12 ms·
I think all 3 Baltic countries get wiped out overnight if Russia decides to press the issue. Disclaimer: I was born in one of those countries. No, I wouldn't f
by skilled 5y ago
I think all 3 Baltic countries get wiped out overnight if Russia decides to press the issue.
Disclaimer: I was born in one of those countries. No, I wouldn't fly back home to go to war. My country is run by crooks like any other, and I am not about to go die like some dumbass. Assuming that it escalates that far.
Also population would play a big role here. The combined population of all three Baltic countries is around 5-6 million. In Ukraine it is 40+ million. Over the last 20 years, a large number of outskirt cities have been left deserted because people went on to find better life elsewhere.
Border cities in particular aren't protected because nobody cares to live there.
I think I am being pretty fair in my assessment, though.
- vehemenz 5y agoIf that happened, Europe and NATO would retake and partition Kaliningrad. Russia cannot sustain that level of military force so close to the rest of the European powers.
- zn44 5y agothat's what everyone thought would happen with Ukraine, and Baltic statse will have full support of nato
- esailija 5y agoNATO members don't have any obligation to defend or even really aid an attacked member. The article 5 is ridiculously vague. I think sacrificing the member state to avoid nuclear war is what would happen. It won't be any different than with Ukraine.
- zn44 5y agoUkraine is not in NATO. Sacrificing three member states won't happen because everyone knows if that is allowed they will be taken one by one NATO is doing everything it can to avoid war now but i'm pretty sure everyone is preparing to react in case member is attacked
- ubercore 5y agoHow do you figure? Unless you mean member states would just ignore their agreements, treating an attack on one as an attack on all is pretty strong?
- hypertele-Xii 5y ago> NATO members don't have any obligation to defend or even really aid an attacked member. "The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all" Every country has an obligation to defend itself when attacked. Article 5 makes an attack on any member an attack on all of them. Short of going "fuck y'all this agreement means nothing to us" every member country has to defend against the attack as if it were on their own soil.
- xdennis 5y agoI never considered this before, but it looks like GP is right. The specific phrasing doesn't say "parties need to go to war when one is attacked". As a Romanian, it is kinda worrying that it's not straightforward.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- stjohnswarts 5y agoDon't spread propaganda. If a Russian boot steps across a NATO member's border NATO will attack, there's not a single doubt, especially with what is going on in Ukraine because obviously Putin has lost his mind and is trying to recreate the USSR.
- bpodgursky 5y agoIt would take weeks for Russia to put forces in place to make this a viable threat though.
- krzyk 5y agoYeah, the famous Russian army. Probably all the money that was directed to it was used for expensive villas.
- markus_zhang 5y agoThis is a large scale ground operation with errornous objectives at the beginning. With a fortified city you probably don't have many ways except to shell your way in. I doubt the other major powers can fare better.
- nemo44x 5y agoThey can’t even keep their supply lines moving on open highway. It’s pathetic. They have units that are totally of course and on their own. Not saying they can’t improve but their best case is starting to look like a many years struggle where they bankrupt their country and lose hundreds of thousands of people and end up worse than when this started.
- markus_zhang 5y agoFrom what I see on Liveuamap they are proceeding steadily. Ukrainians for sure might hit them here and there but that's not going to stop them. The Russians do not really have the man power to support a full scale war so that was what I said in the post that their initial objectives are errornous. They underestimated the resources needed.
- fabian2k 5y agoThey are a part of NATO, and Russia cannot win a conventional war against the entire NATO armies.
- tediousdemise 5y agoThe combined forces of Russia, China, NK and Iran could probably muster a fight. Not sure how likely that WW3 scenario would unfold, though.
- dsabanin 5y agoChina is interested in weak Russia so that they can take its territory. They only support Russian aggression against Ukraine to benefit from the Russian isolation economically, wound Russian army, economy, and slowly digest it. Even when Soviet Union existed, they were on bad terms with Chinese Communist Party. Even Chinese hate Russian nazis. Edit: Out of ~90 something joint non-binding agreements between China and Russia, only 4 were actually acted upon by Chinese government. Digestion of the economy already started, among other things Russia has joined Union Pay, Chinese payment processor.
- bpodgursky 5y agoThis isn't the Avengers, there's no reason for Iran or NK to get involved in that fight. (they have no ability to project force abroad anyway)
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- treis 5y agoNot a chance. NATO would control the skies day 1 and that would end any offensive hopes for non-NATO side.
- whimsicalism 5y agoNATO could not easily control the skies of China, such a suggestion is absurd. they likewise could probably not do the same with Russia.
- cbg0 5y agoSome people thought Ukraine wouldn't last 3 days and yet here we are.
- an9n 5y agoWe keep hearing this assertion. Where is the evidence?
- Lapsa 5y agofor example - I am.
