• realitista@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    4 months ago

    Depends a lot on what NATO does. If Trump pulls out like he says then it could easily happen.

    • IsoKiero
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 months ago

      I wouldn’t say easily. If the russians were crazy enough to try that they’d find out that EU itself has pretty decent armed forces combined and should they attack on any EU country, let’s say Estonia, they’d find out pretty fast on what it means when there’s no political bullshit limiting on attacks to the russian soil. One of Putins villas is 30 minutes (give or take) away for handful of countries to pay a visit with a very modern fighter jet. To Moscow that’s a bit less.

      They just don’t have the hardware to protect their troops, command sites, service locations and everything else needed to even attempt anything.

      • realitista@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        4 months ago

        NATO without the US is barely bigger than Russia’s military. And if some portion of the countries held back forces for their own defense, it’s very possible that Russia could pick countries off one at a time as it has a vastly bigger military than any single NATO country outside of the US, especially the ones it would likely want to start with in the Baltics.

        So it all comes down to how unified NATO is and how strong the response is from all together. It’s not a foregone conclusion with many of the right wing pro-putin governments coming into power around Europe and potentially soon in the US.

        • IsoKiero
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          Bullshit. My country has fewer people in total than many of the metropols in western europe and still we have the most powerful artillery in the western europe. Finland traditional artillery, on own our land, is almost close enough to hit Moscow and we have enough barrels and trained personnel to use them to cover pretty much for the whole 1300km of our border. Estonia isn’t far behind of us.

          That combined with the very capable air force form Finland, Sweden and Estonia covers the northmost corner of the map, marines included. Below that is Poland who aren’t fucking around either and next to them is Ukraine. We’ve already had this fight in the 1940s, other countries a bit later, and there’s absolutely no question if there’s enough manpower to keep the border where it is right now.

          There’s no way Russia could gain any land north of Poland borders even without any EU-wide co-operation and should Germany, France and UK join the fight the chances are pretty much nonexistent. They might take a village or two close to the border after turning it into rubble, but full scale war in EU wouldn’t last too long.

          Current situation in Ukraine is a complex matter on many fronts, politics very much included, but it’s vastly different from a direct attack on any of EU members. The hardware alone is vastly superior on whatever Soviet remains we’ve seen on Ukraine for the last couple of years.

          Just based on the numbers on the play it’s just stupid to spread the propaganda. Maybe you get paid for it, maybe you’re just playing as a devil’s advocate, but the reality just doesn’t align with russia attacking on the parts of global west europe.

          • realitista@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            I’m not going to argue with you, Finland is pretty badass, and hence probably not one of Putin’s first targets. But I can promise you that Putin has more artillery units than you. I know this because they have more than all of NATO excluding the USA. They have more aircraft, more tanks, more everything than you. Now the last time you guys went head to head, you inflicted 10:1 losses on them… Which means you have a good chance if it happens again… But like I said, I think Russia learned it’s lesson and will stick to the Baltics, Georgia, Moldova, until it gets strong enough to do Poland.

            • IsoKiero
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              Soviet Union had a pretty significant army on their disposal and they were a force to really pay attention to. Russia in it’s current state is a poor imitation of that. Current Russian military had 14 000 tanks (rough estimates) and 2/3 of them is currently rusting away on some field in Ukraine, most of that was ww2 era stuff, which is a sitting duck on a literal pair of fighters on a ATV with a javelin or similar as we’ve seen.

              On artillery russia has been shipping their own ammunition and barrels from the 40’s back to the front lines from North Korea. Depending on which source you’ll like to cite they’ve lost either almost all of what they got or everything they’ve had few times over. The picture is pretty similar across the board.

              Air force hasn’t really done anything on the front beyond bombing civil intrastructure and getting destroyed by a cardboard drones from the Ukraine. Of course any kind of mig or shukoi is a sever threat to anything operating on their reach, but their performance hasn’t really shined on the current front where the opponent has been either lacking resources or have had hands tied to polictics across the continent.

              Ukraine stopped the original attack with a handful of troops and they’ve been more and more successfull as the training with experience is getting more and more effective. If Russia can be stopped with pretty much with their own equipment from the soviet era what do you think will happen if they try to attack someone who’s been preparing on that since 1945?

              Current state in Europe is a very bad excuse on what we should have, but even that, with 60 years of preparation, is well enough to counter anything what former ghost of the Soviet Union has to throw against EU. China, India and the rest of global south are the real threat and if things escalate to global war then it’s a whole different scenario, but Russia taking over europe is not a part of that.

              • realitista@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                4 months ago

                All of this is true. But Russia is still outproducing the rest of Europe by a large margin. They are failing in Ukraine only because of extensive support from NATO (more than 70% of which is provided by the USA), starting long before the war began. Ukraine would not have been able to repel the invasion without it.

                I don’t deny that a united NATO can stop Russia. But Russia can beat a divided one country by country if it’s allowed to happen. And there are many in Europe and the USA working towards that.

            • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              Whatever Russia does won’t happen in a vacuum. Of they would attack the Baltics everyone knows what’s up and it immediately becomes existential for all countries in Europe. Especially former warshaw pact countries.

      • JayTreeman@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Russia’s great strength is also a big weakness. It’s size gives population, and resources, but also makes it very hard to defend.

        • realitista@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          True, but given how timid NATO has been about attacking Russia so far, I doubt they’d have to defend their own territory much.

          • JayTreeman@fedia.io
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            Nukes… It’s a big deterrent… they’re such a big deal that either every country should have them. Or no country should be allowed to have them… Everyone should be timid about attacking anyone that has nukes