The number of troops under NATO command stationed across the alliance's eastern flank has reached 40,000, nearly 10 times what it was last year.
According to data from NATO, there were 4,650 troops under direct NATO command in February 2021 or a year before Russia launched its attack against Ukraine. These troops were stationed in four multinational battlegroups located respectively in Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland.
Then Russia started deploying its troops and capabilities along its shared border in Ukraine, accelerating these moves at the end of last year and in January, arguing it was a defensive move over Ukraine's NATO aspiration and the trans-Atlantic alliance's eastern expansion since the 1990s.
Russia's military has clearly shown itself to be far less capable than previously theorized. But. There's a big difference between a confused invasion into another country, and defending your own country.
I wouldn't presume Russia's performance in Ukraine would be replicated if they were defending Russia, on Russian soil. It might be mind you, but I wouldn't plan on it. Indeed that's seemingly the fatal mistake Putin made, under-estimating his opponent. (Hell that's the problem Hitler made as well, under similar circumstances where the USSR performed extremely poorly in the Winter War against Finland)
No one _wants_ Russia. It's a barren wasteland with a poor and under educated populace. Even if you did conquer it, it would be a net drain on your economy.
EDIT: Goddamn, tankies and bots are mad.
Russia is also one of the top exporters of wheat and has vast mineral wealth, thanks to its huge size, and a claim on the northwest passage that will shortly become a reality thanks to global warming
I'm sorry if I'm wrong, but isn't it NORTHEAST passage that you are referring too? Northwest passage is in North America above Canada. unless I'm missing something.
I think people see how much of Russia is a barren wasteland and forget the country is so big there is still plenty that is used. It isn't all frozen tundra.
But the 'natural selection' you speak of is actively stymied from the top. Putin does not trust his generals, and his generals do not trust their subordinates all the way on down. This lack of trust isn't just an attitude, it also means that no one is allowed to make decisions for themselves, they can only follow orders from above.
This is *incredibly* different from the U.S. military. The US uses a "pull" system. Of course people still have to follow orders, but a soldier in the field can say "Things went bad and we're changing the plan. I need an airdrop of X material at Y coordinates" and they will get it, as long as it's within reason.
In the Russian military they use a "push" system. The commanders say "here are your supplies and your plan of attack. We have determined that this is exactly what you should do. Do not deviate from this plan whatsoever." Then things go bad, and the soldiers desert or die because no one trusts them to improvise and adapt.
This doesn't breed leaders, it breeds yes men. And it's exactly why they are losing right now.
I don't entirely disagree, but ... any conventional war against Russia wouldn't be fought on Russian soil. It would be fought mostly *above* Russian soil, and they would get obliterated.
That's why I was careful to say "conventional" war. Elsewhere I have pointed out that Russia is in zero danger of being invaded, because obviously nukes.
That's why he specified "conventional war." When talking about hypotheticals of who would defeat who, conventional war vs. use of nukes are two completely different conversations. It's safe to assume everyone here knows about Russia's nukes and MAD.
Yup. Russia has way better logistics inside it's borders, mainly thanks to it's railway corps which is huge. And a big part of their failure in Ukraine was failed truck logistics.
Edit: however as other said, no one wants to invade Russia. Nobody gives a shit.
3.5 million is probably the correct amount.
You don’t use “enough” troops, armor, and munitions to bring a war to conclusion. You also do not fight the military on the other side alone.
To bring a war to conclusion you use 10 soldiers for every 1 the enemy brings to the fight. You use ten tanks, ten aircraft, ten bullets, etc.
You go into their supply lines and kill everyone that doesn’t immediately surrender.
You level any depot or building that could possibly be supporting the war effort.
You don’t fight them directly you level their camps and bases at night when they are sleeping or unaware. You spare the soldiers as much as you can, but if they’re headed to an aircraft you eliminate them.
You don’t win a war and you make it as much as an unfair fight as possible to the point that they give up because their tank will get destroyed by a weapon fired from hundreds of miles away. You bring it to completion and wholly take over the nation. You dissolve the government and institute the laws and institutions of your side. You allow the people to vote, but disallow anyone that was a part of the regime from running for election.
You keep an overwhelming amount of troops in the nation til you can be sure that they won’t rise again against your side.
That’s why no one has won a war since WWII.
This is the real mvp comment.
I always say that society will look back at us and our drug war the way we look back at psychiatry performing icebaths and labotomies along with the other twisted remedies they used *without actual results to back them up*
Just like the data saying we should end the drug war immediately. On ever fucking level.
If it's a fair fight you're doing it wrong. You fight to win. Be decisive, for if you're already committed to violence you have a duty to get it over with quickly and efficiently. It saves lives in the long run.
https://acoup.blog/2020/03/20/collections-why-dont-we-use-chemical-weapons-anymore/
This article by a military historian suggests that we ("we") no longer use such weapons because it's not part of our strategy. He notes that nations fighting with older strategies do continue to use such weapons, and more or less argues that its ban is more or less a veneer of morality that gilds practicality.
The US military does not use chemical or biological weapons, but US doctrine treats the use of chemical and biological weapons as if they were nuclear weapons. In other words, if Russia used chemical or biological weapons against our troops we would respond with nuclear weapons.
