View Single Post
Old 08-13-16, 10:30 AM   #2677
Skybird
Soaring
 
Skybird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: the mental asylum named Germany
Posts: 40,559
Downloads: 9
Uploads: 0


Default

Careful there, Rockstar. Russia may not be able to maintain a long lasting war over wider parts of Europe against a well-prepared NATO - but it can decisively and quickly gain geographical advantages and objectives in the Polish-Baltic region, as just one exmaple, - and defend these territories, denying NATO access to these territories. It has been admitted repeatedly by highranking NATO and US generals that NATO (and that means the US in Eastern Europe, do not count on the capacity of the German forces, they are in an awful state) cannot defend these territories, if the Russians would start serious business on militarily conquering these. And then digging themselves in and denying aerial access to these regions. A NATO attempt to reconquer these territories later on, against a well prepared Russian defence, without air superiority, would become an extremely costly endavour, and would also mean total destruction of the affected states themselves. Also, the public opinion in at least Europe would not support this. Maybe with the exception of the Eastern Europeans and the stubborn blockheads on the British isles a huge majority in Europe is not capable to even imagine anymore that there could be reasons why it should even want to defend against Russian aggression - that means to fight, that means to be in a conflict, you see. Do not demand so much of stressful things from us! Better talk. Endlessly. That the other side does not leave it to talking, or abuses the time spend on it, is unimaginable for many people.

Its one thing to send an expeditionary force to somewhgere overseas and have it doing some - relatively unrisky- air operations there. Its somethign very different to send massive troop contingents on the ground and see own men returning home in thousands of body bags.

Just that because the Russians cannot storm to the Rhine in 7 days anymore, or less, does not mean one should underestimate them. Even already during the cold war I would have not taken it as granted that NATO would have stopped Russia without nukes. And that ignores for a moment that Russia most likely would have used nukes from day one, hour one on itself. Nukes would not have been escalated to, but would have been the opening.

As I mentioned some weeks earlier, google for the socalled Suwalki gap. And consider their presence in the Kaliningrad enclave. They can deny aerial area access already now, if they want it, they seem to have all needed platforms and hardware in place already. That pulls many of NATO's remaining teeth, since it depends so heavily on air superiority.
__________________
If you feel nuts, consult an expert.
Skybird is online   Reply With Quote