It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
But this misses some important realities, including the condition and age of that equipment, the frayed infrastructure of Russia’s military commands, and the poor quality of Russian conscripts. The Russian military is a large regional force, and it can kill a lot of people. That doesn’t mean it can sustain a war with a vastly more populous and wealthier coalition of some three dozen nations (or more, if others join the fight).
Moreover, NATO enjoys a qualitative edge that would spell disaster for Russian forces in short order, especially in the air. The Vermont Air National Guard (which for years has intercepted Soviet and Russian aircraft on the U.S. East Coast) is more ready to go to war than the Russian Air Force. Without control of the skies, Russian ground forces stand no chance after whatever initial blitzkrieg might get them into NATO territory, and their commanders know it. World War III will not be like doing stunts at an air show, and taking out NATO’s aircraft will surely not be like blowing up unsuspecting commercial airliners.
Finally, NATO has something the Russians sorely lack: experience. Wisely or not, the U.S. and its allies have been at war in the Middle East and Central Asia for nearly 15 years, and NATO’s armies are salted throughout with men and women who know how to fight, supply, communicate, and remain cohesive in the face of actual combat. Russia’s military, once sharpened by World War II survivors and later by the veterans of the brutal attempt to subdue Afghanistan, now boasts men whose combat experience mostly consists of blowing up apartment blocks in Chechnya and shooting at outgunned conscripts in Ukraine.
originally posted by: spy66
The sanctions are not working, because russia is adapting.
originally posted by: FlyingFox
Did Russia ever sign the Geneva Conventions?
ussia invaded Ukrainian sovereign territory in Crimea using specialised troops who had been deliberately dressed in uniforms without clear markings. Russia consistently denied that they were their troops, with President Putin insisting that they where “local partisans who had bought their clothes and weapons in Crimean shops” The status of these unmarked and disowned troops is not clearly defined under the Geneva Convention, making it extremely difficult for the Ukrainian military to respond
originally posted by: mbkennel
a reply to: tsurfer2000h
Take a look at a map. There is a land bridge from Poland to Lithuania, both NATO members.
And that is surrounding Russian Kaliningrad. Estonia would be lost of course, but it may be a matter of trading Kaliningrad for Estonia back.
originally posted by: openminded2011
a reply to: Willtell
I really do believe if the Russians played that card, they would in fact get nuked. Dont even think for a minute if NATO sees Russian tanks rolling across Ukraine towards Europe, that you wont see tactical nukes get used to stop the advance.
You will, and then it escalates very quickly and there is a very ugly outcome for both sides. Which is why it most likely will never happen. If it does, most of Western Russia, Europe, and North America will be a radioactive wasteland shortly after.