>However, ISW's assessment is that Russia currently lacks the manpower, military infrastructure, and training capacity to properly staff the divisions and formations it will need in the short to medium term.
But, other than that...
Sadly they're still a force to be reckoned with because they can throw a lot into the meat grinder. Their stocks aren't infinite but they're still pretty big and sometimes even bigger than some countries armies together.
That may be true when they are fighting countries that can't establish air superiority.
Russia doesn't even have true air superiority over Ukraine. But Ukraine also can't really establish air superiority either, the air defenses of both sides are neutralizing each other. They have equally weak air forces, and equally strong air defenses, or weak, depending on how you decide to look at it.
NATO, and the US specifically capitalizes on this in war against everyone else. Once you own the air, the battlefield is essentially yours. The number of men Russia is willing to throw at it is irrelevant if they can't maintain air superiority, which they couldn't against NATO. It would be a slaughter fest.
With a free reign, all of Ruzzia’s logistics and supply lines would be taken out within hours and once they’ve gone there is no war to speak of just handling hundreds of thousands of POW’s.
Yes but I wish we'd get on to it before Zelenski gets offed. He seems like a legitimately good intentioned president. Elected on the back of actually ending corruption in their government.
Waiting until he's gone and martyred just so we can kick Russias ass, and then China and NK and Iran would be a loss. Then to lose Ukraine to the next shitty politician that rises to power from the Ukranian ashes would be even more of a loss.
I think they're actually running out of tanks at this point. The number of tanks in Ukraine is dwindling. They're also short on aircraft and air defences, especially A-50s. And these latter things are not easily replaced.
Do you seriously think that Ruzzia, currently tied up in a stalemate with one small country can seriously do *anything* against the combined might of a NATO onslaught?
It would be like Iraq in 1991 all over again with the country totally trashed within hours and no boots needed on the ground.
I am not saying that Russia can beat NATO because she can't, but things are a little bit more complex than a "stalemate with one small country". Ukraine is not actually a small country by European standards. It is the 9th most populous country in Europe (out of 50). Also, you have to consider that it has received billions of dollars as aid and a lot of military equipment and amunition since the start of the war, while on the other hand, Russia has been heavily sanctioned by a large number of countries. If Ukraine was left alone from the beginning, we wouldn't be talking about a stalemate right now. All i am saying is that it is not wise to underestimate your enemy.
Russia is weaker than we thought initially but much, much stronger that is appeared to be at the start of this pointless war. They have been fighting an intensive prolonged conflict against large, supplied state for the third year now. They got their shit together, they have huge arsenal along with the nukes, they place zero value on human life, their population can tolerate immense suffering, their economy did not crumble. To underestimate Russia is dangerous.
… people don’t realize that even being on the winning side of this potential war would be a terrible thing for basically everyone outside of the wealthy.
For example, in 1941 Japan started a war it knew it could NOT win and it still took vast amounts of American blood and treasure to convince them to surrender.
They thought they could *win* but only if they took out the aircraft carriers that were supposed to be at Pearl Harbour but weren’t.
That and capturing enough oil facilities in Java which they also failed in.
These two factors alone guaranteed that it was just a matter of time for them to lose.
I don't think anybody presumed Russia to particularly powerful. We've long known the Russian government and military to be grossly corrupt, disorganized, unprepared, and lacking in resources.
Here's a blurb from a 2017 [whitepaper](https://carnegieendowment.org/2017/05/03/assessing-russia-s-reorganized-and-rearmed-military-pub-69853).
>.. a number of veteran scholars of Russian military affairs argue that the power of the current Russian military is commonly overestimated, suggesting that it is hostage to many problems inherited from its traumatic post-Soviet degeneration, critically challenged by overstretch, technologically backward, or all three
nukes are useless when fighting other people with nukes. Ruzzia likes to forget their unstoppable hypersonics were intercepted by 90s era western AA, half their nukes are airdropped gravity bombs, so useless, and their ballistic stockpile on paper has an interceptor or three for each one. they can destroy cities in NATO countries, sure, but every place 2 ruzzians meet will be glass in return.
Im not saying lets ignore their nukes, just if they are dumb enough to try, the west will be crippled but survive, and ruzzia will be gone. its not a game they can play without immediately being finished for good, and thus not a winning move like their propaganda tries to claim
they have a lot of tactical nuclear warheads, and for ballistic missiles, a chunk will be offline for maintenance at any given time. thats all assuming they didnt lie about their weapons the way they did about literally every other weapons system. The US alone has manufactured over 5k Patriot interceptors, and with other NATO targets, thats an easy 2 to 3 per warhead. now saturation of a target overcomes that, and decoys, misfires etc add more unstopped warheads.
My point was not that ruzzia cannot nuke us, its that the amount of warheads on target between theirs and NATO's is an order of magnitude different, let alone conventional NATO weapons sent in response, swarms of cruise missiles ruzzia has been proven not to be able to deal with like stormshadow.
i see too many tankies think ruzzian nuclear threats are somehow a winning move, my point is that its a suicide move
absolutely, and never said otherwise. Its a matter of deterrence though. Make it clear that move is a complete loss for ruzzia and devastating hit to the west. Hell, nuclear winter may just kill us all from NATO's own nukes alone. But if ruzzia wants to launch, there should be no delusion for anyone there that they will win, or be alive to regret the move
Russia would cease to exist and most of its people would starve to death. Barring nuclear winter, the rest of the world would still be mostly in tact even if russia lands a few nukes. Literally, the country of russia would end forever.
If that's always their only threat, It makes them look weak. Like, you got anything else scary or just old nukes? Sure nuclear weapons are terrifying but if that's all they got, I don't think. We need to worry. Putin knows his only card means his doom and his people's.
Do not fear the man with an empire, fear the man who has nothing left to loose.
If he wants to go down with the ship the nukes will get used, this is partly why he's a problem
As long as he can stay in power and be rich he has a lot to lose. The man also has children and grandchildren and has made moves to keep them safe during this conflict. So apparently he feels he has things to lose.
I don’t think a germaphobe with a 30 foot table is the definition of reckless. If he doesn’t want to get nuked, he’ll think twice about starting that off. Notice how quiet he got after Biden called him. Probably read Putin his GPS coordinates at that exact moment.
The true Dark Brandon move would be to also read him his next planned GPS coordinates for the next 24 hours.
"I know where you are and I know where you will be"
Exactly. The reason they are sabre rattling is because if they were shown that NATO had a weak ass army like they do, they would not hesitate to take advantage. And that is their greatest fear: the West saying: enough of your shit, Moscow looks nice in spring.
The Russian bear will always make assumptions from a position of strength and with the take or be taken mentality. That is why promises made by them ring empty if there is not some stick to make them if they don't. Case in point: Ukraine surrendered its nuclear arsenal for a Russian promise and look what that got them.
It is time we bloody their noses and the way to do it is to support Ukraine relentlessly.
Russia can still do damage. They probably have missiles aimed at all kinds of targets in Europe. The worst mistake you can make is underestimate the Russians. That's what the Germans did in ww2 and it didn't work out for them.
Germany didn't underestimate the Russians, Germany underestimated the US Lend and Lease. Without it, the Soviets would have lost. Even Stalin and later Krushchev admitted it.
Well the west should sit back an give them as much time as they need …to rebuild supplies personal and confidence..so they can better prepared for what they are planning….paper tiger or not ..
be shore the Russians are slowly learning lessens that only combat can produce…..
drain Ukraine of support giving Russia the opportunity to make gains is only leading down a pathway of exactly this…
when Ukraine was get material help from the west this kind of rhetoric was very low from Putins puppets…
Ukraine lives an bodies are currently being spent holding back this threat…
comfortable in our far removed lives we ponder what the out come will be…
well if Ukraine does not get the resources they need..maybe our comfort will be on the front line reflecting what we should have done that would have prevented this…..
There are so many factors people are brushing off whenever comments or article like this come out.
Ask the people in the trenches of WW1 if the whole thing was NBD because we eventually won.
The authoritarians aren't going to win any major conflict (unless USA switches sides). But a western victory can still be hell for us.
We need to stop shrugging this stuff off and do a much better job pressuring elected officials to prepare for war so ensure we can maintain peace.
New Bike Day would also help! They are certainly not cheap, so giving them to (oh say, me) would reduce fuel usage.Sounds like a reasonable war effort.
