If he attacks a NATO member, or even an EU member for that matter, his ass will be grass regardless of his nuclear capabilities. How fast do you think we could have some high tech drones over Moscow? I am betting 45 minutes tops.
If any forces enter Russian territory with weapons then Putin will launch. There are some lines in the sand that really are lines -- despite what Barack Obama may think about the concept -- and the entire Russian government would demand hard core retaliation in such an event. Of course that's just my opinion.
I can certainly see what you are saying and agree with 95% of it, but Americans purchased around $190 billion in war bonds etc. back when that was an unthinkable amount of money. The war was costly. Britain ran out of money days into the Battle of Britain and then basically impoverished themselves with the lease-lend program even with the ultra lenient terms. There is definitely going to be rebuilding costs afterwards that almost certainly would have to be taken into consideration. How much to rebuild entire cities, industries and so on in today's dollars? You are right in the US having the resources, technology, know how etc. There is no doubt that the US is the only country that could even attempt it. Any country attempting to engage us in, for example, air combat would lose everything they put in the air. I just don't see any country in Europe wanting to participate. I think you would have a situation where WWIII started, only the USA and China showed up, China found how quickly its planes can be shot out of he sky, ships sent to the bottom of the Ocean and decided that manufacturing shoddy products was a better way to go. Then there is the cost in lives.
Thats what people said about those who warned us about bin Laden before 9/11. "People hijacking planes and flying them into buildings and the Pentagon? And both Trade Centers collapsing? You are living in a dream world!"
I agree. World War One utterly blindsided the world. Nobody expected it. WWII was more or less long range telegraphed and so while it was expected it still was shocking and traumatic. World War III can happen. Not will happen. Not won't happen. Just CAN happen. I just hope like hell that it never does.
Urk! Talk about making a nightmare scenario even worse! The beginning of World War III with President Incompetent as the Commander-in-Chief of the United States of America. Shudder!
Do you really think anyone is going to go to war with Russia over some little Baltic nation? Who in NATO has the political or popular will to go to war? Don't make the mistake of thinking this would be a push-over. This is in Europes backyard, against Europes major energy supplier, and against a Russia that is still very capable even if reduced from its Cold War strength. Russia isn't some third world country where drones are unopposed and the US can operate with total control of the air and with GPS to do all the thinking. A whole lot of people have been warning for years that the US is getting stuck in the counter-insurgency mindset and has lost the "big war" mentality. We always seem to prepare for the last war, and the "last" war has been against a bunch of low tech rag-heads who like living in a 7th century society (and we have had our hands full with them). One day we are going to have to fight someone who understands warfare and can jam GPS and communications, shoot down planes, field mobile artillery and armour, has an abundant supply of man-portable anti-air and anti-tank weapons, can deploy their own capable special forces, has competent cyber warfare assets, and has the ability to take the war to the enemy (that being the US and Europe).
That's why Obama is making certain that if Putin does attack a Baltic nation, he has to figure out what to do with the 600 US troops who are there. They stand no chance against a determined Putin attack; the only reason those troops are there is to let Putin know that 600 US casualties or prisoners will generate the popular will for Obama to go to war. I think that number is a good number. It's enough for Putin to think about. However, in places like South Korea, with unpredictable and irrational players, you have to increase the number to deter. North Korea knows for certain that we would go all out war over 32k US casualties/prisoners. 600 is enough for Putin I think.
The US poured the equivalent of over 800,000,000,000 dollars worth of hardware and materials into our allies during the Lend Lease program in 1941-42. A titanic amount of money, and a debt we almost completely forgave after the war ended. Then we poured the equivalent of tens of billions more into rebuilding the countries outside of the iron curtain after the war ended, all while our economy was booming. When push comes to shove, the US's economic might is absolutely staggering. We have the capabilities to produce enough food to feed literally the entire world. If another world war happens, the US will come out on top just like it did in the last one, and arguably the one before that. And anyone who decides to come under our umbrella will too.