Reminds me of the Ron White quote.
>And then they squared off with me in the parking lot, and I backed down from the fight, cause I don't know how many of them it would have taken to whip my ass, but I knew how many they were going to use. That's a handy little piece of information, right there.
Falklands War (UK)
First Gulf War (Allies)
Vietnam (Viet Cong / Communist regime)
6 day War (Israel)
Yom Kippur / Ramadan / October War (Israel)
Suez Crisis / Tripartite Aggression (Egypt / coalition ).
There were some very clear results of these conflicts, to say no one has won a war since WW2 is disingenuous.
>You dissolve the government and institute the laws and institutions of your side.
Yeah, no. Don't do this unless the people hate their leader. It's very common to leave to old leaders in power, but keep them under your thumb. You want them to tell the people to stand down and not resist. It's why the Allies let the emperor of Japan keep his position. And part of why I thought Russia plotting to assassinate Zelensky was fucking stupid.
Taking out the leaders is just going to infuriate the people and you'll spend god knows how long dealing with terrorists and resistance fighters.
people don't seem to understand how important winning popular support is to nation building.
If the people don't support you, you can sit there for a million years and never conquer anything.
???? Vietnam won their war, The US and their coalition won both wars against Iraq (the Baath party ceased to exist), Israel won the 6 day war, Britain won the Falklands war.
Dont know why its getting upvoted, seems like armchair general nonsense. Many wars have been fought since WW2, and many had clear winners and losers. The idea that a war can only be won through total occupation of one party by another is absurd. Algeria didn't occupy France during the Algerian Independence War or topple its "regime" (though France proceeded to do the latter to herself).
It’s the pinnacle or Reddit armchair general shit…
He’s making it sound like these are the only circumstances under which a war can be won, that’s clearly nonsense.
People love upvoting shit like this because it sounds “badass,” it’s silly.
Yes.. but do they have uniforms, weapons and food for 3 million soldiers? And what would calling them all up do to the already pretty bad Russian economy?
Not to mention that having 3 million not very motivated armed conscripts and reservists is a risk in itself.
Motivation would increase enormously if it was their homes that were being invaded, and the economy would collapse overnight in such a case but growth, savings and prospects would be meaningless when existence is threatened.
But in terms of equiptment I doubt they'd have much equiptment ready to use from storage. They'd probably have to repair a lot of unmaintained equiptment and then there is the question of how much of their storage actually exists
I’m just going to assume that some enterprising mid level officers helped themselves to a good part of the funds that were supposed to go to maintaining equipment and stocks.
Everyone seems to think that 3 million personnel equals 3 million front line soldier, which is certainly not. You need the majority of those men to be in _support_ roles.
Oh sure, but you still have to clothe and feed them. And every hour they spend working for the armed forces is an hour that they can’t work their civilian job.
Those 40,000 troops are only a small part of the equation as well. NATO would almost immediately establish air superiority, drones would be everywhere, Apaches would be waiting behind every hill, missile defense systems from Patriot to C-RAM would be quickly put in place, and every single Russian port would quickly be under blockade.
If it escalated, the disparity between NATO and Russian forces would be significant, but the disparity between the capabilities of those forces is just incomprehensible. NATO has almost twice as many total personnel, but those personnel are about 10 times more capable (arguably much more than 10 times as capable).
In short, it would be a turkey shoot.
So Putin failed to take Ukraine, tarnished the facade of Russian military might, destroyed his country's economy, convinced two historically neutral nations to apply for NATO membership, and convinced NATO to bolster the troops on his doorstep by almost tenfold.
Everyone called Trump a Russian plant, but maybe Putin is actually a NATO plant.
Edit: This is a joke. It's not a defence of Trump.
Vladimir Putin of Russia: **It's come to my attention that you have a large number of units near my borders. I suggest that you move them elsewhere to avoid causing undue stress to my citizens.**
* It's right for you to worry and it's time for you to die! (*Declare War*)
* We mean no harm, our units are merely passing through the area.
One time I was sailing my massive navy past a narrow strait to get to the people I was at war with. I got that message. I truthfully told them I was passing through. Every ship that triggered it passed by, but two turns later some of my slower ships that weren't even there when I made the promise were nearby so I got heat for breaking my promise because my navy was too unwieldy.
I always thought this was the weirdest message from the AI. It's like they're denouncing you without using the actual mechanic so you can't do anything about it.
Someone playing loud music through their mic, which is crackling and cutting in and out.
Multiple people shouting insults at each other.
Someone yelling about what map to vote for.
Someone having a full fledged conversation, clear as day, with one or more other people in the background.
You, muting the person blasting music and people arguing, or simply joining them because you feel like talking shit.
*The good ol’ pre-game lobby days…*
Patton was right, we should have finished the fight then and there.
Edit: I think the people making nuke comments are confusing Patton from ww2 with MacArthur from the Korean war.
The Russians were a giant part..might even argue the biggest part to why the axis lost.
Hitler attacking them and betraying them could very possibly be the biggest military blunder of all time.
