Is Russia capable of attacking Germany or any other western European nation with conventional and/or nuclear forces?

[Delldude]

View attachment 751263

You can do better than that.

 

[watchingfromafar]

You can do better than that.

That was great !!!

-

 

[JohnDB]

Are you so sure that Putin is sane that you are willing to bet the survival of the planet on it? He has shown little sign recently of this sanity that you credit him with. He seems to be the Russian Howard Hughs at this point.

Yes, that was the original motivation. But now ego is involved. If Putin loses, he loses more than fresh water and uranium mines. He loses face, which could cause him to lose his position, which will likely be fatal for him.

Not at all so why risk it?

Then let the war play out. One European country invaded another. Not nearly the first time that has happened. Wish one side well if you truly have expertise in European relations, but no need for American lives to be put at risk, nor American money to be shipped to the Rhode Island of Europe.

If you are amped up to defend against an invasion, the southern border needs you! Our southern border, I mean.

If history is any guide (and for some it never seems to be), then Russia will succeed in the invasion and fail in the ocupation. After the Russians tire of having their soldiers blown up on the streets of Kiev and go home, then we can exercise our altruism by insisting on reforms of corruption in Ukraine as a condition of more aid.

Ok...
Not every nation is capable of being a democracy. Russia claims to be one but it's really a kleptocracy that is run by plutocrats. Always has been for thousands of years.

A democracy or republic democracy flourishes only when the population of a group is somewhat moral and holds to higher ideals than what exists in that neighborhood....
All you need to do is look at Africa to see a failure of democracy where the governments are and have been abject failures towards their population. Somalia is in yet another famine. 20% of their GDP is agricultural but 50% of their labor force derives their income from it. And yet they have to be coerced into putting any Government funds into developing agricultural pursuits. They would rather have pirates than industry.
Almost the same is true of Russia. They just go about theft in a different fashion.

But that's these populations and their cultural norms....which is why a "bully" is needed to keep the area from descending into global chaos.

In the Middle East constant bickering between the Gulf States has actually saved the world from a Petroleum Superpower Nation that could hold the entire world hostage. If Iraq, Iran and the Kurds all united together they could bulldoze Saudis and UAE and anyone else they wanted...including Turkey. Then wars only are successful if planes and Navy's have fuel. Syria suffered a huge blow (and the neighbors all suffered) because of the rise of ISIL....they attacked Russia and paid a huge price for their hubris gained because Syria went a more peaceful route. That's the whole reason ISIL was even able to rise up to begin with was due to Syrian softness.

Think for a minute about the neighbors....like PRC and the "stans". Russia doesn't need to be soft like Syria was. We don't need to remove the claws from the bear. We don't really care if Ukraine leaves their Kleptocratic ways (we tend to call it corruption...they call it normalcy) But we don't want Russia to get too big either.

 

[zaangalewa]

...
If Russia attacks Germany, for example, by blowing up the tanks before they cross into Ukraine, what would/should/could the U.S. reaction be?

To ask us what we will do.

 

[Litwin]

If Russia attacks Germany, for example, by blowing up the tanks before they cross into Ukraine, what would/should/could the U.S. reaction be?

 

[Litwin]

Still, I doubt we have heard the last of old Vlad.

Mass bombing campaigns? That's the benchmark you think is relevant?

There's only two nations capable of giving Russia a "mass bombing campaign" nobody else has an air force that could.

So.....
When you can engage the grey stuff between your ears to actually take part in a discussion try again eh? But maybe you never were capable to do so....I don't know.

View attachment 751263

 

[Litwin]

No....
We don't want that.
We want Russia to remain and be the proverbial "bully" in the neighborhood.
Regime change will be worse and not better. (Unless they can come up with a Putin Clone)

NATO involvement will be a last ditch effort to save the planet....I kinda like life. Rather fond of living. YMMV. There is no winning if NATO gets involved...it's game over for our current lifestyles.

 

[Litwin]

 

[Delldude]

Meh......you know why Z won't get M-1's until late this year or early next?
Because the Biden admin expects the war to be over.....and we ain't talkin' Z.

 

[Litwin]

Meh......you know why Z won't get M-1's until late this year or early next?
Because the Biden admin expects the war to be over.....and we ain't talkin' Z.

Why do you keep making him madder, dmitri?

MSN

www.msn.com

 

[Seymour Flops]

Ok...
Not every nation is capable of being a democracy. Russia claims to be one but it's really a kleptocracy that is run by plutocrats. Always has been for thousands of years.

A democracy or republic democracy flourishes only when the population of a group is somewhat moral and holds to higher ideals than what exists in that neighborhood....
All you need to do is look at Africa to see a failure of democracy where the governments are and have been abject failures towards their population. Somalia is in yet another famine. 20% of their GDP is agricultural but 50% of their labor force derives their income from it. And yet they have to be coerced into putting any Government funds into developing agricultural pursuits. They would rather have pirates than industry.
Almost the same is true of Russia. They just go about theft in a different fashion.

But that's these populations and their cultural norms....which is why a "bully" is needed to keep the area from descending into global chaos.

In the Middle East constant bickering between the Gulf States has actually saved the world from a Petroleum Superpower Nation that could hold the entire world hostage. If Iraq, Iran and the Kurds all united together they could bulldoze Saudis and UAE and anyone else they wanted...including Turkey. Then wars only are successful if planes and Navy's have fuel. Syria suffered a huge blow (and the neighbors all suffered) because of the rise of ISIL....they attacked Russia and paid a huge price for their hubris gained because Syria went a more peaceful route. That's the whole reason ISIL was even able to rise up to begin with was due to Syrian softness.

