And no, I don't think Putin is going to try to conquer Europe (at least I hope he's not that mad). I just wonder where the line for action is and whether it's "touching NATO soil" as you imply or something much more vague and flexible once the prospect of actual war is real.
So it’s not a stretch to think that once a Russian tank would cross into Poland it would be met with immediate lethal force.
[0] https://news.yahoo.com/downing-russia-jet-stab-back-putin-13...
It was one jet, and it wasn't fighter jet, but assault jet, it didn't carry any AA missiles and couldn't defend himself.
The line is the borders of the NATO countries. I don’t think it’s particularly controversial that if someone drove a tank into Poland offensively it would be promptly incinerated.
By clearly defining it, it makes it less likely to escalate to accidental MAD. We know the line, Russia knows the line. And they know the potential consequences should they choose to cross it.
On the other hand Russia has recently been opening their doctrine to allow nuclear strikes in response to conventional attacks. Further they threaten nuclear responses. They're intentionally blurring the lines because they feel they can get away shenanigans in the confusion.
If Russia launches nukes - there's nuclear response, but at that point it's not really "escalation", just extended suicide by Russia.
Anything else would put you at a severe disadvantage.
The goal here is to prevent one invasion, not start another one.
But there ought to be enough fighters in Europe to swat anything flying in Ukraine out of the sky.
It will or there will be no NATO. It's the whole point. Certainly Poland won't just give up not to make other NATO countries angry.
So yes, Putin probably is considering this scenario at least in his wet dreams...
And it seems like largest country in Europe (by area), with 200 thousand strong army, tons od most sophisticated NATO weapons and 8 years of combat experience have collpased like a house of cards within 24 hours. Do you think Polish or German army will do any better? Or does Russia have better opinion of these armies? So, yes this is possible now... Thereotically...
And history knows larger miscalculations...
Where did you get this idea?
Ukrain has only a tiny airforce, no modern air defences, and most heavy military hardware, from artillery to tanks, is cold war vintage.
NATO never supplied it with modern fighter jets and missile systems, if it had, Russian helicopters would not be circling Kiev right now.
"Every Russian general is born with the ambition of driving his tanks to the Atlantic Ocean"
This is not helpfull, Russia has the idea that it should be able to do as it pleasesnl in its sphere of influence, but I never met anyone thinking it stretched to include anything past former eastern block borders.
France may not like that. They're not in NATO. But they have nuclear weapons.
Yes, they are, and have been since NATO was founded. From 1966-2009 they did not participated in the Integrated Military Command Structure, despite remaining fully in the alliance.
They still don't participate in the Nuclear Planning Council, and their troops are not put under permanent UN command in peacetime.
This should be “NATO command” not “UN command”.
> I don't know that NATO has the guts to give Putin that bloody nose.
Again…what? Based on NATO’s military inaction re: Ukraine, you’ve concluded that NATO will also do nothing if Russia were to actually attack NATO itself? The whole point of being in NATO is having the collective backing of its allied members.