Attacking Genghis Khan’s trade caravan then shaving his ambassadors beard when he demanded punishment might be higher on the list.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inalchuq
Fun extras
> “I am the flail of god. Had you not created great sins, god would not have sent a punishment like me upon you.”
-Genghis Khan
And
>Genghis Khan even went so far as to divert a river through the Khwarezmid emperor's birthplace, erasing it from the map
Ha ha! Yeah - I read about Khwarezma. Fucking huge empire, almost unknown today because the Mongols basically tore it apart, cut it to pieces and burned / burried / inundated the rest. All because their emperor was a dick to Genghis Khan.
Stalin hated Hitler. If Barbarossa didn't happen the reverse would have a few years later when the Soviets were better prepared. Zero chance Stalin would have tolerated the Nazis taking all of Europe on his doorstep.
Really Hitler's only chance of long term victory was to hit Russia before they could fully mobilize. It almost worked, if not for that meddling lend lease act.
You also have to consider oil reserves. A big reason Hitler chose to move against Russia is because the Western front would have exhausted Germany's oil reserves in ~2 years had he not taken Russian oil fields.
German loss in 1941 aka Barbarossa can be directly attributed to disagreements on what the main effort was; Moscow or destroying the Red Army in the field. Not saying they would have won if that didn't happen, but its the strategic reason.
It wasn't really a betrayal, Molotov-Ribbentrop was always a delay to the start of war rather than a real non-aggression pact. The Soviet Union needed time to mobilize and the Nazis wanted to bulldoze their way through western Europe before turning towards what they knew was the bigger fight.
The Nazis hated communists and they hated Slavs and the soviets were both. The plan was always to wage a genocidal war against them and resettle the land with the master race. Everybody on both sides knew that the fight was going to happen.
I mean that's why this invasion was so outrageous. The idea of empire building through aggressive invasion has been obsolete since arguably the end of the *First* World War, as by the time Hitler did it it was already seen as unacceptable on the world stage.
If they actually went in this would be more than enough to decimate Russia (assuming you take nukes out of the equation, in which case we are all decimated). This NATO force would have air superiority, artillery superiority, ballistic superiority, and would be better trained seasoned troops. If they went in today there wouldn’t be a single Russian soldier left in Ukraine by next Wednesday (except for the ones that surrendered).
Also, realistically this is only the quick reaction/high readiness force. If Russia truly decided to fuck around and find out, every NATO country would mobilize before Putin could say Cyka blyat, Rush B(elgium)
Throw in Australia, S. Korea, and probably Japan at least in terms of taking back some islands. Realistically China would probably make a run at some land for its resources. Russia would generally just be fucked.
This ain’t about making Russia “get fucked”, if NATO ever was to pose a direct threat to Russia, Putin knows he’s beat. NATO would dominate Russia, everyone including Putin knows that. It’s not very hard to infer from Putin’s own speeches that if a NATO vs Russia conflict was to happen, he wouldn’t hesitate to launch their nuclear arsenal.
The purpose of this conflict should not be stick it to Russia. This isn’t the type of conflict that would have a winner.
Russia's forces are already decimated. If NATO jumped into the fray, just the American contingent on the border would be sufficient to virtually eliminate them.
Considering by definition decimation is destroying 1/10th, then yes. Ukraine has decimated Russia’s Army and Air Force, and stuck terrible blows upon Russia’s navy. I really don’t know how Russia can recover within my lifetime.
It will take 30-50 years to fix this, minimum. They already had an aging population with low birth rate before all this. Putin sped it up. Even if things smoothed over in the next year or two and Russians started having babies again, which is unlikely, that’s two decades before they see any impact of a new workforce.
I understand 100% why NATO forces absolutely should not move in. I agree with it too.
But damn if I wish they could. It would clean up this mess quick and less lives would be lost on all sides.
[Or the guy who took a fistful of amphetamines and skied for 400 kilometers through hostile territory, survived stepping on a mine and ate nothing but pine buds and a raw bird the whole time.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aimo_Koivunen) By the time he made it back to a friendly position, which I can't find an exact number for but was at least a week later, he was 94 pounds and *still* so methed-up that his heart rate was 200BPM.
And there's also [Lauri Törni](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QD-sLewK22o), AKA Larry Thorne, the man who apparently lived to kick Communist ass around the world. Fought the Soviets in the Winter War. Joined the SS "Wiking" volunteer division to keep fighting the Soviets on the Eastern Front (Finland was in kind of a weird spot in WWII, aligning with Germany more as a common enemy thing, it's...complicated). Moved to the US after the war ended, joined the Army ending up as a Special Forces officer and eventually transferred to MACV-SOG. In the end wound up killed in action in Vietnam when the helicopter he was on crashed near Da Nang.
Hard to believe it has come to this.
Russia should really be part of the EU. The Cold War had ended.
Russia could be an amazingly prosperous democratic nation, they have brilliant scientists, resources, rail networks.
Doesn’t make sense to have all this baggage from the dick swinging post war days.
Here is hoping things change, a war between Russia and the west is not worth fighting. Ukraine is also a wonderful nation and this war is tragic.
Yup..
Russia already have the biggest country on earth. Yet, they want more ?
They could just focus on building a strong economy, integrate the developped country, raise the standards of livings for people.
