What should NATO do if a Russian bomb lands in a NATO country or a Russian plane flies in a NATO country's air space?

[maxparrish]

That's the point. NATO has very few MiG's. And drones aren't going to help the Ukrainians get air superiority.

That's the point. NATO doesn't rely on MiGs and can spare them, and drones are not designed to obtain air superiority, but to supplement as ground attack platforms.

Sssssh.

 

[maxparrish]

Like a typical politician, Biden pissed opportunities right down his leg and now he's being laughed at for it.

Damn, I wish a Maggie Thatcher of the Falklands War was our President, not this dithering senior who operates on a broken autopilot.

 

[Questerr]

Currently in all of NATO there are:

-47 MiG-29's spread across three air forces, for which 2 of them they are their only fighter aircraft and they can't spare them.
-18 Su-22's from the Polish Air Force.
-About 40 MiG-21's, again from two countries that can't really spare them.
-and a whopping 8 Su-25's.

So at most, NATO can give about 50 aircraft to Ukraine that Ukranian pilots are actually trained on, and over half of those will be ground attack aircraft, not fighters.

 

[Questerr]

That's the point. NATO doesn't rely on MiGs and can spare them, and drones are not designed to obtain air superiority, but to supplement as ground attack platforms.

Sssssh.

The countries in NATO that have MiG's most definitely do rely on them with the exception of Poland.

Drones in the face of air superiority are targets.

 

[eohrnberger]

what we should do is to respond proportionately and to both deter and prevent escalation, with clear statements what we are doing and why.

You know that might sound really nice in the focus group, but in the field with minutes or seconds to make a decision, it's not nearly clear nor certain enough.

 

[maxparrish]

Currently in all of NATO there are:

-47 MiG-29's spread across three air forces, for which 2 of them they are their only fighter aircraft and they can't spare them.
-18 Su-22's from the Polish Air Force.
-About 40 MiG-21's, again from two countries that can't really spare them.
-and a whopping 8 Su-25's.

So at most, NATO can give about 50 aircraft to Ukraine that Ukranian pilots are actually trained on, and over half of those will be ground attack aircraft, not fighters.

The countries in NATO that have MiG's most definitely do rely on them with the exception of Poland.

Drones in the face of air superiority are targets.

It you are intending to make a relevant argument or even a material point, you are not doing so.

The bulk of the Mig-29s and SU's are in Poland, the offer on the table is from Poland. In their view they can spare them, but would appreciate eventual replacement in comparable aircraft.

Ukraine needs what it can get, MIgs and SU's in combat aircraft and drones.

So what if replacement Migs and SU's from the west is limited, how does that have a parsnip of relevancy to assisting Ukraine NOW? And of what relevancy is it that combat arms, air or ground, are targets in war? OF COURSE THEY ARE, THIS IS WAR, in case you didn't notice it.

If you have a point in your posts, you best make it. Telling us the future inventory of Migs/Su is limited, or that war material has the disadvantage of often being lost in war, is trite gibberish.

 

[Questerr]

It you are intending to make a relevant argument or even a material point, you are not doing so.

The bulk of the Mig-29s and SU's are in Poland, the offer on the table is from Poland. In their view they can spare them, but would appreciate eventual replacement in comparable aircraft.

Ukraine needs what it can get, MIgs and SU's in combat aircraft and drones.

So what if replacement Migs and SU's from the west is limited, how does that have a parsnip of relevancy to assisting Ukraine NOW? And of what relevancy is it that combat arms, air or ground, are targets in war? OF COURSE THEY ARE, THIS IS WAR, in case you didn't notice it.

If you have a point in your posts, you best make it. Telling us the future inventory of Migs/Su is limited, or that war material has the disadvantage of often being lost in war, is trite gibberish.

Poland has 24 MiG-29’s and 18 Su-22’s. That nowhere near enough aircraft for Ukraine to achieve air superiority.

I’m all for NATO sending anything they can spare but don’t act like t would be war-winning move.

 

[sanman]

And how does that help Ukraine. We need to get used to the idea that if Putin wins WE LOSE. NATO generally and west generally and the US ends up looking like a paper tiger which I suspect we might just be and instead of China being motivated to move away from Russia they will get closer together and will ultimately pick us apart. Stop thinking this is the good world of the 21st century. This is still the bad old world of the 20th century.

That's bullshit. NATO was created to fight USSR, and not Russia - but has ended up treating Russia as the Soviet rump state, while the other ex-Soviet states are inclined to egg NATO on, to fight their ethnic conflicts on their behalf which NATO was never intended to or designed to fight.

