timetraveler said:If you military strategy history just references Putin and Saddam you probably don't know *** you are talking about. If Putin actually thought NATO was planning an attack he'd come back to the table unless he just wanted to die.Canada2017 said:Saddam Hussein was widely criticized within the Muslim world for allowing the US army to slowly build up ( took several months ) without opposition until ....finally ....it was ready to attack .timetraveler said:You say Putin isn't an idiot but he'd start a war with 30 countries because of a buildup? A war that he admitted he can't win with or without nukes? Sounds like something an idiot would do to me.Canada2017 said:Putin has this battle all but won . Ukraine is on the verge of collapse .BUBear24 said:Canada2017 said:A. Link to this report of 90,000 troops please.BUBear24 said:just fyi it got reported today with the additions we have 90K in troops in Europe right now.Canada2017 said:Exactly how are you going to get fully battle ready divisions shipped across the Atlantic in 2-3 weeks ? The buildup prior to Desert Storm took MONTHS .nein51 said:Canada2017 said:
Meanwhile the full weight of the Russian military is being brought to bear.
We would crush them in 2-3 weeks. I don't want war. I don't want Americans dying for what amounts to a spat between former partners…but we would destroy their entire fighting force the way we did with Iraq and it wouldn't take much longer either.
How many divisions do you think we even have ? Going to strip every soldier out of South Korea ? Even then......the most we could muster is 7 divisions . Even then they would be horribly outnumbered .
Really believe the massive Russian submarine fleet will just sit idly by while all our troop transports sail to Europe ?
How long do you think it would take for the USAF to mass enough jet fighters to the battle zone . Really think the Russian air force will let them deploy unopposed ?
As for the comments above, taking aside the crazy man's nuke option, you wouldn't need massive ground forces. The fact Ukrainians are knocking out Russian aircraft with mostly Soviet age antiaircraft weaponry means we'd truly win the sky in a few days, and from there the Russian armor is no different from Iraqi last time they had time to lay in the sky all day. Ukraine knows with that they'd mop up the ground themselves. It's why their president wants a no fly zone so badly.
B. Just how many are combat troops ?
C. If they are primarily hospital staff, quartermasters and a division of relatively lightly armed paratroopers ...the numbers don't mean **** .
D. Again ......the Russian Air Force is First Rate. Comparing then to Iraq in terms of training, numbers, and quality of combat aircraft is ridiculous . Most importantly Russian air bases are far closer to the battlefield . Which means each jet can linger over the battlefield far longer before they have to re fuel .
A. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/24/us/politics/us-troops-deploy-europe.html
Just grabbed the first one I saw on google. I've been watching reading so much I don't remember which article I read.
B. Say 50,000 are only combat. Again if it's a hypo where no one else but US/Russia/Ukraine is involved, then Ukraine is still going to be your main fighting force. And the 1st armored division is already over there so I know we have armor on the ground that can love quickly. If your going to be do a WW3 scenario I'll still play but different game.
C. see above
D. This is not true so far as it seems to me. They seem to be having a worse time dealing with a lot of the same Soviet era anti aircraft weaponry(ironically made by them) than we ever did in Iraq. I you could have sheer numbers, but do I think all 1,000 of those Russians planes work? Hell no, not after looking at some of the mechanical issues their armor has been facing. Some of that is being attributed to lack of maintenance. I can imagine their air fleet wouldn't be any different. But if we're bringing in our anti aa imparted to russias S300 systems that we've beaten in the past too, it tips in our favor to me.
I don't want us involved at all for what it's worth. I think this is Russias Afghanistan 2.0, only deadlier and its going to crush Putin, his legacy, and I think his life honestly, he may have to "retire" but I don't see any victory coming out of this for him. I think the insurgency is going to be beyond anything imagined.
We don't have anything approaching 50,000 troops in Europe....and much fewer legitimate combat troops.
Only a couple of regiments of the 1st armored division are in Europe. The rest are still in the states. Would take months to transport enough heavy weapons to make any kind of impact. And Putin isn't an idiot...he will attack before we could possibly match his forces.
Our navy is the best in the world ....possibly our Air Force as well . But they are spread all over the world . In eastern Europe Russia has the dominant conventional force ...by far .
We need to face reality and WALK AWAY from this .
Putin is currently attacking a neighboring country for merely attempting to join NATO in its own self defense..
He is not stupid or timid enough to repeat Hussein's mistake .
Putin would attack BEFORE US forces fully deploy in Europe.
In any case the US army could not deploy enough tanks and heavy equipment to offset the current massive advantage of the Russian army .
Putin is counting on NATO being afraid of nukes and doing nothing. It is central to his strategy. All NATO leaders are predictable. Trump wasn't, for all his bad traits, unpredictability worked well in foreign relations.
