2026 US-Denmark Tensions/End of NATO

[Altair]

Well we already have tanks there (including Canadian tanks) so yes they will roll. The Baltic will be closed to them as will the Black Sea. Likely every refinery and major oil pipeline will be targeted by NATO crippling their economy. NATO navies will blockade their coastline. An economic embargo...a real one not like the sieve-like one currently underway...will stifle their trade.

Putin may not give a damn about the Russian economy but when Russians are cold and hungry in the dark he'll care about his skin.

And when we find put what happens to tanks when drones come into play?

 

[GR66]

And when we find put what happens to tanks when drones come into play?

I guess the same as what would happen to their tanks. The Russians, like the Soviets are not 12' tall giants.

 

[Altair]

I guess the same as what would happen to their tanks. The Russians, like the Soviets are not 12' tall giants.

No, but they have the second most experienced drone forces on the planet.

Seeing as that is where warfare is heading, writing them off is premature.

Russia is currently fighting the next war, we haven't even really begun the process of pivoting to it.

The Brits getting wiped out by the Ukrainians in an exercise was a warning shot to the west. If the Ukrainians can do it, the Russians can too.

 

[GR66]

No, but they have the second most experienced drone forces on the planet.

Seeing as that is where warfare is heading, writing them off is premature.

Russia is currently fighting the next war, we haven't even really begun the process of pivoting to it.

The Brits getting wiped out by the Ukrainians in an exercise was a warning shot to the west. If the Ukrainians can do it, the Russians can too.

And how much Ukrainian territory have those Russian drone forces managed to capture this year?

Yes, drones have changed the nature of war but it's a mistake to take what's happening in Ukraine as being directly transferable to what a Russia/NATO war would look like.

 

[Altair]

And how much Ukrainian territory have those Russian drone forces managed to capture this year?

Yes, drones have changed the nature of war but it's a mistake to take what's happening in Ukraine as being directly transferable to what a Russia/NATO war would look like.

I'm getting Spanish civil war vibes here...

The Brits and the French looked at it and decided that there were no lessons to be learned. The Germans took notes.

Again a NATO military, the UK, got their asses handed to them by the Ukrainians and your takeaway is its not transferable?

My takeaway is we are not ready.

As for the Russians losing to the Ukrainians, yes, they are losing to the best drone forces on the planet. They wouldn't have that disadvantage versus NATO

 

[brihard]

And how much Ukrainian territory have those Russian drone forces managed to capture this year?

Yes, drones have changed the nature of war but it's a mistake to take what's happening in Ukraine as being directly transferable to what a Russia/NATO war would look like.

Altair’s cocky, but on this one he’s right. Russia has a level of experience in new ways of killing people and breaking their shit that we appear unable to even wrap our heads around. While we do see a highly selective and curated depiction of drone warfare, nonetheless the reality is thousands or tens of thousands going out per day, and AFVs getting smoked tens of kilometers before reaching FEBA. If we continue to posture our forces against Russia as a strategic threat, we’d best be live to the tactical realities. I don’t think we’re so super special that we’ll be immune to new TTPs.

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

And how much Ukrainian territory have those Russian drone forces managed to capture this year?

Yes, drones have changed the nature of war but it's a mistake to take what's happening in Ukraine as being directly transferable to what a Russia/NATO war would look like.

The Russian strategy is one of attrition, not maneuver. Territorial gains aren't Russia's objective at this time. Eroding Ukraine's capacity to resist through attrition is the objective.

Altair’s cocky, but on this one he’s right. Russia has a level of experience in new ways of killing people and breaking their shit that we appear unable to even wrap our heads around. While we do see a highly selective and curated depiction of drone warfare, nonetheless the reality is thousands or tens of thousands going out per day, and AFVs getting smoked tens of kilometers before reaching FEBA. If we continue to posture our forces against Russia as a strategic threat, we’d best be live to the tactical realities. I don’t think we’re so super special that we’ll be immune to new TTPs.

They launched over 1,000 long range strike drones in the past 48 hrs alone. The Russian strike complex and its ability to sustain the numbers they are is something that needs to be studied and understood.

