I mean so could I. Russia would probably have better luck than me with it, but still.
I wouldn’t be so sure. They were also supposed to reach Kyiv in 3 days as of several years ago.
Shit, if I sold my old Xbox stuff I could probably reach a NATO capital in 3 days.
I assume I will be met with a surrender when I get there? It’s only fair.
Yes pretty much every country “can” launch and attack on any other country at any time.
Russia certainly could. Given what we’ve seen in Ukraine, launching a limited raid into a NATO country seems like an exercise in losing a lot of men and material. At the same time, it’s not completely far fetched. If Russia feels that it won’t be punished or stopped from engaging in conquest, it could make a go at closing the Suwalki Gap. This would cut off the Baltic States from direct, overland re-supply, then try to conquer those states. Provided Russia made a fast enough land grab, NATO might just sit back and waffle over fighting against a nuclear armed state directly.
I wouldn’t call such a thing “plausible”, but given the tepid response to Russian aggression in Ukraine and NATO nations’ fatigue with that conflict, they might just pull a Neville Chamberlain and decide that appeasement is worth trying again. “But certainly NATO wouldn’t want to risk Article 5 being seen as a paper tiger!” someone is bound to say. And maybe that’s true, but such treaties are just pieces of paper and may not hold up to the reality of artillery shells flying. Hopefully, we never find out. But, the general has a point that NATO needs to look like it can and will spill blood over Article 5, or Russia might just call it a bluff.
The real number that caught my eye was 2029. We’re all going to be in hot water if Russia’s ambitions aren’t broken in Ukraine by then.
With what!? I guess that’s why it’d be “limited,” by definition.