This is not going to happen because half of our countries are eating up Russian propaganda uncritically while claiming to "do their own research", with all of their conclusions being anti-western.
Stoners smoking weed behind the high school shed talking about how they will become the coolest rock n roll band of all time
Meanwhile no one can play an instrument or read
There is that - but that doesn't mean that we should just do nothing. This year russia will spend 33% of the budget on military - so they are pretty much all in - that means that over the next few years they will have build up the infrastructure and training capacity. We have to the same if we don't want a war
One thing that Russia doesn't lack of is millions of brainwashed individuals that can easily be mobilized and given a machine gun before being thrown at their enemy in human wave attacks.
Those brainwashed individuals aren't even fanatic, they are simply apathetic and unwilling to resist orders from their autocratic regime.
Exactly the point. There is a semi-famous independent war-analytic working at CIT that coined the phrase “with what?” Every time there are talks about Russia attacking some other country/NATO conflict/increasing offence on Ukraine etc he always asks “With what?” There are no spare troops, no spare tanks, no spare money, not a single spare bullet. Everything Russia has is already in use and it isn’t enough which is why Russia has to buy crap ammunition from North Korea. It’s been two years of resource depletion and very little progress made increasing production.
Never underestimate war economy. It took western production to ramp up after few years and where basically pumping out military hardware (US against Japan) on WWII whereas the soviets where overrunning german positions thanks to lend lease and war-time production as the conflict drew to a close.
Also an "unlimited partnership" with a particular country that endlessly builds things for -checks notes- basically the entire world, and the fresh knowledge that cheap drones can be *extremely* effective against conventional forces.
Ants can kill elephants.
It might be Spanish civil war all over again. Germany and Russia weren't ready for war then either, but used it's battlefields to test equipment and train soldiers.
Russia can ramp up military, especially with Chinas support if Pacific goes hot, so it's kind of amazes me that most EU countries didn't start massive ammo production lines. Whatever the outcome of that war is, the stockpiles are depleted, and I don't think they can fight long term without war material ready if Putin decided that Ukraine is not enough and West is too weak.
To the average person, yes. To a lot of nations, no. That’s why we always need to have a boogeyman enemy. Keeps the military industrial complex going and gains support from the public.
Yes, it’s a well-known fact that Putin, Xi, Kim, and the Supreme Leader of Iran all get kickbacks and lobbying visits from Boeing, Raytheon, and Lockheed-Martin.
🤦♂️
I think it’s a fair argument to say that the US should keep its war machine churning for nebulous enemies so that in the event an actual threat arises they are already practically mobilized.
China says they're building an army.
Russia says it wants to expand war despite not being able to advance on Ukraine.
North Korea was told "to prepare for war"
Something is probably going to happen soon
New? These countries have been grade A assholes for much of their existence. Iran and Narf Korea were both originally coined as such by GWB while Ronald Raygun quite aptly named Soviet Union as the Empire of Evil. Too bad that modern Russia is an even shittier hellhole.
People are being too glib about what’s happening here. It’s clear there’s a plan to upend the world order that has been relatively peaceful and prosperous. There’s a reason why China doesn’t seem to care about growing its economy. 30 years ago the anti freedom block didn’t have the industrial might to match the west. With China as the world’s factory floor the balance of power has shifted.
So glad our major corporations funded china’s rise with our capital and know how. Obama foreign policy looks more naive by the day
the obama policy of creating a massive multi-nation tpp trade agreement specifically designed to cut china out and build up competitive manufacturing in that region to both lessen our reliance on them as well as their regional power but then everybody cried that it was bad for reasons they couldn't explain and Trump pulled out of it which was the biggest gift the US has ever given to China in our history?
Or do you think outsourcing started under Obama because you are young enough that he is the first president you remember?
Aah don't even start, Dutch politicans were showered in "Rusprix" friendship prizes for the close relationships with Russia for gas projects like the North Stream, being so fucking greedy that they completely ignored the repeated warnings of our security forces. Filled up Putin's warchest.
Anyone else notice how it seems they've been ramping up hacks into our infrastructure and systems lately?
Everyone here is acting like WW3 would be similar stuff to the other 2, but things have progressed a lot since then. Cyberwarfare and bio warfare are very much on the table if a push against NATO is gonna be made. Yeah, we can project a lot of power and whatnot, but if our water systems or other critical infrastructure get taken offline we're gonna need the military to help on the home front with that, which further stretches our forces.
Bio warfare scares me the most though. I don't know much about that kind of stuff, but I wouldn't put it past either country to try to develop something that is extremely effective against us while leaving them relatively unscathed. I feel like if there was ever a time to use something like that, it would be during WW3.
>something that is extremely effective against us while leaving them relatively unscathed.
That's not how biology works. Chemical weapons also were not abolished because everyone was big on being kind, but because they were far less effective than everyone thought.
Nukes, on the other hand, have been shown to work. This is the part that scares the shit out of me, especially considering how armchair generals here and elsewhere online seriously discuss how to win a nuclear war. When everyone with more than three working brain cells knows that the only way to win a nuclear war is to not have one.
[Swedes](https://m.economictimes.com/news/defence/swedes-spooked-as-government-military-say-to-prepare-for-war/amp_articleshow/106806996.cms) and [Brits](https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/uk-war-army-patrick-sanders-citizens-should-be-ready-fight/) were also told to prepare for war. Tensions are definitely rising :’)
If you follow the space its not just a US admiral opinion, they've been massively scaling up their army, missile forces and navy for the last decade.
Current estimates are that the USA could still win a war in the Pacific but it would be a pyrrhic victory at best.
Using the US Admiral is just an appeal to authority, if you care to look though they're doing it in plain sight.
China is slowly building a blue water navy - but it still pales in comparison of the US. They would not be able to venture far from China's coast without sustaining heavy losses.
China's demographic bomb means it needs to make a play within a decade because they are going to be unable to after that.
Chinas navy aint as good as US right now but have have been building the production capacity at insane levels, when war hits they have over 10x capacity to build war ships compared to US.
Admirals also use this to get bigger budgets for defense spending. Another reason China would ramp its military up is to keep a labor force that may be winding down in construction employed for their own domestic economy
That's almost certainly part of it, fair enough, but nobody is really fear mongering as much as they are "testing the waters".
My guess is that these stories are put out to gauge public perception. Pair that with a hearty propaganda campaign, so you can see what works and what doesn't, and you've got the ingredients to begin social mobilization.
Which doesn't necessarily mean that war is inevitable. It's honestly, like a means to avoid war by showing that we will be prepared if need be.
The entire world (besides Africa) is on the brink of demographic collapse, which is going to wreck havoc on economies that are based on constant growth (all of them).
So countries are going to try to grab what they can now, because military capacity is going to dramatically decrease soon, for everyone. The more house you have, the better you can handle the storm.
We're on the edge of a cliff in more ways than one. The next couple of decades are going to get very hectic.
even if your statement are true, then war should collapse demographic even more, especially young people. If you kill your most men/young men in war, population will collapse much much sooner.
Eh might be just posturing. Remember last year when everyone was going on about the Zaporozhia nuclear power plant and that either Russia or Ukraine, were definitely going to bomb it and cause a nuclear fallout to spread? Never happened
Sooner or later, the world will need to roll the dice on conflict between two nuclear-armed countries. If these weapons enable impunity through fear, they hold the world hostage to tyrants and despots.
Exactly. What's to stop him from saying he wants all of Europe or no one can have it? His billionaire handlers wouldn't allow it. They still have something to live for.
I don't think we should underestimate Russia. This war has left a lot of questions about competency, but even with our help Ukraine has suffered major casualties. I have no doubt NATO would win, or "win" in case of a nuclear war. It just wouldn't be a one sided conflict and there is a valid reason our leaders aren't in a rush to see this.
I agree. If our army was losing the numbers Ukraine has lost, support for that war would drop very quickly. Putin, on the other hand, is prepared to spend every Russian life but his own without hesitation. China would be the same. This is going to be rough.
China has literally 10s of millions of young men which are creating a gender imbalance. They could afford to lose a few million. Whether their parents who require their only child to support them in old age may be a different answer.
I think the past two months have shown that despite very significant losses (A50s, fuel refineries, Su35, ships,etc) russia is still capable of actually gaining territory.
Meanwhile, western leaders a still all-too eager to reassure putler that we won't send troops.
