- cross-posted to:
- ukrainianconflict@lemmit.online
- cross-posted to:
- ukrainianconflict@lemmit.online
“It is not we, the West, who should fear a clash with Putin, but the other way around,” Foreign Minister Radosław Sikorski said.
A war between Vladimir Putin’s Russia and NATO would end with Moscow’s “inevitable defeat,” Poland’s Foreign Minister Radosław Sikorski said Thursday.
"It is not we, the West, who should fear a clash with Putin, but the other way around,” Sikorski said during a speech to the Sejm, the lower house of Poland’s parliament. “It is worth reminding about this, not to increase the sense of threat in the Russians, because NATO is a defensive pact, but to show that an attack by Russia on any of the members of the Alliance would end in its [Russia’s] inevitable defeat.”
Sikorski, who was laying out Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk’s vision for the new government’s foreign policy, said Russia’s military and economic potential “pales in comparison to that of the West,” as NATO has three times as many military personnel, three times the aerial resources and four times as many ships as Russia.
…
Western allies and top military officials have become increasingly worried about a potential spillover of violence from Putin’s ongoing full-scale invasion of Ukraine — as the Russian leader continues to issue veiled nuclear threats toward the West and stashes atomic weapons in Belarus, which borders NATO members Poland, Lithuania and Latvia.
You must log in or register to comment.
Fun fact: The Soviets stopped recognizing the sovereignty of Poland and invaded the area of it closest to them 16 days after the Nazis invaded Poland in 1939.
I’m guessing Poland remembers that and is ready this time.
And now Poland’s only ally in the EU parliament is sucking Putin’s dick. I hope they learned a lesson, if they want to be protected by EU law (Article 42.7 is the European Union’s mutual assistance clause, similar to NATO article 5) maybe they should also uphold it within their own nation and don’t conspire against the EU with a crook
The previous far-right PiS government’s only ally, a bond forged from Poland and Hungary standing united against the threat of atheism, gender ideology and forensic accounting from the decadent West. The new, centrist government would classify France and Germany as closer allies than Hungary.
I mean, what does “defeat” even mean in the age of nuclear war?
A war between Russia and NATO would result in the textbook definition of a pyrhhic victory. Everyone should be afraid of that. There will be no winners in nuclear combat.
Yeah exactly. Of course you can “win” but everyone will lose a great deal in the process.
There is a great novel written in 1959 called Alas, Babylon by an author named Pat Frank about the survivors of a nuclear war between the US and the USSR in a small Florida town. The novel ends this way:
“We won it. We really clobbered 'em!” Hart’s eyes lowered and his arms drooped. He said, “Not that it matters.”
That book was wild. Read it in high school as part of a class that also covered the classics of the era; On the Beach, Fail Safe etc. It stuck with me with its description of blindness from the blast and the metaphor for confusion.
That last line has haunted me for decades.
Great quote! That’s one of my absolute favorite books. I recommend it to people all the time.
If you liked Alas, Babylon, I’d strongly recommend On The Beach by Nevil Shute.
I know On The Beach well! The movie is good too. There’s also a decent BBC radio dramatization:
Which is the reason there won’t be one. Nukes are seen these days as a weapon of last resort and has no tactical use.
They’re a weapon of last resort because of (warranted) fear of them. Hence, everyone absolutely should be scared of war between NATO and Russia.
Correct, fear of retribution. War between Russia would be brief without nukes, and you would be counting on NATO pulling back before Russia became desperate for survival.
And NATO wouldn’t be able to impose conditions of surrender, but rather, the loser would impose the conditions. There’s no playbook or precedent for any of it.
Exactly. I’ve read the UKs pm recently talking about the need to increase defense spending as the world’s so much likely to be at war. It’s like world leaders want to see WWIII not realizing or giving a shite that by talking it up that only destabilizes things like the economy as people become anxious and worried. And before anyone comes out with Russia invaded Ukraine first or out of nowhere. They didn’t invade in 2022, they invaded in 2014 with Crimea. Russia had been at war with Ukraine since and regardless invading the rest of Ukraine is a world of difference to invading a NATO member which would invite retaliation from 32 members and so would be an act of self sabotage when some of those members have nuclear weapons.
