• Old_Geezer@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    33
    ·
    5 months ago

    Regardless, attacking NATO countries would be strategic insanity.

    NATO is weak now. I wouldn’t want to bet on that.

    • NeuronautML@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      5 months ago

      It’s not even politics, It’s just math. NATO has superiority in economy, industrial output, operational equipment and manpower.

      Plus they’re too close to Russia for asymmetric warfare rules.

      I would bet on it, but I’d sure as hell wish we could all get along instead.

      • Old_Geezer@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        15
        ·
        5 months ago

        The asymmetric warfare will probably occur in other places around the world. There’s many places to pick. 800 military bases around the world that are vulnerable. The industrial output favours the Russians.

    • jaschen@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Um… Is NATO weaker with the addition of Sweden and Finland? I’m not sure what your definition of “weak” means. I thought having more allies is not weak.