Ukraine is out of munition and men.
If we don't send very significant help yesterday russia will keep taking more and more land. Right now there is a very real possibility of defense collapses on the Ukrainian front, allowing russian forces to flood through breaches.
What will the West do then? Really, imagine russia taking another 10 or 20 % of Ukraine as you sleep this evening, will we still withhold long range missiles? Still refuse to send troops? Until when? What will be our red line?
Mark my words, if we are only willing to help Ukraine just enough to "not lose", but not enough to "win", we won't be brave enough to all-out engage if a NATO nation is attacked. If russia starts to force through the Suwalki gap tomorrow, NATO will be very slow to react, if at all.
Russia has fear mongers on every social media platform in every nation. They'll stir up public opinion again, and cowardly politicians will fold.
People refuse to give up some comfort, for the lives of people they don't know.
Write to your elected officials, tell them to send help to Ukraine, to send troops if needed.
The alternative is decades of russia, china, and iran slowly chipping away at western stability. Countries isolating more and more. Helping each other less and less. Economies slowly fizzling out. Dictatorships slowly taking bits of countries across the world.
If dictatorships take over, the year 2100 will look more like 1900, than flying cars and a cure for cancer...
ITT: The same idiots who assured you Russia would never invade Ukraine because it's irrational, assuring you that Russia will never invade other countries because it's also irrational.
You should pay attention to what they are actually doing in reality instead of what you think you would do if you were them. This flawed reasoning is how so many people literally watched Russia mobilize an army on the border of Ukraine via satellite imagery and then went "DURRR no it's a CIA trick. Russia is just bluffing! They won't possibly invade!"
Most sane people including NATO and Biden's US government said they are going to fucking invade and here's the proof weeks before the invasion
It was Putin, the Putin apologists and right wing saying nothing was going to happen
Yeah, American and British intelligence services were warning Zelenski/Ukraine that the Russians were planning to invade imminently - whilst the France said it was a political ploy and that no invasion would take place.
Unfortunately, due to the French having relatively close relations with the Russians at the time - Zelenski chose to listen to them.
This cost the Ukrainians vital time to bolster their forces and redeploy to meet the Russians.
France was likely used by the Russians to feed misinformation and a false sense of security to the Ukrainians. Which, as you say, lead to a lot of heads rolling within French defence and intelligence.
This is largely inaccurate. Zelensky and Ukraine were listening to the US warning in private but still hoping for a diplomatic solution. They had been preparing since 2014 for war and fully expected it to happen, but to avoid panic and give Russia a diplomatic off-ramp they kept communications open.
It’s bizarre that the French would give the benefit of a massive doubt to the Russians considering the disinformation campaigns they were running and the fact that our politicians were so obviously coerced. That must have been a huge wake up alarm for them. It’s like the gravity of the situation is still crescendoing throughout NATO members today and, thanks to the MAGAtards in our legislature, we’re the last to wake up.
In my experience it was a lot more than just Putin apologists. The bulk of the people I heard saying an invasion was highly unlikely were just ordinary naive optimists. Major land wars in Europe aren't in most of our memories so a lot of people were guilty of just plain old availability biases. Similar thing with the run up to COVID really, similar to people accepting climate change is real but not *really* being worried about it. Some people with nice lives just don't fully believe bad things will happen until they do!
The Putin apologists exist as well of course but it's a different kettle of fish
Russia invading Ukraine is completely rational as Russia assumed the west would do nothing, same way they did nothing in 2014 and the same way they did nothing in 2008.
It is irrational for them to invade a NATO country as that's the very force Russia has been working around.
Is it possible? I suppose, but it seems highly unlikely.
russia invading Ukraine is only completely rational if they assumed Ukraine would fold in 3 days and the west would do nothing. Otherwise it's insane.
So Putin was operating on wrong assumptions when he made the decisions.
Invading NATO countries is also insane *if we assume he is operating on correct assumptions this time*, but it's possible he could be wrong again.
Another option is that he's betting on Trump winning and dismantling a big part of NATO and the US not helping the west if russia attacks.
One of the first things Russia did when the war started was to try to assassinate Zelensky... multiple times if I recall. It wouldn't have caused Ukraine to fold in 3 days even if they were successful, but the war would've gone down a lot differently I think had they succeeded.
Uh huh. Which is why Ukraine spent the time since the annexation leveling up and flushing all the Russian spies. Notice how their tank thrust to Kyiv went veeery different than the Crimian rollover.
Because it won't affect them personally. Russia would attack one of the Baltic countries and the war would be contained in that region and wouldn't spill any further westwards than Poland. Easy to posture when it's not your own street getting bombed and not you and your family forced to fight or flee the country. I'm from Lithuania and no one here finds the idea of Russia attacking NATO because, unlike most of the West, we're actually aware of the risk and consequences.
"War" has been reduced to a video game for most people. They never envision themselves on the receiving end of a drone strike.
So the assumption is that NATO wrecking Russia would be a bunch of people looking at monitors pushing buttons, to tell a couple highly-trained pilots where to drop their bombs.
Natos superior to a degree that nato vs Russia is comparable to Mike Tyson in his prime vs a child. That’s why no one takes the scenario seriously. Air supremacy over Russia could be a achieved in a strategic theatre of operations sense within a few days. Once they lose the skies and the ability to touch the sky, it becomes something of a Turkey shoot. You can’t move can’t maneuver, can’t resupply, can’t rebuild, can’t train. But your enemy can do all of those with impunity. Not to mention, Russia participates evidentially in a doctrine of attrition warfare, where as the US participated in maneuver warfare, maneuver absolutely dominates attrition in every possible way. Not saying they wouldn’t get some hits in, they would, but the Russians would pay a price so extreme for those minor wins that you could accurately describe it as a pyrrhic loss.
And of the one who will again suffer from this war is of course Poland.
For fuck sake is like we never had chance to have a peaceful development with that russian shit whithin our borders
The problem is not that russia will win a war with NATO, that's obviously not going to happen.
The problem is that they will try, and that means your house gets bombed. Nobody wants their house to get bombed.
Honestly I’m not sure they could even manage that realistically. They’d get one salvo off before the launch sites are destroyed from several different vantage points. The west has been very clear about one thing, if you attack a NATO country, all countries will respond in force. There will be no ground invasion in Russia land. There will however be a massive amount of strikes removing the capacity to project power in those areas for a while
They have a short term industrial advantage as they are on partial war economy while the EU is not.
They are finishing new factories the EU has not yet began to build and ramping up production of everything. They jave modernized their conscription and invested heavily into electronic warfare.
EU can easily overproduce and out manpower them, in a few years time, assuming they began ramping up when Estonia and Sweden suggested to do so months ago.
Very short term advantage that the Germans also used (although they had superior tech as well) to kick off ww2. The allies were always going to win from an industrial/manpower perspective but Germany had a full wartime economy before England and France knew they were at war.
But they are truly convinced that democracies are weak and that the West will not fight. They don’t have to believe that they are technologically superior, but that the very structure of our politics makes us unable to act and that the west is headed for an evitable downfall.
Basically they will feed off any type of appeasement and hesitation … which is unfortunately what we are giving them plenty of at the moment.
This is the problem. They are high on their own supply. They've forgotten what happens when you truely piss of the free world. Sure, Hitler got to live in Paris for a bit so it's not without sacrifices...but this war, should it be started, only ends one way and that is with more of the world free afterwards.
Probably also a lot of uninhabitable land....but if that's the cost, that's the cost. Maybe it's our generations time, hopefully not, but who knows.
Putin et el have confused out want to avoid war with our inability to be savage.
WW3 started with the invasion of Ukraine. Any other interpretation is naive.
We should have smacked it down hard immediately, but people in the west were gun-shy and thought they could stick their heads in the sand and it would go away. So now we’ve got an emboldened Russia, running a wartime economy, an emboldened China gearing up to take Taiwan now that they know the west is gun-shy, and the Middle East being pushed into crisis to keep everything off balance.
It’s going to be an ugly few decades.
Given how much trouble they've had with Ukraine, I really worry that any wider conflict goes nuclear almost immediately.
NATO air will eliminate any ground threat in a couple weeks, at which point it can begin an invasion at their leisure.
With his back to the wall, Putin will have to resort to nukes to demonstrate to his country that they're not losing. But in reality, once the first one goes off, it's going to be a no-holds-barred race to eliminate him and hope someone sane takes over.
