Search results for query: *
- Users: strunkenwhite
- With How capable would NATO be of countering a conventional assault on multiple fronts by its enemies against both them and other parties? thread
- Content: Threads, Posts
- Order by date
-
How capable would NATO be of countering a conventional assault on multiple fronts by its enemies against both them and other parties?
The thread prompt posits "a conventional ground invasion betting that Western Europe and the U.S. won't honor NATO defense agreements and will wimp out on the issue. (Don't argue this)" The way I read that is: if you participate in the thread you are expected to assume NATO does fight instead...- Word Count: 83
- strunkenwhite
- Post #40
- Forum: The War College
-
How capable would NATO be of countering a conventional assault on multiple fronts by its enemies against both them and other parties?
How many years do you expect this Russia-NATO war to last? Or are you under the impression that all the countries of NATO actually emptied their warehouses? They did not.- Word Count: 31
- strunkenwhite
- Post #37
- Forum: The War College
-
How capable would NATO be of countering a conventional assault on multiple fronts by its enemies against both them and other parties?
On the main topic, I am not quite as bullish as LordsFire, but still optimistic. BALTIC STATES/EUROPEAN THEATER: the scenario posits that Russia is battle hardened and ready for round two. NATO has been keenly watching what happened in and to Ukraine, and lessons have been learned but there is...- Word Count: 750
- strunkenwhite
- Post #29
- Forum: The War College
-
How capable would NATO be of countering a conventional assault on multiple fronts by its enemies against both them and other parties?
Obviously their ten thousand artillery pieces and ten million artillery shells have absolutely nothing to do with that. And their nukes went back in time to before they had nukes to ensure this outcome.- Word Count: 34
- strunkenwhite
- Post #28
- Forum: The War College