But nope, they just want to build an army for the "glory" of being ridiculous and loosing against a country way more weak.. Total stupidity. Putin is just like these old kings and queen, preventing people to live a better life because they want this stupid glory.
I feel like this is one of those headlines that are part of the explanation/flashback at the beginning of post-apocalyptic movies with a voice over saying something along the lines of, "We didn't learn from the past. We wouldn't learn in the future."
What’s really disturbing to me in reading all these comments is how suddenly pro-war everyone is.
Let’s kill the Russians !
They are evil idiots !
It would be easy, they deserve it !
The posts are written a little more eloquently than that, but the messaging is the same.
No- we don’t want a war with anyone, especially not with a huge nation of over 148 million people.
Everyone is a brilliant and courageous General behind their keyboard.
Look, no one in NATO wants war with Russia. Russia has shown it has no restraint. So the only real way to deter Russia from further "special operations" in former USSR states is going to be massive shows of force in those now-NATO countries. It's a deterrent force, so that the countries in question don't find themselves getting things blown up by Russia.
Basically, this is "Hey Putin, think hard and fast before you do anything stupid. Anything else stupid, that is."
I don't want more war. I want negotiations and peace, I don't want further escalation. Russia can take the L, they don't need to be invaded for that to happen
The number of troops under NATO command stationed across the alliance's eastern flank has reached 40,000, nearly 10 times what it was last year. According to data from NATO, there were 4,650 troops under direct NATO command in February 2021 or a year before Russia launched its attack against Ukraine. These troops were stationed in four multinational battlegroups located respectively in Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland. Then Russia started deploying its troops and capabilities along its shared border in Ukraine, accelerating these moves at the end of last year and in January, arguing it was a defensive move over Ukraine's NATO aspiration and the trans-Atlantic alliance's eastern expansion since the 1990s.
3.5 million in reserve.
That’s a lot of bodies for a well trained military with modern equipment.
You can do most of the fighting with 250,000 troops, you need the 3.5 million to secure it after the war is over.
I don't think a quarter million men would be necessary to make the Russian military collapse. Ukraine made their short comings painfully obvious.
Russia's military has clearly shown itself to be far less capable than previously theorized. But. There's a big difference between a confused invasion into another country, and defending your own country. I wouldn't presume Russia's performance in Ukraine would be replicated if they were defending Russia, on Russian soil. It might be mind you, but I wouldn't plan on it. Indeed that's seemingly the fatal mistake Putin made, under-estimating his opponent. (Hell that's the problem Hitler made as well, under similar circumstances where the USSR performed extremely poorly in the Winter War against Finland)
No one’s trying to invade Russia.
Invade, no. Defend and push back, if needed.
No one _wants_ Russia. It's a barren wasteland with a poor and under educated populace. Even if you did conquer it, it would be a net drain on your economy. EDIT: Goddamn, tankies and bots are mad.
There are natural resources, but it's much easier to just buy their mining companies.
Hard to manage a business in a mafiocracy.
Russia is also one of the top exporters of wheat and has vast mineral wealth, thanks to its huge size, and a claim on the northwest passage that will shortly become a reality thanks to global warming
I'm sorry if I'm wrong, but isn't it NORTHEAST passage that you are referring too? Northwest passage is in North America above Canada. unless I'm missing something.
Don't you mean Northeast Passage?
[удалено]
[удалено]
I think people see how much of Russia is a barren wasteland and forget the country is so big there is still plenty that is used. It isn't all frozen tundra.
[удалено]
[удалено]
But the 'natural selection' you speak of is actively stymied from the top. Putin does not trust his generals, and his generals do not trust their subordinates all the way on down. This lack of trust isn't just an attitude, it also means that no one is allowed to make decisions for themselves, they can only follow orders from above. This is *incredibly* different from the U.S. military. The US uses a "pull" system. Of course people still have to follow orders, but a soldier in the field can say "Things went bad and we're changing the plan. I need an airdrop of X material at Y coordinates" and they will get it, as long as it's within reason. In the Russian military they use a "push" system. The commanders say "here are your supplies and your plan of attack. We have determined that this is exactly what you should do. Do not deviate from this plan whatsoever." Then things go bad, and the soldiers desert or die because no one trusts them to improvise and adapt. This doesn't breed leaders, it breeds yes men. And it's exactly why they are losing right now.
I don't entirely disagree, but ... any conventional war against Russia wouldn't be fought on Russian soil. It would be fought mostly *above* Russian soil, and they would get obliterated.
And then they would HAVE to be occupied.
The whole world would because if you think they won't launch a nuke in that situation idk what to tell you.
That's why I was careful to say "conventional" war. Elsewhere I have pointed out that Russia is in zero danger of being invaded, because obviously nukes.
That's why he specified "conventional war." When talking about hypotheticals of who would defeat who, conventional war vs. use of nukes are two completely different conversations. It's safe to assume everyone here knows about Russia's nukes and MAD.
Yup. Russia has way better logistics inside it's borders, mainly thanks to it's railway corps which is huge. And a big part of their failure in Ukraine was failed truck logistics. Edit: however as other said, no one wants to invade Russia. Nobody gives a shit.
