There are now an estimated 30,000 Wagner troops in Belarus, they have been there since "the attempted coup". I have thought from the start that the "coup" was a fake to give an excuse for these troops to be in Belarus, and to give them the appearance of being out of Russia's control, but whether that is true or not it really doesn't matter, they are there..... There have been two statements made lately that I thought were out of place at the time, the first was made by Belarusian President Victor Lukashenko when he stated that the tactical nuclear weapons Russia placed in his country were fully under his control. The second was Putin stating that "an attack on Belarus, is an attack on Russia"......those two statements are a setup. I think The Wagner military are going to try to take the Suwalki corridor. The corridor connects the Russian Enclave of Kaliningrad on the Baltic to Belarus by land, it is NATO territory, but very lightly guarded, it runs through parts of Poland and the Baltic countries. Taking the corridor would be a win-win for Putin. Politically it could fracture NATO......are all NATO countries going to risk a direct confrontation with Russia for a small strip of land in the Baltic counties? It would test Article 5, An attack on any NATO member is an attack on all....... access to the corridor in some interpretations is considered Russia's right. If NATO did respond, Putin could say NATO started it by attacking Belarus and the only way Belarus could defend itself would be by using the Nuclear weapons.......Russia would keep their hands clean while Belarus carried out Nuclear strikes against NATO targets. Now, we know where the ten nuclear capable aircraft are that Russia moved to Belarus, and I am sure Russia only transferred a small number of weapons (probably only three or four). Belarus would disperse the aircraft ( and weapons) prior to moving in to the corridor, otherwise we would just take out the aircraft. My big concern would be whether NATO would be willing to take out these aircraft prior to them being dispersed. Once they are dispersed it would be almost impossible to know where they are. This whole scenario would really test NATO resolve to the limit........this was all just a thought
My biggest concern (Ukraine - Russia war)
- Thread starter COWBOYintheUK
- Start date
A lot of people don’t realize something about NATO that you pointed out: NATO is a MILITARY alliance. If a NATO member is attacked or at war, ALL members of NATO are pledged to help defend that NATO member. Nowadays, it’s like “we’ll send them some weapons to honor our NATO commitment.” That is NOT how NATO was set up back during the Cold War in 1948! If a NATO member was invaded, you responded like YOU were attacked! Without that stance, NATO is a worthless, spineless organization.
I teach about it and it was historic because it was the first time in our history that the U.S. was in a peace-time military alliance and committed to going to war if our ally was attacked (it was especially a commitment to protect West Germany from Soviet aggression, but Turkey and Greece were the first actual victims of Soviet aggression). Not sure it’s that way anymore.
I teach about it and it was historic because it was the first time in our history that the U.S. was in a peace-time military alliance and committed to going to war if our ally was attacked (it was especially a commitment to protect West Germany from Soviet aggression, but Turkey and Greece were the first actual victims of Soviet aggression). Not sure it’s that way anymore.
Last edited:
I can’t see Greece or Turkey rushing to the other’s defense in a military crisis. Sorta makes NATO look like just another BS method for foreigners to get their hands on American (and Britain’s) tax dollars.
I spent 12 of my 22 years in the USAF in NATO at the height of the cold war.....we were definitely ready and more than willing to take the lead regarding Article 5
NATO is and has always been more beneficial to us , than to the European counties who are members ( although it is beneficial to them also) .....NATO is worth every penny we have and are putting into it, as long as everyone adheres to the articles if it comes to that
Just curious why Belarus would do that or even why putin would want them to do it. Can’t see Lukashenko pissing away his power, prestige & wealth on such a crazy gamble.
Against NATO Belarus would be throttled immediately, then invaded. Which further isolates Russia & any buffer they though they had is gone.
The Chinese were “forced” to give up huge swaths of land in the 1860’s to Russia during the opium wars. That included the port at Vladivostok. Think it’s more likely they lay claim to those lands & get land right next to the US.
Wagner is mostly infantry & trainees now, second they cross the border they will be annihilated. For me the presence of Wagner in Belarus is more of a strategy to tie down Ukrainian troops than anything. Think it’s also a ruse to make some of the NATO countries think hard about continuing to send munitions & equipment to Ukraine.
While what you propose is possible, its more likely the counter move to Ukraine being admitted into NATO that was being pushed heavily up until Biden's statement last week. It's Russia's statement that if we are going to war against NATO, here's what we're taking first.
People wrongly think this Russia-Ukraine war started last year. Its been going on since Obama was president. It was simply regionalized as a civil war in the Donbas region but we were supplying arms to Ukraine troops and Russia was supplying resistance fighters and it was just a stale proxy war. But when Biden got elected, we started pushing for Ukraine to join NATO and cement our alliance, which forced Russia's hand into taking a more direct action. Russia doesn't want to fight NATO. Its a losing proposition for them, so their only course of action to keep Ukraine out of NATO was to force them into a war before they joined. It was the ultimate test of Article V, and Putin was right. America (who's the only NATO vote that matters) was not going to let Ukraine join if it meant the immediate deployment of US troops under our obligations. Recognize this, and you will realize that Russia doesn't have to defeat Ukraine to accomplish its mission. It just has to keep the fighting going. This also means there are only two real paths to peace: Either we accept Ukraine into NATO while they are fighting and thus immediately commit our troops to the conflict, or we negotiate a peace where Ukraine doesn't/can't join NATO. The first option won't be palatable to the American people (no matter how much the media spins it), and the second option isn't palatable to our political elites, and thus the war will continue.