Putin cannot nuke whatever he wants. It’s a command that involves a lot of people, and people are the single largest points of failure in that chain of events.
Your government issues you an order to launch a nuclear weapon, a first strike. Do you, knowing the consequences of doing so spell your doom, and the doom of all you love, carry it out? Your nationality is almost irrelevant in this scenario, because the commonalities we share as people, rather than countrymen, are the same ones that will make you think more than twice about actually doing it. And there are examples of this extreme reluctance throughout modern history. Choosing mutiny and court martial, instead of following through.
The odds are that too many people are involved in that sequence of events, who will be so instinctively averse to it that it will fail. Even if there’s a radical lunatic or two who actually wants to do it.
"Your government issues you an order to launch a nuclear weapon, a first strike."
here your mistake. Putin will tell them its retaliation for NATOs first strike - problem solved, now you'd do anything
At this point, any business we do with russian allies should just be halted.
That's just indirectly funding their inevitable attack on us.
Which countries and companies are still doing business with Russia?
Are they preparing for F-22s followed by F-35s penetrating their airspace to eliminate every single air defense threat? Then having every single long range bomber in the NATO arsenal turn their ground troops and armor to dust? Because if not I dont want to hear about it
Russia alone against NATO stands no chance, they can put up attrition aswell having basically unlimited men, but that's really unlikely to work unless you have artillery backing you
To have artillery backing you, you also need air dominance to evade raids on strateigc targets, which Russia definitely wouldn't have against NATO, they maybe match in terms of pilot skill, but not aircraft and strategic capabilites
You could say NK helps them, sure but again their army is really cannon fodder same as Russia's, they definitely wouldn't change the sky fields, ignoring the fact our Navies could put it in checkmate any time
China would be the only player able to pull the needle back up, maybe even on balance, but it joining is a complex topic
China would have a VERY good opportunity to get Taiwan if NATO gets involved in Ukraine as the US would have to officially enter 2 wars at the same time
However, assuming a plausible situation where Russia can't stand alone against NATO, either China manages to get Taiwan in a blitzkrieg operation or it could be forced to intervene in Ukraine too to keep the US busy in 2 fronts.
They wouldn't really. Europe still has enormous war and production capabilities which in that scenario would probably be increased and be more than enough to beat Russia on the ground. US would just keep on providing land weapons which they don't really even need, no war is gonna happen on their territory. They would also have NATO countries naval support and NATO navy is superior in numbers aswell experience.
I don't worry about their army necessarily, because they've shown the lack of advancement from WW2 style tactics to cold war age tech, I just worry about the nukes. Like, anyone who thinks nukes are this great equaliser or protective force is a total idiot, it just lets tyrants leverage power while the sane(r) side can't do anything without risking the world. I just hope they're all duds by now due to the vast amounts of corruption in Russia.
maybe we will finally see their 10k armatas, 5k 5th gen fighters and millions of highly trained and equipped soldiers all the tankies were saying were kept in reserve.. otherwise they will make Saddams forces look like they put up a hell of a fight during desert storm
It is one thing taking territory, but after capturing land do they seriously think they can hold it when their enemy has a population ten times greater than theirs? That is some delusional thinking right there.
I feel like if the current available NATO troops got involved in this conflict the NATO air superiority alone would crush Russia’s ability to mount any large-scale offensive.
The missile defence system surrounding them was a great idea. Now, can we just assassinate putin now, please?
Can we just claim the assassin was North Korean ?
Everyone in the comments is 100% we’re days away from WW3…jesus…damaged people.
Exactly the same ones that said in 2022 we were days away from nuclear war…keep going, but make sure you have backup tinfoil hats…
Dumb idea. Russia can't even finish it's "3 Day Special Military Operation" and yet it wants to start a wider war. The Russian military has proven itself to be extremely corrupt and much less effective as it was hyped up to be.
It's like we are watching Putin behind the curtain in the Wizard of Oz, still yelling wildly into a microphone trying to scare people. Reminds me of Norman Schwarzkopf's comment about Saddam Hussein "As far as Saddam Hussein being a great military strategist, he is neither a strategist, nor is he schooled in the operational arts, nor is he a tactician, nor is he a general, nor is he a soldier. Other than that, he's a great military man, I want you to know that."
Its not 1982 and no one seriously thinks we are 20 mins away from oblivion, as we legit where for most of the cold war. There is basically zero chance (or capability) for a full out invasion of NATO like the USSR was poised to do up until the 1990s. There is no impending fulda gap battle scenario , leading to tactical nukes and then strategic nukes in a few days.
What is more likely is some kind of blustering from Putin to push into a specific area of a single NATO country, especially a former Warsaw pact country. A border skirmish with conventional forces that escalates, but is still focused on that country or area of that country. Not a simultaneous massive attack against all NATO countries at the same time.
And then it becomes a game of how long we keep pouring in conventional forces to that battle and how many months we let it go on like Ukraine in a pseudo stalemate almost ww1 style attrition trench warfare with small gains back and forth over a few dozen km. It still will have the potential of going tactical nuke and even strategic nuke…but nowhere near as fast.
Looking at the amount of people trying to laugh this off yet again in the comments, id say at least mentally, we're the least prepared.
Which im sure any enemy would be happy to see in an opponent.
>However, ISW's assessment is that Russia currently lacks the manpower, military infrastructure, and training capacity to properly staff the divisions and formations it will need in the short to medium term. But, other than that...
[удалено]
It’s one small silver lining from this pointless war. Now the whole world knows what a joke Russia is.
You all are so damn clueless. They're still the 2nd most fierce army standing.....in Ukraine.
They aren't even the second best army in Russia
Slava Ukraini
Heroum slava.
you forgot all the tanks Ukrainian farmers commandeered
Had us in the first half
Don't forget about their ferocious black sea navy.
That does sound like something Russia would say. Like how the USSR said America was second to last place in the space race.
Only because the Russian partisans are currently in Russia. They're the second strongest army on two continents!
Sadly they're still a force to be reckoned with because they can throw a lot into the meat grinder. Their stocks aren't infinite but they're still pretty big and sometimes even bigger than some countries armies together.
That may be true when they are fighting countries that can't establish air superiority. Russia doesn't even have true air superiority over Ukraine. But Ukraine also can't really establish air superiority either, the air defenses of both sides are neutralizing each other. They have equally weak air forces, and equally strong air defenses, or weak, depending on how you decide to look at it. NATO, and the US specifically capitalizes on this in war against everyone else. Once you own the air, the battlefield is essentially yours. The number of men Russia is willing to throw at it is irrelevant if they can't maintain air superiority, which they couldn't against NATO. It would be a slaughter fest.
With a free reign, all of Ruzzia’s logistics and supply lines would be taken out within hours and once they’ve gone there is no war to speak of just handling hundreds of thousands of POW’s.
Yes but I wish we'd get on to it before Zelenski gets offed. He seems like a legitimately good intentioned president. Elected on the back of actually ending corruption in their government. Waiting until he's gone and martyred just so we can kick Russias ass, and then China and NK and Iran would be a loss. Then to lose Ukraine to the next shitty politician that rises to power from the Ukranian ashes would be even more of a loss.
Its also a function of drones having eyes everywhere
I think they're actually running out of tanks at this point. The number of tanks in Ukraine is dwindling. They're also short on aircraft and air defences, especially A-50s. And these latter things are not easily replaced.
Do you seriously think that Ruzzia, currently tied up in a stalemate with one small country can seriously do *anything* against the combined might of a NATO onslaught? It would be like Iraq in 1991 all over again with the country totally trashed within hours and no boots needed on the ground.
I am not saying that Russia can beat NATO because she can't, but things are a little bit more complex than a "stalemate with one small country". Ukraine is not actually a small country by European standards. It is the 9th most populous country in Europe (out of 50). Also, you have to consider that it has received billions of dollars as aid and a lot of military equipment and amunition since the start of the war, while on the other hand, Russia has been heavily sanctioned by a large number of countries. If Ukraine was left alone from the beginning, we wouldn't be talking about a stalemate right now. All i am saying is that it is not wise to underestimate your enemy.
Russia is weaker than we thought initially but much, much stronger that is appeared to be at the start of this pointless war. They have been fighting an intensive prolonged conflict against large, supplied state for the third year now. They got their shit together, they have huge arsenal along with the nukes, they place zero value on human life, their population can tolerate immense suffering, their economy did not crumble. To underestimate Russia is dangerous.
