3 ms·

direct retaliation would bring the us and Nato into the war, and that would definitely spell the end of Putin.

coffinbirth 3y ago
Yeah as we have seen in Syria, where Assad is still president, thanks to Russia. The US and its vassals (the bulk of NATO) actually lost the conflict in Syria (and Afghanistan). Keep in mind that Russia is not alone. There is China, most of the middle eastern countries, many south American countries, some European countries that will stand on Russias side. NATO is a meaningless, empty shell. At his point, they can't even provide enough ammunition to Ukraine. Additional, NATO and the US do not have the military industrial capacity required for an all out war with the BRICS alliance. NATO doesn't have any military combat experience, which the Russians have now. Just think about the experience Russia and China have regarding drone and robotic warfare, neither US nor European armed forces have anything like this at this time. Who produces all these drones? Right, China. It's all about resources and indrustrial capacity, Russia and China have both, which they can scale massively.
- nradov 3y ago
  You've got more misinformation and errors there than I have time to correct, but to start with BRICS isn't an "alliance". There are no real security guarantees or mutual defense obligations, not even a written treaty. Of those five countries, Brazil, India, and South Africa have good relations with the USA and lack any real ability to project power much beyond their borders. They certainly won't go to war to protect Russia as they have nothing to gain and much to lose. They might sell some equipment to Russia in exchange for cash or oil but that's as far as they will go.
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago
  > as we have seen in Syria, where Assad is still president You’re comparing a proxy war to hypothetical direct action. > they can't even provide enough ammunition to Ukraine This is nonsense. Can versus might decide not to, one. And are, moreover. > Who produces all these drones? Right, China Russia has no robotic warfare to speak of. Its top-of-the line kit is being reliably shot down by out-of-date NATO fare. (Their hypersonic were taken out by circa 1990 Patriot batteries.) China has a serious drone repository, but it’s not in play. Instead we’re seeing Iranian drones fight Chinese consumer drones operated by Ukraine, as well as Ukraine’s own drone production ramp up and learn. NATO drones are way too advanced for this battle and not a significant part of what’s being provided to Kyiv.
  - rewmie 3y ago
    > NATO drones are way too advanced for this battle and not a significant part of what’s being provided to Kyiv. I would add that one of the key factors of Russia's complete collapse of its 3-day invasion of Ukraine was Ukraine fielding half dozen export market drones from Turkey built with components designed for the civilian market.

Yeah as we have seen in Syria, where Assad is still president, thanks to Russia. The US and its vassals (the bulk of NATO) actually lost the conflict in Syria (and Afghanistan). Keep in mind that Russia is not alone. There is China, most of the middle eastern countries, many south American countries, some European countries that will stand on Russias side. NATO is a meaningless, empty shell. At his point, they can't even provide enough ammunition to Ukraine. Additional, NATO and the US do not have the military industrial capacity required for an all out war with the BRICS alliance. NATO doesn't have any military combat experience, which the Russians have now. Just think about the experience Russia and China have regarding drone and robotic warfare, neither US nor European armed forces have anything like this at this time. Who produces all these drones? Right, China. It's all about resources and indrustrial capacity, Russia and China have both, which they can scale massively.

nradov 3y ago
You've got more misinformation and errors there than I have time to correct, but to start with BRICS isn't an "alliance". There are no real security guarantees or mutual defense obligations, not even a written treaty. Of those five countries, Brazil, India, and South Africa have good relations with the USA and lack any real ability to project power much beyond their borders. They certainly won't go to war to protect Russia as they have nothing to gain and much to lose. They might sell some equipment to Russia in exchange for cash or oil but that's as far as they will go.
JumpCrisscross 3y ago
> as we have seen in Syria, where Assad is still president You’re comparing a proxy war to hypothetical direct action. > they can't even provide enough ammunition to Ukraine This is nonsense. Can versus might decide not to, one. And are, moreover. > Who produces all these drones? Right, China Russia has no robotic warfare to speak of. Its top-of-the line kit is being reliably shot down by out-of-date NATO fare. (Their hypersonic were taken out by circa 1990 Patriot batteries.) China has a serious drone repository, but it’s not in play. Instead we’re seeing Iranian drones fight Chinese consumer drones operated by Ukraine, as well as Ukraine’s own drone production ramp up and learn. NATO drones are way too advanced for this battle and not a significant part of what’s being provided to Kyiv.
- rewmie 3y ago
  > NATO drones are way too advanced for this battle and not a significant part of what’s being provided to Kyiv. I would add that one of the key factors of Russia's complete collapse of its 3-day invasion of Ukraine was Ukraine fielding half dozen export market drones from Turkey built with components designed for the civilian market.