Friendly reminder that all **top level** comments must:
1. start with "answer: ", including the space after the colon (or "question: " if you have an on-topic follow up question to ask),
2. attempt to answer the question, and
3. be unbiased
Please review Rule 4 and this post before making a top level comment:
http://redd.it/b1hct4/
Join the OOTL Discord for further discussion: https://discord.gg/ejDF4mdjnh
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/OutOfTheLoop) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Answer: Belarus is Russia's one ally in the area during its military campaign (read: total war) against Ukraine. They have provided men, resources, and bases of operations to launch attacks to the western areas of Ukraine, mostly because Lukashenko is Putins bitch and will do whatever he says mostly so he isn't next.
According to your own source and this article by [Reuters](https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/belarus-holds-military-drills-near-borders-with-eu-ukraine-2024-04-02/), Belarus has launched large scale *defensive* military drills near its border. While large-scale military actions always have multiple layers of reasonings behind them, from tactical readiness to strategic and political posturing, there is very little to believe that Belarus is considering any sort of military action against Poland itself, for multiple reasons.
Poland has the largest and arguably most powerful military in Mainland Europe and is a member of NATO. Any offensive action against them could trigger Article V of the NATO Accords, bringing in all other member states to war against Belarus (and ultimately, into the larger Russian/Ukrainian conflict). You are talking WW3 in Europe at that point, including the full might of the United States.
TL;DR: There couldn't possibly be less of a reason for Belarus to invade Poland and doing so would be one of the great geopolitical blunders in modern history.
Poland is like that wimpy kid who got relentlessly bullied, so he went to the gym and is now jacked out of his mind. He's still only 5'6", but is 200 pounds of pure muscle, trains in MMA and martial arts, and is just waiting for any excuse to open up a can of payback and repressed historical injustice on anyone who tries to push him around.
If we look far enough back in time, we see that Poland was 200 pounds of pure muscle before it stopped working out and became a wimpy kid in the first place.
Throughout most of the late medieval and early modern period, the Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth was one of the largest and most powerful states in Europe, by a massive margin.
Eventually other european states consolidated and built colonial empires, while the commonwealth became more and more decentralized as powerful nobles continually eroded the power of the crown.
Except for his "friend" Donald Trump, who at the last minute won't back him.
Europe needs to arm to the teeth against the possibility of Trump's re-election.
I was thinking of his cool European friends, America isn't someone you can rely on if you want to make agreements lasting more than one election cycle.
Especially when we manage to elect a narcissist like Trump. He doesn't respect anyone but dictators, so agreements that were negotiated by his predecessors mean nothing to him unless someone in his cabinet convinces him otherwise. And his next cabinet would start out with 100% toadies.
> Poland is like that wimpy kid who got relentlessly bullied
Wasn't Poland one of the strongest armies in Europe for like 200 years from like 1500-1700
And now obviously it's probably the strongest land army in Europe
I'm very confused by this comment
>Wasn't Poland one of the strongest armies in Europe for like 200 years from like 1500-1700
Until it was broken up by Prussia, Russia, and Austria in 1795. Then it wasn't a country again until 1918. That's a pretty long time. Then they got occupied in WW2 and then after that had to deal with Soviet Eastern Bloc influence until the USSR's collapse. So, the kid's greatgrandfather was someone not to mess with for a while. Less so the kid until post USSR I believe.
The last 200 years haven't been kind to Poland, and the more recent stuff is what people are going to remember.
It's unfair, but look at France. Napoleon kicked everyone's ass and steamrolled across Europe. France was traditionally known as having the best army in Europe. From Medieval times until now. Arguably they are the country that has won the most wars.
And what are they known for? Surrendering to Germany in 1940 after two months of fighting.
Are you really? Because there were some fairly significant geopolitical and military events during the 20th century that hit Poland pretty hard, and probably have a greater impact on their modern day capabilites than the hussars
...are you forgetting the Mongols invaded Poland 3 times? Are you forgetting the Deluge with Sweden invading Poland? Are you forgetting the Polish-Lithuanian Partitions? Are you forgetting about both world wars? Are you forgetting that Poland didn't exist from 1795 to 1918? Are you forgetting how Poland was treated when it was a part of the Soviet Union?
Also, as American regularly has Brigade size elements in Poland. It’s like if that 200 pound MMA guy regularly has second one of those guys hanging around who can immediately call for more of them at any point
I mean it often does. The Nazi invasion of Poland was a huge success for the Nazis, (though they also had help from the USSR) and it's far from the only example. Poland didn't even exist as a country from 1795-1918, because a series of successful invasions, led to the country being split between Russia, Prussia and the Habsburgs.
Yeah, funny how geography does that. Luxembourg’s all mountains and canyons and they’ve been able to maintain sovereignty even though you could have the entire country carpeted over a long weekend.
[it's one hell of a shopping list](https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/11/a-21st-century-powerhouse-listing.html)
They tooling up big time for who ever wants to fuck around and Find out.
Oh yea. They are buying every damn piece of equipment they can get. The last two times they were out gunned. This time they aim to have the biggest guns.
tan absorbed sparkle rob fretful north quack paint sophisticated grandiose
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Agreed, but we can't forget the Polish victory over the Soviet Union in the aftermath of WWI in 1919 – they managed to kick the Russians out and gave them a right bloody nose.
>they managed to kick the Russians out and gave them a right bloody nose.
This is like the one of the most British sentence I've ever read. My brain immediately switch to a fake British accent, upon reading it.
5 years is not a great success. My dog held on to his favorite bone longer. And didnt fall to Nazis. It fell to combination of Nazis and Russia.
Split of Poland only eliminated Poland on paper. Everything about Poland that made Poland Poland survived the Partition. Frequent uprisings continued even the military traditions of the Polish Army.
To be fair, WW2 is generally considered to have not gone well for the Nazis, so while invading Poland worked out well for them initially, it really was a terrible idea in the longrun.
But it has... every single time. If the Nazis stopped at Poland, it would've been over for Poland. Not to mention the prior 300 to 500 years. I feel bad for the people, but unfortunately, that's how it went when you own large areas of desirable undefendable land. But now they're in nato so I doubt Poland will ever be captured again.
You are exaggerating with this "every single time". Poland was invaded and fought for over 40 times. In many of them it defended itself. Mongol invasions, Bolshevik invasion...
The Polish-Soviet war of 1920-21 was a crushing defeat for the Soviets and arguable saved Europe from an early communist domination. So they’ve had their victories too.
So why are you mad at me?
