Are US GMLRS Missile Shipments an Attempt to Provoke NATO Article 5 & Wider War in Europe?

In the comments to Lavrov Accuses Ukraine Of Drawing Outside Countries Into War – US Missiles A ‘Direct Provocation’ | ZeroHedge, Marman notes:

>This, as well as all other Russian warnings will be ignored…to everyone’s peril.

Actually, I think US is listening very closely.

US desperately wants to bring NATO’s Article 5 into play. US is trying everything to provoke Russia into attacking a NATO country so European troops can replace all the killed and wounded Ukrainian soldiers.

So, US is certainly not ignoring Russia’s warnings, they are counting on it.

Taconasty doesn’t think the US will escalate further:

I don’t think so. Ukraine is just not that valuable. It is one of the poorest countries in Europe and it has a decreasing population that is even older than America (and China). The USA has nearly no international trade with Ukraine.

I’m not buying that argument. Sending in MLRS (Multiple Launch Rocket Systems) with long-range GMLRS missiles (extended range Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System), and now HIMARS (High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems) is another deliberate red-line provocation which will inevitably result in escalation. The US is pushing for an Article 5 incident and already has its EU troops lined up.

Poland is (again stupidly) chomping at the bit
the UK seems keen to get involved in a European land war, albeit at minimum risk to itself
Germany will do what its told and send its army who won’t dare disobey
Romania seems to be enough in thrall to send troops in exchange for Moldavia annexation and Transdnistria
most Czechs won’t want to participate but there’s enough militarist whackos to fill a volunteer regiment (heck the Czech Legion worked their way out to Siberia in 1918 before evacuating from Vladivostock in 1920 after betraying the White general Kolchuk)
Slovaks won’t go in any shape or form
Hungarians won’t go and will push back against other EU countries entering the war

France and Italy won’t go. Baltics are keen but with their tiny populations have little to offer. Finland unlikely to actively intervene in Russia (same goes for Sweden).

So the stage is set for war in Europe. If escalation continues, a logical first Russian step would be to destroy Rammstein and Camp Bondsteel. That will either sit the US down (along with the EU vassals) or provoke full retaliation before the Russians are dragged into a war of attrition.

Vladmir Putin first asked his rhetorical question What value does a peace/world (same word mir in Russian) have to us if there is no Russia? (Зачем нам такой мир, если в нём не будет России?) All the Western maniacs (majority of our elected leaders, the entirety of official MSMs scribes) shrieking for the elimination of Russia and Russian culture are effectively demanding the annihilation of North America, Europe and much of Russia.

Autoscroll:

Here's a very good orientation point, my beacon is what are the interests of the Russian Federation and her people. As long as I feel I'm following this path correctly, nothing else interests me. Simply I couldn't give…these words are too rough…I… Nothing distracts me from decisions which I consider the most important for my country. Here we are not alone. If other countries who have this kind of weapon why shouldn't Russia have them? As far as this theme is directly concerned, of course it's very important, exceptionally sensitive. But I would like to tell you and would like for people both here and abroad to know our doctrine for deployment. I hope it will never happen, but our theoretical doctrine for deployment would be to answer an incoming strike. What does that mean? It means that the decision to deploy nuclear weapons can only be taken in the case where our warning system observes not just rockets taking off but gave an exact prediction of the flight path and time of arrival of the essential parts on the terrritory of the Russian Federation This is called response to an incoming strike. Hence if someone has taken the decision to annihilate Russia then we have the lawful right to answer. Yes, for the human race it will be a global catastrophe. For the planet, it will be a catastrophe. But for me as a citizen of the Russian Federation and the head of the Russian State, I must ask myself the question. What is the point of a world without Russia?

Perhaps the black Africans and the métis of South America will build a more successful next civilisation, or at least one which is not so excessive and demanding of the planet. Russia is large enough that there will be some Russians in this next world as well, albeit starting from small towns in Kamchatka, Krasnoyarsk, Yakutia, Kemerova, Magadan, Zabaykalsky Kraj or Yamalo-Nenets Okrug.

Are US GMLRS Missile Shipments an Attempt to Provoke NATO Article 5?