 

[HavokFour]

Altair’s cocky, but on this one he’s right. Russia has a level of experience in new ways of killing people and breaking their shit that we appear unable to even wrap our heads around. While we do see a highly selective and curated depiction of drone warfare, nonetheless the reality is thousands or tens of thousands going out per day, and AFVs getting smoked tens of kilometers before reaching FEBA. If we continue to posture our forces against Russia as a strategic threat, we’d best be live to the tactical realities. I don’t think we’re so super special that we’ll be immune to new TTPs.

Israel is now getting this lesson.

Lots of footage coming out the past week of Hezbollah FPV's striking soldiers, tanks, and very nearly a Medevac.

They're even fielding fiber-optic drones.

 

[Altair]

The Russian strategy is one of attrition, not maneuver. Territorial gains aren't Russia's objective at this time. Eroding Ukraine's capacity to resist through attrition is the objective.


They launched over 1,000 long range strike drones in the past 48 hrs alone. The Russian strike complex and its ability to sustain the numbers they are is something that needs to be studied and understood.

Ukraine is using 10k FPV drone a DAY

Over 3.65m per year.

And they are only just pushing Russia back, one small village at a time.

I'm going to guess, the entirety of NATO does not make 3.65m FPV drones a year.

According to the Ukrainians, the Russians are making 19k FPV drones a day, but only able to field somewhere like 1-2k due to starlink being down and lack of trained operators.

If Russia spends the time between the Ukraine war and any war with NATO able fix front line satelite coverage and getting enough trained operators, they will absolutely demolish standard NATO forces wherever they concentrate to counterattack any Russian incursion.

But between the thousands of long range strike drones and tens of the thousands of FPV drones they are estimated to be building per day, NATO needs to play catch up or be caught flat footed if Putin decides to roll the dice again.

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

Ukraine is using 10k FPV drone a DAY

Over 3.65m per year.

And they are only just pushing Russia back, one small village at a time.

I'm going to guess, the entirety of NATO does not make 3.65m FPV drones a year.

According to the Ukrainians, the Russians are making 19k FPV drones a day, but only able to field somewhere like 1-2k due to starlink being down and lack of trained operators.

If Russia spends the time between the Ukraine war and any war with NATO being about fix front line satelite coverage and getting enough trained operators, they will absolutely demolish standard NATO forces wherever they concentrate to counterattack any Russian incursion.

But between the thousands of long range strike drones and tens of the thousands of FPV drones they are estimated to be building per day, NATO needs to play catch up or be caught flat footed if Putin decides to roll the dice again.

That's according to Ukrainian sources. The matter is more nuanced. I do believe the UAF has an advantage in tactical FPV drones; however, Russia has a significant advantage in long-range strike drones, artillery, electronic warfare and it's got overwhelming advantage in air power allowing it to drop hundreds of glide bombs every week.

This allows Russia to maintain pressure on the Ukrainian frontline, which is why the Russian Army is still advancing within the fortress belt, and now also able to open up other parts of the front.

 

[Altair]

That's according to Ukrainian sources. The matter is more nuanced. I do believe the UAF has an advantage in tactical FPV drones; however, Russia has a significant advantage in long-range strike drones, artillery, electronic warfare and it's got overwhelming advantage in air power allowing it to drop hundreds of glide bombs every week.

This allows Russia to maintain pressure on the Ukrainian frontline, which is why the Russian Army is still advancing within the fortress belt, and now also able to open up other parts of the front.

In a NATO context, think that long range strike drones, artillery, EW and air power wont be advantages for the Russians.

But in a tactical sense, on the frontlines, FPV drones will make any conflict with NATO forces very costly (For NATO)

 

[Brad Sallows]

And when we find put what happens to tanks when drones come into play?

We learn, and the war goes on.

Find a Churchill to put some spine into people who go around counseling fears and safety concerns, at least until the crisis is passed.

 

[Altair]

We learn, and the war goes on.

Find a Churchill to put some spine into people who go around counseling fears and safety concerns, at least until the crisis is passed.

They don't make Churchills any more, they make Starmers and Mertzs.

Johnson might have made a good Churchill...