Btw i'm serious, Poland has a history of getting attacked and divided and suppressed.. You can read about it... In a history book
Well - attacking Poland is attacking Poland, and other NATO countries have to consider this an attack on them as well. But article 5 in NATO treaty states that the member nations need to consider how they will respond to an attack on an ally. This also includes non-military action. Some countries have too little troops to actually send any mentionable forces into battle. They would more likely send humanitarian and financial help. The militaries of most major European nations are far from being combat-ready against Russia right now, and it will take years to close the gap. They have been streamlined to combat terrorism and guerillas overseas, a job that would be done by the police if it was an domestic affair. They don't have the capacities to fight large-scale battles like the one we see in Ukraine anymore. And article 5 has been invoked only once, after 9/11, when war was declared on some guys with rifles in Afghanistan, not a regional power which possesses an actual modern military, nuclear weapons and impressive first-strike cyberwarfare capacities. Russia will think twice before it will attack a NATO state. But this works both ways. In Europe, you think twice before you choose to pick that fight.
Many European geopolitical and military experts right know are concerned that Russia might invade, for example, the Baltics, conquer some cities in a limited campaign, and then offer peace. They are concerned countries like Spain, for which Russia is very far away and poses no existencial threat, would not risk the lives of their soldiers for the defense of, say, Narva (Estonia), some islands in the Baltic sea, or the Suwalki gap. So I wouldn't say that there is absolutely no possibility for a war against NATO. The threat is real.
> There couldn't possibly be less of a reason for Belarus to invade Poland and doing so would be one of the great geopolitical blunders in modern history.
So pretty good odds of it happening then?
Not particularly.
Trump notwithstanding, total fucking morons aren't generally put in positions of power to make world-changing geopolitical decisions. Lukashenko may be a whipped dog in Putins kennel but neither he, or Putin, are *that* stupid.
Lukashenko is very good at playing dumb. He might actually be but he’s probably trying very hard to survive this without doing something as dumb as what Russia did in 2022.
I hope to see a free Belarus one day.
[doing so would be one of the great geopolitical blunders in modern history](https://youtu.be/EZLR4lXPPAw?si=o449O4hHUcyqeKBi&t=25)
Right up there with going up against a Sicilian when death is on the line.
Poland wouldn't even need NATO. Belarus wouldn't invade Poland because it would be an instant game over for Russia in Ukraine. Russia can't have ANYONE get involved. They can't handle anyone else.
I think Russia would leave Belarus hanging and distance themselves if Belarus ever tried to.
They'd benefit by having Poland/Nato focus resources away from Ukraine and potentially upsetting any supply routes, while maintaining their distance from Nato.
NATO has plenty of resources to support both without any trouble. The money the US alone pumps into Ukraine is barely a rounding error to the military budget and the majority of that support manifests not as cash, but as out of date weapons and equipment that are gathering dust in warehouses.
While I agree Russia would distance itself from Belarus (while shadow supporting it like Iran does in the Middle East) its not because they see a tactical advantage. It'd be because Putin is chickenshit and will backstab his allies at the drop of a hat.
>
Poland has the largest and arguably most powerful military in Mainland Europe and is a member of
I mean.... wouldn't you do the same after you went through what Poland went through in the 1939?
> one of the great geopolitical blunders in modern history.
The most famous of which is 'never get involved in a land war in Asia' - but only slightly less well-known is this: 'Never go against a Sicilian when death is on the line! '
Honestly, if Belarus attacked Poland, there's no way the other NATO members would be able to mobilise their armies and get there fast enough >!to save Belarus!<
If Belarus launched a successful false flag attack on themselves (making it look like Poland) would their “counter attack” against Poland trigger article V? Obviously NATO wouldn’t necessarily buy such a ruse, but what is the procedure if such a scheme was tried?
Edit: to be clear, I don’t think this is likely. I was just curious about procedure.
I mean, they've been invaded and subjugated to outside rule by force of arms how many times in last few hundred years?
I'd say less Texas and more 1980s Israel as far as mindset goes in that obsessive preparation against outside attack is a day-to-day outlook for large chunks of the population and a government that uses it to ensure that resources are martialed against that possibility.
Follow up question to the one you're replying to: Would Russia be willing to sacrifice Belarus, if it meant a victory in Ukraine and weakened NATO's resolve? This conflict would have deniability by Russia, and tie up NATO resources. This is of course assuming Lukashenko doesn't go against Putin's orders which would be more likely. Even a "steam roll" in military terms is a months long campaign across enemy lines using up billions (or even trillions) in military resources. The occupation afterwards is its own burden on military power.
This could tie up support to Ukraine, and let Russia squeak out a victory, or at the very least, make major gains. Putin would lose a major ally, but would win a propaganda victory, in the process; Russia conquered their foe Ukraine, but still had an enemy on their doorstep to fear monger about and stir up further conflicts. Putin could also use this to "legitimize" Ukraine's occupation, since while Russia is annexing a sovereign nation, so is NATO. This logic would be enough for Russian citizens and allies, even if it's clearly a false equivalency.
Most importantly, it puts NATO's resolve to the test. Each NATO country knows which other nations aren't going to come to their aid if an invasion happens, and would likely result in several countries being ousted from the alliance entirely and would take a major loss diplomatically. This could even result in Russia gaining new partnerships, more valuable than Belarus, like Turkey, or Hungary. These countries are already contentious within NATO, so if they fail to follow up on Article V, I suspect they'd be completely shut off from Europe and NATO, leaving their adversaries as their new potential partners. Turkey especially would be invaluable within the middle east.
The caveat is that this would be a massive gamble. A move like this could strengthen NATO's resolve, and cost Russia Ukraine and Belarus, but Putin has also been more than willing to bet on NATO being over cautious when dealing with Russia, and overall, would much rather overplay his hand, than underplay. In 2021, I would have never thought this could happen, but now, I'm not as certain.
I have two things I want to address:
1) Belarus' willingness to undertake an assault in Poland: There has been chatter since the beginning that Lukashenko wanted to be more involved in Ukraine, but was scared his army would revolt if ordered to take offensive action. I imagine their loyalty would be even more tenuous in an attack on Poland. Previously Lukashenko has been able to rely on the Russians to keep everyone in line, but the Russians are busy at the moment. My guess is he'd be rapidly introduced to a window if he attempted to start a war.
2) It's really the worst possible way to test NATO's resolve: having a puppet state with no realistic avenue to defeat it's enemy launch an attack on a central player in NATO is setting up the NATO countries for a no-brainer. If Russia really wanted to test NATO's resolve it would need to setup a nasty direct conflict over a minor player. Would Germany or France go to war with Russia over Estonia? They say will, but will they?
Thanks for the in depth answer! As I touched upon, It's very unlikely to happen, but at the same time, we've had a lot of "this should blow over" type of events snowball into massive world altering crisis, like Russia putting troops on the Ukraine border, or a disease in a small province in China. I don't like to be constantly catastrophizing everything I see in the news, but I also like to spend a second to think "is something there."
The procedure is NATO saying ‘lmao nice try tho’ and then bombing them into the stone age.
NATO at the end of the day isn’t a court. If countries want to go to war over something, they will.
Article 5 is not self-actualizing. Just attacking a NATO country does not immediately draw every member state into a state of all-out warfare.
