Quote:
Originally Posted by wulfir
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aeraaa
How are the Baltics in terms of terrain? I thought that in addition to all other problems they have, their terrain is not very defensible as well. Is anyone more familiar with this topic?
|
The Germans gave the Soviets a few black eyes at Narwa and later the Blue Mountains (hills really) in 1944. There were still sizable German forces in Kurland on May 8, 1945.
I think a Russian invasion of the Baltic states would be difficult against even modest NATO resistance. The current Russian leadership can probably plan ahead and move at a quicker pace than most democratic countries but against a unified Europe they can't IMHO win a conventional conflict that drags out. The European economy is larger.
I'm not convinced of the overall quality of Russian brigades vs western opponents. IIRC conscription was reduced significantly in order to try and combat the bulling of new troops.
IIRC Russia also used to have a hard time finding recruits to fill up all their numerous "elite" units (incl Ministry of Interior competing for bodies) as the health situation in Russia is not that great.
Assuming that Russia can probably not field everything they have against the Baltic states but need to keep their guard up in the north, the far east, the Caucasus etc I'm far from convinced that a defence of the Baltics is hopeless... |
The thing that worries military professionals at the moment is the great strength of Russian artillery, it can call down a lot of very heavy and destructive fire, relatively quickly.
If advanced Russian SAM systems work and protect that artillery from Allied aircraft, NATO would have a big problem. Artillery has, of course, long been the best arm of the Russian Army.
Some NATO forces, Especially the US and UK, have a lot of recent experience of COIN, but very little of conventional warfare. How useful some of the smaller NATO forces would be, and how good their troops might be, also
very much remains to be seen.
My own view is that even the best multi national force (
especially if that force includes several different languages) will have disadvantages against a peer/near peer unified enemy.
Also I don't see how a modern first world Armoured conflict in a geographically limited area lasts long enough for the economy to matter much once it kicks off...