Getting back to the topic of Ukraine, I used to be confident that if Russia were dumb enough to invade or attack NATO, that the NATO-European nations would easily repel it via superior training and technology.
Now, after watching much of NATO-Europe struggle to come up with even just basic artillery shells for Ukraine, I’m getting a different impression - that such a Russian attack on NATO would fail because of Russian weakness, not because of European strength.
The United States, of course, could still do a Desert Storm 2.0. on Russia. But aside from Poland, Sweden and Finland, much of NATO-Europe looks uncomfortably weak. If there were no USA in the picture, they’d still win, but only because Russia sucks even more.
Yeah, it’s been true right from the start that what Ukraine really needs is air superiority. Once they got that, it’d be over fairly quickly, instead of this WWI slog.
Western nations keep on not providing air superiority, because it’d take too long to train up Ukrainian pilots and flight crews. But if we’d done it right away, those crews would be trained by now.
NATO has better equipment and much better training. Plus air superiority. The only issue is the replacement of artillery ammunition, which may be lagging. Still, we haven’t dipped into the smart bomb stocks in Ukraine yet.
NATO wouldn’t need to use nukes. If they/we can drive the Russians back to the border, we can secure the border. Any use of nuclear weapons will be by Russia. Assuming tactical nukes, I see a non-nuclear Armageddon – Precision airstrikes on any and all Russian forces within reach. Russia must know that they will be annihilated if they use strategic nuclear weapons.
Russia also wouldn’t want to get conventionally curb-stomped by NATO. If we’re positing a war between Russia and NATO, then we have to assume that Russia is acting irrationally, and once we’re assuming that, it’s folly to try to assume the exact form their irrationality would take.
Not to mention much higher morale and determination among its troops, who’d be defending their homes rather than invading another country. As Ukraine has shown.
I’ve always understood that deterrence works on the principle of certainty as to capability but uncertainty as to intention. But I may be wrong, so don’t put me in charge.
I’d also wonder if, given the one-way nature of such as Cessna’s mission, they could design the plane to jettison non-essential things, like landing gear, once the plane has taken off, to further extend range.
Maybe if you were really desperate for that last bit of range. But a one-way flight of a small GA plane that doesn’t have to be safe is already a very long range, and things like that would probably decrease the reliability.
A couple of bad things for the russian people. The number of men with disabilities is up 30% (likely due to the war). At the same time russia is facing a severe shortage of medical personnel. Of course this is meaningless to Putin and his oligarchs.
Oh, the choices for the injured Russian infantryman: be left to die on the battlefield like a haphazardly squished bug, or be carted away to be treated by someone who just told some people that they know combat medicine / surgery.