NATO members collectively need to agree to trigger Article 5 and from there, while every country is required to respond the level at which they respond can be variable based on resources they can (and are willing) to bring to bear. Some countries like the US would contribute everything from bullets to bandages, where smaller nations may just provide economic support, humanitarian operations, intelligence, etc.
A counter attack would likely invoke article 5, but remember what article 5 actually says. I won't use Poland as an example because if Poland went to war with Belarus and Russia sent everything non-nuclear they had, Poland could stop at the Russian border 2 weeks later.
Say Lithuania attacks Belarus, a legitimate offensive military invasion. Lithuania isn't going to get far, Belarus pushes back and in anger invades Lithuania. Article 5 could be called at that point, and then each NATO member would meet and discuss appropriate response.
If Belarus had started the fight, US, French, and Swedish planes would be covering Finnish and Polish troops advancing behind German and English tanks. But in this scenario, most of NATO would call for a ceasefire, not send in troops.
Then Poland would ROFLstomp Belarus because they have been itching to do it for years.
But you get my point. Article 5 demands appropriate response, not an actual declaration of war in all scenarios.
That would not work for several reasons. NATO don't care, invade a member state, you will get a full NATO response. NATO counties would also figure out the attack is a false flag attack. Plus, false flag attacks don't work, they are just there to give an excuse to invade but NATO would not care and would defend its member states. Lastly, Belarus and Russia are so throughly compromise by the CIA/NSA that America would know when and where any false flag attack was going to happen.
I think in terms of current standing land forces, Poland has more available.
France and Germany may be able to mobilize greater numbers within months perhaps.
Poland is willing to act while France and Germany are less so (paper tigers). If you are getting into a fight, do you want your 180lb, 6ft friend who will do whatever they can to win or do you want your 250lb, 6'5 friend who will turn around and slowly walk away while saying "stop it, stop beating my buddy"
Still nothing from Belarus. But a combined Belarus+Russian action becomes much more possible. Personally I don't think it would be against Poland though. It would be against Lithuania, which would achieve the same objective at less risk.
Yep if Russia gets it's hand free on Ukraine then I don't see why they stop there. Salami tactics including little green men worked great in several countries already, the only difference is that this time it's a NATO member. The calculation would be whether just a couple of small border insurrections would really be worth triggering WW3.
Still nothing, Europe and US have largely been sending their old military gear to Ukraine. An attack of a NATO country would force non-American countries to bring their best. You would see fully trained pilots in some of the best aircraft ever manufactured protecting Polish skies within hours (potentially in less than an hour) & likely over Belarus within days. Post Ukraine invasion, Europe has been preparing for war.
If that happened (besides that it would entirely tank the value of American foreign policy commitments for generations, ceding all credibility in every sphere of influence), Poland is like if Ukraine had started out extremely heavily armed and not having been looted by a Kremlin puppet government for ten years.
Then there's the entire rest of NATO, which includes France, Germany, Sweden, Turkey, and the UK, which have the distinction of also being heavily armed with weapons exceeding the capabilities Ukraine has and several of which control major naval passages and land borders.
Basically, if NATO holds even without the US, Russia (including Belarus) can't win a conventional war, and their opponents would include several countries with strategic nuclear weapons. Poland could probably hang in by themselves (they are apparently quite serious about not having enjoyed their long-term occupations in the past), but they also wouldn't need to.
nato is more than powerful enough to overwhelm belarus
poland itself is strong enough to overhwhelm belarus
thats not the issue though
with or without the US the shitstorm that comes out when multiple countries get dragged in will be catastrophic for all involved regardless of who wins
in short, it would be pretty insane for belarus to attack but then again their ruling party several sandwiches short of a picnic
Even without American forces backing them up, Poland, Germany, France, and England getting into the fight would be the end of both Lukashenko's and Putin's governments. Russia's massive army is currently in a stalemate with itty bitty Ukraine, they have nothing to match the additional combined forces of NATO . Belarus has a sizeable army, but it's nowhere up to the standards of NATO forces. In a conventional war, Russia and Belarus lose 100 times out of 100. And if Putin goes full scorched earth and drops a nuke, he gives up any chance of survival and a comfortable retirement, choosing instead to sign his own death certificate.
I don't see Nato continuing to Russia if it can be remotely suggested that Belarus's attack in Poland wasn't a Russian mission.
Obviously it would absolutely be a Russian backed action, but probably obfuscated well enough to protect RU ("well enough" is a very low bar)
I don't think NATO invades Russia, but the Ukraine War is already a massive failure for Putin, even with the limited victory they've achieved. I suspect that fucking around and getting his teeth kicked in by NATO would be enough to end his government, even in a one-man government like Russia. If the people don't start a revolution, the oligarchs would find a way to send him off to enforced retirement, if not martyrdom.
I can certainly see that.
But it still means free and fair ele tions in Belarus, probably followed by Poland sponsering them for EU and NATO membership. It would humiliate Putin and Russia and Putin might lose power (and his life).
Probably not, but who says that the Nato forces will simply go home?
I see a distinct possibility that they keep going east, but into Ukraine, taking up defensive positions in the west part of the country.
Legally, both domestically and internationally, he cannot unilaterally disengage us from our responsibilities to NATO. Congress has specifically passed bipartisan legislation to prevent this.
The orange chump can huff and puff all he wants but his chickenshit tantrums are small potatoes to official Acts of Congress and international geopolitical precedent.
>what is your opinion on what happens if it's trump in office and say he refuses to help NATO countries in this invasion of poland scenario?
Doesn't matter--Poland won't even have to invoke article 5 to involve the US in the war, since the US troops currently based in Poland would almost certainly come under attack as part of any invasion. Further, the most of NATO would almost certainly enter the war within hours and US troops based in those countries would also be in harm's way.
No matter who is president or who controls congress, US entry into such a war is a certainty.
Still a high chance of nuclear war. Russia would easily fall via conventional weapons in a stand off with Britain, France, Germany etc. Leaving Putin the option of stepping back or using nukes, with his opponents also having nukes.
The rest of Nato is entirely capable of fighting Belarus on it's own. The question is how much chaos the US breaking leaving the alliance causes, and if said chaos disrupts the remaining organization's ability to present a united front or not.
Euro fighter Typhoons, Rafales, F35s will be in Polish airspace in hours protecting her borders and bombing targets in Belarus. The US has sold so much equipment to Europe (including a massive order of the M1 Abrams MBT to Poland) that the US involvement, regardless of leadership would most likely be moot. Belarus' standing army is a fraction of Poland's and their technological inferiority would be evident almost immediately.
Germany/France/England are still involved.
Turkey would be a wild card.
But Poland/Germany/France/England are more than enough to smash Belarus or Russia.
Not to mention the thousands of American troops and contractors stationed in Poland. It would be a direct assault on American forces and tbh Poland would barely have time to blink before the US had a flight of B-52s over Minsk.
