How capable would NATO be of countering a conventional assault on multiple fronts by its enemies against both them and other parties?
- Thread starter Free-Stater 101
- Start date
North Korea is not any more than it was before getting said deterrent when it also was not invaded for decades.
North Korea is also not even reducing its massive conventional arsenal since getting it.
So take this sort of childish arguments to people who know less than you about this stuff, wrong audience here.
Uh... Yeah we did. The Chinese kind of drove us back, though.
We didn't invade. We supported South Korea and pushed them to the Chinese border
LordsFire
Internet Wizard
You're playing word games.
We invaded N. Korea during the active war, 70+ years ago.
N. Korea then remained uninvaded for ~60 years after that despite lacking a nuclear deterrent.
Stop being lazy, post points clearly.
I mean yes. That's the point I aas making
strunkenwhite
Well-known member
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.
strunkenwhite
Well-known member
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 no teacher quite like experience. Russia has that experience and NATO doesn't. At the same time, NATO is simply better, especially in terms of high value air assets (as opposed to low value air assets i.e. drone warfare). The Russian invasion quickly bogs down as everything from the front line to the logistics network to the factories at home are pummeled by missiles and precision bombs. Many get intercepted but NATO pilot casualties are low; the same cannot be said for Russia. At the same time, the flood of material Russia has thrown into battle is too big to be entirely stopped and even if NATO's damage is a different level of magnitude from what Ukraine inflicted they are still experienced at weathering such storms.
Speaking of material, 2026/7 is not 2024. The production ramp-ups that were too late to save Ukraine have gone into full swing and nobody has failed to notice the lack of Russian demobilization. Stockpiles are ready, tons of stuff is flowing through the pipeline, and morale is high (few are foolish enough to propose surrendering to someone who does that to the vanquished). It's not quite a full-on war economy but it's close enough to put Russia's full-on war economy to shame. After NATO weathers the initial shock, it starts pushing back, and it pushes hard. Russian troops fight valiantly but not especially well, and are stretched too thin on side fronts like Finland and the Caucasus. In some areas, NATO troops encounter opponents who were given the short straw on supplies and equipment, and that's when the routs happen. I don't know the endgame, but it's bad for Russia.
VENEZUELA: A pathetic sideshow that can hope for nothing more than to be a slight distraction to the US Navy. None of its neighbors will take kindly to this, and the real question is more what happens in the aftermath, which I think is mostly outside the scope of the thread.
NORTH KOREA: I find it very hard to believe that Russia could actually convince it to go to war with its eternal rival when it otherwise wouldn't. However, assuming that somehow happened it would be extremely bad. Seoul is pretty much within artillery range of NK. The consequences to global trade would likely be as bad as Taiwan going hot. The goal for SK and allies would likely be to reunify Korea. (Similar to how once the US civil war really got going the question of slavery couldn't go back to the status quo ante.) Expect the Chinese army to become directly involved sooner or later, as with the previous war, since Taiwan is indeed going hot in this scenario. Japan takes the opportunity to regain some goodwill with (South) Koreans.
CHINA: Intense and endless theorycrafting has been done on this conflict for decades but I think we will nevertheless all be surprised at how it goes. It seems obvious that China has the capability to interdict Taiwan but that's different from staging an actual (and successful) invasion. I expect Taiwan will have also been taking extensive notes on Ukraine's famed sea drone efforts. Most of the neighbors China's been bullying will favor the US side, but whether that's actively or passively will vary. The Philippines probably go hot on our side though. The longer the war goes on the more China's lack of sea trade hurts. This war is arguably the most likely of all the specified scenarios to end with status quo ante, despite the incredible devastation.
IRAN/ISRAEL: A lot depends on how the political situation develops in the next couple of years. Nobody is going to like Iran going crazy on Israel but if Israel has been speedrunning the path to pariah state in the interim it might just be one of those conflicts that everyone else stays on the sidelines of, being much too busy elsewhere. Either way, with no nukes and a lot of countries in between these two, it's more or less restricted to being fought over the air. Israel repels any land invasion by terrorist proxies with relative ease compared to the land wars in Europe and east Asia.
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 no teacher quite like experience. Russia has that experience and NATO doesn't. At the same time, NATO is simply better, especially in terms of high value air assets (as opposed to low value air assets i.e. drone warfare). The Russian invasion quickly bogs down as everything from the front line to the logistics network to the factories at home are pummeled by missiles and precision bombs. Many get intercepted but NATO pilot casualties are low; the same cannot be said for Russia. At the same time, the flood of material Russia has thrown into battle is too big to be entirely stopped and even if NATO's damage is a different level of magnitude from what Ukraine inflicted they are still experienced at weathering such storms.
