NATO - myth or legend?

[Gaul]

Russophobia, to the extreme. Putin may meddle in the Ukraine, but he would never down right invade it and annex it. Same with Poland or anywhere else. Never is going to happen.

[Gaul]

And if only 10% of the German army was stationed along it's border with France, I don't care how un mobilized the French and British armies were. A quick sweep would have dislodged the German forces.

Poland has no reason to distrust Germany or Russia, dictators come and go. But they have every reason to distrust the British and French NATO powers. Same people, same greed. We'll just have to wait and see for history to prove me correct.

[Sphere]

Russophobia, to the extreme. Putin may meddle in the Ukraine, but he would never down right invade it and annex it. Same with Poland or anywhere else. Never is going to happen.

Indeed.The Kremlin is being so clearly isolationist right now. I don't understand where people are getting this notion.

[Dromikaites]

Poland has no reason to distrust Germany or Russia, dictators come and go. But they have every reason to distrust the British and French NATO powers. Same people, same greed. We'll just have to wait and see for history to prove me correct.

I guess it is becoming harder and harder for Putin to hire competent help these days.

[Condottiere 40K]

Min-maxing, to achieve optimal leverage, which is why that mini expedition to Syria: the money would have been spent anyway on Russian military manoeuvres, it supports his ally Assad, and forces the West to talk and negotiate with the Kremlin, thereby ending Putin's isolation.

[Gaul]

Hitler didn't attack western Europe until April 1940. For all of you pro Allies, they weren't mobilized yet people, does it take 7 months to mobilize? What if they attacked western Germany in say, January 1940? Oh wait, they weren't mobilized!! Just like NATO won't be mobilized (it's a mere strategic term, that's all) just like NATO won't be mobilized, if Putin started staging rebellions in Russian speaking Baltic countries, or invades Finland.

[Dromikaites]

It is a bit difficult to stage a rebellion in the Baltics nowadays given the lessons learned there on the occasion of the "Bronze solider riots" back in 2007. It has been attempted back in 2014 and failed, in spite of a rather sophisticated approach on the Russian side.

On that occasion the Russians tried a "cross-rebellion", using Russian agents in one Baltic country to try to stir trouble in another. The assumption was the intelligence services in one Baltic country would be too busy monitoring the local Russian agents and would not know the agents operating outside their jurisdiction. That assumption combined with the open borders between Latvia and Lithuania and Latvia and Estonia prompted the Russians to believe it would be easy to shuffle their agents around.

It turned out to be a wrong assumption: the Russian agents were arrested as soon as they had crossed the inter-Baltic borders and handed back to the security forces in their countries of residence. Those interested in the story can look up the names of the notorious Russian "human rights activists" in the Baltics and see how they were all "oppressed" back in 2014. Here's a link to a story about Alexander Graponenko, a notorious Russian agent based in Latvia who was detained and deported back as soon as he crossed into Estonia (use Google translate because the story is in Estonian - the incidents were dealt with swiftly before making it on the international news).

The tight local security leaves Putin only with the option to invade, in which case Russia would be automatically at war with all the major NATO states due to the presence of the British, American, French, Italian, Spanish and German "tripwire troops" present in the Baltics both on the ground and in the air (plus whatever troops from the smaller NATO countries happen to be rotating in the area).

The story you keep repeating, about the invasion of Poland, is actually the wrong example: by starting a war against the major world powers of the time, Germany ended up being crushed and occupied. Putin knows what that means firsthand since his KGB years were spent in the Russian-occupied part of Germany.

Putin's idea is to play with fire in areas outside NATO's umbrella, like Ukraine, Georgia or Syria. After the Swedish parliament voted to allow the NATO troops on Swedish territory in case of a war in the area (say an invasion of the Baltic States or Finland) and after the Finnish decision to send troops to this summer's NATO exercise in Poland it becomes clear Putin can't do much in that part of the world except huffing and puffing.

Add to that last week the Moldavian Defense Minister asked Romania and Ukraine to jointly take over the defense of the Moldavian airspace. That was the diplomatic way to explain the already deployed Ukrainian S-300 and NATO anti-AA assets in ways which practically seal Transnistria off.