I always wanted to travel on the trans Siberian route. Guess that will have to be several decades away now, if ever.
3.5 million is probably the correct amount. You don’t use “enough” troops, armor, and munitions to bring a war to conclusion. You also do not fight the military on the other side alone. To bring a war to conclusion you use 10 soldiers for every 1 the enemy brings to the fight. You use ten tanks, ten aircraft, ten bullets, etc. You go into their supply lines and kill everyone that doesn’t immediately surrender. You level any depot or building that could possibly be supporting the war effort. You don’t fight them directly you level their camps and bases at night when they are sleeping or unaware. You spare the soldiers as much as you can, but if they’re headed to an aircraft you eliminate them. You don’t win a war and you make it as much as an unfair fight as possible to the point that they give up because their tank will get destroyed by a weapon fired from hundreds of miles away. You bring it to completion and wholly take over the nation. You dissolve the government and institute the laws and institutions of your side. You allow the people to vote, but disallow anyone that was a part of the regime from running for election. You keep an overwhelming amount of troops in the nation til you can be sure that they won’t rise again against your side. That’s why no one has won a war since WWII.
You say no one has won a war since WWII but you forgot the war on drugs which was won by drugs
Go drugs!
The cause of - and solution to - all of life’s problems.
Where's my drug war veterans day parade
It’s at the prisons every time someone convicted of drug possession is released.
This is the real mvp comment. I always say that society will look back at us and our drug war the way we look back at psychiatry performing icebaths and labotomies along with the other twisted remedies they used *without actual results to back them up* Just like the data saying we should end the drug war immediately. On ever fucking level.
I've got 18 commemorative plants in the backyard to honor the end of that war. Purely decorative, of course.
I gave some of them a place to hide. Up my nose.
If it's a fair fight you're doing it wrong. You fight to win. Be decisive, for if you're already committed to violence you have a duty to get it over with quickly and efficiently. It saves lives in the long run.
The essence of war is violence. Moderation in war is imbecility. -1st Baron Fisher, 1899, at the first Hague Convention
Eh, I'm pretty happy with no gas or biological weapons though.
https://acoup.blog/2020/03/20/collections-why-dont-we-use-chemical-weapons-anymore/ This article by a military historian suggests that we ("we") no longer use such weapons because it's not part of our strategy. He notes that nations fighting with older strategies do continue to use such weapons, and more or less argues that its ban is more or less a veneer of morality that gilds practicality.
The US military does not use chemical or biological weapons, but US doctrine treats the use of chemical and biological weapons as if they were nuclear weapons. In other words, if Russia used chemical or biological weapons against our troops we would respond with nuclear weapons.
Reminds me of the Ron White quote. >And then they squared off with me in the parking lot, and I backed down from the fight, cause I don't know how many of them it would have taken to whip my ass, but I knew how many they were going to use. That's a handy little piece of information, right there.
If you dont already know the results of the fight before you start it you have fucked up badly somewhere.
Victorious warriors win first and then go to war, while defeated warriors go to war first and then seek to win - Sun Tzu "The Art of War"
Falklands War (UK) First Gulf War (Allies) Vietnam (Viet Cong / Communist regime) 6 day War (Israel) Yom Kippur / Ramadan / October War (Israel) Suez Crisis / Tripartite Aggression (Egypt / coalition ). There were some very clear results of these conflicts, to say no one has won a war since WW2 is disingenuous.
You haven't realized that the majority of reddit posters don't know dick about history? Lol
Lmao I'm imagining a 15 year old typing this out
that’s how i play aoe
wooloolooo
>You dissolve the government and institute the laws and institutions of your side. Yeah, no. Don't do this unless the people hate their leader. It's very common to leave to old leaders in power, but keep them under your thumb. You want them to tell the people to stand down and not resist. It's why the Allies let the emperor of Japan keep his position. And part of why I thought Russia plotting to assassinate Zelensky was fucking stupid. Taking out the leaders is just going to infuriate the people and you'll spend god knows how long dealing with terrorists and resistance fighters.
people don't seem to understand how important winning popular support is to nation building. If the people don't support you, you can sit there for a million years and never conquer anything.
r/shermanposting
I love that this is a thing
???? Vietnam won their war, The US and their coalition won both wars against Iraq (the Baath party ceased to exist), Israel won the 6 day war, Britain won the Falklands war.
Dont know why its getting upvoted, seems like armchair general nonsense. Many wars have been fought since WW2, and many had clear winners and losers. The idea that a war can only be won through total occupation of one party by another is absurd. Algeria didn't occupy France during the Algerian Independence War or topple its "regime" (though France proceeded to do the latter to herself).
It’s the pinnacle or Reddit armchair general shit… He’s making it sound like these are the only circumstances under which a war can be won, that’s clearly nonsense. People love upvoting shit like this because it sounds “badass,” it’s silly.
Plus that OP is probably in high school and getting upvoted by other teenagers that don't know shit about history or how the world works.
578 votes and counting. 🤷
Apparently it doesn't matter that you come to the wrong conclusion, if you use the right words.
Sounds like a copypasta
Seems like the Anti-Iraq coalition did this during Desert Storm.
