• Guests may view all public nodes. However, you must be registered to post.

Future Potential Russian Invasion of NATO Members

OReid

OReid

Power Poster III
Joined
Sep 6, 2022
Socom7 said:
It's still a fairly common view in Germany, believe it or not.
They really have no idea what's coming for them...
Click to expand...

New thread because it really deserves a separate thread from “current” situation in Ukraine.

Here I would like to hear the actual indicators or supporting evidence of any potential Russian invasion of a NATO state.


Separate from any rapidly escalating events in Ukraine. ie. rapidly escalating kinetic event between NATO and Russian forces.
Escalation has always been a possibility from this conflict.


Ukraine aside, what are the build up, capabilities, or rhetorics out of Russia indicating they have any ambitions to invade NATO in the near term.

Not unsupported claims or unreasoned thru propositions to claim this is a likely future.
 
Putin would only test NATO is if he believed the alliance was too weak or divided to respond. And what’s causing that division? Trump’s actions in ostracizing allies, threatining to withdraw troops from EU, signaling that the U.S. might not uphold its commitments, and humiliating Zelensky publicly. That emboldens Putin, not deters him. Undermining NATO doesn't prevent war, it invites it.

Putin will only attack NATO if he believes he can get away with it. Thanks to Trump, he just might......
 
Last edited:
Socom7 said:
jamesdroxford.substack.com

Return to Cold War communications architecture signals Russia's move towards confrontation

Revival of legacy terrestrial C3 links and high levels of warship C3 activity indicate Russia is almost certainly preparing for conflict in the Baltic Sea
jamesdroxford.substack.com jamesdroxford.substack.com
Click to expand...
Good article and deserves some attention.
Follow on article the c-3 or NC-3 encrypted coms are designed for early warning and command of nuclear weapons.
Like the US system its encryption is redundant and robust. To protect against failures.
While the paper I’m referencing doesn’t confirm the late 2024 /2025 activity.
It’s worth exploring as much as it can be in open sources.
I appreciate the supported source and will give it some time.

 
OReid said:
Well it is actually closer to any Russian invasion and would provide quicker reaction time. It’s seems as rational as it is a political move.
Click to expand...
No, because it's Hungary, aka Putin's puppet regime. He's getting them out of harm's way. This is a direct invitation for Russia to attack Europe.
 
I'm honestly of the opinion the UK and France should threaten the USA with nuclear strikes if it contines to act as Russia's puppet and destroy the European security architecture.

They're unlikely to as of right now - but they should consider the option. They have over 600 strategic warheads between them, and that's enough to destroy all major cities in the USA in addition to laying waste to Russia proper.
 
Last edited:
Socom7 said:
"Eastern Europe" meaning Hungary in this instance.

He might as well be redeploying them to Russia. 🙄
Click to expand...
There is talks of deploying some uS troops to Hungary.
But nothing regarding all troops repositioned to Hungary
 
Socom7 said:
I'm honestly of the opinion the UK and France should threaten the USA with nuclear strikes if it contines to act as Russia's puppet and destroy the European security architecture.

They're unlikely to as of right now - but they should consider the option. They have over 600 strategic warheads between them, and that's enough to destroy all major cities in the USA in addition to laying waste to Russia proper.

Moderator Edit: Please keep political commentary in the Politics Forum.
Click to expand...
So the argument is made in such a thin skins emotional tantrum, calling for the retargeting of French and British warheads against the US over a disagreement.
Is this the level of insanity that is overtaking people.

Because an ally of two centuries is trying to negotiate some form of peace settlement. The reaction is to retarget European nukes at the US?

Fine make your self an enemy or both Russia and the US, that’s brilliant statesmanship.

Victoria freeland in Canada said the same thing. who needs Putin when you have allies like this

If this is the level of bat shit crazy think that has overtaken people then were fucked
 
OReid said:
Because an ally of two centuries is trying to negotiate some form of peace settlement. The reaction is to retarget European nukes at the US?
Click to expand...
Yeeeah, that's exactly what's happening... :ROFLMAO: Trump just wants peace. Doves and all. There's absolutely no risk of Russia rearming and rolling into Europe, and it's absolutely not why the US is pulling its troops out of the way.

The price for deluding yourself is that brilliant flash of light on the horizon. Tick tock. 😁
 
DarkNoon said:
Putin would only test NATO is if he believed the alliance was too weak or divided to respond.
Click to expand...
Capitulating to Russia over Ukraine is a pretty strong indicator to Russia that NATO members may not be as safe as they once thought they were.
 
Socom7 said:
Yeeeah, that's exactly what's happening... :ROFLMAO: Trump just wants peace. Doves and all. There's absolutely no risk of Russia rearming and rolling into Europe, and it's absolutely not why the US is pulling its troops out of the way.

The price for deluding yourself is that brilliant flash of light on the horizon. Tick tock. 😁
Click to expand...
Helluva boss vizipop, nuff said.
 
DEFCON Warning System said:
Capitulating to Russia over Ukraine is a pretty strong indicator to Russia that NATO members may not be as safe as they once thought they were.
Click to expand...
So as usual after three years of no plan or commitment other than throw weapons at the fight. Trying to start negotiations is somehow a betrayal.
The betrayal is doing just enough from drowning. All while the absolute refusal to engage directly is ignored or refused.

I simply cannot understand how doing the same thing for four years with no success except a stalemate.
Yet steadfastly refusing to consider the reality the only way Ukraine will Win is with nato troops in the war.

So I will endeavor to say no more. No one has presented a rational argument except diatribes of about the Russian hoard attacking nato.
All while ignoring how past nato gov did little to nothing to oppose previous Russian attacks.
 
OReid said:
So as usual after three years of no plan or commitment other than throw weapons at the fight. Trying to start negotiations is somehow a betrayal.
The betrayal is doing just enough from drowning. All while the absolute refusal to engage directly is ignored or refused.

I simply cannot understand how doing the same thing for four years with no success except a stalemate.
Yet steadfastly refusing to consider the reality the only way Ukraine will Win is with nato troops in the war.

So I will endeavor to say no more. No one has presented a rational argument except diatribes of about the Russian hoard attacking nato.
All while ignoring how past nato gov did little to nothing to oppose previous Russian attacks.
Click to expand...
The primary fear, at least at the beginning, was sparking a nuclear confrontation between NATO and Russia. That's why western countries were very calculating with their support for Ukraine. This is pretty much the same old tired policy that dates all the way back to Korea. Do just enough that we can keep our ally from being overrun completely without risking a nuclear war.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom