The European union has a combined 1.5 million active military personnel, 5000 MBTs, and over a thousand combined fighter aircraft. As a part of their NATO membership, the vast majority of European forces have ammunition commonality and a standardised command structure.
Yes it would be disorganised, yes it would be a political shit show, but the European countries that are likely to get involved in the event of an intervention have a force and equipment parity with Russia, on top of an enormous disparity in population and economy.
It doesn't seem particularly wise to dismiss them out of hand.
We now know for a fact that nothing is actually standardized in practice. In fact, lack of standardization with western equipment is now proving to be a nightmare in Ukraine. NATO hasn't done any serious exercises in literally decades, and vast majority of the 1.5 million military personnel are not active combat personnel.
Europe is now out of basic things like artillery shells and lacks industrial capacity to produce them. On top of that, Russia now has the most seasoned army in the world that's seen real combat on a massive scale for two years now. There is no parity with Russia here.
And of course, the elephant in the room here is nuclear weapons. A direct conflict between NATO and Russia would almost certainly end in a nuclear exchange. If Europeans genuinely don't understand this then we are all truly doomed. On the bright side we won't have to worry about global warming anymore.
We now know for a fact that nothing is actually standardized in practice.
We know that there are issues with Standardisation, but I haven't seen anything to suggest that literally the entire stockpile of European weaponry managed to fall outside of standardisation without NATO noticing.
In fact, lack of standardization with western equipment is now proving to be a nightmare in Ukraine.
Ukraine has been getting the bottom of the barrel of the US and NATO military stockpiles. Mostly stuff from the mid cold war, on schedule for decommissioning.
NATO hasn't done any serious exercises in literally decades, and vast majority of the 1.5 million military personnel are not active combat personnel.
They're doing a few right now, and on top of that, they've been fighting low-level proxy wars across the middle east for the past two decades.
This is true, but there have also been no calls for wartime recruitment or conscription, the number has the potential to multiply to several times larger within a year or two.
Europe is now out of basic things like artillery shells and lacks industrial capacity to produce them.
European shell manufacturing capability has apparently doubled in the past two years and is supposedly on track to do so again by 2025, with current US and EU manufacturing at roughly half of what Russia is currently producing. They do still have some stockpiles, and on top of 155mm shells, the various European NATO powers have large stockpiles of cruise missiles, bombs and rockets.
On top of that, Russia now has the most seasoned army in the world that's seen real combat on a massive scale for two years now.
While true, they have also suffered considerable losses (though probably less than Ukraine proportionally). To effectively respond to NATO boots on the ground, they'd conservatively need to double their current number of active personnel, which lessens the experience advantage.
And of course, the elephant in the room here is nuclear weapons. A direct conflict between NATO and Russia would almost certainly end in a nuclear exchange. If Europeans genuinely don't understand this then we are all truly doomed. On the bright side we won't have to worry about global warming anymore.
Of course, though brinkmanship does cut both ways. Is Russia willing to risk nuclear war to take Kiev? Probably not IMO.
There's also the potential to limit it to a conventional conflict if it's made very clear there is no intention to stray outside the pre-war borders of Ukraine.
We know that there are issues with Standardisation, but I haven’t seen anything to suggest that literally the entire stockpile of European weaponry managed to fall outside of standardisation without NATO noticing.
Then you really haven't been paying attention. For example, all the tanks use different platforms, they use different kinds of chassis, different barrels, different ammunition, and so on. This means that you have to train crews for each specific tank, and if one tank breaks down, you cannot use parts of another tank to repair it. This is the case for vast majority of NATO equipment. This is now openly admitted by western media.
Ukraine has been getting the bottom of the barrel of the US and NATO military stockpiles. Mostly stuff from the mid cold war, on schedule for decommissioning.
That's not true, UK, France, and Germany all have publicly stated that their militaries are no longer capable of any real combat due to depletion of weapons and ammunition after two years of the conflict.
This is true, but there have also been no calls for wartime recruitment or conscription, the number has the potential to multiply to several times larger within a year or two.
Nobody in Europe wants to fight Russia, the calls for conscription are much more likely to topple pro NATO governments than accomplish anything else. People are already literally rioting all across Europe, and anti war parties are gaining popularity by the day. People of Europe aren't interested in having a war with Russia.
European shell manufacturing capability has apparently doubled in the past two years and is supposedly on track to do so again by 2025, with current US and EU manufacturing at roughly half of what Russia is currently producing. They do still have some stockpiles, and on top of 155mm shells, the various European NATO powers have large stockpiles of cruise missiles, bombs and rockets.
Nothing of the sort happened. Only thing EU managed to achieve was to drive up the price.
In October, NATO’s senior military officer, Adm. Rob Bauer, said that the price for one 155mm shell had risen from 2,000 euros ($2,171) at the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion to 8,000 euros ($8,489.60).
Europe promised to deliver a million shells to Ukraine, and they only managed to scrape up around 300k. Europe is currently actively hunting for shells from around the world because none can be produced in Europe.
This should not be surprising to anybody because steel production is energy intensive, and energy prices in Europe are now through the roof. Steel industry has been shutting down as opposed to expanding.
Meanwhile, Russia is already producing three times more artillery shells than all of the west combined. That's US and EU together!
While true, they have also suffered considerable losses (though probably less than Ukraine proportionally). To effectively respond to NATO boots on the ground, they’d conservatively need to double their current number of active personnel, which lessens the experience advantage.
The only western source that provides any actual methodology puts Russian losses at around 47k, it's absurd to call that considerable for a country with a population of 140 million.
Of course, though brinkmanship does cut both ways. Is Russia willing to risk nuclear war to take Kiev? Probably not IMO.
Russia has already stated that they will continue to push in Ukraine and will directly engage NATO if NATO decides to put boots on the ground. This an existential war for Russia, and it's not about Ukraine. The war is about NATO expansion, and Russia will call NATO bluffs.
it’s absurd to call that considerable for a country with a population of 140 million.
I mean, most of this population is elderly or otherwise unfit for active combat (including due to lack of experience and training). Send my overweight ass to a war zone, what would happen? I die and possibly get someone else killed
This means that you have to train crews for each specific tank, and if one tank breaks down, you cannot use parts of another tank to repair it.
Sure, but they have trained crews for each specific tank.
Nobody in Europe wants to fight Russia, the calls for conscription are much more likely to topple pro NATO governments than accomplish anything else. People are already literally rioting all across Europe, and anti war parties are gaining popularity by the day.
I don't know what riots you're talking about, the pension protests in France? The farmers protests in Germany, Belgium and the UK?
Anti-Russian sentiment is very strong, especially in Eastern Europe, and most of the large nations are likely to have enough volunteers to remove the need for conscription in the mid term.
Nothing of the sort happened. Only thing EU managed to achieve was to drive up the price.
Ammunition production across Europe has significantly increased, and continues to increase, the price has gone up per shell sure, but that doesn't contradict an increase in production.
The only western source that provides any actual methodology puts Russian losses at around 47k, it's absurd to call that considerable for a country with a population of 140 million.
The source you linked doesn't place losses "around" 47k, it established 47k as the absolute minimum, and provides a higher estimate based on excess mortality. With roughly 100k dead, you'd normally expect to see 2-3x that in injuries rending personnel unfit for service with modern battlefield medicine, and 300-400k gone is more than the entire Russian active combat personnel before the escalation of the war in 2022.
Russia has already stated that they will continue to push in Ukraine and will directly engage NATO if NATO decides to put boots on the ground. This an existential war for Russia, and it's not about Ukraine. The war is about NATO expansion, and Russia will call NATO bluffs.
Assuming it is a bluff. Russia is already bordered by NATO in the Baltic for hundreds of miles, it can survive a NATO Ukraine in the same way that China has survived being surrounded by US allies along it's entire eastern border.
Sure, but they have trained crews for each specific tank.
And that's precisely the problem. All the logistics become a lot more complicated, and when you lose people and equipment, it's that much more difficult toe work around that. This is why any serious military actually standardizes so that you have common platforms with fungible parts, and people can be trained once and use all the equipment. It should be obvious why standardization is important when you're in actual combat.