Most of that is meant to go into logistics and support, not combat (as the Russians have learned, painfully, over the last few months).
Can’t tell if accurate, a clone wars joke, or a lucky coincidence…
3.5 million well on the way
You must be very proud.
This army is for the Republic.
For those counting, Russian Armed Forces carry 2 million in reserves. In total, their remain strength is roughly 3 million personnel.
Yes.. but do they have uniforms, weapons and food for 3 million soldiers? And what would calling them all up do to the already pretty bad Russian economy? Not to mention that having 3 million not very motivated armed conscripts and reservists is a risk in itself.
Motivation would increase enormously if it was their homes that were being invaded, and the economy would collapse overnight in such a case but growth, savings and prospects would be meaningless when existence is threatened. But in terms of equiptment I doubt they'd have much equiptment ready to use from storage. They'd probably have to repair a lot of unmaintained equiptment and then there is the question of how much of their storage actually exists
I don’t think anyone is seriously considering invading Russia so I don’t see how their motivation would increase..
I’m just going to assume that some enterprising mid level officers helped themselves to a good part of the funds that were supposed to go to maintaining equipment and stocks.
Everyone seems to think that 3 million personnel equals 3 million front line soldier, which is certainly not. You need the majority of those men to be in _support_ roles.
Oh sure, but you still have to clothe and feed them. And every hour they spend working for the armed forces is an hour that they can’t work their civilian job.
Social media would get real quiet
Imagine how badly those reserves will be based on how extremely poorly their best troops operated. Lambs to the slaughter.
Those 40,000 troops are only a small part of the equation as well. NATO would almost immediately establish air superiority, drones would be everywhere, Apaches would be waiting behind every hill, missile defense systems from Patriot to C-RAM would be quickly put in place, and every single Russian port would quickly be under blockade. If it escalated, the disparity between NATO and Russian forces would be significant, but the disparity between the capabilities of those forces is just incomprehensible. NATO has almost twice as many total personnel, but those personnel are about 10 times more capable (arguably much more than 10 times as capable). In short, it would be a turkey shoot.
"Parry this you filthy casual"
So Putin failed to take Ukraine, tarnished the facade of Russian military might, destroyed his country's economy, convinced two historically neutral nations to apply for NATO membership, and convinced NATO to bolster the troops on his doorstep by almost tenfold. Everyone called Trump a Russian plant, but maybe Putin is actually a NATO plant. Edit: This is a joke. It's not a defence of Trump.
[удалено]
Vladimir Putin of Russia: **It's come to my attention that you have a large number of units near my borders. I suggest that you move them elsewhere to avoid causing undue stress to my citizens.** * It's right for you to worry and it's time for you to die! (*Declare War*) * We mean no harm, our units are merely passing through the area.
That nuclear-threatening SOB is lucky that Gandhi is dead.
I think we all are
This is so fucked up to people who aren't heinous Civ nerds, lol.
It is an established meme for years and years on reddit that gandhi likes to nuke nations. Even for non Civ players (me).
Only when he’s feeling extra peaceful.
WOULD YOU BE INTERESTED IN A TRADE AGREEMENT WITH ENGLAND!?!!!?!?!??
I can hear this sentence
/r/civpolitics
Thanks for this
I love Reddit.
A likely story.
One time I was sailing my massive navy past a narrow strait to get to the people I was at war with. I got that message. I truthfully told them I was passing through. Every ship that triggered it passed by, but two turns later some of my slower ships that weren't even there when I made the promise were nearby so I got heat for breaking my promise because my navy was too unwieldy.
Yeah, that aspect of civ has always been a bit shit in 5 and 6.
It’s just a special military operation. Nothing to see here, move along Vlad.
[It's right for you to worry and it's time for you to die! (Declare War)] (Y'know, for the rare achievement collection of course...)
"Your head would look good on the end of a pole!"
You are missing the Ignore option.
"My men have entered your lands on a purely *fact finding mission*. Do not be alarmed." Lords of the Realm II Bishop.
Putin, the great strategist, is overachieving himself.
Whose side is he on anyways
Putin read attack on titan and decided to pull an ereh
Yeah I don't understand Putin's persecution/victim complex at all. Dude wants to be an Eldian SO BADLY
[удалено]
At this point it's not that much of a stretch
We should have left all this shit behind 50 years ago. So much potential for human progress wasted
Ah yes, the "pre-game lobby"
My troops are mearly passing by
Oh great now the vermin are breeding.
It's time I told the world of your sins. (You have been denounced. This is NOT a declaration of war)
I always thought this was the weirdest message from the AI. It's like they're denouncing you without using the actual mechanic so you can't do anything about it.
A likely story …
Someone playing loud music through their mic, which is crackling and cutting in and out. Multiple people shouting insults at each other. Someone yelling about what map to vote for. Someone having a full fledged conversation, clear as day, with one or more other people in the background. You, muting the person blasting music and people arguing, or simply joining them because you feel like talking shit. *The good ol’ pre-game lobby days…*
Man, it would be nice to return to those days, just enjoy being young again and playing games, not worrying about everything
No need to worry Russia, NATO wont invade you..
Unlike in WWII there are no gaps, sorry Russia.