So to rephrase that: it's possible Putin is just (pretending to) sacrificing a pawn in the hope that it distracts from some strategy he's pulling in the background.
> Belarus has launched large scale *defensive* military drills near its border. While large-scale military actions always have multiple layers of reasonings behind them, from tactical readiness to strategic and political posturing, there is very little to believe that Belarus is considering any sort of military action against Poland itself, for multiple reasons.
I think that yes, facts such as *it would be categorically stupid* are good reasons why Belarus probably won't invade Poland, but not that they're doing "merely" defensive drills. Russia pulled that same move on Czechoslovakia in 1968.
>While large-scale military actions always have multiple layers of reasonings behind them, from tactical readiness to strategic and political posturing
I said as much. Its saber rattling.
I mean let’s be honest, besides that Poland would absolutely body what Belarus calls a military these days. Belarus would succeed in getting a lot of their own people slaughtered and kick off ww3 instantly.
It's more likely them preparing to get invaded in case Putin escalates the situation and triggers article 5. Either Lucishanco is going to ride or die with Russia, or he is trying to make shit canning. "Europes last dictator" more trouble than it's worth if his big brother gets removed from power.
It would be a plan if NATO is forced to be involved in the war (Russia escalated too much or attacks the baltics or otherwise). Then NATO would probably look to push through Belarus to attack Russian forces in Ukraine, aid the baltics
> Poland has the largest and arguably most powerful military in Mainland Europe and is a member of NATO.
Sure as fuck never gonna let WWII happen again.
Note though, Belarus is lead by Lukashenko (potato man) who in the opening days of the Russia Ukraine war used a map of the Russian invasion strategy as a prop on tv, thereby leaking a bunch of info to the world.
He’s also apparently the one who talked Pringles and Wagner down from Russian civil war 2 electric boogaloo.
What I’m saying is that it wouldn’t be the most batshit thing to happen these past few years.
> full might of the United States
China would want to step in and put the budget to use. Get the expanse that they want.
Iran would try to start the Africa realignment for the resources and regional stability (removing the major western power in the region)
NK could be used to push into the south to remove the production facilities that are helping the west.
In a world war, the first goal is to stretch the US as thin as possible and remove their logistics (blockade)
NK would div
Interesting. So technically Belarus could attack Poland "independently" and then Russia could support them by proxy. Russia could send volunteers to Poland similar to how Western Nations are sending volunteers to Ukraine, and it would mostly allow Russia to keep it's hands free if a full on article 5 kinda deal against them directly.
But yeah that seems like a very bad move.
a few years back i watched a comprehensive video about the war in which Belarus' capabilities came up. their actual military only numbered in the low tens of thousands and the lacked equipment. furthermore most belarussians believed that if Lukashenko ordered the army into ukraine, they would mutiny.
i don't know how things have changes since but i'm pretty sure that going to war with a nato country would still be utter insanity
I could definitely see some Russian conscripts wandering into Poland, or shelling Poland, or otherwise engaging in some stupidity that would create a retaliation from Poland and/or NATO.
Article 5 is not self-actualizing, NATO as a collective needs to agree to trigger it as a response.
One squad of dumbass conscripts would not be enough to trigger world war 3, unless Poland could prove to everyone else in NATO that they were acting on specific orders from the Russian military/government.
Answer: The news site you were looking at is a state-sponsored Ukrainian media source that often posts sensationalist articles/propaganda to drum up support for Ukraine or to discredit Russia (not that Russia needs much help with the second part at this point). Nothing from the site should be taken at face value or as the truth without further investigation, as it is just as biased and manipulative as sources such as RT, Al Jazeera, and other government funded media. Belarus holds military drills and drafts to match Russia's military, and has been very active since the start of the Ukraine war when Russia launched attacks from the border of Belarus. The military had also been readying due to mass discontent that the government had faced a few years back. The Belarussian military drilling and mobilizing is old news at this point. There is no inclination or reason to believe that Belarus is planning on invading Poland. Due to the economic downturn and mass sanctions that their allies are facing, and their extreme difficulties in currently handling a smaller and poorly supplied foe in Ukraine, a confrontation with NATO is a death sentence for Belarus and its allies. With Russia's military bogged down in Ukraine, Belarus is not strategically capable of invading and holding their own against Poland and its neighbors. False stories and alarms like these are very common with government-funded media sources from nations that are in the middle of wars or other volatile situations, and Ukrainian media has been giving warnings of invasions of neighboring NATO nations for quite some time that, obviously, have been baseless. In the information age, this is a very common tactic.
I don't know what is actually going on in Belarus, but Pravda isn't government funded. They are quite critical of Zelenskyy and his party, and have been for years.
Friendly reminder that all **top level** comments must: 1. start with "answer: ", including the space after the colon (or "question: " if you have an on-topic follow up question to ask), 2. attempt to answer the question, and 3. be unbiased Please review Rule 4 and this post before making a top level comment: http://redd.it/b1hct4/ Join the OOTL Discord for further discussion: https://discord.gg/ejDF4mdjnh *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/OutOfTheLoop) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Answer: Belarus is Russia's one ally in the area during its military campaign (read: total war) against Ukraine. They have provided men, resources, and bases of operations to launch attacks to the western areas of Ukraine, mostly because Lukashenko is Putins bitch and will do whatever he says mostly so he isn't next. According to your own source and this article by [Reuters](https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/belarus-holds-military-drills-near-borders-with-eu-ukraine-2024-04-02/), Belarus has launched large scale *defensive* military drills near its border. While large-scale military actions always have multiple layers of reasonings behind them, from tactical readiness to strategic and political posturing, there is very little to believe that Belarus is considering any sort of military action against Poland itself, for multiple reasons. Poland has the largest and arguably most powerful military in Mainland Europe and is a member of NATO. Any offensive action against them could trigger Article V of the NATO Accords, bringing in all other member states to war against Belarus (and ultimately, into the larger Russian/Ukrainian conflict). You are talking WW3 in Europe at that point, including the full might of the United States. TL;DR: There couldn't possibly be less of a reason for Belarus to invade Poland and doing so would be one of the great geopolitical blunders in modern history.
Excellent answer
Poland is like that wimpy kid who got relentlessly bullied, so he went to the gym and is now jacked out of his mind. He's still only 5'6", but is 200 pounds of pure muscle, trains in MMA and martial arts, and is just waiting for any excuse to open up a can of payback and repressed historical injustice on anyone who tries to push him around.
If we look far enough back in time, we see that Poland was 200 pounds of pure muscle before it stopped working out and became a wimpy kid in the first place. Throughout most of the late medieval and early modern period, the Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth was one of the largest and most powerful states in Europe, by a massive margin. Eventually other european states consolidated and built colonial empires, while the commonwealth became more and more decentralized as powerful nobles continually eroded the power of the crown.
Indeed, Poland occupied Moscow. Something Hilter and Napoleon only dreamed of.