I hope we learn, I really do, but if we were learning, where are our 4-6 million FPVs a year? Why are we still thinking about driving tanks up to the frontline like they will survive waves of drones going after them?

Ukraine and Russia are giving the entire world a crash course in how war is going to be fought and we are sitting around twiddling our thumbs.

Ukraine beat up a NATO force in a exercise and it wasn't even close and all we get is a collective shrug.

I don't get it.

 

[GR66]

I'm getting Spanish civil war vibes here...

The Brits and the French looked at it and decided that there were no lessons to be learned. The Germans took notes.

Again a NATO military, the UK, got their asses handed to them by the Ukrainians and your takeaway is its not transferable?

My takeaway is we are not ready.

As for the Russians losing to the Ukrainians, yes, they are losing to the best drone forces on the planet. They wouldn't have that disadvantage versus NATO

Where did I say that there is nothing to learn from the Ukraine war? If you look at my posting history you'll clearly see that I'm a big proponent of unmanned systems and learning lessons from the Ukraine war.

That however doesn't change the fact that a Russia-NATO war will be fundamentally different than the Russia-Ukraine war simply due to the fact that NATO (and the US in particular) has capabilities and reach that the Ukrainians simply do not have. Would the Russians be able to duplicate the mass drone attacks they are conducting against Ukraine if their factories deep inside Russia are destroyed along with the rail bridges that lead to the front, the refineries and POL storage facilities that fuel their vehicles, the satellites that provide their targeting info are taken out, etc.?

The Ukrainians, with all their disadvantages against the Russians were able to halt their offensive and even take back territory and even launch an attack on Russian territory. Why do you think that magically the Russians will be able to roll over NATO?

Again, I'm not discounting Russian capabilities but what we're talking about here is their ability to seize and hold NATO territory. Their 800 mile front lines against a much weaker Ukraine are frozen and they can't make any headway. How will they deal with a front line that extends from the Barents Sea to the Black Sea?

 

[daftandbarmy]

US leadership in NATO helped the Europeans skate around some uncomfortable differences that they will have to face now that the US is pulling out ...

Balancing intra-European differences​

There is also a second shift: the more European NATO becomes, the more important differences within Europe will become. One axis runs from east to west. In the west are the older NATO states, some with strong leadership ambitions but less fear of Russia. In the east, states have massively increased their defence efforts and tend to hold more hawkish views on defending NATO. To avoid civilian casualties, they want to stop a possible Russian attack – on Russian territory.

The other axis runs from north to south. NATO’s northern flank has expanded dramatically with Finland and Sweden, and the threat environment is leading Northern European states to treat the region as a single theatre. In planning and manoeuvres, national borders now play almost no role. The south, by contrast, appears largely untouched by this in security terms. Yet the conflict in the Middle East is once again drawing attention to the vulnerability of Europe’s south-eastern flank.

Both axes will become more politically significant as the Americans lose relative weight. Europeans will then have to negotiate what different risks they are prepared to take in order to deter Russia – and, if necessary, to defend themselves successfully. A more European NATO will be viable only if Europe addresses these differences.

Defence: Europe needs a plan B for NATO

www.epc.eu

 

[Halifax Tar]

Where did I say that there is nothing to learn from the Ukraine war? If you look at my posting history you'll clearly see that I'm a big proponent of unmanned systems and learning lessons from the Ukraine war.

That however doesn't change the fact that a Russia-NATO war will be fundamentally different than the Russia-Ukraine war simply due to the fact that NATO (and the US in particular) has capabilities and reach that the Ukrainians simply do not have. Would the Russians be able to duplicate the mass drone attacks they are conducting against Ukraine if their factories deep inside Russia are destroyed along with the rail bridges that lead to the front, the refineries and POL storage facilities that fuel their vehicles, the satellites that provide their targeting info are taken out, etc.?

The Ukrainians, with all their disadvantages against the Russians were able to halt their offensive and even take back territory and even launch an attack on Russian territory. Why do you think that magically the Russians will be able to roll over NATO?