- vmception 5y agoPlenty of that, what news sources do you respect enough for me to link to? The “special military operation” isnt over and even Russia is attempting a limited ceasefire to help humanitarian efforts, for the third time, which means its not over due to Ukrainians resisting with some success
- kangda123 5y agonot really an answer but for one Russian military also seems to have expected and even planned for that (e.g. sending recon units first)
- halfmatthalfcat 5y agoBased on the Russian military tactics that were employed during the first couple days of the war. You don't run and gun into a country where you're expecting much resistance. There's also the logistical self-owns by the Russians where, by many accounts, they only had enough gas and food for at most a week but it's been reported only 3 days worth.
- macintux 5y agoRussia prepared (and accidentally published) a press release for 3 days after the invasion, congratulating themselves on their victory.
- 5y ago
- rmind 5y agoLike it took a night for the Russians to wipe out Ukraine (which has been lacking modern weapons)? The Russian invasion of Ukraine has shown how weak the Russian army is in reality. They have no chance against NATO whatsoever. Poland and Baltics are also arming themselves to teeth now.
- micromacrofoot 5y agoOnce the nuclear taboo is crossed it could happen near-instantly. I imagine Russia would prefer to be bordered by nuclear wastelands as a DMZ rather than EU states, which create a existential cultural threat just by existing. At that point you'd have to ask yourselves: who would risk nuclear escalation to retaliate for Latvia or Estonia? not the US. Would the UK bomb Russia with London on the line? probably not. Just about everyone has more to lose than Russia at this point, which is an incredibly dangerous situation to be in.
- david422 5y agoIf nobody launches a nuclear retaliation, then Russia knows it can nuke with impunity. What are the rules they are playing with? Literally just hope they don't invade or nuke London first.
- blub 5y agoWell, they probably can’t nuke Western Europe with impunity. But it’s not clear what NATO membership’s really worth for Eastern Europe. I’m from EE and I don’t understand why the US or the UK would risk their countries or even WE getting nuked for EE. I have the feeling that EE was accepted into NATO just to piss off the Russians and put some space between them and WE. Just like with Ukraine before it went sideways.
- stjohnswarts 5y agoBecause we know that we aren't far behind if such a madman is allowed to exist. It's better to go out with a boom than let a dictator win. --Love, an american
- BurningPenguin 5y agoThey're all in the EU, so it would invoke the EU defense pact as well. As we can see right now, our stuff seems to be decent enough to scrap those ancient soviet rust buckets. Also don't forget that France has the Nuclear Reset Button available. I count on them to convince the Russians not to deploy nukes. We need an EU army nevertheless. And to deploy this army we'll need some proper governing entity for the EU.
- vmception 5y agoDumbass or Donbas? Missed special military opportunity.
- skilled 5y agoWhichever speeds up my US visa process.
- jd115 5y agoUm.. wiped out by Russia and what army?
- skilled 5y agoThe real question here is, how far are Russian soldiers willing to go to protect their pride? At what point do you wake up and realize that you're killing people for no reason other than to appease a tyrant?
- whimsicalism 5y agoHow long did it take US soldiers in Iraq? at least a few years. Despite the obviously undemocratic elections, independent polling still puts Putin's approval among Russians at or above W's.
- spywaregorilla 5y agoUS soldiers weren't being slaughtered by the thousands
- whimsicalism 5y ago1. Nobody actually believes the numbers of Russians killed coming out of Kyiv, these are for morale purposes. 2. Thousands of US soldiers were killed in the Iraqi invasion & occupation.
- EB-Barrington 5y ago"Nobody"? Not in my research. Feel free to provide your best estimate, feel free to use any non-Ukrainian or Russian source, I would love to see it. Various open source lists, independently curated, align with each other. I know what they say, as my life may depend upon it. Hello from Kyiv.
- acdha 5y ago> 1. Nobody actually believes the numbers of Russians killed coming out of Kyiv, these are for morale purposes. That was true at first but has increasingly been changing as NATO sources have been reporting numbers closer to the Ukranian reports. That's not saying it's 100% reliable but it suggests the numbers are closer to what Ukraine is reporting rather than what Russia is reporting. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/1-million-flee-ukraine-russia-attack-civilians-kyiv-zelenskyy-rcna18473 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/1-million-flee-ukraine-ru... > 2. Thousands of US soldiers were killed in the Iraqi invasion & occupation. This is true, and it turned public opinion against both wars. Now consider what the impact is of having that happen in a week — if the U.S. figures are right, much less the Ukranian, they are rapidly closing on the _total_ number of casualties from their decade-long invasion of Afghanistan in just the current month and all signs point to a long, bitter occupation anywhere they do capture.
- keewee7 5y agoDo you happen to be from the Russian minority in these countries? Actual Latvians and Estonians are far more ready to defend their countries.
- lawn 5y ago> I think all 3 Baltic countries get wiped out overnight if Russia decides to press the issue. When I first heard that Russia had launched an attack on Ukraine, I thought it would be over in a few days and that Russia would steamroll them completely. But I couldn't have been more wrong, and if Russia attacks a NATO state I don't see how they can stand a chance.
- oblio 5y ago> My country is run by crooks like any other, and I am not about to go die like some dumbass. I don't understand how you can look at the development rate in Baltic countries and decide "it's run like crooks". From a distance your crooks seem to be quite effective at managing the country.
- skilled 5y agoMaybe trying living there?