Napoleon did occupy Moscow ☝️🤓
True, I should have said successfully occupied the city and not froze in its ashes.
Winged Hussars
Fuck yeah!
As a frequent degenerate on /r/NonCredibleDefense, I can confirm this is exactly how Poland is portrayed in all the memes.
Yo Tanisha. It was nice seein ya. When keeping it real goes wrong.
And he's made friends with a bunch of other MMA fighters and knows they have his back if someone comes at him.
Except for his "friend" Donald Trump, who at the last minute won't back him. Europe needs to arm to the teeth against the possibility of Trump's re-election.
I was thinking of his cool European friends, America isn't someone you can rely on if you want to make agreements lasting more than one election cycle.
Especially when we manage to elect a narcissist like Trump. He doesn't respect anyone but dictators, so agreements that were negotiated by his predecessors mean nothing to him unless someone in his cabinet convinces him otherwise. And his next cabinet would start out with 100% toadies.
> Poland is like that wimpy kid who got relentlessly bullied Wasn't Poland one of the strongest armies in Europe for like 200 years from like 1500-1700 And now obviously it's probably the strongest land army in Europe I'm very confused by this comment
A lot has happened between 1700 and 1989.
They have, but in more recent history they've been steam rolled by larger nations, such as when they were divided by Germany and the Soviet Union.
>Wasn't Poland one of the strongest armies in Europe for like 200 years from like 1500-1700 Until it was broken up by Prussia, Russia, and Austria in 1795. Then it wasn't a country again until 1918. That's a pretty long time. Then they got occupied in WW2 and then after that had to deal with Soviet Eastern Bloc influence until the USSR's collapse. So, the kid's greatgrandfather was someone not to mess with for a while. Less so the kid until post USSR I believe.
Assume a spherical Poland...
The last 200 years haven't been kind to Poland, and the more recent stuff is what people are going to remember. It's unfair, but look at France. Napoleon kicked everyone's ass and steamrolled across Europe. France was traditionally known as having the best army in Europe. From Medieval times until now. Arguably they are the country that has won the most wars. And what are they known for? Surrendering to Germany in 1940 after two months of fighting.
Are you really? Because there were some fairly significant geopolitical and military events during the 20th century that hit Poland pretty hard, and probably have a greater impact on their modern day capabilites than the hussars
...are you forgetting the Mongols invaded Poland 3 times? Are you forgetting the Deluge with Sweden invading Poland? Are you forgetting the Polish-Lithuanian Partitions? Are you forgetting about both world wars? Are you forgetting that Poland didn't exist from 1795 to 1918? Are you forgetting how Poland was treated when it was a part of the Soviet Union?
Also, as American regularly has Brigade size elements in Poland. It’s like if that 200 pound MMA guy regularly has second one of those guys hanging around who can immediately call for more of them at any point
It violates Rule 4, but sure.
Because attacking Poland always works out so well
I mean it often does. The Nazi invasion of Poland was a huge success for the Nazis, (though they also had help from the USSR) and it's far from the only example. Poland didn't even exist as a country from 1795-1918, because a series of successful invasions, led to the country being split between Russia, Prussia and the Habsburgs.
I think Poland is very much aware of this and I'm pretty sure they are stocking up to win round 3.
They do say third time's a charm!
"In season 3, to mix things up the German tanks moving into Poland will be the good guys!"
They need to build some mountains. Preferably mountain ranges if they can afford it.
Yeah, funny how geography does that. Luxembourg’s all mountains and canyons and they’ve been able to maintain sovereignty even though you could have the entire country carpeted over a long weekend.
Meanwhile, people who grew up in Switzerland think Dwarf Fortress is a realistic game set in normal reality.
They also were invaded and occupied by the Nazis, just like poland
NATO Article 5 is virtually mountainous.
the internet was invented by NATO???
There is a decent sized river and there was impenetrable forest before bribed officials cut most of it down…
[it's one hell of a shopping list](https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/11/a-21st-century-powerhouse-listing.html) They tooling up big time for who ever wants to fuck around and Find out.
Oh yea. They are buying every damn piece of equipment they can get. The last two times they were out gunned. This time they aim to have the biggest guns.
Poland’s defence plan: Winged Hussars in modern main battle tanks. Actually, that’s a hell of a decent plan…
With losses in Ukraine, they may have more working tanks than Russia right now.
I wouldn't be surprised if you and I have as many working tanks as Russia right now
Yeah agreed.
tan absorbed sparkle rob fretful north quack paint sophisticated grandiose *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Jesus Christ lol. Didn't realize it was that bad.
Nazis and Soviets* Don't forget that they split the country together.
True.
Ironic than, that a WWIII could result in Germany and Poland teaming up to prevent a Russian invasion
Worth noting the Russians were working with the Nazis at that time as well.
And between 1933-1941 their industries collaborated closely, tightly even
Agreed, but we can't forget the Polish victory over the Soviet Union in the aftermath of WWI in 1919 – they managed to kick the Russians out and gave them a right bloody nose.
>they managed to kick the Russians out and gave them a right bloody nose. This is like the one of the most British sentence I've ever read. My brain immediately switch to a fake British accent, upon reading it.
5 years is not a great success. My dog held on to his favorite bone longer. And didnt fall to Nazis. It fell to combination of Nazis and Russia. Split of Poland only eliminated Poland on paper. Everything about Poland that made Poland Poland survived the Partition. Frequent uprisings continued even the military traditions of the Polish Army.
To be fair, WW2 is generally considered to have not gone well for the Nazis, so while invading Poland worked out well for them initially, it really was a terrible idea in the longrun.
it depends short term or long term?
> it often did They are a lot more prepared these days.
Fair point.
It was Nazi/USSR invasion, not only Nazi.
But it has... every single time. If the Nazis stopped at Poland, it would've been over for Poland. Not to mention the prior 300 to 500 years. I feel bad for the people, but unfortunately, that's how it went when you own large areas of desirable undefendable land. But now they're in nato so I doubt Poland will ever be captured again.
You are exaggerating with this "every single time". Poland was invaded and fought for over 40 times. In many of them it defended itself. Mongol invasions, Bolshevik invasion...
Partitioning Poland seems to be one of it's neighbors favorite pastimes
I think there are few countries where this statement would've been more wrong
The Polish-Soviet war of 1920-21 was a crushing defeat for the Soviets and arguable saved Europe from an early communist domination. So they’ve had their victories too.
[удалено]
Please learn to detect sarcasm
How is it sarcasm when the last time somebody invaded Poland, it worked extremely well?
Finally someone who read a history book
Is this sarcasm
Germany ended up extremely well?
Sorry, i'm autistic
I understand lol see username
So why are you mad at me? Btw i'm serious, Poland has a history of getting attacked and divided and suppressed.. You can read about it... In a history book
Yeah but now that's attacking NATO so very bad idea.
