Lounge of The Russian-Ukrainian War

Australia Sucks said:
Well sure Russia can conquer Germany but they cannot defeat the whole of the NATO alliance (excluding USA). There is 31 countries in NATO excluding USA. No way Russia can beat 31 countries. It took Russia 3 years to gain only 20% of the territory of Ukraine.
Click to expand...
You're including countries like Luxembourg, Slovakia, Slovenia, Denmark, Montenegro, Croatia etc. Once Russia announced its new military doctrine, the Croatian president immediately said they wanted no part of this and has made sure to reiterate those sentiments weekly, just to make sure his country gets spare if or when ish hits the fan.

That said, in my opinion, no one would come out of a war with Russia with victorious. Everyone would lose. Australia would end up being the last fully intact "western" country.

Regarding the territory, 8.3 million Ukrainians are ethnic Russia. Therefore, there's no way Russia can just steamroll the country without significant backlash back home. This whole reasoning could of course just be a smart excuse designed to hide Russia's military ineptitude. We'll, hopefully, never have to find out.
 
Australia Sucks said:
Well sure Russia can conquer Germany but they cannot defeat the whole of the NATO alliance (excluding USA). There is 31 countries in NATO excluding USA. No way Russia can beat 31 countries. It took Russia 3 years to gain only 20% of the territory of Ukraine.
Click to expand...
This is the image that matters

Take the US out and there goes ~35 percent of your active service members and 30 percent of your reserves.

Russia has 1.5 million active personnel and 2 million reserve personnel (probably a lot more paramilitary to include EVERY Chechnyan)

At this point, NATO is still larger, but consider Turkey, a country that hasn't always been the best-behaved NATO member.

Turkey’s geography has always been important, but with the US out of the equation, they’re almost 3x the next closest member. How much do you think they’re going to use this to their advantage (“Give us EU”; “Take the ‘refugees’ we don’t want”, etc.)?

If NATO/EU don’t give in to these demands, Turkey could also opt to sit out any engagement between NATO and Russia. Hell, they’d probably love to stay fresh and eat up some of what is left from the losing side.

Take Turkey’s ~1.25MM out of the equation and Russia vs. no USA, no Turkey NATO looks a lot more even.
 

Attachments

  • NATO.png
    NATO.png
    35.6 KB · Views: 7
Last edited:
BehindTheLines said:
This is the image that matters

Take the US out and there goes ~35 percent of your active service members and 30 per cent of your reserves.

Russia has 1.5 million active personnel and 2 million reserve personnel (probably a lot more paramilitary to include EVERY Chechnyan)

At this point, NATO is still larger, but consider Turkey, a country that hasn't always been the best-behaved NATO member.

Turkey’s geography has always been really important, but with the US out of the equation, they’re almost 3x the next closest member. How much do you think they’re going to use this to their advantage (“Give us EU”; “Take the ‘refugees’ we don’t want”, etc.).

If NATO/EU don’t give in to these demands, Turkey could also opt to sit out any engagement between NATO and Russia. Hell, they’d probably love to stay fresh and eat up some of what is left from the losing side.

Take Turkey’s ~1.25MM out of the equation and Russia vs. no USA, no Turkey NATO looks a lot more even.
Click to expand...
Great points. It would actually be the perfect scenario for the EU to achieve a moral victory by "defeating" Russia (assuming both sides somehow agree not to use nuclear weapons) and then accepting millions of additional Afghani, Syrian, Palestinian etc. refugees to help with the imminent demographic issues. What a great moral victory that would be for the EU.

Also, add to those 35% the fact that the Americans are the most specialised and probably among the most physically fit. Just for reference, this is the Belgian army. It was posted in Russian telegram groups a couple of weeks ago. Russians are NOT scared of NATO without the US. Everyone is aware of this. That's why Trump trolled Starmer by saying "You guys can take of Russia by yourselves." Europe will get partitioned, if they attempt any such nonsense.

Belgian army:

 
Aldebaran said:
Say what you will about Stalin, but he sent his own sons to the frontline.

Same goes for the Nazi leadership. Many of them had sons killed in the fighting.

JFK and George Bush Sr. had combat duty and was close to death in WW2 (JFK's older brother was killed).

I think WW2 was the last war that politicians and state leaders had real skin in the game. After that they got smart.
Click to expand...
It used to be in Europe and America that officers were upper class, and in particular were from the aristocracy in Europe. This is because the aristocracy wanted to ensure that the lower classes couldn't use the army to rise up and overthrow them.

This is the reason for the term "Officer and Gentleman". A gentleman specifically meant a member of the upper classes under the aristocracy. This was a person authorized to carry a weapon, and was treated as a separate class before the law. Under this system, even if a commoner was promoted into officer rank for ability, they then became a gentleman. The concept of gentleman vs commoner wasn't as strong in the US, but the same principle still applied to a considerable degree.

So, sons of leaders had to join the army and fight, because that's how their class held onto power. It was the duty that went along with the privileges of being elite.

Somehow this was lost, so now the elite feels confident they can never be overthrown, and they can be military adventurers in their public policy, without having to dirty their hands with actual service.
 
Australia Sucks said:
Well sure Russia can conquer Germany but they cannot defeat the whole of the NATO alliance (excluding USA). There is 31 countries in NATO excluding USA. No way Russia can beat 31 countries. It took Russia 3 years to gain only 20% of the territory of Ukraine.
Click to expand...
First of all, it's pointless. As an all out war between nuclear powers would inevitably end with nukes flying and mutual destruction.
Second. Pre-war ukraine could win 1:1 with any European country, probably even 1:3. Not just because European armies are pitifully weak (which they are), but because pre-war ukraine was a military powerhouse. Find a moment to look into their pre-war stocks. Think about this: ukraine reportedly had 100 S-300 batteries (long range air defense), France has 7 long range air defense batteries (SAMP/T) while the UK has none.
And it's not just legacy soviet gear, look at all the systems they've designed using soviet blueprints and modern western tech (and of course western money) like the "Hrim" tactical ballistic missile or the "Vilkha" MLRS - both superior to their western counterparts.
 
Last edited:
WaveMechanic said:
In a proper world that woman wouldn't be talking about international conflict, but instead be a mother of four children, pregnant with the fifth, and talking to her husband about what she is cooking for dinner.
Click to expand...
Not in Europe, sadly...

GlTPgryWIAAUDsD

 
TruckDriver9 said:
First of all, it's pointless. As an all out war between nuclear powers would inevitably end with nukes flying and mutual destruction.
Click to expand...
Yep. Putin knew this. He didn´t went cold war modus operandi on Ukraine with the funding of a russian Ukrainians and leaving russian army out of it cause he would lose. Economically Russia couldn´t endure funding an Ukrainan side into a traditional warfare against US and Europe funded side like in the old cold war days. They would ran out of money faster.

Entering Ukraine with russian troops meant Russia considered Ukraine vital to it´s existence. And anyone entering a conflict with them with the chance of winning would have to be willing to also consider Ukraine vital to it´s existence. Ukraine is not vital to EU or US.

It was a dumb suicidal move by US deep state. Followed by retarded talking heads in Europe. Not considering the billions laundered.

TruckDriver9 said:
Second. Pre-war ukraine could win 1:1 with any European country, probably even 1:3. Not just because European armies are pitifully weak (which they are), but because pre-war ukraine was a military powerhouse. Find a moment to look into their pre-war stocks. Think about this: ukraine reportedly had 100 S-300 batteries (long range air defense), France has 7 long range air defense batteries (SAMP/T) while the UK has none.
Click to expand...
Nope. Uk and France have nukes. They would just unleash them and Ukraine and it´s army would be turned to dust.

TruckDriver9 said:
And it's not just legacy soviet gear, look at all the systems they've designed using soviet blueprints and modern western tech (and of course western money) like the "Hrim" tactical ballistic missile or the "Vilkha" MLRS - both superior to their western counterparts.
Click to expand...
Ukraine is a shithole. All their tech came from US and EU.
 
(up to) 20 years ago the Netherlands and Scandinavia had the best commandos in the world. Not so much now as gen z is not interested in fighting / doing anything really but what is there to fight for anyway. Gays and trannies?

The Russians are not scared of western Europe at all.
 
Last edited:
RedLagoon said:
(up to) 20 years ago the Netherlands and Scandinavia had the best commandos in the world. Not so much now as gen z is not interested in fighting / doing anything really but what is there to fight for anyway. Gays and trannies?

The Russians are not scared of western Europe at all.
Click to expand...

It's not just this, but also the fact that there is no external threat to western Europe in the form of a classical invading army from a foreign power. Vance is right, the threat is from within.
 
Cooper said:
It's not just this, but also the fact that there is no external threat to western Europe in the form of a classical invading army from a foreign power. Vance is right, the threat is from within.
Click to expand...

Even back then there was no way anyone wanted to fight the Russians, that wasn't even a discussion. They're known to be brutally strong, everyone remembers Stalingrad.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top