cross-posted from: https://lemm.ee/post/59867996

German media outlets Süddeutsche Zeitung, WDR, and NDR also cite the report, noting that Russian President Vladimir Putin appears intent on testing NATO’s Article 5 guarantees. The alliance’s mutual defence clause obliges member states to come to one another’s aid if attacked. The assessment suggests Putin may seek to challenge how seriously that commitment would be honoured.

89 points

They burned through their Soviet stockpiles of artillery and tanks in 3 years fighting Ukraine, what makes anyone think they could fight NATO?

permalink
report
reply
133 points

Depends which side the US is on

permalink
report
parent
reply
56 points

Bingo.

And also depends on which side China is on. Their war production dwarfs even the US, and I find it difficult to believe that it will all be spent fighting the US and Taiwan.

There is a very real possibility that these three countries gang up together and divide the world among themselves.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

At this point it seems much more likely that the US sides with Russia than China. The EU is their largest trading partner, they’d never risk losing that market.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points
*

Why would either need to side with Russia? They only have 140m people, a untrustworthy and soon to be unstable government. If you’re aim is to carve up territory then you don’t give a potential long term adversary access to half a billion people.

permalink
report
parent
reply
47 points

US has a sizeable advantage in terms of sheer firepower but lacks the collective will to side with Russia in a conflict with NATO. To be clear, the Trump administration might try to side with Russia and the initial consequences of that would be very serious. But, long term, I think that would bring a swift end to the US’ global dominance. Potentially even bringing us to the point of total collapse.

That’s just one American’s perspective though.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

But is there a downside for the guy running our country?

permalink
report
parent
reply
29 points
*

Their unlimited supplies of Russian delusions of superiority.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

they have the US on their side now

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*

China doesn’t want to war between Europe and Russia.

It would force Europe to rapidly develop military capability and when Europ inevitably won that war, it would still have a vast military and might be feeling a bit touchy about dictatorships. China likes the world as it is right now, they have a lot of long-term plans and Russia suddenly ceasing to exist would mess all those plans up.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

I don’t think Russia has money either from all the sanctions. This all strikes me as extremely unlikely. They can’t even get through Ukraine lol.

But maybe they’re just exaggerating to justify war spending just in case.

permalink
report
parent
reply
42 points

So I just looked into the numbers quickly and am probably off by a bit

NATO has 3.2m active military personnel and 2.2m in reserve

Russia has 1.5m active and 2m reserve

BUT, American forces make up 1.3m of NATOs active and 800k reserve

If I were to randomly combine the American army with Russia rather than NATO for no particular reason,

NATO would have 1.9m active 1.4m reserve and the Axis-sorry I mean Russia and America would have 2.8m active 2.8m reserve…

permalink
report
reply
19 points
*

Maybe this is a suicidal plan, Putin is going to die and wants to take the world with him. From what we know about him, he is megalomaniacal and sadistic enough to want something like this.

He must also be counting on the United States being out of NATO by then, maybe Trump will even send some soldiers to help his Russian allies.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

It has nothing to do with wanting to actually fight NATO. The idea is to manufacture a carefully crafted situation where Article 5 is triggered, but due to internal disagreement and individual risk, it is not fully honored.

Needless to say, any such move would be very risky.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

And Trump’s United States will be one of those not to honour Article 5, if they are still part of NATO at that time.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Just based on Trump’s previous administration I’m confident that if he actually tried to do that it would cause serious arguments between the military and the executive branch. The military already decided to pretty much ignore him when he was going on in his last term about nuclear weapons, fortunately it never came up.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

The number of personnel won’t really matter here past a threshold. Looking at Ukraine Russian war it’s clear most of the fighting will be done with suicide drones, ones that can be produced en mass by any country more or less.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-13 points

There’s no way the US military would side with Russia, even if ordered to.

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points
*

Would you say they’re at the top of that slippery slope, or part way down it already?

Maybe today’s top brass wouldn’t, but there are probably enough JD Vance types among the MAGA lovin’ grunts to promote, to structure an army that’ll take Trump at his word. If he says ‘Europe were the enemy all along’, enough times, with enough conviction…

Wouldn’t have believed it myself until this year.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points
*

George W. Bush convinced Americans that France was an enemy for a while, and his supporters lapped it up. Today Trump has large chunks of his cult believing that Canada is an enemy. There’s apparently no limit to the absurdities and poison people will swallow if their beloved cult leader tells them to.

permalink
report
parent
reply

famous last words.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

I hope you’re right.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I agree. People underestimate how our perspectives of war have shifted tremendously in the past century. The ideological shift towards xenophobia and nationalism in recent years is undeniable, but it lacks the context of the world prior to the world wars.

War was the default state. It was expected. Not just colonization, oppression, or revolution. No. Prior to the 20th century, humanity had experienced a nearly constant stream of full-scale, all-out, nation-making and nation-breaking wars.

In the modern day, American “wars” happen in deserts and distant places. There is a level of cognitive dissonance in the public and military consciousness, a separation of “us” vs. “them”, a facade of bringing “justice and peace”. There is, always, a one-sidedness to the engagement. Even when America “loses”, it has no fear of a counterattack, because in every case it is merely “protecting democracy”, as opposed to actually being at war.

The implicit biases against empathizing with other people - especially impoverished non-white refugees - have kept the nation from properly grappling with its history of tyranny. Many people have always believed in the greatness of the Land of the Free, simply because they could physically and emotionally distance themselves from the victims of “freedom”.