I don’t know what riots you’re talking about, the pension protests in France? The farmers protests in Germany, Belgium and the UK?
There are farmers rioting all over France, Belgium, Italy, Spain, Poland, and Germany. The videos are all over the internet. Do you live in some alternate reality?
Anti-Russian sentiment is very strong, especially in Eastern Europe, and most of the large nations are likely to have enough volunteers to remove the need for conscription in the mid term.
Russophobia is not going to be enough to get people to go and die in a war. As the plitico link in my last reply explains, people are actually leaving the army right now. And if Europeans are going to conscript then at that point people are being forced to fight against their will by their regimes.
Ammunition production across Europe has significantly increased, and continues to increase, the price has gone up per shell sure, but that doesn’t contradict an increase in production.
I provided you actual numbers that show this is not the case to any significant degree. Ammunition production in Europe is a joke.
The source you linked doesn’t place losses “around” 47k, it established 47k as the absolute minimum, and provides a higher estimate based on excess mortality. With roughly 100k dead, you’d normally expect to see 2-3x that in injuries rending personnel unfit for service with modern battlefield medicine, and 300-400k gone is more than the entire Russian active combat personnel before the escalation of the war in 2022.
I'm not sure how you managed to jump from 47k to 100k here, and of course people who are injured mostly end up returning to service after recovery.
Assuming it is a bluff. Russia is already bordered by NATO in the Baltic for hundreds of miles, it can survive a NATO Ukraine in the same way that China has survived being surrounded by US allies along it’s entire eastern border.
After spending two years at war, Russia isn't just going to give up and go home at this point. Hopefully people who are in actual European militaries aren't utter imbeciles, and they can see what an utter disaster a war with Russia would be for Europe. Unfortunately, there are lots of imbeciles in EU politics and within the general EU public, so can't rule this scenario out entirely.
Europe+Canada has 1.28 million active personnel when you don't count Turkey. Most of those can't actually be sent.
Greece (140k) will not send anything while turkey exists.
Spain (133k) can't send more than tiny units (single digit thousands) in case of war with Morocco.
France and UK (200k each) can't send more than half of that considering their other imperialism.
Effectively, they can spare at absolute most 820k. Less, considering they have presence in international missions and need to duplicate command structures at home and at the front.
I wouldn't expect more than 410k actual combat personnel. You start counting how many brigades the western countries have and it's single digits.
Oh tanks? Sure, tons of different ones, though standardisation is somewhat less important for those since they already have the facilities and engineers trained to support them.
The European union has a combined 1.5 million active military personnel, 5000 MBTs, and over a thousand combined fighter aircraft. As a part of their NATO membership, the vast majority of European forces have ammunition commonality and a standardised command structure.
Yes it would be disorganised, yes it would be a political shit show, but the European countries that are likely to get involved in the event of an intervention have a force and equipment parity with Russia, on top of an enormous disparity in population and economy.
It doesn't seem particularly wise to dismiss them out of hand.
We now know for a fact that nothing is actually standardized in practice. In fact, lack of standardization with western equipment is now proving to be a nightmare in Ukraine. NATO hasn't done any serious exercises in literally decades, and vast majority of the 1.5 million military personnel are not active combat personnel.
Europe is now out of basic things like artillery shells and lacks industrial capacity to produce them. On top of that, Russia now has the most seasoned army in the world that's seen real combat on a massive scale for two years now. There is no parity with Russia here.
And of course, the elephant in the room here is nuclear weapons. A direct conflict between NATO and Russia would almost certainly end in a nuclear exchange. If Europeans genuinely don't understand this then we are all truly doomed. On the bright side we won't have to worry about global warming anymore.
We know that there are issues with Standardisation, but I haven't seen anything to suggest that literally the entire stockpile of European weaponry managed to fall outside of standardisation without NATO noticing.
Ukraine has been getting the bottom of the barrel of the US and NATO military stockpiles. Mostly stuff from the mid cold war, on schedule for decommissioning.