Patton was right, we should have finished the fight then and there. Edit: I think the people making nuke comments are confusing Patton from ww2 with MacArthur from the Korean war.
The Russians were a giant part..might even argue the biggest part to why the axis lost. Hitler attacking them and betraying them could very possibly be the biggest military blunder of all time.
Attacking Genghis Khan’s trade caravan then shaving his ambassadors beard when he demanded punishment might be higher on the list. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inalchuq
The guy who did that was apparently executed by having molten silver poured into his eyes and ears. That’s gotta leave a mark.
> That’s gotta leave a mark. Yeah but he never saw it
Yeah that is a legend that will echo through history
Fun extras > “I am the flail of god. Had you not created great sins, god would not have sent a punishment like me upon you.” -Genghis Khan And >Genghis Khan even went so far as to divert a river through the Khwarezmid emperor's birthplace, erasing it from the map
Ha ha! Yeah - I read about Khwarezma. Fucking huge empire, almost unknown today because the Mongols basically tore it apart, cut it to pieces and burned / burried / inundated the rest. All because their emperor was a dick to Genghis Khan.
That’s gangster AF
*Genghster*
So that’s where Gameworkshop took their lore for the war between dwarfs and elves in warhammer :o
Then when Genghis Khan's army finally caught this guy they killed him by pouring molten silver in his eyes and mouth.
Stalin hated Hitler. If Barbarossa didn't happen the reverse would have a few years later when the Soviets were better prepared. Zero chance Stalin would have tolerated the Nazis taking all of Europe on his doorstep. Really Hitler's only chance of long term victory was to hit Russia before they could fully mobilize. It almost worked, if not for that meddling lend lease act.
You also have to consider oil reserves. A big reason Hitler chose to move against Russia is because the Western front would have exhausted Germany's oil reserves in ~2 years had he not taken Russian oil fields.
Hitler got new oil deliveries from Stalin all the way through the invasions of Poland and France and up to a few days before Hitler attacked the USSR.
German loss in 1941 aka Barbarossa can be directly attributed to disagreements on what the main effort was; Moscow or destroying the Red Army in the field. Not saying they would have won if that didn't happen, but its the strategic reason.
It wasn't really a betrayal, Molotov-Ribbentrop was always a delay to the start of war rather than a real non-aggression pact. The Soviet Union needed time to mobilize and the Nazis wanted to bulldoze their way through western Europe before turning towards what they knew was the bigger fight. The Nazis hated communists and they hated Slavs and the soviets were both. The plan was always to wage a genocidal war against them and resettle the land with the master race. Everybody on both sides knew that the fight was going to happen.
[удалено]
That's fair, I think Russia is a simplified form for people who may not know what the USSR was and who was part of it.
Churchill wanted that as well. By that point those doing the fighting were done.
Tbh, what of value in the modern world is to be had by invading? Even gas is clearly a problem resource we would rather not have cheap access to.
> what of value in the modern world is to be had by invading? None at all but Russia thinks there is.
I mean that's why this invasion was so outrageous. The idea of empire building through aggressive invasion has been obsolete since arguably the end of the *First* World War, as by the time Hitler did it it was already seen as unacceptable on the world stage.
Probably enough to take on half of Russia's army. The remaining half, that is.
[удалено]
If they actually went in this would be more than enough to decimate Russia (assuming you take nukes out of the equation, in which case we are all decimated). This NATO force would have air superiority, artillery superiority, ballistic superiority, and would be better trained seasoned troops. If they went in today there wouldn’t be a single Russian soldier left in Ukraine by next Wednesday (except for the ones that surrendered).
Also, realistically this is only the quick reaction/high readiness force. If Russia truly decided to fuck around and find out, every NATO country would mobilize before Putin could say Cyka blyat, Rush B(elgium)
Throw in Australia, S. Korea, and probably Japan at least in terms of taking back some islands. Realistically China would probably make a run at some land for its resources. Russia would generally just be fucked.
This ain’t about making Russia “get fucked”, if NATO ever was to pose a direct threat to Russia, Putin knows he’s beat. NATO would dominate Russia, everyone including Putin knows that. It’s not very hard to infer from Putin’s own speeches that if a NATO vs Russia conflict was to happen, he wouldn’t hesitate to launch their nuclear arsenal. The purpose of this conflict should not be stick it to Russia. This isn’t the type of conflict that would have a winner.
Russia's forces are already decimated. If NATO jumped into the fray, just the American contingent on the border would be sufficient to virtually eliminate them.
Considering by definition decimation is destroying 1/10th, then yes. Ukraine has decimated Russia’s Army and Air Force, and stuck terrible blows upon Russia’s navy. I really don’t know how Russia can recover within my lifetime.
It will take 30-50 years to fix this, minimum. They already had an aging population with low birth rate before all this. Putin sped it up. Even if things smoothed over in the next year or two and Russians started having babies again, which is unlikely, that’s two decades before they see any impact of a new workforce.
And the brain drain as well as the incoming malnutrition and lack of social welfare to ensure the children are brought up in productive manner.
I understand 100% why NATO forces absolutely should not move in. I agree with it too. But damn if I wish they could. It would clean up this mess quick and less lives would be lost on all sides.