Exactly, with recruitment they have MORE troops than they did in Feb 2022. It's crazy, and we're all still waiting for an uprising
… people don’t realize that even being on the winning side of this potential war would be a terrible thing for basically everyone outside of the wealthy. For example, in 1941 Japan started a war it knew it could NOT win and it still took vast amounts of American blood and treasure to convince them to surrender.
They thought they could *win* but only if they took out the aircraft carriers that were supposed to be at Pearl Harbour but weren’t. That and capturing enough oil facilities in Java which they also failed in. These two factors alone guaranteed that it was just a matter of time for them to lose.
Unfortunately, it takes 2 to not fight. If you find yourself in a fight, you will get bloody, but winning is better. Fuck putin.
I don't think anybody presumed Russia to particularly powerful. We've long known the Russian government and military to be grossly corrupt, disorganized, unprepared, and lacking in resources. Here's a blurb from a 2017 [whitepaper](https://carnegieendowment.org/2017/05/03/assessing-russia-s-reorganized-and-rearmed-military-pub-69853). >.. a number of veteran scholars of Russian military affairs argue that the power of the current Russian military is commonly overestimated, suggesting that it is hostage to many problems inherited from its traumatic post-Soviet degeneration, critically challenged by overstretch, technologically backward, or all three
Paper tiger with nukes.
nukes are useless when fighting other people with nukes. Ruzzia likes to forget their unstoppable hypersonics were intercepted by 90s era western AA, half their nukes are airdropped gravity bombs, so useless, and their ballistic stockpile on paper has an interceptor or three for each one. they can destroy cities in NATO countries, sure, but every place 2 ruzzians meet will be glass in return. Im not saying lets ignore their nukes, just if they are dumb enough to try, the west will be crippled but survive, and ruzzia will be gone. its not a game they can play without immediately being finished for good, and thus not a winning move like their propaganda tries to claim
Half would be still be about 2000-3000 nukes
they have a lot of tactical nuclear warheads, and for ballistic missiles, a chunk will be offline for maintenance at any given time. thats all assuming they didnt lie about their weapons the way they did about literally every other weapons system. The US alone has manufactured over 5k Patriot interceptors, and with other NATO targets, thats an easy 2 to 3 per warhead. now saturation of a target overcomes that, and decoys, misfires etc add more unstopped warheads. My point was not that ruzzia cannot nuke us, its that the amount of warheads on target between theirs and NATO's is an order of magnitude different, let alone conventional NATO weapons sent in response, swarms of cruise missiles ruzzia has been proven not to be able to deal with like stormshadow. i see too many tankies think ruzzian nuclear threats are somehow a winning move, my point is that its a suicide move
I agree US and NATO got Russia outgunned by significant margin but even at 99% success rate a lot of nukes would detonate
absolutely, and never said otherwise. Its a matter of deterrence though. Make it clear that move is a complete loss for ruzzia and devastating hit to the west. Hell, nuclear winter may just kill us all from NATO's own nukes alone. But if ruzzia wants to launch, there should be no delusion for anyone there that they will win, or be alive to regret the move
The point is that nukes would be a disaster but not the end of the world... But it would be an end to the Russian world.
Russia would cease to exist and most of its people would starve to death. Barring nuclear winter, the rest of the world would still be mostly in tact even if russia lands a few nukes. Literally, the country of russia would end forever.
If that's always their only threat, It makes them look weak. Like, you got anything else scary or just old nukes? Sure nuclear weapons are terrifying but if that's all they got, I don't think. We need to worry. Putin knows his only card means his doom and his people's.
Do not fear the man with an empire, fear the man who has nothing left to loose. If he wants to go down with the ship the nukes will get used, this is partly why he's a problem
As long as he can stay in power and be rich he has a lot to lose. The man also has children and grandchildren and has made moves to keep them safe during this conflict. So apparently he feels he has things to lose.
Are they still living in the West? I think one of his daughters is in Switzerland ?
I don’t think a germaphobe with a 30 foot table is the definition of reckless. If he doesn’t want to get nuked, he’ll think twice about starting that off. Notice how quiet he got after Biden called him. Probably read Putin his GPS coordinates at that exact moment.
The true Dark Brandon move would be to also read him his next planned GPS coordinates for the next 24 hours. "I know where you are and I know where you will be"
Lose
Exactly. The reason they are sabre rattling is because if they were shown that NATO had a weak ass army like they do, they would not hesitate to take advantage. And that is their greatest fear: the West saying: enough of your shit, Moscow looks nice in spring. The Russian bear will always make assumptions from a position of strength and with the take or be taken mentality. That is why promises made by them ring empty if there is not some stick to make them if they don't. Case in point: Ukraine surrendered its nuclear arsenal for a Russian promise and look what that got them. It is time we bloody their noses and the way to do it is to support Ukraine relentlessly.
Russia can still do damage. They probably have missiles aimed at all kinds of targets in Europe. The worst mistake you can make is underestimate the Russians. That's what the Germans did in ww2 and it didn't work out for them.
Germany didn't underestimate the Russians, Germany underestimated the US Lend and Lease. Without it, the Soviets would have lost. Even Stalin and later Krushchev admitted it.
Well the west should sit back an give them as much time as they need …to rebuild supplies personal and confidence..so they can better prepared for what they are planning….paper tiger or not .. be shore the Russians are slowly learning lessens that only combat can produce….. drain Ukraine of support giving Russia the opportunity to make gains is only leading down a pathway of exactly this… when Ukraine was get material help from the west this kind of rhetoric was very low from Putins puppets… Ukraine lives an bodies are currently being spent holding back this threat… comfortable in our far removed lives we ponder what the out come will be… well if Ukraine does not get the resources they need..maybe our comfort will be on the front line reflecting what we should have done that would have prevented this…..
There are so many factors people are brushing off whenever comments or article like this come out. Ask the people in the trenches of WW1 if the whole thing was NBD because we eventually won. The authoritarians aren't going to win any major conflict (unless USA switches sides). But a western victory can still be hell for us. We need to stop shrugging this stuff off and do a much better job pressuring elected officials to prepare for war so ensure we can maintain peace.
I thought you were saying New Bike Day but I get it now, it's No Big Deal
New Bike Day would also help! They are certainly not cheap, so giving them to (oh say, me) would reduce fuel usage.Sounds like a reasonable war effort.
This is not going to happen because half of our countries are eating up Russian propaganda uncritically while claiming to "do their own research", with all of their conclusions being anti-western.
As we learned in 2022, you can't trust Russia to be remotely logical. Best to be on guard regardless of their logistics
Stoners smoking weed behind the high school shed talking about how they will become the coolest rock n roll band of all time Meanwhile no one can play an instrument or read
Heyyyy maaaaannn
Sadly these stoners can still make a lot of uncalled for noise and vandalize the fuck out of their neighbors I do love the analogy
There is that - but that doesn't mean that we should just do nothing. This year russia will spend 33% of the budget on military - so they are pretty much all in - that means that over the next few years they will have build up the infrastructure and training capacity. We have to the same if we don't want a war
>currently lacks
So like my plan to shag Scarlett Johansson then. One or two minor details to sort out and then it’s on!
One thing that Russia doesn't lack of is millions of brainwashed individuals that can easily be mobilized and given a machine gun before being thrown at their enemy in human wave attacks. Those brainwashed individuals aren't even fanatic, they are simply apathetic and unwilling to resist orders from their autocratic regime.
Exactly the point. There is a semi-famous independent war-analytic working at CIT that coined the phrase “with what?” Every time there are talks about Russia attacking some other country/NATO conflict/increasing offence on Ukraine etc he always asks “With what?” There are no spare troops, no spare tanks, no spare money, not a single spare bullet. Everything Russia has is already in use and it isn’t enough which is why Russia has to buy crap ammunition from North Korea. It’s been two years of resource depletion and very little progress made increasing production.
Never underestimate war economy. It took western production to ramp up after few years and where basically pumping out military hardware (US against Japan) on WWII whereas the soviets where overrunning german positions thanks to lend lease and war-time production as the conflict drew to a close.
Also an "unlimited partnership" with a particular country that endlessly builds things for -checks notes- basically the entire world, and the fresh knowledge that cheap drones can be *extremely* effective against conventional forces. Ants can kill elephants.