Yes, if a NATO nation is attacked, then NATO as a whole will go to war. The very sanctity of its existence depends on that singular fact. Even so, many Eastern European nations such as Lithuania and Poland have been forging their own second layer alliances with each other just in case. We haven't lost the big war mentality. There just isn't any way to beat an insurgency unless you completely win over the locals (which didn't happen), or your willing to go full Mongolian regional genocide mode (which we are not willing to do). We still have the big war mentality, and plenty of it. Just ask those congressmen who are pushing fourth a bill for another 2,000 M1-Abrams tanks to be manufactured (like the 9,000+ we already have aren't enough). And sure we are going to fight a somewhat competent enemy again at some point, and that enemy will last a few weeks just like Iraq's standing army did... if their REALLY GOOD they might last a few months. Against the combined arms of the US, western Europe, most of Eastern Europe, and Turkey though? There isn't a chance in hell their going to win. Not without using nukes, and in that situation, no one really wins do they? America, because of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, has the most combat experienced and ready active duty military and reservists in the world. Every other nations military aside from Britain's arguably, are green behind the ears. Russia dicked around in Georgia for a few months in 2008, thats the most experience most anyone under rank of major has in that army, and their high command is made up of guys that dicked around in Chechnya 15 years ago four a year and a half. Big woop. Their military capabilities are purely regional at best too. They had too cannibalize their own APC's for parts during the South Ossetia war for Christ sake.
If we let Russia take eastern Ukraine, Latvia/Estonia may be next..with their 27%/25% Russian population
Actually no. Bismark completely predicted it: "Europe today is a powder keg and the leaders are like men smoking in an arsenal ... A single spark will set off an explosion that will consume us all ... I cannot tell you when that explosion will occur, but I can tell you where ... Some damned foolish thing in the Balkans will set it off." - Otto Von Bismark, Said during the Congress of Berlin in 1878 He knew the complex web of alliances and agreements that kept peace in Europe was something only someone like him could keep organized, and that it would eventually fall apart when he died or left power, and would do so with devastating results. Another quote of his that seems to ring true with this modern situation in the Ukraine is this one: "A conquering army on the border will not be stopped by eloquence." -Otto Von Bismark, Speech to North German Reichstag (24 September 1867)
"Biggest GOP donor: US should nuke Iran" http://www.presstv.com/detail/2013/10/24/331089/biggest-gop-donor-us-should-nuke-iran/
I agree with Post #133. Nobody in the West is gonna go to war to save Ukraine. Nobody in the West is gonna go to war to save Moldova. Nobody in the West is gonna go to war to save Latvia, treaty or no treaty. Nobody in the West is gonna go to war to save Estonia, treaty or no treaty. Nobody in the West is gonna go to war to save Lithuania, treaty or no treaty. Nobody in the West is gonna go to war to save Finland. Nobody in the West is gonna go to war to save Slovakia, treaty or no treaty. Nobody in the West is gonna go to war to save Poland, treaty or no treaty. The US has gone into an isolationist fetal position. Obama's and Biden's bluster counts for nothing. When they drastically cut the military, the intervention option was foreclosed. NATO (less the US) and the EU in general could not handle Libya or Serbia. Putin has them by the 'nads with his natural gas. They cannot even make economic sanctions stick. The nations mentioned better start training their people to fight or accept being a Russian satrapy. Will Ms. Merkel watch the old German provinces of Prussia and Silesia go under the Russian heel? I think she will because that's all she can do.
of course were not gonna allow anouther 10+ year war... we had our fill of useless wars with the Bush clan and Iraq
Obama killed Osama bin Laden in Pakistan, without Pakistani permission to enter their territory/ Obama attacked Ghaddafi, leading to his downfall. If Russia attacked a NATO nation, Obama would fully retaliate.
Psssst . . . there is one hell of a forking difference between doing things to and with little militarily insignificant nations and doing those same things to a nation that really is not all that far from becoming a full-fledged super power again. So, no, Obama would NOT retaliate from a military standpoint. Not unless he's insane as well as being an utter incompetent. Yes, I am aware that technically Pakistan is a nuclear power but it is a nuclear power in comparison to Russia the way that a kid with a BB-gun is armed compared to a combat veteran with a fully automatic assault weapon.