Well yeah, obviously they would lose. How could a country with an economy the size of Spain’s take on almost every developed country simultaneously?
A Hail Mary play where “taking them down with me” is considered a win. Humans do that all the time and get awarded for it. Add a nuclear arsenal to it and, well…there’s your answer.
A Hail Mary play where “taking them down with me” is considered a win.
Can you name a single war in history where anyone did this?
For obvious reasons (ie: we’re still here) it’s never happened. But you can say the same thing about a former US president facing criminal fraud charges in court and the US dropping atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Just because it never happened before doesn’t mean the conditions are not ripe for it to happen now (or in the near future).
Not to mention the fact that all it takes is for one nuclear exchange to happen, and the world as we know it ceases to exist. The stakes are incredibly high.
And every Russian is going to go along with Putin’s suicide-by-NATO? This isn’t a comic book.
Yeah, definitely. Quite a lot actually.
Edit: Oh, I got a downvote. Sorry, did you want me to Google for you, or…?
I didn’t downvote you, but “trust me bro” contributes absolutely nothing to the conversation FWIW
By not going to full war but using hybrid warfare. Trump might get elected tomorrow, he will want to promote isolationism. Without the US, the EU is not that much stronger than Russia, in terms of military.
Just because you are richer, doesnt mean you can magically create tanks and ammunition by burning money. We can already see how hard it is to get artillery ammunition for Ukraine, even though EU is willing to overpay for it. These things take time(to build factories, train people, etc) and a major policy adjustment(ie cut funding on things in order to redirect it to defense spending).
Tomorrow Russia might “want to protect the rights of oppressed russians” in the estonian city Narva, that has 90% ethnic russian population. And they just march some “peacekeepers” in, like they did with Crimea. Would the rest of Europe go to war over an estonian city that has 90% ethnic russians(dont ask how it got so many russians, that is not kosher)?
What if the initial reaction is to actually go to war but then Russia goes “ok, my bad, i just wanted to help my people, i am out of Narva”. Even in this “ideal” scenario, the original dilemma would have created some friction and fractures within EU. Hungary and Slovakia would be extremely reluctant in opposing Russia.
Keep repeating this, increasing friction in the EU, forcing EU to redirect funding to defense spending(thus degrading social services in EU) and eventually there will be enough resistance. Eventually enough german citizens would go “Why are we part of this bullshit? We could have been spending those billions to improve german lives, instead of this. It’s not as if Russia will ever invade Germany”. And thats Russia’s winning scenario.
You can do a lot of things, if you dont care about your own population. North Korea is a great example of this. They are poor as fuck but they got nukes and missiles and a huge military. As long as your population think that this is necessary for the survival of the country, humans can tolerate a lot. And people in charge of authoritarian countries like this, think that people in other countries are soy cucks who will surrender the minute they cant get their daily avocado toast.
I’m seeing a lot of hypotheticals here that seem to ignore the reality that Russia is already bogged down in a war with a country that shares an enormous border with it and is effectively on its own diplomatically, not being a member of the EU or NATO. Your scenario implies that Russia will somehow wrap up this current war or be able to open up a second front, which is a stretch to put it mildly. I also struggle to imagine a scenario where Russia puts boots on Estonian ground and the other Baltics, Poland, and Finland don’t step in to help. Czechia would also not be far behind.
As for your North Korea example, that’s actually a very instructive one, because they have practically zero power projection aside from their hit-and-miss missile program.
Their psyops have also reached their apex, I think. Trump will not win and people are (slowly) becoming more wise to foreign influence online.
Without US and EU support Russia would wrap up the war in Ukraine quite quickly. That would be the death of Ukrainian morale.
And if my grandmother had wheels she’d be a bicycle.
Trump is ahead in polls. If the US doesnt provide help to Ukraine, Ukraine has 0% chance of winning. Europe does not have the military inventory or production to provide meaningful longterm help to Ukraine, only the US has that.
I also struggle to imagine a scenario where Russia puts boots on Estonian ground and the other Baltics, Poland, and Finland don’t step in to help. Czechia would also not be far behind.
If Ukraine is mostly out and US is mostly out, then these countries dont have enough to resist Russia. Poland might have enough, combined with Finland and Sweden, in 5+ years but not atm.
As for your North Korea example, that’s actually a very instructive one, because they have practically zero power projection aside from their hit-and-miss missile program.
Do not underestimate North Korea. Their missile program is legit. In fact, probably some of the ballistic missiles Iran launched were based on North Korean designs. And some were modern iranian designs that are a lot better. These things are expensive and hard to shoot down.
Their psyops have also reached their apex, I think. Trump will not win and people are (slowly) becoming more wise to foreign influence online.
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-20-how-us-allies-are-working-iron-out-bugs-2024-04-24/
“Germany is waging a charm offensive inside the Republican Party. Japan is lining up its own Trump whisperer. Mexican government officials are talking to Camp Trump. And Australia is busy making laws to help Trump-proof its U.S. defense ties.”
"Britain’s Labour party, now in opposition but strong favorite to win elections expected by year-end, may have a steeper hill to climb to reach a good relationship with a Trump administration.
Labour’s nominative foreign minister, David Lammy, once wrote in Time magazine, opens new tab that Trump was a “woman-hating, neo-Nazi sociopath”. Lammy is now working to build ties with Republicans, said a Labour official."
Everyone fucking loses if Russia goes to war with NATO as it won’t only involve Russia and NATO but other countries that have issues with NATO and those that would support Russia would get involved and now that I think about it so could the common wealth countries and other nations that are friendly if not allied to an the NATO members. I’d like to think even Putin and Russia itself isn’t stupid enough to kickstart what would probably be WWII. In the words of Einstein "I don’t know what weapons WWIII will be fought with but WWIV will be fought with sticks and stones I.e humanity would kill itself back to the stone age after a war involving nuclear weapons.
A Russia - NATO war is extremely unlikely to become the type of global war that WWII was. There’s not anywhere near enough strength among Russia’s close allies, and China is extremely unlikely to go full out war with NATO. Their economy is too centered around being the manufacturing base for the rest of the developed world. They’re more likely to grab a chunk of eastern Russia while Russia is unable to do anything about it.
Why do you think WWIII would be like II? WWIII will probably be nuclear and strength of allies counts for fuck all when M.A.D is in involved. I wouldn’t doubt Russia would use nukes, I wouldn’t doubt the NATO countries that do would retaliate and I wouldn’t doubt the allies of Russia with nukes would strike back too.
The first “W” in “WWII” stands for “World”. It was used to describe the wars because there were multiple countries on both sides that were roughly at parity with each other when it comes to military power. In a NATO vs Russia scenario, there aren’t military peers on both sides. NATO has multiple members that could likely win a war against Russia on their own, and Russia has no one.
It wouldn’t be a “World War”. It would be Russia lashing out one final time before it ceased to exist.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
A war between Vladimir Putin’s Russia and NATO would end with Moscow’s “inevitable defeat,” Poland’s Foreign Minister Radosław Sikorski said Thursday.
Western allies and top military officials have become increasingly worried about a potential spillover of violence from Putin’s ongoing full-scale invasion of Ukraine — as the Russian leader continues to issue veiled nuclear threats toward the West and stashes atomic weapons in Belarus, which borders NATO members Poland, Lithuania and Latvia.
Sikorski returned to his post as foreign minister after Tusk’s success in last October’s election, booting out Poland’s nationalist Law and Justice (PiS) party after eight years in power.
Since then, Tusk’s center-right administration has been trying to undo years of PiS policy, vowing to restore democratic standards in the country and improve relations with Brussels.
And recently, Polish President Andrzej Duda said Poland is “ready” to host nuclear weapons on its territory if NATO decides to reinforce its eastern flank.
Poland is fast turning into a defense heavyweight, and the world’s 14th largest military spender, after raising its expenditure a whopping 75 percent between 2022 and 2023 to $31.6 billion, according to data released this week by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute.
The original article contains 503 words, the summary contains 190 words. Saved 62%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