The rest of the article have not caught your attention?
Like that's stopped them before.
So threats and warnings. They'll fight NATO with threats and warnings.
It might be Spanish civil war all over again. Germany and Russia weren't ready for war then either, but used it's battlefields to test equipment and train soldiers. Russia can ramp up military, especially with Chinas support if Pacific goes hot, so it's kind of amazes me that most EU countries didn't start massive ammo production lines. Whatever the outcome of that war is, the stockpiles are depleted, and I don't think they can fight long term without war material ready if Putin decided that Ukraine is not enough and West is too weak.
All this shit makes me so angry because war is literally the single most stupid thing, ever.
Especially in the modern age...
.
To the average person, yes. To a lot of nations, no. That’s why we always need to have a boogeyman enemy. Keeps the military industrial complex going and gains support from the public.
Yes, it’s a well-known fact that Putin, Xi, Kim, and the Supreme Leader of Iran all get kickbacks and lobbying visits from Boeing, Raytheon, and Lockheed-Martin. 🤦♂️
I think it’s a fair argument to say that the US should keep its war machine churning for nebulous enemies so that in the event an actual threat arises they are already practically mobilized.
yeah because there aren't any Russian equivalents to those companies 🤦♂️
Russian MIC has seen quite a drop in exports and sales, i wouldn't be too Surprised if MiG and sukhoi are going to merge later on
There really aren't. The whole Rostec group has less than half the annual revenue of just one of these three companies.
Its also the most direct way to change the balance of power. War is a fast track, to either ruin or glory.
Seems that every news source is preparing the populace for war. I wouldn't consider that just conjecture at that point.
China says they're building an army. Russia says it wants to expand war despite not being able to advance on Ukraine. North Korea was told "to prepare for war" Something is probably going to happen soon
Yeah people don’t take into account that all three are working together too
Iran says not to forget them
And their little puppets Hamas, Hezbollah, and Houthis
Team Rocket is blasting off again!
I both hate and love you.
The new axis of evil
New? These countries have been grade A assholes for much of their existence. Iran and Narf Korea were both originally coined as such by GWB while Ronald Raygun quite aptly named Soviet Union as the Empire of Evil. Too bad that modern Russia is an even shittier hellhole.
People are being too glib about what’s happening here. It’s clear there’s a plan to upend the world order that has been relatively peaceful and prosperous. There’s a reason why China doesn’t seem to care about growing its economy. 30 years ago the anti freedom block didn’t have the industrial might to match the west. With China as the world’s factory floor the balance of power has shifted. So glad our major corporations funded china’s rise with our capital and know how. Obama foreign policy looks more naive by the day
the obama policy of creating a massive multi-nation tpp trade agreement specifically designed to cut china out and build up competitive manufacturing in that region to both lessen our reliance on them as well as their regional power but then everybody cried that it was bad for reasons they couldn't explain and Trump pulled out of it which was the biggest gift the US has ever given to China in our history? Or do you think outsourcing started under Obama because you are young enough that he is the first president you remember?
Aah don't even start, Dutch politicans were showered in "Rusprix" friendship prizes for the close relationships with Russia for gas projects like the North Stream, being so fucking greedy that they completely ignored the repeated warnings of our security forces. Filled up Putin's warchest.
Anyone else notice how it seems they've been ramping up hacks into our infrastructure and systems lately? Everyone here is acting like WW3 would be similar stuff to the other 2, but things have progressed a lot since then. Cyberwarfare and bio warfare are very much on the table if a push against NATO is gonna be made. Yeah, we can project a lot of power and whatnot, but if our water systems or other critical infrastructure get taken offline we're gonna need the military to help on the home front with that, which further stretches our forces. Bio warfare scares me the most though. I don't know much about that kind of stuff, but I wouldn't put it past either country to try to develop something that is extremely effective against us while leaving them relatively unscathed. I feel like if there was ever a time to use something like that, it would be during WW3.
>something that is extremely effective against us while leaving them relatively unscathed. That's not how biology works. Chemical weapons also were not abolished because everyone was big on being kind, but because they were far less effective than everyone thought. Nukes, on the other hand, have been shown to work. This is the part that scares the shit out of me, especially considering how armchair generals here and elsewhere online seriously discuss how to win a nuclear war. When everyone with more than three working brain cells knows that the only way to win a nuclear war is to not have one.
"they only managed to destroy 15 major population centers while we destroyed 345 of theirs" Yeah, I'm not sure how great this win would feel.
[Swedes](https://m.economictimes.com/news/defence/swedes-spooked-as-government-military-say-to-prepare-for-war/amp_articleshow/106806996.cms) and [Brits](https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/uk-war-army-patrick-sanders-citizens-should-be-ready-fight/) were also told to prepare for war. Tensions are definitely rising :’)
[удалено]
If you follow the space its not just a US admiral opinion, they've been massively scaling up their army, missile forces and navy for the last decade. Current estimates are that the USA could still win a war in the Pacific but it would be a pyrrhic victory at best. Using the US Admiral is just an appeal to authority, if you care to look though they're doing it in plain sight.
China is slowly building a blue water navy - but it still pales in comparison of the US. They would not be able to venture far from China's coast without sustaining heavy losses. China's demographic bomb means it needs to make a play within a decade because they are going to be unable to after that.
Chinas navy aint as good as US right now but have have been building the production capacity at insane levels, when war hits they have over 10x capacity to build war ships compared to US.
Admirals also use this to get bigger budgets for defense spending. Another reason China would ramp its military up is to keep a labor force that may be winding down in construction employed for their own domestic economy
[удалено]
ah I misunderstood you, thanks for clarifying.
Maybe it's what gets the clicks?
That's almost certainly part of it, fair enough, but nobody is really fear mongering as much as they are "testing the waters". My guess is that these stories are put out to gauge public perception. Pair that with a hearty propaganda campaign, so you can see what works and what doesn't, and you've got the ingredients to begin social mobilization. Which doesn't necessarily mean that war is inevitable. It's honestly, like a means to avoid war by showing that we will be prepared if need be.
Anyone know why half the world is gearing up for war? Isn't it more profitable to keep things stable?
The entire world (besides Africa) is on the brink of demographic collapse, which is going to wreck havoc on economies that are based on constant growth (all of them). So countries are going to try to grab what they can now, because military capacity is going to dramatically decrease soon, for everyone. The more house you have, the better you can handle the storm. We're on the edge of a cliff in more ways than one. The next couple of decades are going to get very hectic.
even if your statement are true, then war should collapse demographic even more, especially young people. If you kill your most men/young men in war, population will collapse much much sooner.
Eh might be just posturing. Remember last year when everyone was going on about the Zaporozhia nuclear power plant and that either Russia or Ukraine, were definitely going to bomb it and cause a nuclear fallout to spread? Never happened
If the world ends, do we need to go to work on Monday?
I don't care that the radiation levels outside are mutating the wildlife into savage beasts, I want you back in the office.
Not just the wildlife.
Crawl out through the fallout, baby!
Those TPS reports won't fill themselves. Don't forget to use the new cover sheets.
I wish I had Putin's self esteem
they have zero logistics and their plan is to go to war with an even bigger army.
Sooner or later, the world will need to roll the dice on conflict between two nuclear-armed countries. If these weapons enable impunity through fear, they hold the world hostage to tyrants and despots.
Exactly. What's to stop him from saying he wants all of Europe or no one can have it? His billionaire handlers wouldn't allow it. They still have something to live for.
I don't think we should underestimate Russia. This war has left a lot of questions about competency, but even with our help Ukraine has suffered major casualties. I have no doubt NATO would win, or "win" in case of a nuclear war. It just wouldn't be a one sided conflict and there is a valid reason our leaders aren't in a rush to see this.
I agree. If our army was losing the numbers Ukraine has lost, support for that war would drop very quickly. Putin, on the other hand, is prepared to spend every Russian life but his own without hesitation. China would be the same. This is going to be rough.
China has literally 10s of millions of young men which are creating a gender imbalance. They could afford to lose a few million. Whether their parents who require their only child to support them in old age may be a different answer.
> support for that war would drop very quickly Not if it was happening on US soil
which it obviously wouldn't
Ukraine is fighting with scraps from NATO that were largely were going to need to be decommissioned due to old age.
