Russia has depleted its tank stocks: the industry is not covering combat losses
-
Russia can't even take over Ukraine, let alone half of NATO to even make it into Germany. I personally think this is just fearmongering on the side of our elected officials so the military industrial complex can make a few more bucks with money from the state.
-
Russia doesn't need to make it into Germany to make it a disaster for all of Europe.
-
Sure, NATO as a whole is bigger than Russia, but the troops and equipment are mostly not at the eastern border where the fighting would take place. We certainly don't have anything near the size of the Ukrainian army stationed in the Baltics. Take the US out of the equation, because let's be honest: under Trump they're not going to stand up for Europe, and the military balance suddenly looks a lot less favorable. I'm not so sure the European NATO states could mount an effective and timely response to an incursion into the Baltic states, or into Poland around the Suwalki gap.
-
-
Who said the attack would be with conventional armed forces?
German security officials believe the Kremlin is laying the groundwork for a potential large-scale conventional war with NATO by the end of the decade, according to multiple reports cited by European Pravda and Bild.
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/germany-warns-russia-may-be-preparing-attack-on-nato/
-
Elsewhere on Lemmy today;
Germany warns Russia may be preparing attack on NATO
Both of these cannot be true.
If you know anything about current Russian government, you'd know that one necessarily follows the other. The more desperate Russia gets, the less reserves they have, the more bold and aggressive they're getting. There is a combination of factors leading into it, both psychological and material.
-
Russia was ridiculed by a very small army. It does not stand against NATO
They will not win, doesn't mean they can't deal untold damage trying
-
-
Russia doesn't need to make it into Germany to make it a disaster for all of Europe.
-
Sure, NATO as a whole is bigger than Russia, but the troops and equipment are mostly not at the eastern border where the fighting would take place. We certainly don't have anything near the size of the Ukrainian army stationed in the Baltics. Take the US out of the equation, because let's be honest: under Trump they're not going to stand up for Europe, and the military balance suddenly looks a lot less favorable. I'm not so sure the European NATO states could mount an effective and timely response to an incursion into the Baltic states, or into Poland around the Suwalki gap.
Then move troops there. The European NATO members already outspend Russia in terms of military investments. Russia can't even take over Ukraine, a country that's not even in NATO and hasn't even had any modern military equipment for a very long time. Hell, they're getting hand me downs from countries like Germany, equipment that's decades old, isn't state of the art, and needs repairs, and they're still keeping Russia at bay. Now there's articles about Russia depleting its own tank stocks and shit, not being able to sustain even a war with Ukraine, and we're supposed to believe that Russia will somehow attack Germany or Poland (which is to be fair probably better armed than Germany).
So there's only two options here: either the western press is lying about Russia depleting its stocks and they're actually holding back instead of fully invading Ukraine (God knows why they fought in Ukraine for three years now then instead of just releasing their full "military might" from the get go). Or, the western press is fear mongering about Russia actually being able to invade NATO so the military industrial complex can make a quick buck off of our tax money.
My two cents: there's no chance in hell Russia can invade any NATO country, they can barely function in Ukraine lmao. Just send troops to the baltic and you're gonna be fine. No need for trillions of euros in new guns.
-
-
They will not win, doesn't mean they can't deal untold damage trying
Right, but that would not make sense
-
Right, but that would not make sense
That's because you're not thinking like Putin. Starting this war in the first place was the worst possible idea that never made any sense, except it allowed Putin to reform the slipping grip on the country and cemented his regime and his vision for at least some time. But just like the empires of old, now his regime requires constant slow boiling war to operate.
He will happily sacrifice every Russian to this, he can easily afford losing a thousand men per day to the grinder. It costs very little to him. European countries on the other hand will be very very hurt by the war on their territory, and everyone understands it. -
That's because you're not thinking like Putin. Starting this war in the first place was the worst possible idea that never made any sense, except it allowed Putin to reform the slipping grip on the country and cemented his regime and his vision for at least some time. But just like the empires of old, now his regime requires constant slow boiling war to operate.
He will happily sacrifice every Russian to this, he can easily afford losing a thousand men per day to the grinder. It costs very little to him. European countries on the other hand will be very very hurt by the war on their territory, and everyone understands it.Interesting stance
-
Yeah, the fact that Putin is not really pushing for a ceasefire means that they are not as out-of-stock as the headline suggests...
They are already using way less tanks & armored vehicles today. They will never really "run out" but just have a smaller stockpile to draw from, which seems to be the case.
Also, who knows what kind of information putin gets, look at donald and the information he gets and he's not even killing everyone not doing their job correctly.