They're doing a few right now, and on top of that, they've been fighting low-level proxy wars across the middle east for the past two decades.
This is true, but there have also been no calls for wartime recruitment or conscription, the number has the potential to multiply to several times larger within a year or two.
European shell manufacturing capability has apparently doubled in the past two years and is supposedly on track to do so again by 2025, with current US and EU manufacturing at roughly half of what Russia is currently producing. They do still have some stockpiles, and on top of 155mm shells, the various European NATO powers have large stockpiles of cruise missiles, bombs and rockets.
While true, they have also suffered considerable losses (though probably less than Ukraine proportionally). To effectively respond to NATO boots on the ground, they'd conservatively need to double their current number of active personnel, which lessens the experience advantage.
Of course, though brinkmanship does cut both ways. Is Russia willing to risk nuclear war to take Kiev? Probably not IMO.
There's also the potential to limit it to a conventional conflict if it's made very clear there is no intention to stray outside the pre-war borders of Ukraine.
Then you really haven't been paying attention. For example, all the tanks use different platforms, they use different kinds of chassis, different barrels, different ammunition, and so on. This means that you have to train crews for each specific tank, and if one tank breaks down, you cannot use parts of another tank to repair it. This is the case for vast majority of NATO equipment. This is now openly admitted by western media.
That's not true, UK, France, and Germany all have publicly stated that their militaries are no longer capable of any real combat due to depletion of weapons and ammunition after two years of the conflict.
Nobody in Europe wants to fight Russia, the calls for conscription are much more likely to topple pro NATO governments than accomplish anything else. People are already literally rioting all across Europe, and anti war parties are gaining popularity by the day. People of Europe aren't interested in having a war with Russia.
https://www.politico.eu/article/nato-russia-ukraine-war-defense-france-germany-soldiers-army/
Nothing of the sort happened. Only thing EU managed to achieve was to drive up the price.
https://www.defenseone.com/business/2023/11/race-make-artillery-shells-us-eu-see-different-results/392288/
Europe promised to deliver a million shells to Ukraine, and they only managed to scrape up around 300k. Europe is currently actively hunting for shells from around the world because none can be produced in Europe.
This should not be surprising to anybody because steel production is energy intensive, and energy prices in Europe are now through the roof. Steel industry has been shutting down as opposed to expanding.
Meanwhile, Russia is already producing three times more artillery shells than all of the west combined. That's US and EU together!
The only western source that provides any actual methodology puts Russian losses at around 47k, it's absurd to call that considerable for a country with a population of 140 million.
https://en.zona.media/article/2022/05/20/casualties_eng
Russia has already stated that they will continue to push in Ukraine and will directly engage NATO if NATO decides to put boots on the ground. This an existential war for Russia, and it's not about Ukraine. The war is about NATO expansion, and Russia will call NATO bluffs.
I mean, most of this population is elderly or otherwise unfit for active combat (including due to lack of experience and training). Send my overweight ass to a war zone, what would happen? I die and possibly get someone else killed
Sure, but it's not like things are any different in Europe.
Sure, but they have trained crews for each specific tank.
I don't know what riots you're talking about, the pension protests in France? The farmers protests in Germany, Belgium and the UK?
Anti-Russian sentiment is very strong, especially in Eastern Europe, and most of the large nations are likely to have enough volunteers to remove the need for conscription in the mid term.
Ammunition production across Europe has significantly increased, and continues to increase, the price has gone up per shell sure, but that doesn't contradict an increase in production.
The source you linked doesn't place losses "around" 47k, it established 47k as the absolute minimum, and provides a higher estimate based on excess mortality. With roughly 100k dead, you'd normally expect to see 2-3x that in injuries rending personnel unfit for service with modern battlefield medicine, and 300-400k gone is more than the entire Russian active combat personnel before the escalation of the war in 2022.
Assuming it is a bluff. Russia is already bordered by NATO in the Baltic for hundreds of miles, it can survive a NATO Ukraine in the same way that China has survived being surrounded by US allies along it's entire eastern border.
