[img]http://cdn.theatlantic.com/static/newsroom/img/mt/2014/03/RTR8RJ1/lead.jpg?n2djpw[/img]
[quote]It's a good time to have friends in Eastern Europe.
Leaders in the region, who have reacted to Russia's occupation of Crimea by expressing fears that they could be next, are now taking solace in their alliances. "Thanks be to God, we are NATO members," exclaimed Lithuanian President Dalia Grybauskaite last week. This month, Norway is hosting 16,000 NATO soldiers for previously planned cold-weather training exercises on the Russian border, much to the Russians' displeasure. Among those participating in Operation Cold Response are 1,400 Swedish troops under the Nordic nation's limited partnership with the alliance.
Non-aligned since the early 19th century, Sweden's "splendid isolation" has endured two world wars and even the five-decade superpower slugfest that dominated the late 20th century. That could change, however, in the wake of Russia's intervention in Ukraine. Last week, Swedish Finance Minister Anders Borg indicated that the defense budget, to which he had recently announced cuts, would be increased as a result of the crisis. Deputy Prime Minister Jan Björklund also publicly floated the idea of Swedish membership in NATO, warning that Russia could attempt to seize Gotland, a strategically located Swedish island province in the Baltic Sea, if it chose to attack the Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania. Sverker Göransson, the supreme commander of Sweden's military, has rejected Björklund's call for a change to the country's defense doctrine.[/quote]
[url]http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/03/after-crimea-sweden-flirts-with-joining-nato/284362/[/url]
Isn't Sweden Neutral?
[QUOTE=Daniel Smith;44300026]Isn't Sweden Neutral?[/QUOTE]
That's Switzerland. Which also doubles as a fortress and is home to the makers of what is arguably the finest line of assault rifles currently in existence.
They literally admitted that they wouldn't last a week in a Russian invasion.
[QUOTE=laserguided;44300098]They literally admitted that they wouldn't last a week in a Russian invasion.[/QUOTE]
Pretty sure I've read them saying they wouldn't even last a week against a Finnish invasion :v
But I might've mixed em up.
[QUOTE=booster;44300127]Pretty sure I've read them saying they wouldn't even last a week against a Finnish invasion :v
But I might've mixed em up.[/QUOTE]
Oh little brother :)
Finland and Sweden combined wouldn't last a week against Russia
[QUOTE=Saturn V;44300213]Finland and Sweden combined wouldn't last a week against Russia[/QUOTE]
The answer is clear. You need to construct a MegaZord.
[QUOTE=Saturn V;44300213]Finland and Sweden combined wouldn't last a week against Russia[/QUOTE]
They said that before.
Look what happened.
[QUOTE=Saturn V;44300213]Finland and Sweden combined wouldn't last a week against Russia[/QUOTE]
But a Poland-led NATO would
[QUOTE=Sir_takeslot;44300259]They said that before.
Look what happened.[/QUOTE]
You mean the time when russia didn't really take the operation seriously and didn't prepare properly or the time we had help from the mightiest military power in europe?
[QUOTE=Grimhound;44300039]That's Switzerland. Which also doubles as a fortress and is home to the makers of what is arguably the finest line of assault rifles currently in existence.[/QUOTE]
[t]http://www.cuckooclocks-kuckucksuhren.com/media/catalog/product/cache/2/image/1200x1600/859a26d859f796c6b600b9f06ec58e15/3/4/3406-neu.jpg[/t]
[quote]In Switzerland they had brotherly love - they had 500 years of democracy and peace, and what did that produce? The cuckoo clock.
-Harry Lime[/quote]
I love you sweden, be our friend!
[QUOTE=Sir_takeslot;44300259]They said that before.
Look what happened.[/QUOTE]
That was the 40's, middle of the winter.
These days, outcome not so good
Finland would join NATO, but too many patriotic old men here.
[QUOTE=Grimhound;44300039][B]That's Switzerland[/B]. Which also doubles as a fortress and is home to the makers of what is arguably the finest line of assault rifles currently in existence.[/QUOTE]
Being neutral or not won't matter when war breaks out. The invading force will just drive over the border and occupy the country.
[QUOTE=Sir_takeslot;44300259]They said that before.
Look what happened.[/QUOTE]As much as I do find it rather sweet how the world has this image of us as a cross between superheroes and tactical geniuses, the Soviet Union we fought was under-equipped, crippled by the Great Purge, assumed the entire operation would be easy as hell, and sent troops against us who weren't used to the winter (simply because they weren't from regions bordering us, and thus assumed to be more loyal). There were more factors than that working in our favour, but that's a basic summary.
[QUOTE=Saturn V;44300213]Finland and Sweden combined wouldn't last a week against Russia[/QUOTE]
The Baltic States wouldn't last a day in that case.
[sp] We really wouldn't [/sp]
[QUOTE=Sir_takeslot;44300259]They said that before.
Look what happened.[/QUOTE]for fuck's sake
that was a different age, a time before smart weapons, laser targeting, jet engines and all the other bazillion innovations that have changed the face of war in the last 60-70 years. a time when the enemy, however great and mighty, was ill-prepared and led by a powerful but insane and incompetent dictator.
if the present day Russia ever attacks for whatever reason, there won't be a pyrrhic victory, there won't be patriotic sacrifices, there won't be a fucking "Winter War Vol. 2".
it will be an utter and total defeat at best and a massacre at worst.
[QUOTE=Thompsonas;44300368]The Baltic States wouldn't last a day in that case.
[sp] We really wouldn't [/sp][/QUOTE]
You guys are in NATO, Russia isn't that stupid.
[QUOTE=Joazzz;44300403]for fuck's sake
that was a different age, a time before smart weapons, laser targeting, jet engines and all the other bazillion innovations that have changed the face of war in the last 60-70 years. a time when the enemy, however great and mighty, was ill-prepared and led by a powerful but insane and incompetent dictator.
if the present day Russia ever attacks for whatever reason, there won't be a pyrrhic victory, there won't be patriotic sacrifices, there won't be a fucking "Winter War Vol. 2".
it will be an utter and total defeat at best and a massacre at worst.[/QUOTE]
We live in an age where entire city blocks are evacuated because someone's WW2 memorabilia collection is discovered and it contains *GASP* G-G-GUNS.
That's the UK, though.
[QUOTE=Sgt Doom;44300362]As much as I do find it rather sweet how the world has this image of us as a cross between superheroes and tactical geniuses, the Soviet Union we fought was under-equipped, crippled by the Great Purge, assumed the entire operation would be easy as hell, and sent troops against us who weren't used to the winter (simply because they weren't from regions bordering us, and thus assumed to be more loyal). There were more factors than that working in our favour, but that's a basic summary.[/QUOTE]
It's not hard to see why, a 4.6 KD against a force with vastly superior numbers and over 141 times the tanks is impressive whether they're under-prepared or not :v:
[sp]before you jump on me no I'm not trying to say winter war v.2 or anything I know europe is in danger and I hope all of our european friends get support[/sp]
[QUOTE=Joazzz;44300403]for fuck's sake
that was a different age, a time before smart weapons, laser targeting, jet engines and all the other bazillion innovations that have changed the face of war in the last 60-70 years. a time when the enemy, however great and mighty, was ill-prepared and led by a powerful but insane and incompetent dictator.
if the present day Russia ever attacks for whatever reason, there won't be a pyrrhic victory, there won't be patriotic sacrifices, there won't be a fucking "Winter War Vol. 2".
it will be an utter and total defeat at best and a massacre at worst.[/QUOTE]The most we can hope for is conducting a costly insurgency, but tbh after what the Russians did to the Chechens I wouldn't fancy trying that either.
tanks are only useful when they can actually engage targets, like we learned in iraq, they were utterly useless once the fighting turned door to door, the same thing works with gaurilla warfare, in vietnam the only time our tanks ever got to do any fighting was when they were conveniently there for an ambush or attack or when we knew where the enemy was
seems like putin's advice to yankuvitch has switched sides, military up or shut-up, every country which doesn't want to be in the EEU is scrambling to join up
This article is already a week old but still I will say that after what has happened in the Crimea, some neutral countries are re-assessing their neutrality.
[QUOTE=hypern;44300497]This article is already a week old but still I will say that after what has happened in the Crimea, some neutral countries are re-assessing their neutrality.[/QUOTE]
Neutral countries reassessing their neutrality... Not-Russia countries reassessing where they get their fuel and energy from...
[QUOTE=ZyreHD;44300355]Being neutral or not won't matter when war breaks out. The invading force will just drive over the border and occupy the country.[/QUOTE]
The previous world wars would like to disagree.
I suppose that's the one good thing to come out of this whole mess.
Now everyone is looking to be a part of NATO.
we can handle the russians thanks to our ultra realistic russian invasion simulator world in conflict, no worries people we can handle this
[QUOTE=Pvt. Martin;44300535]I suppose that's the one good thing to come out of this whole mess.
Now everyone is looking to be a part of NATO.[/QUOTE]
no
everyone is looking to be part of russia
[QUOTE=Hole;44300569]no
everyone is looking to be part of russia[/QUOTE]152% of people agree!
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