Speaking of material, 2026/7 is not 2024. The production ramp-ups that were too late to save Ukraine have gone into full swing and nobody has failed to notice the lack of Russian demobilization. Stockpiles are ready, tons of stuff is flowing through the pipeline, and morale is high (few are foolish enough to propose surrendering to someone who does that to the vanquished). It's not quite a full-on war economy but it's close enough to put Russia's full-on war economy to shame. After NATO weathers the initial shock, it starts pushing back, and it pushes hard. Russian troops fight valiantly but not especially well, and are stretched too thin on side fronts like Finland and the Caucasus. In some areas, NATO troops encounter opponents who were given the short straw on supplies and equipment, and that's when the routs happen. I don't know the endgame, but it's bad for Russia.
VENEZUELA: A pathetic sideshow that can hope for nothing more than to be a slight distraction to the US Navy. None of its neighbors will take kindly to this, and the real question is more what happens in the aftermath, which I think is mostly outside the scope of the thread.
NORTH KOREA: I find it very hard to believe that Russia could actually convince it to go to war with its eternal rival when it otherwise wouldn't. However, assuming that somehow happened it would be extremely bad. Seoul is pretty much within artillery range of NK. The consequences to global trade would likely be as bad as Taiwan going hot. The goal for SK and allies would likely be to reunify Korea. (Similar to how once the US civil war really got going the question of slavery couldn't go back to the status quo ante.) Expect the Chinese army to become directly involved sooner or later, as with the previous war, since Taiwan is indeed going hot in this scenario. Japan takes the opportunity to regain some goodwill with (South) Koreans.
CHINA: Intense and endless theorycrafting has been done on this conflict for decades but I think we will nevertheless all be surprised at how it goes. It seems obvious that China has the capability to interdict Taiwan but that's different from staging an actual (and successful) invasion. I expect Taiwan will have also been taking extensive notes on Ukraine's famed sea drone efforts. Most of the neighbors China's been bullying will favor the US side, but whether that's actively or passively will vary. The Philippines probably go hot on our side though. The longer the war goes on the more China's lack of sea trade hurts. This war is arguably the most likely of all the specified scenarios to end with status quo ante, despite the incredible devastation.
IRAN/ISRAEL: A lot depends on how the political situation develops in the next couple of years. Nobody is going to like Iran going crazy on Israel but if Israel has been speedrunning the path to pariah state in the interim it might just be one of those conflicts that everyone else stays on the sidelines of, being much too busy elsewhere. Either way, with no nukes and a lot of countries in between these two, it's more or less restricted to being fought over the air. Israel repels any land invasion by terrorist proxies with relative ease compared to the land wars in Europe and east Asia.
Dunno about rest of NATO,but Poland have only 4 divisions,no reserves, weak territorial defense,weak air forces,museum instead of navy and no real production of ammo/we produce shells and warheads,but not powder for schells/
As a result,do not expect much from us.
P.S Not mention,current premier is Putin friend.
IndyFront
Well-known member
You would need to throw in the rest of Latin America spearheaded by Brazil, along with India spearheading the non-Anglo Commonwealth of Nations, ASEAN, the Arab League and the non-NATO Turkic countries all under a UN coalition to have a snowball's chance in hell against NATO. It is the single-most militarized region on the planet outside perhaps the Korean DMZ. Most times out of ten NATO withstands the UN assault.
Do you get some kind of perverse satisfaction out of spamming this doomer bullshit?
Operational structure of the Polish Land Forces - Wikipedia
Two dead in Polish gunpowder factory explosion – DW – 05/17/2017
An explosives factory that was founded in 19th century Prussia has exploded for the fourth time in its recorded history. Two people have died in the latest accident.
www.dw.com
Did you read what you posted? two divisins are still not formed,and in remaining out of 12 tank and 25 mechanized battalions most still have obsolate tanks and IFV.Do you get some kind of perverse satisfaction out of spamming this doomer bullshit?
Operational structure of the Polish Land Forces - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Two dead in Polish gunpowder factory explosion – DW – 05/17/2017
An explosives factory that was founded in 19th century Prussia has exploded for the fourth time in its recorded history. Two people have died in the latest accident.
They do not have reserves.When they die,there would be nobody to replace them,becouse Poland do not consprit new recruits from at least 15 years.
And your factory? it is producing FUCKING BLACKPOWDER.GOOD FOR MUSKETS,NOT MODERN GUNS.
You are either troll,or idiot unable to distinguish blackpowder used for musket from modernpowder used for modern schells.Which we cease to made in 2000.
And both german puppet Tusk who ruled once by 8 years and rule now,and "great patriot" Kaczyński who ruled for 8 years till last elections,failed to start production.
You must support one of them,to spamm this bullshit.
Yet they still exist as divisions, and don't forget the separate brigades.