By ham-fistedly shoehorning NATO into the role of ethnic-warfighter, this is only damaging NATO's image, especially in the eyes of local partners, as well as regional and international stability & security.

 

[ChickenTendies]

Poland has 24 MiG-29’s and 18 Su-22’s. That nowhere near enough aircraft for Ukraine to achieve air superiority.

I’m all for NATO sending anything they can spare but don’t act like t would be war-winning move.

It doesn't need to be. It will give them the opportunity to contest the air space and intercept Russian sorties. Every little bit counts

 

[Questerr]

It doesn't need to be. It will give them the opportunity to contest the air space and intercept Russian sorties. Every little bit counts

Unless it ultimately results in their defeat anyways.

 

[ChickenTendies]

Unless it ultimately results in their defeat anyways.

Well if you go by what the posters here and media seem to believe, Russia will be beaten back in weeks.

 

[jnug]

That's bullshit. NATO was created to fight USSR, and not Russia - but has ended up treating Russia as the Soviet rump state, while the other ex-Soviet states are inclined to egg NATO on, to fight their ethnic conflicts on their behalf which NATO was never intended to or designed to fight.

By ham-fistedly shoehorning NATO into the role of ethnic-warfighter, this is only damaging NATO's image, especially in the eyes of local partners, as well as regional and international stability & security.

BULLSHIT...NATO was created to keep Europe from exploding into conflict that can potentially lead to world war. Something it does about every 50 years. Notice if you will that Russia/Ukraine is a war between European countries.

 

[Questerr]

Well if you go by what the posters here and media seem to believe, Russia will be beaten back in weeks.

The only way Russia will be beaten is politically. They can grind Ukraine down. It’s going to take the oligarchs in Russia putting their foot down to end the invasion.

 

[Deuce]

Like a typical politician, Biden pissed opportunities right down his leg and now he's being laughed at for it.

Opportunity to do what? Start a war with Russia?

 

[maxparrish]

Twhat we should do is to respond proportionately and to both deter and prevent escalation, with clear statements what we are doing and why.

Wrong...wrong....wrong. And even if you were correct, it's totally irrelevant. There hasn't been proportionality since the first hour of the invasion. Russian troops are in Ukraine (bout 200K at this point), ZERO Nato troops are in Ukraine. The Russian air force dominates in Ukraine, there is ZERO Nato planes in Ukraine. The Russian forces are using cruise missiles, thermobaric rocket launchers, long range artillery, and many tanks...NATO is providing NONE.

A "proportional response" would be NOT LESS THAN, sending in the aircraft, cruise missiles, tanks, artillery, drones, AA systems and conventional weapons of major destruction (thermobaric, cluster bombs, etc.) to supplement and redress Ukraine's significant material and manpower inequality.

AND NO, in war a proportional response is childish thinking. As Putin and Russia and China knows, the object of war is to win. And to win, it minimally requires a disproportion in military power.

The proper response has always been obvious to those without jello'd knees and clay feet.

1) From the outset he allies should have decided what they are willing to do REGARDLESS of the military circumstance in Ukraine. In this case it was everything short of boots on the ground.

2) You don't wait for the enemy to act, YOU DO IT. Your only "escalation" is a single act: maximum sanctions, maximum military aide, maximum political pressure.

3) If after a period of time it does not break the enemy you either withdraw or keep a stalemate.

What you don't do is what is now an apparent and unnecessary blood bath in "fighting by little steps". HOW STUPID IS THAT?

 

[Manc Skipper]

Correct, a truck is really no different than a Javelin. If its NATO personnel driving the material around Ukraine, I would be surprised at that mainly because there is really no reason to expect Russia to look at a supply column in Ukraine and not attack it just because it was in NATO livery.

They're routinely attacking TV crews and hospitals. Any convoy including refugees would be fair game to them.

 

[jnug]

Well if you go by what the posters here and media seem to believe, Russia will be beaten back in weeks.

More and more analysts are saying the same thing as the war has developed. Ukraine needs to fight more of a 3 dimensional defense. If tanks can stand off and fire point blank at civilian facilities your Javelins (2 dimensional defense) are not getting it done. Ukraine needs either more jets or more drones or both.

Keep in mind that if Russia takes Odessa they will have land locked Ukraine and no amount of negotiation will force Russia to give back what they have taken. If they can land lock Ukraine ultimately they will turn what should be a strategic defeat for Russia into a strategic victory. If they land lock Ukraine eventually the government of Ukraine will topple, Russia will turn Ukraine into a vassal state something they have been trying to do for all of the 21st century. They will absorb all Ukraine assets and turn them into profit centers for Putin and his oligarchs.