In the same time Ukraine and the EU agreed to the building of a new highway linking Odessa to Romania. While the highway will take some 3-5 years to be built, the message is clear: just like on the North-Eastern NATO flank, Russia's options on the South-Eastern flank are more and more limited by the day.

[AnthoniusII]

In fact with the recent iconical exersises , NATO reports write that is no chance for NATO to defend Baltic countries exept with nuclear weapons (that wont be used anyway).
The last exersises shown that Russia has enough local superiority to take all 3 baltic coutries in less than 60 hours.
NATO forces rely on Polish armed devisions that hold the south borders of Kalinigrad but Poland could not risk to help baltic countries and expose its own borders.
Germany now has not enough fire power to suport Polland. In the last exersise NATO desided that it would be easier to move British troops and Greek armored devisions (since Turkey will try to hold the Armenian borders that Russia has much manpower). But those re-inforcements need much more than 60 hours to deploy! Never the less the "hate" that Baltic countries have for Greece (Greece and Turkey have the most numerus armed forces after US in NATO) maybe a cuase of Greece's hesiatation to help because NATO has been many times hostile to Greece helping from times to time Turkeys invasion plans against Greece! That exersise was commited 3 months ago and ended with a dead end! After that Germany and France desided to co-operate in the creation of a new common tank and increase of their forces by 10% when the last decade botrh countries decreased their forces by 70%!

[Dromikaites]

The Baltic States fit nicely inside a rectangle 300 km x 1000 km. More to the point, they fit into a 1000 km strip along the Baltic Sea, which is roughly only 300 km deep inland. If crap hits the fan there's little doubt the Baltic Sea would be dominated by NATO, meaning whatever the Russians might place in that rather narrow strip of land would be hit from the air and the sea pretty much with impunity.

Therefore the issue isn't that the Russian land forces can defeat the Baltic armies in 60 hours. The issue is how would those Russian land forces hold the area after that? Riding a tiger is easy. More difficult is to get off.

[AnthoniusII]

Therefore the issue isn't that the Russian land forces can defeat the Baltic armies in 60 hours. The issue is how would those Russian land forces hold the area after that? Riding a tiger is easy. More difficult is to get off.

Fair question...
The answer though is quite simple..IF/WHEN Russian invade and occupy Baltic countries nothing will happen, just like nothing happened in the Crimaia conflict.
Why? Because war is NOT a total war game to gather troops and fight.
War between NATO and Russia would mean the END of the world because both of them will use nuclear weapons against each other. That is why the Cuba insident DID NOT end with a NATO/WPact war back then, that is why Korean War DID NOT triger a WPact/UN war back then, that is why Russia did not intearfear to defend Cyprus against Turkish invasion.
That is why the Soviet Invasions in Hungary and Tcechslovakia did not triger a NATO respond.
Do you need more examples or NOW you can see what realy happens in the world arround you?
Great POWERS NEVER fight each other. They leave smaller powers to fight for them because they know that when WW III will start noone will be able to stop it untill Earth will remain lake Mars!
COMMON LOGIC

[Dromikaites]

Invading the Baltic States can only be done by killing the Baltic and NATO troops stationed there. In Crimea the Ukrainian government was in chaos and nobody ordered the Ukrainian troops to resist. In addition to that the attack was unexpected. Hardly the case if Russia decides to invade the Baltic States: the governments there are functional and the military forces are expecting to be attacked.

Once the Ukrainian forces became ready the Russians were pushed back from 2 thirds of the territory they had occupied in Eastern Ukraine. After that the Ukrainians almost liberated the remaining part of Donbas, forcing the Russians to invade a second time. Even then it took 5 months for the Russians to force the Ukrainians out of the Donbas airport and Debaltseve, while the Russian attempt to capture of Mariupol failed.

The Soviet invasions of Hungary and Czechoslovakia are irrelevant. The Czechoslovaks chose not to resist while the Hungarians were having their own mini-civil war going on. Beside both countries were NATO enemies officially, since both were members of the Warsaw Pact.

The Turkish invasion of Northen Cyprus is likewise irrelevant because the Soviet Union had no practical means to interfere (no way for the Soviet fleet to cross into the Mediterranean) and no interest either: hostility between two NATO members (Greece and Turkey) was more useful than strengthening Greece by helping her unite with Cyprus and thus prolonging the survival of the military dictatorship.

The loss of Northern Cyprus contributed to the downfall of the "colonels", which in turn made it possible for the Greek communist party to legally take part in the Greek politics. It also created hostility between Turkey and Greece and made some Greeks pissed off with NATO. The Soviet Union gained all that without losing a single soldier.

In the case of the Cuban missile crisis the Soviet Union was intimidated into backing down by the explicit threat of using the American nuclear arsenal. At the time it was known the Soviet Union didn't actually have the capability to hit the US soil with intercontinental ballistic missiles. The only reliable rockets the Soviet Union were able to manufacture back then were those for the space program. This is why the Soviets needed Cuba: it was the only way for them to be able to hit major US cities by using the more reliable and cheaper medium-range missiles.

Even today there is considerable doubt about the ability of the Russian (and Chinese) intercontinental ballistic missiles to actually hit their targets. Of course they could still hit some Western targets with shorter range missiles like those on submarines or mobile launchers, but there's no guarantee the subs and mobile platforms won't be destroyed right before the first strike happens.

It is one thing to produce with huge costs a handful of space program rockets and another thing to produce hundreds or thousands over a short period of time. Of course nobody wants to test this hypothesis, but if crap hits the fan, like it was about to happen in Cuba, those who trust their nukes (the Westernenrs) would strike first.

[AnthoniusII]

NATO will not go to war for the loss of 1800 troops!
Remember that USA signed truce with Vietnam even when there were more than 3000 US troops missing!
Polland "refused" kindly (in the exercise) to help Baltic countries offering only a solid defencive line in Kallinigrand-Polland borders.
Newest news ...Both USA and Russia "activated" their Nuclear Weaponry.
That is the most common Cold War tactic.
Have you ever saw the documentary of how close to WW3 NATO and WPact came in 1980's?
In a Soviet Army exersice NATO inteligent missread the messages and NATO came to red allert! Only the last minnute came the "corect" messages from spies that Soviet Union did not invade but had an exercise! From that momment NATO officials realised how "leathal" a mistake could be!
No one will start a war with Russia for Baltic states! A war between Polland and Germany for the Blatic States control has more chanches to happen!
EDIT: UPDATE
Today NATO desided to form 4 multi national Brigades to sent to Polland and each one of the 3 Baltic states.
The catch is in the "multinational" though..
We must wait and see what future has to offer us.

[Dromikaites]

Any idea why NATO has opted for multinational brigades?

Could it be to make sure everybody is automatically at war with Russia from the moment the Russian invasion begins? There would be no need for article 5 because Russia would already be at war with all the NATO countries.

Also I think you misinterpret the purpose of that particular exercise in which Poland started on the defensive. Here is the explanation of what was going on:

1) The Baltic States form a rather small area (1000km along the coast x 300km deep). It is an area which can be hit easily from Russia with airstrikes, artillery and tactical missiles, just as it can be hit with airstrikes and tactical missiles from Poland, Norway and Sweden and with naval artillery and missiles from the Baltic Sea (the Russian Baltic fleet stands no chance and therefore it won't play any major role in a conflict there);

2) Because land troops are vulnerable to strikes from afar, neither side would keep a massive land presence in the Baltics. Whoever wants to control the Baltics needs to be able to control at least Eastern Poland as well. That means if Russia ever decides to invade the Baltics, it would have to also invade Poland in the same time by going through Belarus and maybe Northern Ukraine. Otherwise, by invading only the Baltic States the Russians would simply throw their soldiers into a meat grinder;

3) Therefore the scenario NATO needs to prepare for is to delay the Russians in Eastern Poland till the rest of the Western forces arrive. That means Poland needs to hold the Eastern part of the country for 48 hours.

The exercise showed 48 hours would be enough not only for the Germans but also for the Spaniards to arrive (the Spanish forces arrived by sea in Western Poland). If the Spaniards could arrive from the other end of Europe in 48 hours, then everybody else (French, Dutch, Belgians, Danes and British) can.