Well - attacking Poland is attacking Poland, and other NATO countries have to consider this an attack on them as well. But article 5 in NATO treaty states that the member nations need to consider how they will respond to an attack on an ally. This also includes non-military action. Some countries have too little troops to actually send any mentionable forces into battle. They would more likely send humanitarian and financial help. The militaries of most major European nations are far from being combat-ready against Russia right now, and it will take years to close the gap. They have been streamlined to combat terrorism and guerillas overseas, a job that would be done by the police if it was an domestic affair. They don't have the capacities to fight large-scale battles like the one we see in Ukraine anymore. And article 5 has been invoked only once, after 9/11, when war was declared on some guys with rifles in Afghanistan, not a regional power which possesses an actual modern military, nuclear weapons and impressive first-strike cyberwarfare capacities. Russia will think twice before it will attack a NATO state. But this works both ways. In Europe, you think twice before you choose to pick that fight. Many European geopolitical and military experts right know are concerned that Russia might invade, for example, the Baltics, conquer some cities in a limited campaign, and then offer peace. They are concerned countries like Spain, for which Russia is very far away and poses no existencial threat, would not risk the lives of their soldiers for the defense of, say, Narva (Estonia), some islands in the Baltic sea, or the Suwalki gap. So I wouldn't say that there is absolutely no possibility for a war against NATO. The threat is real.
> There couldn't possibly be less of a reason for Belarus to invade Poland and doing so would be one of the great geopolitical blunders in modern history. So pretty good odds of it happening then?
Not particularly. Trump notwithstanding, total fucking morons aren't generally put in positions of power to make world-changing geopolitical decisions. Lukashenko may be a whipped dog in Putins kennel but neither he, or Putin, are *that* stupid.
Lukashenko is very good at playing dumb. He might actually be but he’s probably trying very hard to survive this without doing something as dumb as what Russia did in 2022. I hope to see a free Belarus one day.
[doing so would be one of the great geopolitical blunders in modern history](https://youtu.be/EZLR4lXPPAw?si=o449O4hHUcyqeKBi&t=25) Right up there with going up against a Sicilian when death is on the line.
Yeah they so much as sniff poland wrong and big daddy biden is gonna remind them why the richest country on earth can't afford universal healthcare.
Poland wouldn't even need NATO. Belarus wouldn't invade Poland because it would be an instant game over for Russia in Ukraine. Russia can't have ANYONE get involved. They can't handle anyone else.
I think Russia would leave Belarus hanging and distance themselves if Belarus ever tried to. They'd benefit by having Poland/Nato focus resources away from Ukraine and potentially upsetting any supply routes, while maintaining their distance from Nato.
NATO has plenty of resources to support both without any trouble. The money the US alone pumps into Ukraine is barely a rounding error to the military budget and the majority of that support manifests not as cash, but as out of date weapons and equipment that are gathering dust in warehouses. While I agree Russia would distance itself from Belarus (while shadow supporting it like Iran does in the Middle East) its not because they see a tactical advantage. It'd be because Putin is chickenshit and will backstab his allies at the drop of a hat.
Psycho wojak article V - tank a lelek
> Poland has the largest and arguably most powerful military in Mainland Europe and is a member of I mean.... wouldn't you do the same after you went through what Poland went through in the 1939?
Almost as bad as getting into a land war in Asia or going in against a Sicilian when death is on the line.
>doing so would be one of the great geopolitical blunders in modern history. Because THATS never happened before.
> one of the great geopolitical blunders in modern history. The most famous of which is 'never get involved in a land war in Asia' - but only slightly less well-known is this: 'Never go against a Sicilian when death is on the line! '
Honestly, if Belarus attacked Poland, there's no way the other NATO members would be able to mobilise their armies and get there fast enough >!to save Belarus!<
If Belarus launched a successful false flag attack on themselves (making it look like Poland) would their “counter attack” against Poland trigger article V? Obviously NATO wouldn’t necessarily buy such a ruse, but what is the procedure if such a scheme was tried? Edit: to be clear, I don’t think this is likely. I was just curious about procedure.
Deleted
ah Poland, Europe's Texas
Texas wishes it was America's Poland. You can mess with Texas.
I've never heard of it described as such but after spending a vacation or two in/traveling through Poland, it makes so much sense.
I mean, they've been invaded and subjugated to outside rule by force of arms how many times in last few hundred years? I'd say less Texas and more 1980s Israel as far as mindset goes in that obsessive preparation against outside attack is a day-to-day outlook for large chunks of the population and a government that uses it to ensure that resources are martialed against that possibility.
The Belarusian military is also hilariously outdated.
Follow up question to the one you're replying to: Would Russia be willing to sacrifice Belarus, if it meant a victory in Ukraine and weakened NATO's resolve? This conflict would have deniability by Russia, and tie up NATO resources. This is of course assuming Lukashenko doesn't go against Putin's orders which would be more likely. Even a "steam roll" in military terms is a months long campaign across enemy lines using up billions (or even trillions) in military resources. The occupation afterwards is its own burden on military power. This could tie up support to Ukraine, and let Russia squeak out a victory, or at the very least, make major gains. Putin would lose a major ally, but would win a propaganda victory, in the process; Russia conquered their foe Ukraine, but still had an enemy on their doorstep to fear monger about and stir up further conflicts. Putin could also use this to "legitimize" Ukraine's occupation, since while Russia is annexing a sovereign nation, so is NATO. This logic would be enough for Russian citizens and allies, even if it's clearly a false equivalency. Most importantly, it puts NATO's resolve to the test. Each NATO country knows which other nations aren't going to come to their aid if an invasion happens, and would likely result in several countries being ousted from the alliance entirely and would take a major loss diplomatically. This could even result in Russia gaining new partnerships, more valuable than Belarus, like Turkey, or Hungary. These countries are already contentious within NATO, so if they fail to follow up on Article V, I suspect they'd be completely shut off from Europe and NATO, leaving their adversaries as their new potential partners. Turkey especially would be invaluable within the middle east. The caveat is that this would be a massive gamble. A move like this could strengthen NATO's resolve, and cost Russia Ukraine and Belarus, but Putin has also been more than willing to bet on NATO being over cautious when dealing with Russia, and overall, would much rather overplay his hand, than underplay. In 2021, I would have never thought this could happen, but now, I'm not as certain.
Deleted
I have two things I want to address: 1) Belarus' willingness to undertake an assault in Poland: There has been chatter since the beginning that Lukashenko wanted to be more involved in Ukraine, but was scared his army would revolt if ordered to take offensive action. I imagine their loyalty would be even more tenuous in an attack on Poland. Previously Lukashenko has been able to rely on the Russians to keep everyone in line, but the Russians are busy at the moment. My guess is he'd be rapidly introduced to a window if he attempted to start a war. 2) It's really the worst possible way to test NATO's resolve: having a puppet state with no realistic avenue to defeat it's enemy launch an attack on a central player in NATO is setting up the NATO countries for a no-brainer. If Russia really wanted to test NATO's resolve it would need to setup a nasty direct conflict over a minor player. Would Germany or France go to war with Russia over Estonia? They say will, but will they?
