this post was submitted on 03 Mar 2024
424 points (93.8% liked)

World News

38304 readers
3060 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] toastus@feddit.de 7 points 5 months ago (2 children)

That's just wrong for the simple reason that NATO is vastly superior in any form of conventional warfare.

NATO against russia would be nothing like WW2.
It would be a one sided beating.

And russia would lose and lose fast.

But russia would still have no incentive to be the first to launch nukes, because that would change the situation from bad to total annihilation.

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world -2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

NATO against russia would be nothing like WW2. It would be a one sided beating.

Like NATO in Afghanistan.

[–] Tinidril@midwest.social 4 points 5 months ago

NATO sucks at occupation. (As does everyone) Clashing armies are another matter. A war with Russia would be quick and decisive. The following occupation of Russia would be a quagmire.