Russian Snap Military Drill ‘Could Turn Into Assault on Baltic Capital’
52 replies, posted
[QUOTE]Increasingly frequent snap military drills being carried out by Russia near its eastern European neighbours could be part of a strategy that will open the door for a Russian offensive on the Baltic states according to defence expert Martin Hurt, deputy director at Estonia’s International Centre for Defence and Security.
The Lithuanian and Estonian defence ministries have expressed alarm at the increased military activity, and drawn comparisons with moves prior to the Russian invasion of Crimea.
Commenting on Russia’s announcement last week that its armed forces will not cease holding snap military exercises, Hurt, who has previously worked for Estonia’s Ministry of Defence as well as for the armed forces of both Estonia and Sweden, warned against taking this news lightly[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE][url]http://www.newsweek.com/russian-snap-military-drill-could-turn-quick-assault-baltic-capital-308752[/url][/QUOTE]
Now please explain this Karimatrix...
"its ukranian propaganda"
get out of lithuania putin
I like to think that the Russian government is a little self-destructive as much as the next guy, but isn't this a little bit of a stretch?
Russia would lose in a conflict against the NATO states, flat-out. I'm sure Putin is fine piece-mealing helpless nation-states, but fighting [b]defined, fully functional[/b] NATO-member states would not end well, even in an absolute blitz.
[QUOTE=ewitwins;47204945]I like to think that the Russian government is a little self-destructive as much as the next guy, but isn't this a little bit of a stretch?
Russia would lose in a conflict against the NATO states, flat-out. I'm sure Putin is fine piece-mealing helpless nation-states, but fighting [b]defined, fully functional[/b] NATO-member states would not end well, even in an absolute blitz.[/QUOTE]
If the Russian army attacks tonight, they'll be in Kaliningrad by the time NATO organizes a response force.
fear mongering
anyone who thinks russia will invade the baltic states is an absolute idiot, this martin hurt fella included
[QUOTE=Stopper;47204986]If the Russian army attacks tonight, they'll be in Kaliningrad by the time NATO organizes a response force.[/QUOTE]
And than it will get destroyed. There is really no way to win that for Russia.
This is why Russia wont even try. What Melnek said.
Nukes, British, French, German-US bases and ICBMs and Ballistics from the US will stop Russia. But then we need to kill of China and it's allies, because if Russia attacks us then China will attack other countires like Vietnam, Taiwan, then NK will attack SK, so the third world war is pretty close that way.
[QUOTE=Soret;47205887]Nukes, British, French, German-US bases and ICBMs and Ballistics from the US will stop Russia. But then we need to kill of China and it's allies, because if Russia attacks us then China will attack other countires like Vietnam, Taiwan, then NK will attack SK, so the third world war is pretty close that way.[/QUOTE]
Directly going after Russia or China will immediately lead to a massive conflict anyway. not a good move
[QUOTE=Soret;47205887]Nukes, British, French, German-US bases and ICBMs and Ballistics from the US will stop Russia. But then we need to kill of China and it's allies, because if Russia attacks us then China will attack other countires like Vietnam, Taiwan, then NK will attack SK, so the third world war is pretty close that way.[/QUOTE]
And for what Casus Belli ?
If anybody is threatened it should be Latvia, they have a large Russian population that needs protecting.
[QUOTE=Stopper;47204986]If the Russian army attacks tonight, they'll be in Kaliningrad by the time NATO organizes a response force.[/QUOTE]
But that doesn't mean they will attack. Why would they? They'd likely get stomped as soon as NATO steps in with full force, especially by the US who will be dragged into a direct confrontation with Russia, a situation with a high chance of going nuclear, which no one wants.
Putin is not an idiot and would not start a war where the odds are against him. The reason he went for Ukraine, Georgia etc is because they're not in NATO. This is fear-mongering and not much else.
[QUOTE=Itsjustguy;47205933]And for what Casus Belli ?[/QUOTE]
No Casus Belli. They'll just take a few stability hits
[QUOTE=isreal?;47205976]If anybody is threatened it should be Latvia, they have a large Russian population that needs protecting.[/QUOTE]
It's not like they're all anti-Latvian though. I don't know anyway... I just know a high majority of Estonian Russians are, by now, integrated, and there have been a bunch of anti-Putin rallies or something - gist of it being "we don't want your protection".
[QUOTE=MuffinZerg;47205084]And than it will get destroyed. There is really no way to win that for Russia.
This is why Russia wont even try. What Melnek said.[/QUOTE]
Finally something we can agree on.
[QUOTE=Soret;47205887]Nukes, British, French, German-US bases and ICBMs and Ballistics from the US will stop Russia. But then we need to kill of China and it's allies, because if Russia attacks us then China will attack other countires like Vietnam, Taiwan, then NK will attack SK, so the third world war is pretty close that way.[/QUOTE]
I think you're in the wrong thread, here is the correct one:
[url]http://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1251206[/url]
What of Russia launches all the nukes?
[QUOTE=isreal?;47206190]What of Russia launches all the nukes?[/QUOTE]
Considering that nuclear launches are uncommon, and that they have an outdated stockpile manned by bored incompetents with a limited budget, many of the nukes probably won't even be launched.
[QUOTE=Deng;47206225]Considering that nuclear launches are uncommon, and that they have an outdated stockpile manned by bored incompetents with a limited budget, many of the nukes probably won't even be launched.[/QUOTE]
"Outdated" as compared to whom? The U.S. certainly has more obsolete missiles in service. IIRC militaries test their nuclear stockpiles thoroughly.
[QUOTE=isreal?;47206269]"Outdated" as compared to whom? The U.S. certainly has more obsolete missiles in service. IIRC militaries test their nuclear stockpiles thoroughly.[/QUOTE]
In general. It's not the 80s anymore, where funding is poured into building top of the line nukes and improving them. Both the United States and Russia have let their nuclear stockpiles and capabilities decay since the cold war ended.