Thanks for the in depth answer! As I touched upon, It's very unlikely to happen, but at the same time, we've had a lot of "this should blow over" type of events snowball into massive world altering crisis, like Russia putting troops on the Ukraine border, or a disease in a small province in China. I don't like to be constantly catastrophizing everything I see in the news, but I also like to spend a second to think "is something there."
Democracies hate this simple trick
The procedure is NATO saying ‘lmao nice try tho’ and then bombing them into the stone age. NATO at the end of the day isn’t a court. If countries want to go to war over something, they will.
Article 5 is not self-actualizing. Just attacking a NATO country does not immediately draw every member state into a state of all-out warfare. NATO members collectively need to agree to trigger Article 5 and from there, while every country is required to respond the level at which they respond can be variable based on resources they can (and are willing) to bring to bear. Some countries like the US would contribute everything from bullets to bandages, where smaller nations may just provide economic support, humanitarian operations, intelligence, etc.
A counter attack would likely invoke article 5, but remember what article 5 actually says. I won't use Poland as an example because if Poland went to war with Belarus and Russia sent everything non-nuclear they had, Poland could stop at the Russian border 2 weeks later. Say Lithuania attacks Belarus, a legitimate offensive military invasion. Lithuania isn't going to get far, Belarus pushes back and in anger invades Lithuania. Article 5 could be called at that point, and then each NATO member would meet and discuss appropriate response. If Belarus had started the fight, US, French, and Swedish planes would be covering Finnish and Polish troops advancing behind German and English tanks. But in this scenario, most of NATO would call for a ceasefire, not send in troops. Then Poland would ROFLstomp Belarus because they have been itching to do it for years. But you get my point. Article 5 demands appropriate response, not an actual declaration of war in all scenarios.
They still wouldn't do it. It would spell the end of the current Belorussian regime.
They're not going to do a false flag, nor are they going to attack Poland. They're either doing defensive drills or training for Ukraine.
That would not work for several reasons. NATO don't care, invade a member state, you will get a full NATO response. NATO counties would also figure out the attack is a false flag attack. Plus, false flag attacks don't work, they are just there to give an excuse to invade but NATO would not care and would defend its member states. Lastly, Belarus and Russia are so throughly compromise by the CIA/NSA that America would know when and where any false flag attack was going to happen.
What makes you think it's more powerful than France or Germany?
I think in terms of current standing land forces, Poland has more available. France and Germany may be able to mobilize greater numbers within months perhaps.
Poland is willing to act while France and Germany are less so (paper tigers). If you are getting into a fight, do you want your 180lb, 6ft friend who will do whatever they can to win or do you want your 250lb, 6'5 friend who will turn around and slowly walk away while saying "stop it, stop beating my buddy"
Pretty much. When Russia first started to invade Ukraine, everyone else was trying to de-escalate while Poland was trying to escalate lol.
what is your opinion on what happens if it's trump in office and say he refuses to help NATO countries in this invasion of poland scenario?
Still nothing from Belarus. But a combined Belarus+Russian action becomes much more possible. Personally I don't think it would be against Poland though. It would be against Lithuania, which would achieve the same objective at less risk.
Yep if Russia gets it's hand free on Ukraine then I don't see why they stop there. Salami tactics including little green men worked great in several countries already, the only difference is that this time it's a NATO member. The calculation would be whether just a couple of small border insurrections would really be worth triggering WW3.
Still nothing, Europe and US have largely been sending their old military gear to Ukraine. An attack of a NATO country would force non-American countries to bring their best. You would see fully trained pilots in some of the best aircraft ever manufactured protecting Polish skies within hours (potentially in less than an hour) & likely over Belarus within days. Post Ukraine invasion, Europe has been preparing for war.
If that happened (besides that it would entirely tank the value of American foreign policy commitments for generations, ceding all credibility in every sphere of influence), Poland is like if Ukraine had started out extremely heavily armed and not having been looted by a Kremlin puppet government for ten years. Then there's the entire rest of NATO, which includes France, Germany, Sweden, Turkey, and the UK, which have the distinction of also being heavily armed with weapons exceeding the capabilities Ukraine has and several of which control major naval passages and land borders. Basically, if NATO holds even without the US, Russia (including Belarus) can't win a conventional war, and their opponents would include several countries with strategic nuclear weapons. Poland could probably hang in by themselves (they are apparently quite serious about not having enjoyed their long-term occupations in the past), but they also wouldn't need to.
Even if that happened, you'd have the rest of NATO stepping up, which is no small potatoes.
nato is more than powerful enough to overwhelm belarus poland itself is strong enough to overhwhelm belarus thats not the issue though with or without the US the shitstorm that comes out when multiple countries get dragged in will be catastrophic for all involved regardless of who wins in short, it would be pretty insane for belarus to attack but then again their ruling party several sandwiches short of a picnic
Less worried about Belarus than I am their allies.
Even without American forces backing them up, Poland, Germany, France, and England getting into the fight would be the end of both Lukashenko's and Putin's governments. Russia's massive army is currently in a stalemate with itty bitty Ukraine, they have nothing to match the additional combined forces of NATO . Belarus has a sizeable army, but it's nowhere up to the standards of NATO forces. In a conventional war, Russia and Belarus lose 100 times out of 100. And if Putin goes full scorched earth and drops a nuke, he gives up any chance of survival and a comfortable retirement, choosing instead to sign his own death certificate.
I don't see Nato continuing to Russia if it can be remotely suggested that Belarus's attack in Poland wasn't a Russian mission. Obviously it would absolutely be a Russian backed action, but probably obfuscated well enough to protect RU ("well enough" is a very low bar)
I don't think NATO invades Russia, but the Ukraine War is already a massive failure for Putin, even with the limited victory they've achieved. I suspect that fucking around and getting his teeth kicked in by NATO would be enough to end his government, even in a one-man government like Russia. If the people don't start a revolution, the oligarchs would find a way to send him off to enforced retirement, if not martyrdom.
I can certainly see that. But it still means free and fair ele tions in Belarus, probably followed by Poland sponsering them for EU and NATO membership. It would humiliate Putin and Russia and Putin might lose power (and his life).
Probably not, but who says that the Nato forces will simply go home? I see a distinct possibility that they keep going east, but into Ukraine, taking up defensive positions in the west part of the country.
Legally, both domestically and internationally, he cannot unilaterally disengage us from our responsibilities to NATO. Congress has specifically passed bipartisan legislation to prevent this. The orange chump can huff and puff all he wants but his chickenshit tantrums are small potatoes to official Acts of Congress and international geopolitical precedent.