In addition NATO and the west and the US will look like a paper tiger. China and Russia combined will simply pull us down in time.

 

[ChickenTendies]

The only way Russia will be beaten is politically. They can grind Ukraine down. It’s going to take the oligarchs in Russia putting their foot down to end the invasion.

If Russian casualties become politically untenable even for the "casualty-averse" Russian doctrine, then yes Putin will be forced to come to the negotiating table for a compromise that saves face. The oligarchs have little power tbh, they mostly rely on Putin.

 

[maxparrish]

Poland has 24 MiG-29’s and 18 Su-22’s. That nowhere near enough aircraft for Ukraine to achieve air superiority.

I’m all for NATO sending anything they can spare but don’t act like t would be war-winning move.

As air superiority is not a requisite for a MIG shooting down a Russian SU bombing a hospital.

Ukraine does not need air superiority to win this war, it needs as many planes as it can get to assist their other combat arms win it (or stalemate it to force negotiations).

 

[sanman]

BULLSHIT...NATO was created to keep Europe from exploding into conflict that can potentially lead to world war. Something it does about every 50 years. Notice if you will that Russia/Ukraine is a war between European countries.

NATO was not created to fight ethno-national conflicts in Europe -- it was meant to oppose the threat of Soviet invasion and communist takeover of Western Europe. You are wrongly equating Russia to the former USSR, and are attributing to Russia the same geostrategic motives as the USSR, even though Russia already had an established history as a Great Power prior to the existence of the USSR, including established Russian interests and red lines -- lines which clearly included Ukraine as a vital interest.
When all you have is a (NATO) hammer, then every problem is made to look like a nail.

America likewise has had an existence prior to its Cold War conflict with Moscow -- an existence which likewise included its own associated interests and red lines -- like the Monroe Doctrine, etc.
America's Monroe Doctrine precedes the arrival of the Cold War, and therefore American pursuit of that doctrine should not automatically be construed as more Cold War hostility.

 

[Questerr]

If Russian casualties become politically untenable even for the "casualty-averse" Russian doctrine, then yes Putin will be forced to come to the negotiating table for a compromise that saves face. The oligarchs have little power tbh, they mostly rely on Putin.

Casualties aren’t going to force the Russians to do anything. Money will. Going after the Oligarchs wealth will.

 

[Questerr]

As air superiority is not a requisite for a MIG shooting down a Russian SU bombing a hospital.

Ukraine does not need air superiority to win this war, it needs as many planes as it can get to assist their other combat arms win it (or stalemate it to force negotiations).

Then that MiG immediately gets clobbered out of the sky and there’s no replacement for it, while Russia has dozens of bombers left they can continue bombing with.

 

[maxparrish]

More and more analysts are saying the same thing as the war has developed. Ukraine needs to fight more of a 3 dimensional defense. If tanks can stand off and fire point blank at civilian facilities your Javelins (2 dimensional defense) are not getting it done. Ukraine needs either more jets or more drones or both.

Keep in mind that if Russia takes Odessa they will have land locked Ukraine and no amount of negotiation will force Russia to give back what they have taken. If they can land lock Ukraine ultimately they will turn what should be a strategic defeat for Russia into a strategic victory. If they land lock Ukraine eventually the government of Ukraine will topple, Russia will turn Ukraine into a vassal state something they have been trying to do for all of the 21st century. They will absorb all Ukraine assets and turn them into profit centers for Putin and his oligarchs.

In addition NATO and the west and the US will look like a paper tiger. China and Russia combined will simply pull us down in time.

And, if they add 40 million people and their resources to a new Russian empire, the West will be facing an even more powerful Russia in the future. It is only a matter of time before Russia under Putin makes more demands, most likely Moldovia and the Baltic States next. After the Baltics, he would then start on the weakest of the NATO states...Bulgaria and/or Romania.

The best time to stop Putin is NOW...not later when he rebuilds with a larger manpower and resource base.

 

[ChickenTendies]

Casualties aren’t going to force the Russians to do anything. Money will. Going after the Oligarchs wealth will.

Not really. Putin only tolerates the oligarchs when they stay out of politics. The only person with the authority to stop the war is Putin. He couldn't care less about the oligarch's wealth, and alot of them only gained their wealth due to Putin anyways.

 

[Questerr]

Not really. Putin only tolerates the oligarchs when they stay out of politics. The only person with the authority to stop the war is Putin. He couldn't care less about the oligarch's wealth, and alot of them only gained their wealth due to Putin anyways.

And yet they are the real power in Russia. The problem with the kleptocracy is that the kleptocrats are the ones the country is build around.