Ed Russia Threatens Lithuania

It might be an empty threat and Russia's military depleted by Ukraine but remember, Kaliningrad is one great military and naval base. In addition, it is near directly opposite Gotland, which Russia crassly threatened on TV. Russia has been breaching air space (probably to spy on Swedish response times) and has cheekily encroached Danish maritime space twice recently.

It has always been a desperate, clumsy, brutal and unsophisticated foe. Vindictive and psychopathic.

Kaliningrad is a POW camp waiting to happen. It is in range of thousands of NATO weapon systems. Its fleet is antiquated. Its air arm is a liability. Russian air support would have to fight its way through NATO defensive counter air and surface to air missiles. In the mean times, NATO isn't Ukraine, we'll attack Russian air bases launching support for Kaliningrad and their advance on Lithuania (and any other NATO country).

The correlation of forces is on NATO's side and we don't have the same morale and good order and discipline issues the Russians have.
 
Rewatching "Babylon 5" and damned if Putin's Russia is not a mirror for The Centauri Empire.........
 
...In the mean times, NATO isn't Ukraine, we'll attack Russian air bases launching support for Kaliningrad and their advance on Lithuania (and any other NATO country). ...

I am mostly with you (Russia stands not chance, mid- and long-term, short of using nukes), however I wonder:

Isn't the general doctrine to go after enemy's forward radar and AA capabilities before penetrating deep towards their fighter and bomber bases?
I mean that was the plan in Iraq . and Russia isn't Iraq.
This means it might take a bit of time to get to that point - perhaps enough time for Russia to hit the Baltics nastily somehow (with invading ground forces, missiles, ...).
 
I am mostly with you (Russia stands not chance, mid- and long-term, short of using nukes), however I wonder:

Isn't the general doctrine to go after enemy's forward radar and AA capabilities before penetrating deep towards their fighter and bomber bases?
I mean that was the plan in Iraq . and Russia isn't Iraq.
This means it might take a bit of time to get to that point - perhaps enough time for Russia to hit the Baltics nastily somehow (with invading ground forces, missiles, ...).

You would conduct SEAD first followed by rapidly executing a PTOK of Air Bases (Prevent Take Off Kill). In both Iraq wars we conducted rapid SEAD, immediately followed by PTOKs of air bases and power on the first night. Doctrinally the Air calls it (or used to I may be dating myself) Hyperwar, overwhelming an entire enemy network at once with mass attacks with precision munitions (generally stand-off) from multiple directions.
 
I am mostly with you (Russia stands not chance, mid- and long-term, short of using nukes), however I wonder:

Isn't the general doctrine to go after enemy's forward radar and AA capabilities before penetrating deep towards their fighter and bomber bases?
I mean that was the plan in Iraq . and Russia isn't Iraq.
This means it might take a bit of time to get to that point - perhaps enough time for Russia to hit the Baltics nastily somehow (with invading ground forces, missiles, ...).

Taking out Russian air is exactly what NATO trains for. A 'bit of time' would be a day or so.
There is an entire Russian airbase in the forest at Spadeadam in Northumberland. It simulates the electronic environment in Russian airspace. NATO aircraft come in off the North Sea over us and then turn right and fly north to attack it three or four times a week.
 
Putin expects to retake the Baltic states eventually, and even if he didn't expect to, he wouldn't want to give up one inch of "sovereign Russian territory" for fear of losing face.

He's been pretty blatant in the cyberwar against Estonia.


I have seen analysts pointing out that Russia mightn't have finished breaking up into independent states. Which Putin might actually be accelerating.
 

Back
Top Bottom