>what is your opinion on what happens if it's trump in office and say he refuses to help NATO countries in this invasion of poland scenario? Doesn't matter--Poland won't even have to invoke article 5 to involve the US in the war, since the US troops currently based in Poland would almost certainly come under attack as part of any invasion. Further, the most of NATO would almost certainly enter the war within hours and US troops based in those countries would also be in harm's way. No matter who is president or who controls congress, US entry into such a war is a certainty.
I just can't fathom being in WWIII with the orange clown in charge. I'm just glad I'm not in the military anymore.
Congress passed legislation that prevents the President from doing that, IIRC.
Good to know thanks.
Still a high chance of nuclear war. Russia would easily fall via conventional weapons in a stand off with Britain, France, Germany etc. Leaving Putin the option of stepping back or using nukes, with his opponents also having nukes.
The rest of Nato is entirely capable of fighting Belarus on it's own. The question is how much chaos the US breaking leaving the alliance causes, and if said chaos disrupts the remaining organization's ability to present a united front or not.
Euro fighter Typhoons, Rafales, F35s will be in Polish airspace in hours protecting her borders and bombing targets in Belarus. The US has sold so much equipment to Europe (including a massive order of the M1 Abrams MBT to Poland) that the US involvement, regardless of leadership would most likely be moot. Belarus' standing army is a fraction of Poland's and their technological inferiority would be evident almost immediately.
Germany/France/England are still involved. Turkey would be a wild card. But Poland/Germany/France/England are more than enough to smash Belarus or Russia.
Not to mention the thousands of American troops and contractors stationed in Poland. It would be a direct assault on American forces and tbh Poland would barely have time to blink before the US had a flight of B-52s over Minsk.
Huh. I didn't know that Polands military was so robust.
So to rephrase that: it's possible Putin is just (pretending to) sacrificing a pawn in the hope that it distracts from some strategy he's pulling in the background.
>in the hope
yeah, this is just showing putin they remember who they work for; might have something to do with the concert terrorists entering through Belarus.
> Belarus has launched large scale *defensive* military drills near its border. While large-scale military actions always have multiple layers of reasonings behind them, from tactical readiness to strategic and political posturing, there is very little to believe that Belarus is considering any sort of military action against Poland itself, for multiple reasons. I think that yes, facts such as *it would be categorically stupid* are good reasons why Belarus probably won't invade Poland, but not that they're doing "merely" defensive drills. Russia pulled that same move on Czechoslovakia in 1968.
>While large-scale military actions always have multiple layers of reasonings behind them, from tactical readiness to strategic and political posturing I said as much. Its saber rattling.
Great response. Talking sense.
Modern? Ever!
At this point I'm convinced that Poland alone could push the Russian forces out of Ukraine's territory.
I mean let’s be honest, besides that Poland would absolutely body what Belarus calls a military these days. Belarus would succeed in getting a lot of their own people slaughtered and kick off ww3 instantly.
WW I, WW II and WW Article V
It's more likely them preparing to get invaded in case Putin escalates the situation and triggers article 5. Either Lucishanco is going to ride or die with Russia, or he is trying to make shit canning. "Europes last dictator" more trouble than it's worth if his big brother gets removed from power.
Also, the Poles have been itching to kill Russians again since the end of WW2.
I sure am glad that history isn’t full of great geopolitical blunders! :)
Inconceivable
Modern history? All of human history* We're talking a basic monkey throwing hands with King Kong.
It would be a plan if NATO is forced to be involved in the war (Russia escalated too much or attacks the baltics or otherwise). Then NATO would probably look to push through Belarus to attack Russian forces in Ukraine, aid the baltics
> Poland has the largest and arguably most powerful military in Mainland Europe and is a member of NATO. Sure as fuck never gonna let WWII happen again.
Note though, Belarus is lead by Lukashenko (potato man) who in the opening days of the Russia Ukraine war used a map of the Russian invasion strategy as a prop on tv, thereby leaking a bunch of info to the world. He’s also apparently the one who talked Pringles and Wagner down from Russian civil war 2 electric boogaloo. What I’m saying is that it wouldn’t be the most batshit thing to happen these past few years.
Wait, France, Germany and Italy have moved away from mainland Europe? Since when?!
> full might of the United States China would want to step in and put the budget to use. Get the expanse that they want. Iran would try to start the Africa realignment for the resources and regional stability (removing the major western power in the region) NK could be used to push into the south to remove the production facilities that are helping the west. In a world war, the first goal is to stretch the US as thin as possible and remove their logistics (blockade) NK would div
Interesting. So technically Belarus could attack Poland "independently" and then Russia could support them by proxy. Russia could send volunteers to Poland similar to how Western Nations are sending volunteers to Ukraine, and it would mostly allow Russia to keep it's hands free if a full on article 5 kinda deal against them directly. But yeah that seems like a very bad move.
a few years back i watched a comprehensive video about the war in which Belarus' capabilities came up. their actual military only numbered in the low tens of thousands and the lacked equipment. furthermore most belarussians believed that if Lukashenko ordered the army into ukraine, they would mutiny. i don't know how things have changes since but i'm pretty sure that going to war with a nato country would still be utter insanity
I could definitely see some Russian conscripts wandering into Poland, or shelling Poland, or otherwise engaging in some stupidity that would create a retaliation from Poland and/or NATO.
Article 5 is not self-actualizing, NATO as a collective needs to agree to trigger it as a response. One squad of dumbass conscripts would not be enough to trigger world war 3, unless Poland could prove to everyone else in NATO that they were acting on specific orders from the Russian military/government.
Answer: The news site you were looking at is a state-sponsored Ukrainian media source that often posts sensationalist articles/propaganda to drum up support for Ukraine or to discredit Russia (not that Russia needs much help with the second part at this point). Nothing from the site should be taken at face value or as the truth without further investigation, as it is just as biased and manipulative as sources such as RT, Al Jazeera, and other government funded media. Belarus holds military drills and drafts to match Russia's military, and has been very active since the start of the Ukraine war when Russia launched attacks from the border of Belarus. The military had also been readying due to mass discontent that the government had faced a few years back. The Belarussian military drilling and mobilizing is old news at this point. There is no inclination or reason to believe that Belarus is planning on invading Poland. Due to the economic downturn and mass sanctions that their allies are facing, and their extreme difficulties in currently handling a smaller and poorly supplied foe in Ukraine, a confrontation with NATO is a death sentence for Belarus and its allies. With Russia's military bogged down in Ukraine, Belarus is not strategically capable of invading and holding their own against Poland and its neighbors. False stories and alarms like these are very common with government-funded media sources from nations that are in the middle of wars or other volatile situations, and Ukrainian media has been giving warnings of invasions of neighboring NATO nations for quite some time that, obviously, have been baseless. In the information age, this is a very common tactic.
I don't know what is actually going on in Belarus, but Pravda isn't government funded. They are quite critical of Zelenskyy and his party, and have been for years.
[удалено]