Nagorno-Karabagh: Military Balance Between Armenia & Azerbaijan

[burjuin]

Re: Nagorno-Karabagh: Military Balance Between Armenia & Azerbaijan

[Artashes]

Re: Nagorno-Karabagh: Military Balance Between Armenia & Azerbaijan

One of our priorities must be pushing the contact line back enough that they would be outside the range of missiles from airport and start the airport operation.

I hate to say it , but that sounds right to me.

What's next ?
They say ... "We can't tolerate that you can't tolerate our *** OVERTLY *** aggressive posturing ***
LOL.
It remains to be seen.

----- they need to reconsider ----

We are not war mongering. They are being overtly ***** WAR MONGERING *****
That's why we were compelled to do a "preemptive strike(s).
I'm concerned.

[burjuin]

Re: Nagorno-Karabagh: Military Balance Between Armenia & Azerbaijan

[burjuin]

Re: Nagorno-Karabagh: Military Balance Between Armenia & Azerbaijan

[burjuin]

Re: Nagorno-Karabagh: Military Balance Between Armenia & Azerbaijan

[burjuin]

Re: Nagorno-Karabagh: Military Balance Between Armenia & Azerbaijan

[burjuin]

Re: Nagorno-Karabagh: Military Balance Between Armenia & Azerbaijan

[burjuin]

Re: Nagorno-Karabagh: Military Balance Between Armenia & Azerbaijan

[londontsi]

Re: Nagorno-Karabagh: Military Balance Between Armenia & Azerbaijan

Defense Forces launched a preemptive action

Destroyed two Azerbaijani post and at least two Asker

To ensure the security of the country today at 13:00 advanced units of the Defense Army resorted to proactive action in the eastern direction of the state border of the Republic of Artsakh. As a result of these actions destroyed two enemy positions and one passenger car.

At another location the same direction on the positions of the enemy was dealt a preemptive strike, in which the enemy lost at least two of his askers.

Units of the Defense Army confidently continue to monitor the situation on the front line.
http://voskanapat.info/?p=10272

If we read the news announcement carefully we can see "enemy positions destroyed".

To me this is very dangerous because it encourages the Azeri behaviour.

I think we must have some constraints in taking those position, perhaps political.

It might mean our current border is recognised by us as the official border which we are protecting.
Going forward could be "aggression" by us.

Just trying to read between the lines.

.

[Artashes]

Re: Nagorno-Karabagh: Military Balance Between Armenia & Azerbaijan

Defense Forces launched a preemptive action

Destroyed two Azerbaijani post and at least two Asker

To ensure the security of the country today at 13:00 advanced units of the Defense Army resorted to proactive action in the eastern direction of the state border of the Republic of Artsakh. As a result of these actions destroyed two enemy positions and one passenger car.

At another location the same direction on the positions of the enemy was dealt a preemptive strike, in which the enemy lost at least two of his askers.

Units of the Defense Army confidently continue to monitor the situation on the front line.
http://voskanapat.info/?p=10272

(my analysis)

----- first vase of war ----
By announcing this, Hayastan has said ... *** this position "you" took" is INTOLORABLE!!!! ***.

----- what follows remains to be seen ----
Armenia, or more specifically for everyone who thinks we are 2 different people (LOL). . .
Artsakh has drawn the line of *** INTOLARANCE ***
Period.
That --- MUST --- mean that the turcs to our east ... Aka ... Azeri are being so dangerously aggressive in their posturing that we felt *** COMPELLED *** to take these actions.

I hate to say it , but that sounds right to me.

What's next ?
They say ... "We can't tolerate that you can't tolerate our *** OVERTLY *** aggressive posturing ***
LOL.
It remains to be seen.

----- they need to reconsider ----

We are not war mongering. They are being overtly ***** WAR MONGERING *****
That's why we were compelled to do a "preemptive strike(s).
I'm concerned.

If we read the news announcement carefully we can see "enemy positions destroyed".

To me this is very dangerous because it encourages the Azeri behaviour.

I think we must have some constraints in taking those position, perhaps political.

It might mean our current border is recognised by us as the official border which we are protecting.
Going forward could be "aggression" by us.

Just trying to read between the lines.

.

--- very dangerous because it encourages azeru ... ---
My read (between) the lines is the same as yours and paradoxically the opposite.
Like your analysis, I think this could open the door for them to retaliate.
But, my take that's different is ... Whatever they did, whether it was take --- UNTENABLE --- position(s) or something else we (general public) are not being told, that our forces felt it was *** MANATORY *** to take these actions.
Therefore, we have pre-empted them from taking action against us in a "favorable" position to them!!
In other words, what you fear was going to happen and we had to stop it.
--- Had to ---
It was NOT us that chose to escalate the situation by these acts, but rather , it was them that made it apparent that they were preparing to escalate hostilities toward us and we *** prevented *** them from taking a position(s) to more effectively escalate the situation to their benefit.
We prevented an an escalation and sent a clear message ... NO CAN DO ... PERIOD.