And that's precisely the problem. All the logistics become a lot more complicated, and when you lose people and equipment, it's that much more difficult toe work around that. This is why any serious military actually standardizes so that you have common platforms with fungible parts, and people can be trained once and use all the equipment. It should be obvious why standardization is important when you're in actual combat.
There are farmers rioting all over France, Belgium, Italy, Spain, Poland, and Germany. The videos are all over the internet. Do you live in some alternate reality?
Russophobia is not going to be enough to get people to go and die in a war. As the plitico link in my last reply explains, people are actually leaving the army right now. And if Europeans are going to conscript then at that point people are being forced to fight against their will by their regimes.
I provided you actual numbers that show this is not the case to any significant degree. Ammunition production in Europe is a joke.
I'm not sure how you managed to jump from 47k to 100k here, and of course people who are injured mostly end up returning to service after recovery.
After spending two years at war, Russia isn't just going to give up and go home at this point. Hopefully people who are in actual European militaries aren't utter imbeciles, and they can see what an utter disaster a war with Russia would be for Europe. Unfortunately, there are lots of imbeciles in EU politics and within the general EU public, so can't rule this scenario out entirely.
what are they gonna shoot though, since the EU's arms industry cant supply a moderately long fart, let alone a real war...
Europe+Canada has 1.28 million active personnel when you don't count Turkey. Most of those can't actually be sent.
Greece (140k) will not send anything while turkey exists. Spain (133k) can't send more than tiny units (single digit thousands) in case of war with Morocco. France and UK (200k each) can't send more than half of that considering their other imperialism.
Effectively, they can spare at absolute most 820k. Less, considering they have presence in international missions and need to duplicate command structures at home and at the front.
I wouldn't expect more than 410k actual combat personnel. You start counting how many brigades the western countries have and it's single digits.
Albania: 40 T-55 (old af, Type 59, effectively 0)
Austria: 56 Leo 2A4
Belgium: 0
Bulgaria: 90 T-72
Canadá: 20 Leo 2A6, 54 Leo 2A4
Croatia: 77 T-72 (M-84 variant)
Czechia: 30 T-72, 14 Leo 2A4
Denmark: 48 Leo 2A7
Estonia: 0
Finland: 100 Leo 2A6, 139 Leo 2A4
France: 406 Leclerc
Germany: 310 Leo 2A5 to 2A8
Greece: (not counted) 1345 tanks, of which 353 modern Leo 2A4 and 2A6
Hungary: 44 Leo 2A7, 12 Leo 2A4, 34 T-72
Ireland: 0
Italy: 200 Ariete
Latvia: 3 T-55 (old af, effectively 0)
Lithuania: 0
North Macedonia: 10 T-72, 98 T-55 (effectively 0)
Moldova: 10 T-64 (effectively 0)
Montenegro: 0
Netherlands: 20 Leo 2A6
Norway: 30 Leo 2A4 (after 8 donated to Ukraine)
Poland: 112 T-72 (PT-91 variant), 114 Leo 2A4, 105 Leo 2A5 (after donations to Ukraine)
Portugal: 37 Leo 2A6
Romania: 717 T-55 (incl. TR-85 variants, old af, effectively 0)
Slovakia: 22 T-72, 6 Leo 2A4
Slovenia: 28 T-72 (M-84 variant)
Spain: 239 Leo 2A6, 54 Leo 2A4 (after donations)
Sweden: 120 Leo 2A5
Switzerland : 250 Leo 2A4 (not participating)
Turkey: 354 Leo 2A4, 1894 old-modernized tanks (not participating)
United Kingdom: 134 Challenger 2 (after donations)
USA: 2509 M1 Abrams
TOTAL = 1542 Leo 2 + 398 T-72 (likely lower due to donations) + 406 Leclerc + 200 Ariete + 134 Challenger
TOTAL = 2680 tanks (likely a few hundreds lower due to donations)
The Netherlands has their tanks (all of them?) on a lease from Germany, to give an idea how prepared we would be.
I think it's a mixed Dutch /German armored brigade too.
Oh tanks? Sure, tons of different ones, though standardisation is somewhat less important for those since they already have the facilities and engineers trained to support them.
deleted by creator