An American invasion of Europe would completely shatter the Union. Full stop. No amount of xenophobic lies can prepare the troops and civilians fast enough for such a dramatic cultural and ideological shift. The rhetoric will ramp up, the core supporters will rabble rouse, and the soundbites will be bloodthirsty, but the actual bloodthirst won’t be there among the rest of the population or the military.

War was easy to sell to Germany because it was billed as the only way out from the under the oppressive burdens of the last war. War was in the public mind. It was living memory of everyone else on the planet banding together to screw over Germany in particular.

War will not be so easy to sell here. Americans literally identify themselves as European Americans. They’re italian and irish and german. They want to visit, they want to find love, they want to dine in Paris and party in Dublin and see the Vatican. American soldiers are literally stationed all across the region partying with the locals.

We don’t remember war as a culture. We remember oppression, and “police actions”, and Vietnam. But we don’t remember world war, and we can’t imagine London or New York falling. That will all change if we attack our friends, and the cultural and ideological whiplash would tear the nation to pieces.

permalink
report
parent
reply
34 points

Take out putin now and set the stage for a world at “peace” with humanity’s eye back on a civilized future.

permalink
report
reply
13 points

Problem is the people waiting to take over from Putin. They’re not at all nice.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points
*

Take them out first so it looks like Putin is doing it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

None of the candidates are nice and most are much, much worse. Don’t recall the name, but one of them basically is ready to drop the h bombs and push us all straight into WWIII because reasons.

If anyone takes out Putin, they’ll have to take out the entire military top and government of Russia with it or we’re all fucked

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Eh, it’s the sword rattling. Common tactic to make himself look strong and to be feared. He could still be spineless or once not under watchful eye of Putin, a drastically different person.

Putin isn’t known for keeping people around if they’re a threat to him.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Putin has made his country after his own image; deceptive, criminal, deceitful, isolated, and violent… so you’re probably right there are no decent people to take up after he’s gone.

permalink
report
parent
reply
29 points

Considering that Putin got his ass absolutely beat by a small country using second hand and surplus military hardware he’d have to be an absolute moron to pick a fight with NATO. Literally the only card he has to play is nukes and that’s kind of an all or nothing sort of move. If nukes are off the table any concerted push by NATO is going to be mopping up in moscow within a few months.

That’s also assuming the US doesn’t get serious about it, but considering Putin’s puppet in the Whitehouse there’s a pretty good chance the US would quit NATO and so wouldn’t factor in. Even without the US though Russia has demonstrated the rest of NATO is far more than sufficient to handle Russia.

permalink
report
reply
26 points
*

Poland + Ukraine is enough to practically destroy Russia.

Honestly I really hope putin just croaks over and dies at this point, the old fuck has practically killed endless amounts of his own people just for land. He can’t use the excuse of “Hur dur NATO is encroaching on my borders via Ukraine” because Finland is in NATO now thanks to his stupidity.

He’s gambling with WW3 with a high chance of losing it.

And he can’t keep America under his grasp forever, by the end of the decade trump could lose the election or get couped by anyone.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Then again he’s going on with cable cutting and other idiocies. I’m not sure some kind of stupid “test run” could be ordered by him, like attacking one of the Baltic countries or Finland.

If the war stops BTW then his days are probably numbered so maybe he’ll need some stupid war just to stay in power/alive.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Redo the calculations with the USA fighting on Russia’s side, and things start to look different.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Trump doesn’t have enough pull yet to make that happen, and it’s unlikely he will anytime soon. He could manage to get the US to sit out the fight, but actively committing US forces to help Russia isn’t going to happen.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

What about Putin and Trump working together the rhetoric of nuclear deterrence?

IIRC, Russia+USA = 90% of all nuclear weapons in the world.

A big whammy hammer if they (hypothetically) fight together.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Trump seems to be consolidating to focus on Iran (and it’s allies) and China. He’s not going to fight Europe. If anything, he’ll try to get them to help by threatening NATO membership or something.

permalink
report
parent
reply
26 points

Elsewhere on Lemmy today;

Russia has depleted its tank stocks: the industry is not covering combat losses

Both of these cannot be true.

permalink
report
reply
16 points

Well they can both be true, It just depends on Putin’s mental state.

There was a rumor going around that he is dying and he is basically just doing this to try and make a name for himself, he will rebuild the USSR and it will stand for a thousand years as him as its founding father, and all that rubbish. Of course it’s impossible for that to happen, but if he’s dying anyway why not try?

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

He has definitely made a name for himself. Can we just tell him it’s positive and let him die so that the rest of the world can move on?

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points
*

Hmm who do we know that will sell anything that isn’t tied down and currently controls the US government and is buddy buddy with Putin? No, not Satan, but you are close!

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Nah dude killing people is God’s department Satan just smokes gay weed

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Right? I don’t recall Satan killing anyone in the Bible, whereas God killed almost everyone.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

TBF I explicitly said “Not Satan.”

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Soon to be seen on the battlefield: Reinforced, armored attack-Ladas, with turrets mounted on the roof.

permalink
report
parent
reply

World News

!world@lemmy.world

Create post

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

  • Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:

    • Post news articles only
    • Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
    • Title must match the article headline
    • Not United States Internal News
    • Recent (Past 30 Days)
    • Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
  • Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think “Is this fair use?”, it probably isn’t. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.

  • Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.

  • Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.

  • Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19

  • Rule 5: Keep it civil. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to “Mom! He’s bugging me!” and “I’m not touching you!” Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

  • Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.

  • Rule 7: We didn’t USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you’re posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

Community stats

  • 15K

    Monthly active users

  • 12K

    Posts

  • 163K

    Comments