Therefore the exercise actually showed the Russians cannot hold the Baltic States. The 60 hours the Russians would need to overrun them is too long because before that happens the Western armies would already be there (in 48 hours), crushing them.

The Russian generals know how to interpret NATO's exercises. That is exactly why Putin is mouth foaming every time the exercises happen. Each NATO exercise is telling the Russian generals "don't even think about it". That in turn means Putin is told by his own generals "don't push it beyond the breaking point or we will have to do to you what we did to Khrushchev".

[Condottiere 40K]

Once little green army men pop up in the Baltic states, they become a law enforcement problem, and cannot be reinforced from Russia, since NATO forces would act as a blocking force.

And the only cat's paw the Russians could employ would be the Belorussians, whose President for Life wouldn't want that to shorten.

[Dromikaites]

Lukashenko is indeed trying to play nice with the West. His model seems to be Beijing not Moscow.

[Anna_Gein]

They had trouble to fill theses multinational brigade. Did France finally agreed to take the lead of 4th brigade or did an other country took the position ?

[AnthoniusII]

@Dromicaites
Have you served -even as a private soldier- in a real army?
Things are not that simple you know...Once Russian troops will take a part of land it will require douzens of Brigades with thousands of airplanes to counter attack.
It a matter of distances.
Kallinigrad is not olny heavily defended -that could alone hold entire Pollish army's counter attack- but is so essential to Russia that could start nuclear early strikes to avoid such an invasion.
WHY? Because only 4 countries in Europe have nuclear weapons (Russia,USA,France and UK). No one will dare to use them because it will mean the end of the world.
I sugest you see an old but realy educating film (war games) of 1980's to realise the real delima and FINALY UNDERSTAND why major superpowers DO NOT EVER fight each other.
Russia is a smaller power than it was in Sovier Union. But we forget that in northern europe Polland is the state with the biggest number of Tanks (300) when Germany today has ONLY 250...
The flat terain of eastern europe favors the massive tank assault and masive artilery use that Russia still has 500% to 800% more staff! The only NATO states that still use massive armies are Greece (110000 personel with 800 artilery and 1400 tanks, and Turkey with 3 times more in every aspect)...You see the huge gap of forces?
@Anna_Gein
Multi national brigates can not easily come true despite the fact that many NATO exersises did form such units several times.
Its not a practical issuein this case rather than a political one. Anaconda NATO exersise in Black Sea had numerus NATO forces but some NATO states avoided to provoke Russia. And it was only a exersise (message)...
Sending troops in Baltic states each EU and european NATO state actually declares also a finansial war with Russia.
I do not expect to see German troops in Baltic unless Germany has already found new gas provider...Howa NATO state will go to war against Russia if in the next winder its subjects will have to endure cold without heat?
Just a thought for mind exersise..

[Johnadiw26]

After i finished read this thread, suddenly pop up in my mind "this situation in Balkan today is Game of Thrones version 2016 be like".

Sent from my Smartfren Andromax AD688G using Tapatalk

[Dromikaites]

@Dromicaites
Have you served -even as a private soldier- in a real army?

Everybody in my lot started as a private but by the time I saw combat I was already an officer.

Things are not that simple you know...Once Russian troops will take a part of land it will require douzens of Brigades with thousands of airplanes to counter attack.

I know from personal experience things are not that simple. I have been in urban combat. The enemy were poorly trained irregulars armed only with light handguns, and still wasn't easy. The Baltic soldiers defending their homeland would pack considerably more firepower and would have proper communications to coordinate their defenses. This is exactly why the Russians would have a hard time in the Baltics even against the local forces.

The terrain is not as easy as you may think. Take a look at the satellite view of that area. There are lots of choke points, which by the way explains why the Germans lasted that long into that area against superior forces.

As for thousands of planes, can I humbly point out we're not in WW2 anymore?

It a matter of distances.
Kallinigrad is not olny heavily defended -that could alone hold entire Pollish army's counter attack- but is so essential to Russia that could start nuclear early strikes to avoid such an invasion.

Kaliningrad has only limited value for the Russians and can be neutralized easily. Once neutralized nobody would bother to actually conquer it.

WHY? Because only 4 countries in Europe have nuclear weapons (Russia,USA,France and UK). No one will dare to use them because it will mean the end of the world.

It would be the end of Russia for sure. The end of the rest of the world? Depends on how many Russian missiles manage to hit their targets.

The Russians keep saying they won't be the first to use nukes. Do you know why they keep saying that while the Americans never said they wouldn't be the first?

It has nothing to do with propaganda. The Russians do not want to be on the receiving end of an American attack triggered by some satellite or radar malfunction. Or by a mistaken interpretation of a civilian launch.

The Russians have seen the Americans about to nuke them over the Cuban missiles and don't trust much in the mutual assured destruction doctrine because they have doubts about their own capabilities.

The only time the Russians would use their nukes would be if they couldn't ensure the survival of their country by conventional means. In WW2 terms they would have probably used the nukes after the capture of Moscow. As long as they would have been able to keep the enemy West of Moscow they would have preferred to stick to the conventional arsenal.

I sugest you see an old but realy educating film (war games) of 1980's to realise the real delima and FINALY UNDERSTAND why major superpowers DO NOT EVER fight each other.

I would say a better use of one's time would be to read about the Cuban missile crisis and the works on nuclear deterrence of the French general Andre Beaufre. That is, if one wants to really understand what role the nukes might play in case of a NATO-Russia conflict.

Russia is a smaller power than it was in Sovier Union. But we forget that in northern europe Polland is the state with the biggest number of Tanks (300) when Germany today has ONLY 250...

Yes and?

The flat terain of eastern europe favors the massive tank assault and masive artilery use that Russia still has 500% to 800% more staff!

The Russians need to be able to deploy then supply and maintain their tanks and artillery. Not very likely given the current logistic capabilities of the Russians. They had serious problems supplying the ammo to the forces sieging Debaltseve.

The only NATO states that still use massive armies are Greece (110000 personel with 800 artilery and 1400 tanks, and Turkey with 3 times more in every aspect)...You see the huge gap of forces?

What huge gap? Tanks without fuel and ammo cannot do much damage.

@Anna_Gein
Multi national brigates can not easily come true despite the fact that many NATO exersises did form such units several times.
Its not a practical issuein this case rather than a political one. Anaconda NATO exersise in Black Sea had numerus NATO forces but some NATO states avoided to provoke Russia. And it was only a exersise (message)...

Isn't it a bit early to conclude the multinational brigades cannot work? I mean, shouldn't we wait a few months until they are actually operational?

Sending troops in Baltic states each EU and european NATO state actually declares also a finansial war with Russia.
I do not expect to see German troops in Baltic unless Germany has already found new gas provider...Howa NATO state will go to war against Russia if in the next winder its subjects will have to endure cold without heat?
Just a thought for mind exersise..

How did Europe prevent her citizens from freezing before the gas pipes were built in the mid-80s?!

Add to that the financial war has been declared 2 years ago. Since then the Russians cannot get any long term loans from the West. This means the Russians are burning their own financial reserves for 2 years now. The gas has not stop flowing because that is the only important source of money Russia still has access to.

[Condottiere 40K]

The Russians have inventory and numbers, compared to NATO, so they'll outnumber them in the initial onslaught, rather like the Japanese for the first six to twelve months.

Inventory is mostly legacy, and numbers are conscription, though Putin has been selectively upgrading certain capabilities.

Cyberwarfare is the cheapest to invest in, but NATO is catching up, and likely they'll get all the civilian security firms to shutdown Russian access to the internet, and probably have a number of STUXNET worms already lodged in Russia's military and civilian infrastructure.

Russia's Navy seems partially vapourware, with promises of refurbishing their only, and probably useless, aircraft carrier; it may be that under actual tension, the Kursk may not be the only submarine to self destruct, at least surface combatants can always call in a tug.

The Air Force costs a lot of money to maintain, let alone buy more aircraft, and develop new ones. Syria was a godsend to them, since it's a relative cheap way for them to get combat experience, and again precision targetting is either too expensive for them to sustain, or their planes and pilots aren't really capable of it. Much how I remain skeptical of the F-35, it will be a mixture of aircraft acting as force enhancers that should dominate the Europeanair thatre and sweep the Russian jets well within their ground based Air Defence envelopes, which will likely get slowly decimated in turn.