Those obsolete tanks and IFVs and often also worse ones are still being used at large scale in the Ukraine war, so making my point perfectly, you are making up bullshit excuses to support your doomer bullshit spamming.
If they die faster than it takes to train new ones or for NATO to send an intervention, there will be nowhere to organize the replacements nor anything to equip them with anyway.
Yet fucking again, all you do is make retarded claims to fit your doomer spamming but have no fucking idea about the miltech stuff you are talking about, when you know only half of basic things, yet you think you know everything and others are idiots.
Military black powder MIL-P-223C - ZS Black Powder Ltd.
Black powder producer for military use, supplying e.g. MIL-P-223, GOST standards to top ammunition makers in Europe and globally.
blackpowder.eu
Yup, black powder is only good for muskets, some fucking genius said, we are so fucking lucky that people like you are not in charge of anything.
US DoD Invests To Re-Establish Black Powder Production | Joint Forces News
US Defense Department Industrial Base Support (IBS) office invests to re-establish domestic production of critical black powder propellant.
www.joint-forces.com
When will you fucking learn that just because *you* are not aware that something exists or is used for something doesn't mean that it isn't, because you suck at doing research?
Also we have nitro powder factories too.
You also have goldfish memory and don't remember the times i did your research for you, so you still repeat the bullshit after i point it out:
Last edited:
Exist as divisions without weapons.How to you want to use them/ send on battlefield to say "BOOOM" to soviet troops?
And,ukrainian war proved that T.72 could be useful,but BWP 1- not.
Sigh.We should have reserved ready to send to army now - but,becouse Tusk before 2010 stopped conscription,we do not have them.
And nothing change,even if we start it now.
Yet fucking again, all you do is make retarded claims to fit your doomer spamming but have no fucking idea about the miltech stuff you are talking about, when you know only half of basic things, yet you think you know everything and others are idiots.
Military black powder MIL-P-223C - ZS Black Powder Ltd.
Black powder producer for military use, supplying e.g. MIL-P-223, GOST standards to top ammunition makers in Europe and globally.
Did you read it? it is not used as propellant,but small part of propellant.For most we still need normal powder - which we do not produce anymore.
You delivered souure,which say,that black powder is used in small amount in schells,but you still need modern powder.Yup, black powder is only good for muskets, some fucking genius said, we are so fucking lucky that people like you are not in charge of anything.
US DoD calls black powder "critical to national security needs" and "widely used propellant in artillery, firearms, rocketry, pyrotechnics and numerous weapons systems.".US DoD Invests To Re-Establish Black Powder Production | Joint Forces News
US Defense Department Industrial Base Support (IBS) office invests to re-establish domestic production of critical black powder propellant.
When will you fucking learn that just because *you* are not aware that something exists or is used for something doesn't mean that it isn't, because you suck at doing research?
And you show it as proof,that blackpowder is enough.
Are you genuine idiot,or master troll?
Which maybe would produce nitro powder for ammo as propellant,but so now still failed to do so.
All they showed is production of various ammo now,and future production of powder.
When we need to produce at least 750.000 155mm schells for fighting in defensive per year,made all in Poland.Including powder.
Becouse West proven unable to deliver enough.
Prove they are without weapons. They even show what they already have formed. Just because a division lacks few support components still doesn't mean it's useless or without weapons.
Yet everyone uses them too. Yeah, it's standard weapons suck, but they can be changed, or removed and the vehicle be repurposed as normal poorly armored tracked transport.
Whatever, we have WOT for that now anyway.
Can you even read? It is also used as main propellant in few weapons.
For example some models of 40mm grenades use black powder as main.
Usually police ones, but if need be this can be used in many military variants too.
Also cheapest RPG rockets use black powder as propellant. So did Panzerfaust btw.
Again you can't read. Are you a bot or illiterate?
Code:
[RIGHT]ARTILLERY NITROGLYCERINE TUBE POWDERS[/RIGHT]
Parameters:
[LIST]
[*]thickness of the combustible layer 1,4 � 3,3 mm
[*]calorific value 3200 kJ/kg
[*]minimum density 1,54 g/³
[/LIST]
We have a possibility of carrying out ballistic tests and we make ready-to-use charges with black powder.
[HR][/HR]
[RIGHT]MORTAR NITROGLYCERINE POWDERS[/RIGHT]
Parameters:
[LIST]
[*]form of a band or discs
[*]thickness of the combustible layer min 0,3 - 0,02 mm
[*]calorific value max 5000 kJ/kgNo we do not, no one cares nor should care about your asspull numbers with arbitrary requirements. We are a NATO army, we have no reason to prepare to pretend we will fight like we are not, like Ukraine does. We're not buying F-35's and insane amounts of heavy rockets to be reliant on large amounts of tube artillery and trench warfare with it.
Last edited: