cross-posted from: https://lemm.ee/post/59867996

German media outlets Süddeutsche Zeitung, WDR, and NDR also cite the report, noting that Russian President Vladimir Putin appears intent on testing NATO’s Article 5 guarantees. The alliance’s mutual defence clause obliges member states to come to one another’s aid if attacked. The assessment suggests Putin may seek to challenge how seriously that commitment would be honoured.

  • ReanuKeeves@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    So I just looked into the numbers quickly and am probably off by a bit

    NATO has 3.2m active military personnel and 2.2m in reserve

    Russia has 1.5m active and 2m reserve

    BUT, American forces make up 1.3m of NATOs active and 800k reserve

    If I were to randomly combine the American army with Russia rather than NATO for no particular reason,

    NATO would have 1.9m active 1.4m reserve and the Axis-sorry I mean Russia and America would have 2.8m active 2.8m reserve…

    • Tryenjer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      Maybe this is a suicidal plan, Putin is going to die and wants to take the world with him. From what we know about him, he is megalomaniacal and sadistic enough to want something like this.

      He must also be counting on the United States being out of NATO by then, maybe Trump will even send some soldiers to help his Russian allies.

      • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        Just based on Trump’s previous administration I’m confident that if he actually tried to do that it would cause serious arguments between the military and the executive branch. The military already decided to pretty much ignore him when he was going on in his last term about nuclear weapons, fortunately it never came up.

      • Carrolade@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        2 days ago

        It has nothing to do with wanting to actually fight NATO. The idea is to manufacture a carefully crafted situation where Article 5 is triggered, but due to internal disagreement and individual risk, it is not fully honored.

        Needless to say, any such move would be very risky.

        • Tryenjer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 days ago

          And Trump’s United States will be one of those not to honour Article 5, if they are still part of NATO at that time.

    • Giorgsen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      The number of personnel won’t really matter here past a threshold. Looking at Ukraine Russian war it’s clear most of the fighting will be done with suicide drones, ones that can be produced en mass by any country more or less.

    • Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      17
      ·
      2 days ago

      There’s no way the US military would side with Russia, even if ordered to.

      • Initiateofthevoid@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        18 hours ago

        I agree. People underestimate how our perspectives of war have shifted tremendously in the past century. The ideological shift towards xenophobia and nationalism in recent years is undeniable, but it lacks the context of the world prior to the world wars.

        War was the default state. It was expected. Not just colonization, oppression, or revolution. No. Prior to the 20th century, humanity had experienced a nearly constant stream of full-scale, all-out, nation-making and nation-breaking wars.

        In the modern day, American “wars” happen in deserts and distant places. There is a level of cognitive dissonance in the public and military consciousness, a separation of “us” vs. “them”, a facade of bringing “justice and peace”. There is, always, a one-sidedness to the engagement. Even when America “loses”, it has no fear of a counterattack, because in every case it is merely “protecting democracy”, as opposed to actually being at war.

        The implicit biases against empathizing with other people - especially impoverished non-white refugees - have kept the nation from properly grappling with its history of tyranny. Many people have always believed in the greatness of the Land of the Free, simply because they could physically and emotionally distance themselves from the victims of “freedom”.

        An American invasion of Europe would completely shatter the Union. Full stop. No amount of xenophobic lies can prepare the troops and civilians fast enough for such a dramatic cultural and ideological shift. The rhetoric will ramp up, the core supporters will rabble rouse, and the soundbites will be bloodthirsty, but the actual bloodthirst won’t be there among the rest of the population or the military.

        War was easy to sell to Germany because it was billed as the only way out from the under the oppressive burdens of the last war. War was in the public mind. It was living memory of everyone else on the planet banding together to screw over Germany in particular.

        War will not be so easy to sell here. Americans literally identify themselves as European Americans. They’re italian and irish and german. They want to visit, they want to find love, they want to dine in Paris and party in Dublin and see the Vatican. American soldiers are literally stationed all across the region partying with the locals.

        We don’t remember war as a culture. We remember oppression, and “police actions”, and Vietnam. But we don’t remember world war, and we can’t imagine London or New York falling. That will all change if we attack our friends, and the cultural and ideological whiplash would tear the nation to pieces.

      • Darkmoon_UK@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        Would you say they’re at the top of that slippery slope, or part way down it already?

        Maybe today’s top brass wouldn’t, but there are probably enough JD Vance types among the MAGA lovin’ grunts to promote, to structure an army that’ll take Trump at his word. If he says ‘Europe were the enemy all along’, enough times, with enough conviction…

        Wouldn’t have believed it myself until this year.

        • floofloof@lemmy.caOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          George W. Bush convinced Americans that France was an enemy for a while, and his supporters lapped it up. Today Trump has large chunks of his cult believing that Canada is an enemy. There’s apparently no limit to the absurdities and poison people will swallow if their beloved cult leader tells them to.

          • Hawke@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            2 days ago

            Big difference from renaming French fries to actual boots-on-the-ground fighting.