military assistance in northeastern Europe.

“The same report very adequately assesses that the Baltic States are able to increase their wartime defense forces and close up the gaps demographically and organizationally. But they simply do not have the money. The economy cannot pay for it,” Kunnas added.

For Kunnas, “plan B” is not a contingency plan in case NATO does not work, but rather the next step in cooperation with NATO. In addition to the allies, the Baltic States must increase their own strength and capabilities, Kunnas argues. [..]

avots

VB: Aktuāla ilustrācija, par to kuram ir lielāka taisnība. TR izpildās uz 3B rēķina.

“[..]Without Turkey’s approval, it could be harder for NATO to step up its defenses in the Baltics and Poland quickly.

“They (the Turks) are taking eastern Europeans hostage, blocking approval of this military planning until they get concessions,” one of the diplomatic sources told Reuters.[..]

avots