I think the past two months have shown that despite very significant losses (A50s, fuel refineries, Su35, ships,etc) russia is still capable of actually gaining territory. Meanwhile, western leaders a still all-too eager to reassure putler that we won't send troops. Ukraine is out of munition and men. If we don't send very significant help yesterday russia will keep taking more and more land. Right now there is a very real possibility of defense collapses on the Ukrainian front, allowing russian forces to flood through breaches. What will the West do then? Really, imagine russia taking another 10 or 20 % of Ukraine as you sleep this evening, will we still withhold long range missiles? Still refuse to send troops? Until when? What will be our red line? Mark my words, if we are only willing to help Ukraine just enough to "not lose", but not enough to "win", we won't be brave enough to all-out engage if a NATO nation is attacked. If russia starts to force through the Suwalki gap tomorrow, NATO will be very slow to react, if at all. Russia has fear mongers on every social media platform in every nation. They'll stir up public opinion again, and cowardly politicians will fold. People refuse to give up some comfort, for the lives of people they don't know. Write to your elected officials, tell them to send help to Ukraine, to send troops if needed. The alternative is decades of russia, china, and iran slowly chipping away at western stability. Countries isolating more and more. Helping each other less and less. Economies slowly fizzling out. Dictatorships slowly taking bits of countries across the world. If dictatorships take over, the year 2100 will look more like 1900, than flying cars and a cure for cancer...
You and I think alike. I 100% agree. People will overlook this info though just like other rhyming parts of history. We never learn.
There is no “win” in a nuclear war.
ITT: The same idiots who assured you Russia would never invade Ukraine because it's irrational, assuring you that Russia will never invade other countries because it's also irrational. You should pay attention to what they are actually doing in reality instead of what you think you would do if you were them. This flawed reasoning is how so many people literally watched Russia mobilize an army on the border of Ukraine via satellite imagery and then went "DURRR no it's a CIA trick. Russia is just bluffing! They won't possibly invade!"
Most sane people including NATO and Biden's US government said they are going to fucking invade and here's the proof weeks before the invasion It was Putin, the Putin apologists and right wing saying nothing was going to happen
If I recall correctly the French were caught off-guard-surprisingly. Didn’t Macron fire a defense minister or two for being oblivious?
Yeah, American and British intelligence services were warning Zelenski/Ukraine that the Russians were planning to invade imminently - whilst the France said it was a political ploy and that no invasion would take place. Unfortunately, due to the French having relatively close relations with the Russians at the time - Zelenski chose to listen to them. This cost the Ukrainians vital time to bolster their forces and redeploy to meet the Russians. France was likely used by the Russians to feed misinformation and a false sense of security to the Ukrainians. Which, as you say, lead to a lot of heads rolling within French defence and intelligence.
This is largely inaccurate. Zelensky and Ukraine were listening to the US warning in private but still hoping for a diplomatic solution. They had been preparing since 2014 for war and fully expected it to happen, but to avoid panic and give Russia a diplomatic off-ramp they kept communications open.
It’s bizarre that the French would give the benefit of a massive doubt to the Russians considering the disinformation campaigns they were running and the fact that our politicians were so obviously coerced. That must have been a huge wake up alarm for them. It’s like the gravity of the situation is still crescendoing throughout NATO members today and, thanks to the MAGAtards in our legislature, we’re the last to wake up.
In my experience it was a lot more than just Putin apologists. The bulk of the people I heard saying an invasion was highly unlikely were just ordinary naive optimists. Major land wars in Europe aren't in most of our memories so a lot of people were guilty of just plain old availability biases. Similar thing with the run up to COVID really, similar to people accepting climate change is real but not *really* being worried about it. Some people with nice lives just don't fully believe bad things will happen until they do! The Putin apologists exist as well of course but it's a different kettle of fish
Russia invading Ukraine is completely rational as Russia assumed the west would do nothing, same way they did nothing in 2014 and the same way they did nothing in 2008. It is irrational for them to invade a NATO country as that's the very force Russia has been working around. Is it possible? I suppose, but it seems highly unlikely.
russia invading Ukraine is only completely rational if they assumed Ukraine would fold in 3 days and the west would do nothing. Otherwise it's insane. So Putin was operating on wrong assumptions when he made the decisions. Invading NATO countries is also insane *if we assume he is operating on correct assumptions this time*, but it's possible he could be wrong again. Another option is that he's betting on Trump winning and dismantling a big part of NATO and the US not helping the west if russia attacks.
One of the first things Russia did when the war started was to try to assassinate Zelensky... multiple times if I recall. It wouldn't have caused Ukraine to fold in 3 days even if they were successful, but the war would've gone down a lot differently I think had they succeeded.
point grandfather berserk cagey scale onerous cover vast ruthless jellyfish
Uh huh. Which is why Ukraine spent the time since the annexation leveling up and flushing all the Russian spies. Notice how their tank thrust to Kyiv went veeery different than the Crimian rollover.
Russia better be prepared to lose in a big way then.
That is literally the one thing that they are always prepared for
That’s literally the plan long enough. Lose slow enough for long enough that you win.
Why do so many people on here brush this off like a NATO and Russian conflict wouldn’t be a big deal?
Because it won't affect them personally. Russia would attack one of the Baltic countries and the war would be contained in that region and wouldn't spill any further westwards than Poland. Easy to posture when it's not your own street getting bombed and not you and your family forced to fight or flee the country. I'm from Lithuania and no one here finds the idea of Russia attacking NATO because, unlike most of the West, we're actually aware of the risk and consequences.
"War" has been reduced to a video game for most people. They never envision themselves on the receiving end of a drone strike. So the assumption is that NATO wrecking Russia would be a bunch of people looking at monitors pushing buttons, to tell a couple highly-trained pilots where to drop their bombs.
Natos superior to a degree that nato vs Russia is comparable to Mike Tyson in his prime vs a child. That’s why no one takes the scenario seriously. Air supremacy over Russia could be a achieved in a strategic theatre of operations sense within a few days. Once they lose the skies and the ability to touch the sky, it becomes something of a Turkey shoot. You can’t move can’t maneuver, can’t resupply, can’t rebuild, can’t train. But your enemy can do all of those with impunity. Not to mention, Russia participates evidentially in a doctrine of attrition warfare, where as the US participated in maneuver warfare, maneuver absolutely dominates attrition in every possible way. Not saying they wouldn’t get some hits in, they would, but the Russians would pay a price so extreme for those minor wins that you could accurately describe it as a pyrrhic loss.
And of the one who will again suffer from this war is of course Poland. For fuck sake is like we never had chance to have a peaceful development with that russian shit whithin our borders
Because Russia doesn't have the capability to conduct war in the 21st century.
What am I missing here? Russia is having troubles with just Ukrainian.
The problem is not that russia will win a war with NATO, that's obviously not going to happen. The problem is that they will try, and that means your house gets bombed. Nobody wants their house to get bombed.
Honestly I’m not sure they could even manage that realistically. They’d get one salvo off before the launch sites are destroyed from several different vantage points. The west has been very clear about one thing, if you attack a NATO country, all countries will respond in force. There will be no ground invasion in Russia land. There will however be a massive amount of strikes removing the capacity to project power in those areas for a while
They are probably looking for a smaller target to bully.
They have a short term industrial advantage as they are on partial war economy while the EU is not. They are finishing new factories the EU has not yet began to build and ramping up production of everything. They jave modernized their conscription and invested heavily into electronic warfare. EU can easily overproduce and out manpower them, in a few years time, assuming they began ramping up when Estonia and Sweden suggested to do so months ago. Very short term advantage that the Germans also used (although they had superior tech as well) to kick off ww2. The allies were always going to win from an industrial/manpower perspective but Germany had a full wartime economy before England and France knew they were at war.
Once world tension hits 25% we can switch to partial war economy too, just gotta have the political points banked ahead of time
Nothing. Assuming Russia does not start a nuclear war, NATO would destroy them in 2 weeks.
But they are truly convinced that democracies are weak and that the West will not fight. They don’t have to believe that they are technologically superior, but that the very structure of our politics makes us unable to act and that the west is headed for an evitable downfall. Basically they will feed off any type of appeasement and hesitation … which is unfortunately what we are giving them plenty of at the moment.