Again, I'm not discounting Russian capabilities but what we're talking about here is their ability to seize and hold NATO territory. Their 800 mile front lines against a much weaker Ukraine are frozen and they can't make any headway. How will they deal with a front line that extends from the Barents Sea to the Black Sea?

Drones are like cavalry, are like bows, are like firearms, are like automatic weapons, are like tanks, are like submarines, are like aircraft are like cyber.

All of these were cutting edge at one time... A balance/counter will be found and drones will become just another facet of warfare...

 

[Altair]

Where did I say that there is nothing to learn from the Ukraine war? If you look at my posting history you'll clearly see that I'm a big proponent of unmanned systems and learning lessons from the Ukraine war.

This is great to hear because the west needs to learn what the Russians and Ukrainians already have a wealth of experience in.

That however doesn't change the fact that a Russia-NATO war will be fundamentally different than the Russia-Ukraine war simply due to the fact that NATO (and the US in particular) has capabilities and reach that the Ukrainians simply do not have. Would the Russians be able to duplicate the mass drone attacks they are conducting against Ukraine if their factories deep inside Russia are destroyed along with the rail bridges that lead to the front, the refineries and POL storage facilities that fuel their vehicles, the satellites that provide their targeting info are taken out, etc.?

That war sounds an awful lot like the USA would be involved.

If it were just the Europeans, would you be saying this?

The Ukrainians, with all their disadvantages against the Russians were able to halt their offensive and even take back territory and even launch an attack on Russian territory. Why do you think that magically the Russians will be able to roll over NATO?

Because the USA is making moves to leave. So I'm basing this on Europe versus Russia, the USA giving good vibes if that.

Again, I'm not discounting Russian capabilities but what we're talking about here is their ability to seize and hold NATO territory. Their 800 mile front lines against a much weaker Ukraine are frozen and they can't make any headway. How will they deal with a front line that extends from the Barents Sea to the Black Sea?

See above.

 

[Brad Sallows]

NATO vs Russia wouldn't be decided by drones.

NATO vs Russia would be decided by geography and economics. Russia is fighting Ukraine along the eastern border of Ukraine from, roughly, Belarus to the Sea of Azov.

If Russia picks a fight with NATO, the front line on land alone would extend from, roughly, Murmansk to Baku. Russia would have to cover all of that. I doubt it has massive reserves in hand for that, so it would have to dilute whatever it has brought to bear against Ukraine to cover that exciting new distance. Ukraine would not of course be diluting itself to cover that; NATO would bring fresh forces to cover all of that.

We could suppose Russia would not do that until it has settled with Ukraine. We could also suppose that shortly after Russia is at war with NATO, Ukraine would resume hostilities to recover lost territories and invite NATO to use its territory for operations.

And of course it would be open season on all of Russia's major military assets, everywhere.

 

[Altair]

NATO vs Russia wouldn't be decided by drones.

NATO vs Russia would be decided by geography and economics. Russia is fighting Ukraine along the eastern border of Ukraine from, roughly, Belarus to the Sea of Azov.

If Russia picks a fight with NATO, the front line on land alone would extend from, roughly, Murmansk to Baku. Russia would have to cover all of that. I doubt it has massive reserves in hand for that, so it would have to dilute whatever it has brought to bear against Ukraine to cover that exciting new distance. Ukraine would not of course be diluting itself to cover that; NATO would bring fresh forces to cover all of that.

We could suppose Russia would not do that until it has settled with Ukraine. We could also suppose that shortly after Russia is at war with NATO, Ukraine would resume hostilities to recover lost territories and invite NATO to use its territory for operations.

And of course it would be open season on all of Russia's major military assets, everywhere.

And you expect a NATO without the USA being capable of all of this?

 

[Brad Sallows]

And you expect a NATO without the USA being capable of all of this?

Yes.

Combined GDP of just Germany, UK, France, Italy, and Canada is somewhere above $13T. Russia a bit over $2T.

A NATO-Russia war wouldn't be decided by drone swarms in 6 weeks. Russia caught Ukraine off balance and couldn't even manage that.

If assuming the US might stay completely out of a defensive NATO war against Russia is a necessary condition of a Russia-can-win-this argument, the argument is worthless.