flamming_python Thu Mar 24, 2022 11:17 pm
walle83 wrote: Arkanghelsk wrote:NATO will not deploy troops in Ukraine to avoid war with Russia - Alliance Secretary General Stoltenberg, responding to Poland's proposal to send a peacekeeping mission to Ukraine.
NATO shit it's panties big surprise, no asswhooping for now
Probably the opposite. The war has shown that Russian convential forces are not that good, and probably would get thier ass kicked in a confrontation with Nato forces.
What makes you think NATO conventional forces are any good?
When was the last time Sweden fought anyone, or any of these NATO states fought anyone that's not a 3rd world Muslim country with equipment from the 60s?
In Yugoslavia the NATO bombing campaign barely took out anything of the Yugoslav army. NATO aircraft were flying too high to target the army. And they never went in with ground forces. Yugoslavia simply gave up as there was nothing they could do other than being pummeled for two months and getting its infrastructure taken out.
The US led coalition had its success against Saddam Hussein's Iraq, which was under sanctions, split along sectarian lines internally, and largely obsolescent
The Ukraine is linked up to all NATO command, training, EW, satellites, intel, has NATO officers co-coordinating its strategy, its air-defense units get data from NATO radars, etc...
It has fairly modern equipment, and a large army of some 250,000-300,000 + 100,000 more or so as auxiliaries and called up reservists.
It's basically as much a NATO army as Finland's is.
Yet when you take away the info-war stuff, you end up with a Russian force that came in with a naive strategy, took heavy losses in the first 3 days, but very rapidly adapted, and now is grinding down and destroying the Ukrainian military on its terms.
We're talking about a 1:6 casualty ratio in Russia's favor, all the while with its group being smaller than the Ukraine's military.
Last edited by flamming_python on Thu Mar 24, 2022 11:20 pm; edited 1 time in total