Revealed: Russian Invasion Could Overrun NATO in 60 Hours

a reply to: luthier

Not only that they have advanced tech, built the internet, and are frontrunners in AI development.

Rand was abandoned by the military in their think-tank scenarios due to funding. With the advent of powerful computing , such as mainframes and clusters ,there was no longer a need for humans to develop with statistics. Took too long.

Back to the internet and the development. This should help

History of the Internet

These test are meant to "fail".

For a country with 11 times zones already under it's yoke, it's hard to imagine what could be gained from such an exercize.

Back to the root of the OP, which was an invasion by Russia of the Baltic States.

Yes, the Russian's could pull that off as the Baltic states are not highly militarised, but certainly not as easy as Russia's victims to date like Ukraine and Georgia. However, the cost would be very high militarily for Russia and it would be a Pyrrhic victory. Doubtful that the Baltic States could be held conventionally once NATO got limbered up.

There is very little chance Russia would survive long after such a display of belligerence. The body bags being shipped back home would lead to social unrest and revolution in Russia. Even RT.com would find it difficult painting a positive picture of Russia's prowess.

People "big" Russia up, but the country has an economy the size of Italy and a potent military that is outmatched by Western nations and there is no evidence that Russia could succeed against someone capable of shooting back.

This test has nothing to do with Russia invading the Whole of Europe. The test was done to see if NATO were capable of defending their Three weakest member states from a Russian invation.

The conclution from these tests are No. Not With the current NATO forces stationed in these states.

No even within the 60 hours, it at the moste would take Russia to do the job, is NATO capable of defending these states. What comes after is a different cenario.


When it comes to Russian capability against the Whole of Europe With out full US support. Russia can deam Europe incapable of any retaliation on Russian teritorry. This menas a full scale Russian attack on Europe means Europe would not be capable of attacking Russia. Europe would have to use all its forces and assets to defend.

originally posted by: Willtell
So the American people should know that their government and Army is not what its all cracked up to be...

The one flaw in that argument is ignoring the political leadership. When our military has issues doing their job because of political rules of engagement blaming the military for failures is problematic because it ignores the reasons those failures occurred.

Has anyone asked President Putin if he actually has even thought about invading Europe?

We have had an endless boo hop against Russia by Obama, Cameron and mates probably as a red herring to the refugee crisis caused by Obama and the financial one hidden beneath that crisis.

These world leaders hate Putin because he got more done in Syria against ISIS in the short time Russia was hitting the headlines with its successful bombing campaign than they have managed in all the time they have been waging war and letting their mates quietly drill for oil on the Golan Heights etc etc.

a reply to: Shiloh7

Really more done with ISIS than anyone...so does bombing civilians that aren't near any jihadists come to play in your world of Russia doing such good things in Syria?

If you carpet bomb enough places your going to kill jihadists...but you also get innocent civilians along with them something Russia doesn't care about...collateral damage.

a reply to: Willtell

Funny that your using a source that was called a US propahanda device during the conflict in Ukraine...your hypocrisy is astounding.

Now Russia had a hard time getting soldiers to fight in Ukraine against that military...do you think they would fight against a military group such as NATO?

Just love that Putin don't you...

originally posted by: Shiloh7
Has anyone asked President Putin if he actually has even thought about invading Europe?

The fact that this was a war-game concerning the Baltic States (not wider Europe) needs to be taken on board.

That said, Putin won't invade the Baltic States because that would be suicide. However, Putin - or rather Russia - has form in attacking invading weaker nations (Georgia and Ukraine), so maybe not too much of a fantasy that an economically broke Russia may not attempt a big nationalist distraction.

originally posted by: paraphi

originally posted by: Shiloh7
Has anyone asked President Putin if he actually has even thought about invading Europe?

The fact that this was a war-game concerning the Baltic States (not wider Europe) needs to be taken on board.

That said, Putin won't invade the Baltic States because that would be suicide. However, Putin - or rather Russia - has form in attacking invading weaker nations (Georgia and Ukraine), so maybe not too much of a fantasy that an economically broke Russia may not attempt a big nationalist distraction.

It wont be suicide for Putin to invade the Baltic states. Just look how Putin walked all over US/NATO in Syria. THe US/NATO were shown to the stans as observers.

There is not even a garanti that NATO will show up and support the Baltic States. Whats written on paper means nothing. Its all about loses and gains.

Georgia is another example of this. Russia attacked before the US could blink. There for the US/NATO were shown to the stand as a observer.

If Russia invade the Baltic stats. This test that was conducted will indicate what NATO must sacrifice to retake the Baltic states. That in the end will become a political issue. Harldy resolved With a war between NATO and Russia. There is no gain in such a conflict.

a reply to: Willtell

Hi everyone,

IMHO the Russians have been preparing this invasion since WWII.
They will move through long tunnels inside enemy territory
and will pop-up like mushrooms in isolated areas, forests etc.
They will use a huge number of tanks to break trough enemy defenses
(Russia together with China have 25.000 tanks - US have 9.000)
They will have Chinese and Muslim support .
They will use top secret weapons, just like us.
And when they feel they are losing and are cornered, they
will unleash a full scale nuclear attack.

a reply to: Willtell

from the article

In a series of wargames conducted between summer2014 and spring 2015, the RAND Corporation examined

you then state...

So the American people should know that their government and Army is not what its all cracked up to be.

Since when does a Rand/NATO scenario become the USA? How do you make that jump?

a reply to: skywatcher44

What more Russian BS from another of Mr Putins boot boys

The BS is coming from you...nowhere is there any mention of any quotes from Russia - just Rand/Nato.

Edgar Cayce the sleeping Prophet seemed to think Russia would one day become the Hope of the World.

I tend to agree with him.

a reply to: Willtell

Yes dear Americans, there is not enough money going to military. So next year we need to give military more. We cut health department and we destroy little man but we will be ready for those crazy ruskies.

a reply to: Willtell

Dont see Russian being allowed to invade that far without NATO using tactical nukes and EMP weapons against any invading force.

Plus like someone else suggested there supply lines simply could not cope with the fuel demands, reload of weaponry and whatever else there Armour and troops need to function in such a short period of time.

originally posted by: spy66
It wont be suicide for Putin to invade the Baltic states. Just look how Putin walked all over US/NATO in Syria. THe US/NATO were shown to the stans as observers.

It would be suicide both economically and militarily. If you are basing your worldview on Russia's intervention in Syria then they are two different things. Flattening a city like Aleppo with dumb bombs and cluster munitions, is a different thing to tangling with someone who shoots back.

The Baltic States are members of NATO and the EU. Georgia and Ukraine were not.

Anyway, it won't happen. Russia will continue to pick on weaker neighbours, as is their form.

a reply to: paraphi

Is it possible Putin could underestimate a NATO response to them invading the Baltic's? Could Putin believe that NATO would not go to war over 3 tiny countries? I ask because if we look back after the fall of the USSR when NATO / Russia began talking and the idea was floated about Russia joining NATO we saw Russia object to the fact NATO members all had an equal voice.

They did not like the fact the smallest NATO country could block a NATO action. When NATO would not agree we were left with the council.

I think he would risk invading the Baltics playing the card that NATO wont defend the Baltics.

I find all this talk some what funny even though if it transpired it would be a very serious matter.

This is all about gaining more funding for the massive military complex.

Look, in no way could Russia invade any NATO country in the same way NATO would fail to invade Russia.

We have already seen how the combined forces of the USA and many European countries have utterly failed in invading every middle eastern country they have tried to. As someone else pointed out, the same thing happened when Russia tried with Afghanistan.

I would argue eastern Ukraine and Crimea are slightly different due to their p op violations actually wanting help, but I don't want to detract from the topic so will leave it there.

This is all ignoring the fact there would be no financial advantage for Russia invading NATO countries and let's be honest money is what it is all about.

It's the same with China, for some reason we are told we should be afraid of China and they should be our enemy. But China would run out of money if they went to war with the west because there would be no one left to buy their products. Their economy is thriving because we buy all their mass produced rubbish.

Anyway, carry on.