• NeuronautML@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        38
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        Russia has stated many things which are often contradictory and false.

        Regardless, attacking NATO countries would be strategic insanity.

        • Vilian@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          5 months ago

          they are insane tho, but putin don’t want to die, and their fuxked up defense system can’t cope with the ammount of missiles that gonna rain in his head

          • oatscoop@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            5 months ago

            They’re not insane: everything they’ve done are things they sincerely thought they could get away with, and up until Ukraine Putin has been correct in that regard.

            Pretending to be crazy is an effective strategy: ironically Nixon popularized it during the cold war.

            Attacking targets in NATO countries (even if “justified”) is going to drastically increase the odds NATO gets directly involved in Ukraine – something Putin absolutely doesn’t want.

          • NeuronautML@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            15
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            5 months ago

            It’s not even politics, It’s just math. NATO has superiority in economy, industrial output, operational equipment and manpower.

            Plus they’re too close to Russia for asymmetric warfare rules.

            I would bet on it, but I’d sure as hell wish we could all get along instead.

          • jaschen@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            Um… Is NATO weaker with the addition of Sweden and Finland? I’m not sure what your definition of “weak” means. I thought having more allies is not weak.

      • CptEnder@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        5 months ago

        If it’s a NATO country the F-16s are the least of their worries and find out what a real 3 day operation looks like.

        • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          5 months ago

          Here’s what Russia actually stated as explained by the chief of NATO

          The background was that President Putin declared in the autumn of 2021, and actually sent a draft treaty that they wanted NATO to sign, to promise no more NATO enlargement. That was what he sent us. And was a pre-condition for not invade Ukraine. Of course we didn’t sign that.

          The opposite happened. He wanted us to sign that promise, never to enlarge NATO. He wanted us to remove our military infrastructure in all Allies that have joined NATO since 1997, meaning half of NATO, all the Central and Eastern Europe, we should remove NATO from that part of our Alliance, introducing some kind of B, or second class membership. We rejected that.

          So he went to war to prevent NATO, more NATO, close to his borders. He has got the exact opposite.

          https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/opinions_218172.htm