[QUOTE=Deng;47206362]In general. It's not the 80s anymore, where funding is poured into building top of the line nukes and improving them. Both the United States and Russia have let their nuclear stockpiles and capabilities decay since the cold war ended.[/QUOTE]
Sure, but Russia has more advanced nuclear forces. I wouldn't declare them useless. They would certainly be able to commence final destruction of the U.S.A.
[QUOTE=isreal?;47206376]Sure, but Russia has more advanced nuclear forces. I wouldn't declare them useless. They would certainly be able to commence final destruction of the U.S.A.[/QUOTE]
Except Russia would also cease to exist as well.
[QUOTE=isreal?;47206376]Sure, but Russia has more advanced nuclear forces. I wouldn't declare them useless. They would certainly be able to commence final destruction of the U.S.A.[/QUOTE]
Unlikely. That would require a ground invasion and who is going to do that?
[QUOTE=isreal?;47206376]Sure, but Russia has more advanced nuclear forces. I wouldn't declare them useless. They would certainly be able to commence final destruction of the U.S.A.[/QUOTE]
Realistically I can't imagine Russia firing a nuke unprovoked.
The second they'd fire that thing it'd be their own end aswell. It's an idiotic risk with no positive outcomes.
[QUOTE=GunFox;47206411]Unlikely. That would require a ground invasion and who is going to do that?[/QUOTE]
KPA?
[QUOTE=Stopper;47204986]If the Russian army attacks tonight, they'll be in [B]Kaliningrad[/B] by the time NATO organizes a response force.[/QUOTE]
Umm
do you mean that the Russian Army are going to slice across the Baltics to that little exclave above Poland or are units already deployed/garrisoned there, or do you mean to say that the Russian Army is totally inefficient and they're not going anywhere?
[editline]24th February 2015[/editline]
my bad, ground forces of the Baltic Fleet are garrisoned in Kaliningrad Oblast
[QUOTE=isreal?;47206426]KPA?[/QUOTE]
Nobody has the boats to mount an invasion. The US is literally the only nation with a navy even remotely large enough. Nobody fields a proper navy anymore.
The thing about nuclear weaponry is that typically, they are seen as a weapon of "last resort", not to be taken lightly because of how much death and suffering it will cause. At the minimum, deploying them against a nuclear armed country is recognition that your own country has no chance of survival.
However, the politicians of a country will never be put into a position of last resort, where they think of using the nuclear button. The other side clearly knows this, and so if they want to conduct the war without reaching nukes, they will use non-nuclear means (i.e conventional forces).
Why bother with nukes, when you can spend the money instead on conventional forces? Or even diplomacy?
Putin better keep his game in check. If he wants to put all his chips in, his cards better match his bluff.
[QUOTE=Soret;47205887]Nukes, British, French, German-US bases and ICBMs and Ballistics from the US will stop Russia.[/QUOTE]
Nobodies nuking anybody unless a nuclear state is directly hit. Even then, unless there's a good chance of a threatening of the nation's governments or integrity there probably wouldn't be nukes. I'm talking NATO tanks bombarding Moscow. Nobody is willing to end the war over the Baltics.
Not to mention, NATO doesn't need to use nukes to win there either. It would probably be one of the most difficult battles NATO has fought, but in the end, the US alone could probably take Russia in a one on one war, and with the support of almost all of western Europe then Russia stands little chance of winning, which is why they haven't annexed the Baltics yet and most likely won't in the future.
[QUOTE=Soret;47205887]But then we need to kill of China and it's allies, because if Russia attacks us then China will attack other countires like Vietnam, Taiwan[/QUOTE]
China and what allies? China is neutral in practically everything, and their golden age of territorial conquest of the Asias is long gone. They might make a move on Taiwan if the country wasn't protected by NATO as well, but they have almost zero reason to do so besides the two not liking each other too much.
They also have little reason to full on war Vietnam, and if they did so, there's no reason the war in Europe would at all effect their decision. The south China sea dispute is hardly one that needs to be even fought with a war, and if China is willing to go to war over it, they'd most likely just occupy the islands and ignore protests because they'd have to do little else.
That's not even mentioning the multitude of problems facing China today, they have many other things to worry about.
[QUOTE=Soret;47205887]then NK will attack SK, so the third world war is pretty close that way.[/QUOTE]
North Korea couldn't survive attacking South Korea, especially not with a US military presence there (because the US won't just withdraw from the entirety of the world if Russia attacks Estonia, this isn't Homefront).
So no, World War 3 is nowhere near close, and we most likely won't see it any time soon. The age of total war passed with the invention of the nuclear weapon, and drone development and the ideas of air supremacy have further killed it.
[editline]24th February 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=Fort83;47206630]We don't know if NATO would even mean anything if t happened. NATO looks great on paper but hasn't been used in a such a way against a superpower before. If individual countries aren't doing anything now because of the threat of nukes, what guarantee is there that the same countries that are part of NATO would do anything? The threat of nukes will still be there. They are supposed to act, but we don't know 100% if NATO would help.[/QUOTE]
Because it's in NATO's charter that every country in it is obligated to aid any who is attacked. Without use of that charter, NATO would more or less collapse in on itself. Even if it's not the full on invasion we imagine, they'd still support the Baltics with at the least a proxy war against Russia.
NATO was founded with the words "to keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down", and if the organization failed to provide a bulwark against Russia then it would be completely contradictory to everything it has ever worked towards.
A Russian snap military drill ‘could turn into assault on Baltic capital’ and I *could* win the lottery. They have about the same chance of realistically happening.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.