yes. What Russia does currently is probing and testing - what it takes to disrupt all the necessary cables simultaneously to create communication breakdown and a lot of chaos, what resources and time it takes to repair (and thus planning the options on blocking those repair resources, etc.) It takes tanks half-a-day to cross the Baltic states to reach the sea. That is the time Russia wants to buy. Once Russian forces are already in Riga, Tallinn, Vilnus, the NATO will have a decision to make on whether to bomb the Russian forces already placed by that time among the Baltic states population.

replies(9): >>42180481 #>>42180683 #>>42180860 #>>42181022 #>>42181892 #>>42182824 #>>42184114 #>>42185835 #>>42188330 #

nkrisc ◴[19 Nov 24 10:23 UTC] No.42181892[source]▶

>>42180465 #

This would be more concerning if Russia had any tanks left.

Are you suggesting Russia has a full invasion force they’re not using in Ukraine? Or to liberate their own occupied territory?

replies(3): >>42182181 #>>42182294 #>>42182489 #

oneshtein ◴[19 Nov 24 11:58 UTC] No.42182489[source]▶

>>42181892 #

RF refurbishes about 1300 tanks a year. It's more than enough to conquer part of Europe and then exchange it for Ukraine.

replies(3): >>42182813 #>>42184387 #>>42184478 #

Cthulhu_ ◴[19 Nov 24 15:21 UTC] No.42184387[source]▶

>>42182489 #

They might occupy some area, sure, but if they invade a EU or NATO country they'll get that full force on top of them. And they have a lot of aircraft to deploy too; tanks have zero chance against an airstrike.

replies(1): >>42184517 #

1. oneshtein ◴[19 Nov 24 15:29 UTC] No.42184517[source]▶

>>42184387 #

NATO cannot stop Russia in Ukraine, even with help of 1 million Ukrainian army. NATO have no enough tanks, shells, soldiers to stop 2 million army in few first weeks, even if Russians will just march with their AK-s in hands. The only thing that will stop Russia for sure is a nuclear strike. Planes are good for strikes, but ground must be captured and hold by soldiers.

replies(3): >>42185202 #>>42185727 #>>42185925 #

2. rurp ◴[19 Nov 24 16:25 UTC] No.42185202[source]▶

>>42184517 (TP) #

Eh, western militaries are holding a lot of weaponry back from Ukraine; like the vast majority of it. They have run low in a few areas that have been key in this war, like artillery shells, but that's in part because these countries haven't prioritized that production in recent history in favor of other systems.

I actually do think that the US and Europe should be moving faster to increase their military manufacturing capacity, especially Europe given the situation they are now facing. But to say that NATO countries have been throwing everything they have to Ukraine is wildly off the mark.

3. dh2022 ◴[19 Nov 24 17:10 UTC] No.42185727[source]▶

>>42184517 (TP) #

None of the western air forces are involved. In the Iraq war most of the Iraqi casualties were due to air force, not ground forces (like Iraq' Highway of Death for example). If US Air Force ever gets involved in this conflict it will be a turkey shot.

replies(1): >>42186921 #

4. dragonwriter ◴[19 Nov 24 17:23 UTC] No.42185925[source]▶

>>42184517 (TP) #

> NATO cannot stop Russia in Ukraine, even with help of 1 million Ukrainian army.

I mean, they are doing pretty good for a total NATO deployment of 0 combat forces. Funny to describe the only country with troops involved as “helping” and treating the nonexistent NATO presence as the primary force.

> NATO have no enough tanks, shells, soldiers to stop 2 million army in few first weeks, even if Russians will just march with their AK-s in hands.

In the event of a Russian invasion of Eastern flank NATO members and the NATO forward-deployed battlegroups in those countries, NATO policy, unlike in Ukraine, would not restrict the use of long range weapons against command and control, logistics, and combat aviation facilities in Russia, nor would NATO forces be short on their own combat aviation to use against the invasion itself.

Ukraine isn’t NATO, and while impressive for their conditions, what Ukraine can do is not a model for what NATO can do.

replies(1): >>42187027 #

5. oneshtein ◴[19 Nov 24 19:00 UTC] No.42186921[source]▶

>>42185727 #

F-16 are already in Ukraine. They fail to demonstrate great results, because of Russian air defense. Both RF and Ukraine can launch glide bombs at enemy.

replies(1): >>42187194 #

6. oneshtein ◴[19 Nov 24 19:14 UTC] No.42187027[source]▶

>>42185925 #

Russia is at war with NATO. Ukraine is invaded because Ukraine wants to join NATO, to make NATO weaker. Same for Georgia. If Ukraine will fall, Russia will win, NATO will lose.

Long range weapons will hit hard for sure, but millions of soldiers still must be defeated in close combat to take ground. Ukraine has western tech, it good, but it not good enough when Ukrainians are outnumbered. To win the war, Ukraine must dominate in the war, but western allies fail to deliver anything that will dominate over Russia.

replies(2): >>42188525 #>>42189835 #

7. dh2022 ◴[19 Nov 24 19:30 UTC] No.42187194{3}[source]▶

>>42186921 #

You mean the 6 Ukrainian manned F-16s? Well, 5 now since Ukrainians downed one of their own in friendly fire..

Meanwhile US AirForce has about 900 F-16s... and a whole bunch of F35s. This it not a serious comparison....

replies(1): >>42191338 #

8. coffeebeqn ◴[19 Nov 24 21:56 UTC] No.42188525{3}[source]▶

>>42187027 #

Have a look at what Israel did to Irans S-300s last month. Ukraine has still only received scraps from NATO

replies(1): >>42191329 #

9. dragonwriter ◴[20 Nov 24 01:08 UTC] No.42189835{3}[source]▶

>>42187027 #

> Russia is at war with NATO.

No, its not. Russia is at war with Ukraine. No NATO countries are fighting Russia, Russia is fighting no NATO countries.

> Ukraine is invaded because Ukraine wants to join NATO

Even if that was true, invading Ukraine is war with Ukraine, not NATO.

But it is not true, you have cause and effect reversed. Ukraine had a legal dedication to neutrality when Russia invaded in 2014, that provision was eliminated and its pursuit of NATO membership, which had been abandoned years before in favor of neutrality, resumed after the invasion. Ukraine wants to join NATO because Russia invaded it, not vice versa.

replies(1): >>42191322 #

10. oneshtein ◴[20 Nov 24 06:39 UTC] No.42191322{4}[source]▶

>>42189835 #

Russia is at war with NATO. No NATO countries are fighting Russia. Russia freely perform acts of sabotage in NATO countries.

11. oneshtein ◴[20 Nov 24 06:41 UTC] No.42191329{4}[source]▶

>>42188525 #

Ukraine destroyed many Russian S300, S400, S500, but Ukrainian planes cannot fly freely over combat area.

12. oneshtein ◴[20 Nov 24 06:44 UTC] No.42191338{4}[source]▶

>>42187194 #

Russia had over 1000 of planes, but failed to achieve air superiority in Ukraine. They tried, but they lost about 1/3 of their combat air force.

↑