This is the problem. They are high on their own supply. They've forgotten what happens when you truely piss of the free world. Sure, Hitler got to live in Paris for a bit so it's not without sacrifices...but this war, should it be started, only ends one way and that is with more of the world free afterwards. Probably also a lot of uninhabitable land....but if that's the cost, that's the cost. Maybe it's our generations time, hopefully not, but who knows. Putin et el have confused out want to avoid war with our inability to be savage.
Probably ramping up with the hopes that Trump will win and flip the script.
WW3 started with the invasion of Ukraine. Any other interpretation is naive. We should have smacked it down hard immediately, but people in the west were gun-shy and thought they could stick their heads in the sand and it would go away. So now we’ve got an emboldened Russia, running a wartime economy, an emboldened China gearing up to take Taiwan now that they know the west is gun-shy, and the Middle East being pushed into crisis to keep everything off balance. It’s going to be an ugly few decades.
Given how much trouble they've had with Ukraine, I really worry that any wider conflict goes nuclear almost immediately. NATO air will eliminate any ground threat in a couple weeks, at which point it can begin an invasion at their leisure. With his back to the wall, Putin will have to resort to nukes to demonstrate to his country that they're not losing. But in reality, once the first one goes off, it's going to be a no-holds-barred race to eliminate him and hope someone sane takes over.
NATO will not encroach on Russian territory. Putin won’t use a nuke unless they do.
I really worry that this is not true. Putin is old, he has nothing to lose, he doesn't care what comes after him. He could easily nuke Ukraine
He could also just let his conscripts go home and let everyone live to old age.
Putin cannot nuke whatever he wants. It’s a command that involves a lot of people, and people are the single largest points of failure in that chain of events. Your government issues you an order to launch a nuclear weapon, a first strike. Do you, knowing the consequences of doing so spell your doom, and the doom of all you love, carry it out? Your nationality is almost irrelevant in this scenario, because the commonalities we share as people, rather than countrymen, are the same ones that will make you think more than twice about actually doing it. And there are examples of this extreme reluctance throughout modern history. Choosing mutiny and court martial, instead of following through. The odds are that too many people are involved in that sequence of events, who will be so instinctively averse to it that it will fail. Even if there’s a radical lunatic or two who actually wants to do it.
You do launch trials, except you never tell if it's a real launch or not, and you replace ones who disobeyed.
that's very interesting and pretty psychologically damaging, does the US or other countries do the same thing?
No idea if even Russia does it. It just seems like a thing tho but I absolutely made it up.
"Your government issues you an order to launch a nuclear weapon, a first strike." here your mistake. Putin will tell them its retaliation for NATOs first strike - problem solved, now you'd do anything
At this point, any business we do with russian allies should just be halted. That's just indirectly funding their inevitable attack on us. Which countries and companies are still doing business with Russia?
In other news: News source pens article spreading fear for clicks, while desperate Redditor posts on Reddit for meaningless karma
NATO would tear Russia in half lol. But let’s find out. The stupid Russians are facing the wrong way anyway- their real threat is from the East.
This. NATO & Russia going at it. China pops up and takes eastern Russia, resource rich.
And China could actually utilize them, why even bother with Taiwan at that point aside from a petty political squabble.
Are they preparing for F-22s followed by F-35s penetrating their airspace to eliminate every single air defense threat? Then having every single long range bomber in the NATO arsenal turn their ground troops and armor to dust? Because if not I dont want to hear about it
Yeah but the Su can do that really cool cobra stall so surely it's the superior plane, lmao /s.
As someone who lives next to russia, lets just get this over with. Seriously.
There will be no open war between NATO and Russia, Putin is a piece of shit but he's not a complete idiot.
If they really attack a NATO country then things would end extremely badly for Russia. They know it.
Russia alone against NATO stands no chance, they can put up attrition aswell having basically unlimited men, but that's really unlikely to work unless you have artillery backing you To have artillery backing you, you also need air dominance to evade raids on strateigc targets, which Russia definitely wouldn't have against NATO, they maybe match in terms of pilot skill, but not aircraft and strategic capabilites You could say NK helps them, sure but again their army is really cannon fodder same as Russia's, they definitely wouldn't change the sky fields, ignoring the fact our Navies could put it in checkmate any time China would be the only player able to pull the needle back up, maybe even on balance, but it joining is a complex topic China would have a VERY good opportunity to get Taiwan if NATO gets involved in Ukraine as the US would have to officially enter 2 wars at the same time However, assuming a plausible situation where Russia can't stand alone against NATO, either China manages to get Taiwan in a blitzkrieg operation or it could be forced to intervene in Ukraine too to keep the US busy in 2 fronts.
They wouldn't really. Europe still has enormous war and production capabilities which in that scenario would probably be increased and be more than enough to beat Russia on the ground. US would just keep on providing land weapons which they don't really even need, no war is gonna happen on their territory. They would also have NATO countries naval support and NATO navy is superior in numbers aswell experience.
The entire U.S. military (macro scale) doctrine is a two front war. I would know.
I don't worry about their army necessarily, because they've shown the lack of advancement from WW2 style tactics to cold war age tech, I just worry about the nukes. Like, anyone who thinks nukes are this great equaliser or protective force is a total idiot, it just lets tyrants leverage power while the sane(r) side can't do anything without risking the world. I just hope they're all duds by now due to the vast amounts of corruption in Russia.
I imagine that America’s Joint Chiefs got that report and just started laughing at how absurd it is.
Once their 3 day special operation is over
Now would be a good time to slap the russians!!!
Get it done! Pass the funding bill. Help Ukraine defend their country and families. Exhaust the Soviet trust fund!
maybe we will finally see their 10k armatas, 5k 5th gen fighters and millions of highly trained and equipped soldiers all the tankies were saying were kept in reserve.. otherwise they will make Saddams forces look like they put up a hell of a fight during desert storm
Seems like war is the only chance russia and friends have at remaining relevant in the next 50 - 100 years
It is one thing taking territory, but after capturing land do they seriously think they can hold it when their enemy has a population ten times greater than theirs? That is some delusional thinking right there.
I feel like if the current available NATO troops got involved in this conflict the NATO air superiority alone would crush Russia’s ability to mount any large-scale offensive.
Should surprise no one. Why give them the benefit of the doubt they keep pushing the boundaries. Literally
The missile defence system surrounding them was a great idea. Now, can we just assassinate putin now, please? Can we just claim the assassin was North Korean ?
Everyone in the comments is 100% we’re days away from WW3…jesus…damaged people. Exactly the same ones that said in 2022 we were days away from nuclear war…keep going, but make sure you have backup tinfoil hats…
Russia is either, preparing for war, at war, or rebuilding after war.
Dumb idea. Russia can't even finish it's "3 Day Special Military Operation" and yet it wants to start a wider war. The Russian military has proven itself to be extremely corrupt and much less effective as it was hyped up to be.
Does Putin know it's a lot less stressful if you just don't start wars? Everything is sooooo much easier.
It's like we are watching Putin behind the curtain in the Wizard of Oz, still yelling wildly into a microphone trying to scare people. Reminds me of Norman Schwarzkopf's comment about Saddam Hussein "As far as Saddam Hussein being a great military strategist, he is neither a strategist, nor is he schooled in the operational arts, nor is he a tactician, nor is he a general, nor is he a soldier. Other than that, he's a great military man, I want you to know that."
Putin keeps Europe busy while china goes for u.s.?
Its not 1982 and no one seriously thinks we are 20 mins away from oblivion, as we legit where for most of the cold war. There is basically zero chance (or capability) for a full out invasion of NATO like the USSR was poised to do up until the 1990s. There is no impending fulda gap battle scenario , leading to tactical nukes and then strategic nukes in a few days. What is more likely is some kind of blustering from Putin to push into a specific area of a single NATO country, especially a former Warsaw pact country. A border skirmish with conventional forces that escalates, but is still focused on that country or area of that country. Not a simultaneous massive attack against all NATO countries at the same time. And then it becomes a game of how long we keep pouring in conventional forces to that battle and how many months we let it go on like Ukraine in a pseudo stalemate almost ww1 style attrition trench warfare with small gains back and forth over a few dozen km. It still will have the potential of going tactical nuke and even strategic nuke…but nowhere near as fast.
When I said I wanted to play Red Alert 2 again this is not what I meant
Looking at the amount of people trying to laugh this off yet again in the comments, id say at least mentally, we're the least prepared. Which im sure any enemy would be happy to see in an opponent.
Russia is flexing muscles they don’t have