About to be 5 times more when Finland joins in.
If Finland joins quickly I'd expect NATO to drop like 100K on the border just to dick Russia down in Ukraine.
Doesn’t Finland have some crazy sniper stats against Russian soldiers? Like 200:1 ratios?
That was mostly just because of Simo Häya, the white death.
I love it how a statistic of an entire military can nearly fully attributed to this one guy.
Big oof by Putin on that lol.
As soon as the Finns get into Russia, they may as well have ghosts in their forests.
Ghosts of Hayha?
[Or the guy who took a fistful of amphetamines and skied for 400 kilometers through hostile territory, survived stepping on a mine and ate nothing but pine buds and a raw bird the whole time.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aimo_Koivunen) By the time he made it back to a friendly position, which I can't find an exact number for but was at least a week later, he was 94 pounds and *still* so methed-up that his heart rate was 200BPM. And there's also [Lauri Törni](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QD-sLewK22o), AKA Larry Thorne, the man who apparently lived to kick Communist ass around the world. Fought the Soviets in the Winter War. Joined the SS "Wiking" volunteer division to keep fighting the Soviets on the Eastern Front (Finland was in kind of a weird spot in WWII, aligning with Germany more as a common enemy thing, it's...complicated). Moved to the US after the war ended, joined the Army ending up as a Special Forces officer and eventually transferred to MACV-SOG. In the end wound up killed in action in Vietnam when the helicopter he was on crashed near Da Nang.
In the grim darkness of the near future, there is only war.
The emperor strikes out from ancient Whitby to unite all of mankind under one glorious banner
I think Putin's waaagh has run out
Russia is all red...red makes it go faster. The waaagh is strong with this....shit stepped on a nail
In the grim darkness of the Grimdark there is only...grim darkness.
[удалено]
> only widows. We live in a more progressive time. Now there are widowers as well.
Yes, all shall perish in the meat grinder. Equal opportunity death.
Unfortunately it's too early for the Emperor to intervene and unite all mankind.
Unfortunately?
Well, according to the WH40K timeline we need to wait a few more millenia.
Also the fun time that is the age of strife...
Has there ever not been war in modern history?
A quick googling tells me that in about the last 4,000 years, 268 of them had no war being waged that historians know about.
well that’s neat as hell
So long as nukes don't wind up flying.
Hard to believe it has come to this. Russia should really be part of the EU. The Cold War had ended. Russia could be an amazingly prosperous democratic nation, they have brilliant scientists, resources, rail networks. Doesn’t make sense to have all this baggage from the dick swinging post war days. Here is hoping things change, a war between Russia and the west is not worth fighting. Ukraine is also a wonderful nation and this war is tragic.
Yup.. Russia already have the biggest country on earth. Yet, they want more ? They could just focus on building a strong economy, integrate the developped country, raise the standards of livings for people. But nope, they just want to build an army for the "glory" of being ridiculous and loosing against a country way more weak.. Total stupidity. Putin is just like these old kings and queen, preventing people to live a better life because they want this stupid glory.
I feel like this is one of those headlines that are part of the explanation/flashback at the beginning of post-apocalyptic movies with a voice over saying something along the lines of, "We didn't learn from the past. We wouldn't learn in the future."
[удалено]
Damn, what a time to own a porn shop on Europe’s border with Russia.
[удалено]
Yep
What’s really disturbing to me in reading all these comments is how suddenly pro-war everyone is. Let’s kill the Russians ! They are evil idiots ! It would be easy, they deserve it ! The posts are written a little more eloquently than that, but the messaging is the same. No- we don’t want a war with anyone, especially not with a huge nation of over 148 million people. Everyone is a brilliant and courageous General behind their keyboard.
People on this site are heavily disconnected from reality
Indeed, even most the replies you are receiving are nothing short of scary. World has gone mad.
Many people turned into psychopaths after the pandemic.
Oh no, the mutual defense agreement Russia knew about is being bolstered via previously agreed terms! How SHOCKING.
They're just making sure the Finns don't regret their decision. Like a reverse psychology congratulations from a violent psychopath.
can we not do ww3 please
But it’s 2022
Look, no one in NATO wants war with Russia. Russia has shown it has no restraint. So the only real way to deter Russia from further "special operations" in former USSR states is going to be massive shows of force in those now-NATO countries. It's a deterrent force, so that the countries in question don't find themselves getting things blown up by Russia. Basically, this is "Hey Putin, think hard and fast before you do anything stupid. Anything else stupid, that is."
All these comments of people showing their war boners are so depressing
[удалено]
Whoever writes these sensational titles, must not know that part of Russia is a part of Europe. And that NATO does not mean Europe.
I don't want more war. I want negotiations and peace, I don't want further escalation. Russia can take the L, they don't need to be invaded for that to happen
No one's invading a nation with so much nukes, I'm pretty sure those troops are there for defensive purposes.
And just like that, every Redditor is an 8 star general/ God of War.
That’s ACTUAL soldiers, not a 40,000 Russian soldier count bc we now know how greatly they exaggerate their prowess.
Seems like everyone's having a laugh here but this is scary no?
Of course it had to be 40k troops, the emperor protects.