Change comes gradually and then suddenly. Lots of signs point to a collapse (stockpiles, economy, the blocked frontlines, ..., and donkeys), some people have put it to around mid 2025-end 2025 for quite some time now.
Interesting times.
-
That's because you're not thinking like Putin. Starting this war in the first place was the worst possible idea that never made any sense, except it allowed Putin to reform the slipping grip on the country and cemented his regime and his vision for at least some time. But just like the empires of old, now his regime requires constant slow boiling war to operate.
He will happily sacrifice every Russian to this, he can easily afford losing a thousand men per day to the grinder. It costs very little to him. European countries on the other hand will be very very hurt by the war on their territory, and everyone understands it.Interesting to note that since 2022, he lost under 1% of his population to the war... Meat attacks could go on for years on end and it would barely move him.
You got to get him out of the picture to have this war end.
-
They will not win, doesn't mean they can't deal untold damage trying
There's been very little damage to Russia so far though.
-
Elsewhere on Lemmy today;
Germany warns Russia may be preparing attack on NATO
Both of these cannot be true.
They can flood the Baltics with drones and cause plenty of chaos and destruction.
-
Just leave Lemmy already, you are cancer
Your comment is the more stupid here
-
I think at this point the unspoken truth is that we must have a military that needs to be a deterrent to the US as well.
US has thousand military facilities all over europe, you could simply lower the gap by kicking them out. Making such claim a year ago would have get you labeled as a russian troll.
Everyone upvoting your comment should take half of the money in his wallet and donate them to the government because that's how you match US trillion dollar budget.
-
Yes because Russia will build more tanks and other equipment in the next decade. Not a problem if Europe builds up too. But that will be a problem if Europe does nothing.
If Russia were an immediate threat, Europe would have no choice but to give Trump whatever he wants so the US will protect Europe. But with Russian forces being decimated by this war, Europe has the opportunity to build it's own arms industry to be able to produce it's own weapons to be able to counter Russia in a decade's time.
Europe does nothing.
European countries combined are already spending more money on war than russia. European countries have a big arms industry already and they export weapons all over the world, including to countries ruled by dictatorships like saudi arabia. They even sold weapons to russia in the past years that are being used in the ukraine war.
-
I'm going to go with what European military leaders are saying, out loud and in public. God knows what those leaders really know and talk about.
I'm guessing you're European? Well, you've had 80 years of mostly peace and prosperity. Timed to get armed, personally. (Yes my fellow Americans, Europeans can acquire guns without too much hassle. Yes, real guns. Gun ownership just isn't a major part of their culture like it is over here.)
If you're allergic to guns, consider these two scenarios:
-
Hostile foreign power invades America.
-
Hostile foreign power invades Europe.
In which case do you expect the invader to suffer the most? Which case do you consider more likely?
I’m guessing you’re European? Well, you’ve had 80 years of mostly peace and prosperity.
I'm guessing you are american because you sound like you don't know much history
-
-
I don't know what to think anymore. I feel like every week for the last 4 years it's been "China's economy is going collapse any day now" and "Russia is losing to many people and resources in this war. They might as well give all of Russia to Ukraine"
I don't take any news written in English with any seriousness for these two countries.
-
European leaders are already talking about using the new army to invade the Middle East.
It's funny how easily people are deceived, imagine if your house neighbor were to buy some howitzers and hire 100 guys for "security reasons". Armies are made to wage war and most weapons are designed to kill other humans.
-
You are ignoring the elephant in the room, which is that a rising sense of militarism quickly feeds into a decay of your society, if you make an incredible amount of guns somebody is going to use them, that is how these things work.
I am not saying Europe shouldn't absolutely take being able to militarily counter Russia seriously, as they should any regional threat, but what is needed isn't necessarily to reshape Europe into a hypermilitarized environment, especially in the area of police and the militarization of police, what Europe needs is to make sure it has effective counters to a mass, mechanized land war.
One of the most effective counters, and a decisive element of the war in Ukranian has been HIMARs, long range missiles capable of striking mobile Russian SAM assets and other high value targets from extremely far away. These make maneuvering a large concentrated armored force much much much more costly and dangerous.
...but this all devolves into a sense of militarism that undermines the original reason for making all the guns in the first place, it is just a matter of how far you can push it in your society before that cancer becomes terminal... see the U.S. as a prime example....
Even your comment advocating for reasonable spending gets downvoted. People are mad on war propaganda.
-
where's that super next-next-gen Russian Armata thing? is that a ghost tank?
It never really existed in production, of course. It is like the early builds of the AK-12 where one offs were made and shown off as if they were going into full scale production soon.
The more real BMPT was at least fielded in double digit numbers, although conceptually it seems more suited to being a terror weapon supporting a shock & awe type advance rather than something used in a prolonged war.