Think for a minute about the neighbors....like PRC and the "stans". Russia doesn't need to be soft like Syria was. We don't need to remove the claws from the bear. We don't really care if Ukraine leaves their Kleptocratic ways (we tend to call it corruption...they call it normalcy) But we don't want Russia to get too big either.

Well said. That first sentence was a hard idea for me to learn during the start of the endless post-9/11 wars. When the Iraqis had their purple-finger voting day, I thought it was the beginning a solid, stable democratic republic that would be an ally to the U.S. in the middle east.

No.

The fundamentalist culture in Iraq is not suited to democracy. They will not stand for it and will "vote" against it with IED's and weapons supplied by other fundamentalist nations.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Dmitri, do you comprehend the implications of what will transpire if russia takes ukraine in this massive escalation surrounding ukraine? 500,000 troops, 2000 tanks, 700 tanks.

 

[Delldude]

Dmitri, do you comprehend the implications of what will transpire if russia takes ukraine in this massive escalation surrounding ukraine? 500,000 troops, 2000 tanks, 700 tanks.

Is why Biden's M-1 high tech tank thing won't happen until late this year or early next year, after they feel Russia will end the war.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Is why Biden's M-1 high tech tank thing won't happen until late this year or early next year, after they feel Russia will end the war.

The only way Russia can end the war is to withdraw from all of Ukraine.

 

[JohnDB]

The only way Russia can end the war is to withdraw from all of Ukraine.

Well,
There is another way....but nobody wants to consider it.

If the axis of nations that hates the US combine power and agree to destroy the US with a surprise nuclear attack NATO will fold like a house of cards.

Currently 2 nations that hate the USA are nuclear powers....two other current nuclear powers don't exactly like the US but enjoys using the US for other purposes.

It's not looking good right now. Especially when the USA is having issues with military personnel. (Democrats tend to cannibalize the military and cause huge drops in recruitment)

Unless an about face is done soon....this might come to fruition.

Some people just like to be in charge....it doesn't matter if it's a trash dump or a wonderful nation....they want to hold the most power.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Well,
There is another way....but nobody wants to consider it.

If the axis of nations that hates the US combine power and agree to destroy the US with a surprise nuclear attack NATO will fold like a house of cards.

Currently 2 nations that hate the USA are nuclear powers....two other current nuclear powers don't exactly like the US but enjoys using the US for other purposes.

It's not looking good right now. Especially when the USA is having issues with military personnel. (Democrats tend to cannibalize the military and cause huge drops in recruitment)

Unless an about face is done soon....this might come to fruition.

Some people just like to be in charge....it doesn't matter if it's a trash dump or a wonderful nation....they want to hold the most power.

There is no such thing as a surprise nuclear attack of any size. Both sides have been working since the 1950's to make sure that can't happen. Large scale missile launches would be instantly detected and presently it takes only 5 minutes for the US to launch its missiles once the President gives the ok. Mutually assured destruction remains a valid deterrent to nuclear war.

The Russian invasion of Ukraine has been just a long list of miscalculations not only by Putin but also by the leaders of the Russian military and intelligence. Russia can survive for a long time while fighting this war, but it cannot win and it cannot save its economy or the quality of life of the Russian people unless it withdraws from Ukraine and makes other concessions.

 

[JohnDB]

There is no such thing as a surprise nuclear attack of any size. Both sides have been working since the 1950's to make sure that can't happen. Large scale missile launches would be instantly detected and presently it takes only 5 minutes for the US to launch its missiles once the President gives the ok. Mutually assured destruction remains a valid deterrent to nuclear war.

The Russian invasion of Ukraine has been just a long list of miscalculations not only by Putin but also by the leaders of the Russian military and intelligence. Russia can survive for a long time while fighting this war, but it cannot win and it cannot save its economy or the quality of life of the Russian people unless it withdraws from Ukraine and makes other concessions.

Our borders are too open....
It literally doesn't require a missile. Just a few well placed cargo containers. And while our own government is busy squabbling over "who's in charge" a second strike can devastate the rest of the command and control.

I'm saying that this is possible...our gubbermint isn't as together as it really needs to be.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Our borders are too open....
It literally doesn't require a missile. Just a few well placed cargo containers. And while our own government is busy squabbling over "who's in charge" a second strike can devastate the rest of the command and control.

I'm saying that this is possible...our gubbermint isn't as together as it really needs to be.

It is not possible. A few nukes exploded at ground level would produce a horrible humanitarian disaster, but it would have no military benefit, and a large missile launch would trigger a massive US nuclear launch that would destroy the enemy. Partisan political loyalties do not make for clear thinking.

 

[JohnDB]

It is not possible. A few nukes exploded at ground level would produce a horrible humanitarian disaster, but it would have no military benefit, and a large missile launch would trigger a massive US nuclear launch that would destroy the enemy. Partisan political loyalties do not make for clear thinking.

I was thinking that if they obscure who exactly was attacking then there's a bit of a difficulty in knowing who to strike back at.

 

[toomuchtime_]

I was thinking that if they obscure who exactly was attacking then there's a bit of a difficulty in knowing who to strike back at.

What would be the point? Only a large-scale nuclear attack could have any possible military benefit, and since the launch would be immediately detected the enemy would be exposed.