— We're running out of time. Let's discuss Europe's unpreparedness for a war with Russia. That's what the Washington Post has published recently. This isn't about our country's technical advantages or even our soldiers' legendary will to win. Because of the poorly developed infrastructure NATO tanks won't be able to arrive on time to the battlefield, whether on their own or via railroad. Let's watch the following footage.
Ben Hodges, former top commander of the U.S. Army in Europe: “The road network going between Poland and Lithuania is wholly inadequate for what we really need. I believe that Russia's objective is to undermine the alliance, and one way to do it is to demonstrate that we can't protect our allies. To call our bluff, basically.”
"There are other problems. Military shipments sometimes rank low on transportation priorities. It's not easy to slip a dozen trains transporting Strykers, which are military vehicles, in between cabbages and commuters. Lt. Colonel Adam Lackey learned this when he tried to get equipment for his squadron of strikers from Georgia to Germany. He thought it would take two weeks".
Colonel Adam Lackey: "The end of the exercise was August of 2015, and we saw the remainder, the last remaining vehicles, arrive in late December".
— So, that's the story. Nikolay Viktorovich, should we build them highways, too?
Nikolay Starikov, the Great Fatherland Party leader: They need a lot of things. As they say, a bad workman always blames his tools. However, I see this news in an exclusively positive light. If the West isn't ready for a war with Russia, there won't be a war. We don't plan to attack them. If they don't either, we'll remain at peace. Thus, it's great that their shipments arrive half a year later than scheduled. But, all jokes aside, I consider such talks controversial. On one hand, it's a subtle request for funding to build new railroads and highways.
— In Russia?
— No, towards Russia. As we know, any past aggression from the West relied on certain infrastructure. That's how it was during Napoleon and Hitler, and it won't be anything new now. On the other hand, the Americans are sending explanations to the media, justifying why they weren't able to keep the promises they've made to their allies. Either way, it's great, so this news is absolutely positive. If we also learn they didn't get their diapers, or their toilet paper supply is running late, let them keep saying that.
— They're doing exactly what you're doing. Look, you've annexed Crimea. What did you begin doing there?
— You know we haven't annexed anything.
— You began improving the infrastructure. You began to build highways, railroads, and airports. You're a militaristic state, just like the men shown by the US. Your logic is absolutely identical. You said so yourself just now.
— They began building power plants…
— ...when you've blocked our power supply.
— Do you know what the problem is?
— And, they began building highways after Ukraine had ruined them all.
— We couldn't respond, that's the difference. Vasily, it's not that simple. We deployed our troops on our territory.
— But, the logic is the same for all militarists.
— I disagree.
— Take over a territory, build highways, improve the infrastructure, and consolidate them.
— And put S-400 systems there.
— That's genius. That's the way to go.
— Put them on a beach by Yalta. What beaches? Who will go to Crimea now?
— If the point of war is to build bridges and roads for the enemy, I'd support this war.
— This is your goal, for us to deploy our troops there. There are some curious details.
— Vadim Valeryevich has been silent all this time. He's boiling over, he needs to speak out.
Vadim Tryukhan, the leader of Ukraine's European Movement:
— Let's talk about NATO. As we know, there's a summit scheduled for July 12th in Brussels. And now…
— Yet another attempt by Ukraine to enter NATO.
— The experts who analyze the prearrangements say it will leave its mark in history. Why is that? Because currently, Donald Trump's administration is preparing for serious changes in their interactions with the European NATO members. They will insist on NATO re-mobilizing, to increase their capabilities. They want NATO to increase their capabilities, their ability to confront any possible threats, mainly the ones coming from Russia.
—Their abilities for a possible confrontation. That's some historic summit.
—Nikolay Viktorovich, laugh at it all you want. However, if we compare the military power of the US and NATO with Russia's military power, the results won't play out in your favor. That's my first point. Now, the second one.
—What do you compare?
—Now, the financial factors.
Nikolay Starikov:
—I don't want to fight NATO, we don't plan to do it.
—Let me remind you.
—They'll throw money around.
—Do you recall NATO ever attacking Russia in its 70 years of existence?
Nikolay Starikov:
—And when has Russia attacked NATO?
—They never have.
—Over 70 years.
—However, Russia…
—NATO attacked Yugoslavia and Libya. NATO has been acting rather aggressively.
—Ever since 2007, time has been generating threats. Over time generating threats to NATO countries, to their neighbors, and other various states. Thus, NATO is forced to get defensive. That's why even Ukraine…
—Poor, vulnerable NATO.
—Only the minority of Ukrainian population wanted to enter NATO, but now the majority does. NATO is power, NATO is dependability, NATO is fair decision-making. And, fair distribution of resources.
—Good afternoon, NATO soldiers.
—I wouldn't underestimate the statements about improving communications for troop deployments. That's exactly what happened in Russia after 2008. When they saw the obvious shortcomings in the Russian Armed Forces during the 5-day war in Georgia, they invested a lot of money into the Armed Forces, making them significantly stronger.
—And who won?
—Thank God, there are no more obvious shortcomings.
—This was 60 Minutes. Have a good night.
—Good night.
