5 ms·

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 th

by nkrisc 2y ago

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?

v0lta 2y ago
Today: no In 5-10 years: probably
- KptMarchewa 2y ago
  No, they literally make barely any tanks. What they do is refurbish and modernize post-soviet stock.
- Cthulhu_ 2y ago
  Maybe, but that's assuming their war economy lasts for that long, that they still have people to run those things, etc. Besides, Europe was caught with its proverbial pants down; in 5-10 years, they will (should) have their military up to speed again, with fresher, better equipped and better trained people than Russia has. The border countries have all upgraded their defenses already, and if they invade a NATO country they suddenly have all of Europe and - if still applicable at the time - the US on their back. There are no scenarios in which Russia can have any significant victories. The only thing they maybe have is nukes, but nobody wins if those are deployed.
  - holoduke 2y ago
    You forgot one thing. Nato has zero combat experience. Its entire economy is not suitable for warfare. Will take a lot longer than 5 years.
    - aguaviva 2y ago
      Nato has zero combat experience. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_NATO_operations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_NATO_operations
      - holoduke 2y ago
        Not a single serious war. A war against Russia will be similar to ww1 and ww2. meaning men from all age groups will die in large masses. Or you believe a war will be similar to sandal terrorists.
        aguaviva 2y ago
        Not a single serious war And you're both changing the goalposts, and setting a ridiculous standard (WWI/WWII) for the minimum standard of what constitutes a "serious" war.
trhway 2y ago
Baltic states have 30K military total combined - Russia loses 20-30K/month in Ukraine. So, with all the respect to the Baltic states military - with them being responsible for the defense of about 700km long strip of land, it isn't about full invasion force, it is about having NATO not responding long enough.
- nkrisc 2y ago
  And Russia can’t expel a Ukrainian force smaller than that from less area of their own territory.
  - trhway 2y ago
    You're comparing frontal assault on battle hardened troops vs. potentially highly maneuvering invasion. It is somewhat like comparing Harkiv operation in the Fall 2022 vs. counteroffensive in the South in the Summer 2023. In Kursk Russian forces can't maneuver much, they have to directly push on Ukrainians. The density of Russian and Ukrainian forces in this war - like ~500K each on the 1000km of the battle lines - is order of magnitude higher than that of the Baltic states militaries. Potential invasion in the low density situation of the Baltic states would make sense by cutting through un/low-defended areas with encircling/etc. of the more fortified areas without direct assault of them, at least initially.
- cmrdporcupine 2y ago
  I can't imagine a scenario where the Baltics are invaded without Poland getting involved. And maybe even Germany, Sweden, Finland. And that is not a fight I think Russia can win and they know that.
  - dh2022 2y ago
    I would imagine at least US Air Force getting involved. And that would mean Russia will be pushed out of Baltics fairly quickly (assuming the conflict remains a conventional conflict and does not escalate into nuclear conflict).
oneshtein 2y ago
RF refurbishes about 1300 tanks a year. It's more than enough to conquer part of Europe and then exchange it for Ukraine.
- KptMarchewa 2y ago
  They probably do, but they send them immediately to the frontlines. There are people who track RU storage and refurbishment sites. https://x.com/Jonpy99/status/1856776568057565284/photo/1 https://x.com/Jonpy99/status/1856776568057565284/photo/1 There's no secret real russian army just waiting to invade some another country, or just chilling in Urals. If russia did not have nuclear weapons, road to moscow would be open.
- Cthulhu_ 2y ago
  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.
  - oneshtein 2y ago
    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.
    - rurp 2y ago
      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.

by nkrisc 2y ago

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?

v0lta 2y ago

Today: no In 5-10 years: probably

KptMarchewa 2y ago
No, they literally make barely any tanks. What they do is refurbish and modernize post-soviet stock.
Cthulhu_ 2y ago
Maybe, but that's assuming their war economy lasts for that long, that they still have people to run those things, etc. Besides, Europe was caught with its proverbial pants down; in 5-10 years, they will (should) have their military up to speed again, with fresher, better equipped and better trained people than Russia has. The border countries have all upgraded their defenses already, and if they invade a NATO country they suddenly have all of Europe and - if still applicable at the time - the US on their back. There are no scenarios in which Russia can have any significant victories. The only thing they maybe have is nukes, but nobody wins if those are deployed.
- holoduke 2y ago
  You forgot one thing. Nato has zero combat experience. Its entire economy is not suitable for warfare. Will take a lot longer than 5 years.
  - aguaviva 2y ago
    Nato has zero combat experience. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_NATO_operations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_NATO_operations
    - holoduke 2y ago
      Not a single serious war. A war against Russia will be similar to ww1 and ww2. meaning men from all age groups will die in large masses. Or you believe a war will be similar to sandal terrorists.
      - aguaviva 2y ago
        Not a single serious war And you're both changing the goalposts, and setting a ridiculous standard (WWI/WWII) for the minimum standard of what constitutes a "serious" war.

trhway 2y ago

Baltic states have 30K military total combined - Russia loses 20-30K/month in Ukraine. So, with all the respect to the Baltic states military - with them being responsible for the defense of about 700km long strip of land, it isn't about full invasion force, it is about having NATO not responding long enough.

nkrisc 2y ago
And Russia can’t expel a Ukrainian force smaller than that from less area of their own territory.
- trhway 2y ago
  You're comparing frontal assault on battle hardened troops vs. potentially highly maneuvering invasion. It is somewhat like comparing Harkiv operation in the Fall 2022 vs. counteroffensive in the South in the Summer 2023. In Kursk Russian forces can't maneuver much, they have to directly push on Ukrainians. The density of Russian and Ukrainian forces in this war - like ~500K each on the 1000km of the battle lines - is order of magnitude higher than that of the Baltic states militaries. Potential invasion in the low density situation of the Baltic states would make sense by cutting through un/low-defended areas with encircling/etc. of the more fortified areas without direct assault of them, at least initially.
cmrdporcupine 2y ago
I can't imagine a scenario where the Baltics are invaded without Poland getting involved. And maybe even Germany, Sweden, Finland. And that is not a fight I think Russia can win and they know that.
- dh2022 2y ago
  I would imagine at least US Air Force getting involved. And that would mean Russia will be pushed out of Baltics fairly quickly (assuming the conflict remains a conventional conflict and does not escalate into nuclear conflict).

oneshtein 2y ago

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

KptMarchewa 2y ago
They probably do, but they send them immediately to the frontlines. There are people who track RU storage and refurbishment sites. https://x.com/Jonpy99/status/1856776568057565284/photo/1 https://x.com/Jonpy99/status/1856776568057565284/photo/1 There's no secret real russian army just waiting to invade some another country, or just chilling in Urals. If russia did not have nuclear weapons, road to moscow would be open.
Cthulhu_ 2y ago
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.
- oneshtein 2y ago
  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.
  - rurp 2y ago
    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.