Excargodog

First of all, I accused you of nothing. I simply found the comment you made ambiguous and curious. I requested clarification, and you accused me of starting a fight. If you don’t want people to question your comments perhaps you should make less easily misinterpreted comments.
Secondly, I don’t take orders from you. It is possible, I suppose, that you left the USAF at a higher rank than I did, but neither of us are in the Air Force any more and (subject only to the APC rules and the like) I have the same freedom of speech as you or anyone else.
Latly, I will find my entertainment where I find it, not based upon your directions, and there is little either you or I can do about that.

rickair7777

Oh I know the history, that's right up my professional alley. You're wrong.

No NATO authority "promised" dismantling. There were discussions with Gorby about limiting NATO expansion into Eastern Europe, but that was never codified in writing.

There is actually a post-warsaw pact treaty with RU but it covers hardware quantity and disposition in Europe, not alliances.

Only a compleate moron would ever think that NATO was an offensive entity of any sort. RU leadership is not that dense either, but of course NATO makes a great bogeyman to scare the russian man on the street.


He doesn't care about NATO (that's not what he tells his people of course), as in he's not afraid NATO will invade. He does care very much about the de facto remnants of the old CCCP empire, for mainly economic but also prestige reasons. His concerns there are justified because eastern states which engage with the west economically tend to naturally drift away from RU in time.

His real problem with NATO is that it might interfere with aspirations to rebuild part of the empire he grew up in... if he invades his neighbors.


There is no "NATO", the HQ can't declare war or authorize employment of forces. Exception is article 5, which is the sole reason NATO even exists: to ensure members can rely on each other for mutual DEFENSE. But Vlad would have to try very hard to trigger article 5, and if he does, he deserves every bit of what he has coming.





Yes. I've also read the BASE constitution which vests war making authority with congress... the direct representatives of the people. So either way you're covered: The constitution grants the authority in the first place so the 10th doesn't apply

Article V was RATIFIED by congress, so congress (the people's reps) have preemptively declared war in the event that certain predefined conditions exist. Necessary and obviously prudent in the modern era when war could happen on a moments notice.

But this all academic... NATO has not engaged RU, and clearly will not over UR. Even a humanitarian crisis (ex WMD) wouldn't be enough IMO, at least a couple NATO members would veto any interference.

What might happen is one or more NATO members, acting outside of NATO protocol, might get involved in some hypothetical scenarios. But that would happen anyway, regardless of whether NATO even existed. Multiple NATO members might get involved but unilaterally or with some other alliance or partnership arrangement. The standing NATO dedicated forces (such as the HQ) cannot be committed unilaterally. Some forces could be withdrawn from NATO by the member which provided them, and then employed any way they see fit.

The *real* NATO is simply the existence of and natural close relationships between the Western Europeans and the North Americans... that would still still exist regardless of any particular treaty or lack thereof.

Hubcapped

Ok friend…….sounds good. You explicitly say why lol about that, and then send me bullet points about dead people, and then get butt hurt when I call you out on it. You literally are incapable of having non emotional discussions on tactics, current events, etc….Have fun barking at the sky.

METO Guido

• Remain civil in the war thread
• Don't trifle the Col.
• Advanced weapon systems require direct supervision
• Tactics aside, wars end when cost exceeds means
• This proxy set piece is running up a tab 150M a day

Excargodog

You are the one that laughed about Backfires damaging infrastructure and killing people. I was merely questioning in which way you found that funny. Not butt hurt a bit, just informing you of reality and my ROE. So what part of the backfire attacks did you find funny? That they were attacking before the Patriots got there? Why wouldn’t they be if they were going to attack at all? Which side do are you attempting to somehow cheer on here? Those Patriots won’t be fully mission capable for another six months IF they get there at all. And then what? We sent the Ukrainians HARMs, and it took them almost three months to adapt their equipment and tactics to use them. The Russians have their Kh-31s and Kh-38s and allegedly a few designated Wild Weasel units. It’s not like either side is going to suddenly own all the airspace because of either Backfires or Patriot missiles. No real game hangers there. Still not sure what you find amusing about the situation. The ugliest wars ever fought are between closely matched adversaries. At which time it generally becomes a war of attrition.

Excargodog

If these sources are correct, the US is only planning on sending one (1) Patriot Missile battery to the Ukraine:

https://breakingdefense.com/2022/12/...-experts-warn/


https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinio...iv-n-rcna61887

John Carr

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UAeqVGP-GPM

tnkrdrvr

You clearly know nothing about NATO

Hubcapped

Well that lasted a hot 69 seconds

METO Guido

Yep. What's old is new again.

Ted: Because of my mistake six men didn't return from that raid.
Elaine: Seven. Lt. Zip died this morning.