By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
I am just wondering what the mood is on this question, which for years would have been practically unthinkable:
What do you think are the chances of a deliberate Russian (or Belarusian or Wagner Group etc) military strike on a target in NATO territory within the next 12 months?
Please give your answer as a percentage, ranged from 0.1 to 99.9%.
If I get a few answers it will give us a Hive Mind average.
0
Rather grim Hive Mind question: on 13:28 - Mar 20 with 3145 views
Not quite the answer, but I think we'll see a nuclear strike in Ukraine within the next 12 months, potentially timed after the US election to 'test' the response of US and NATO. Especially if Trump wins.
It might not be on a NATO member, but there is an understanding that would change the narrative and would expect an escalated NATO response.
[Post edited 20 Mar 13:38]
0
Rather grim Hive Mind question: on 13:39 - Mar 20 with 3065 views
Rather grim Hive Mind question: on 13:38 - Mar 20 by ElderGrizzly
Not quite the answer, but I think we'll see a nuclear strike in Ukraine within the next 12 months, potentially timed after the US election to 'test' the response of US and NATO. Especially if Trump wins.
It might not be on a NATO member, but there is an understanding that would change the narrative and would expect an escalated NATO response.
[Post edited 20 Mar 13:38]
I'd be even more surprised by that to be honest. A nuclear strike on Ukraine would be a bigger escalation than some form of direct military action against a NATO member. I would imagine that some of those countries that have previously been neutral or tacitly backed Russia would very quickly start to pull support if they launched a nuclear strike on Ukraine.
Rather grim Hive Mind question: on 13:44 - Mar 20 by Herbivore
I'd be even more surprised by that to be honest. A nuclear strike on Ukraine would be a bigger escalation than some form of direct military action against a NATO member. I would imagine that some of those countries that have previously been neutral or tacitly backed Russia would very quickly start to pull support if they launched a nuclear strike on Ukraine.
I'm not talking a huge nuclear strike, just something targeted to make Putin's point and he'll use a self-defence argument to keep his allies on side.
I hope we'll never find out, but Russia entering another sovereign nation would be a bigger issue imo.
0
Rather grim Hive Mind question: on 13:49 - Mar 20 with 2987 views
I think it's very unlikely but I have increased it a bit in case Putin is terminally ill in which case he doesn't have much left to lose. Also Trump is a massive wildcard but I think he will be reigned in by more sane people.
With that said I think there are a number of things which make it unlikely:
China has likely made it known privately that Russia would be on their own if they attack NATO. Even Iran and North Korea may think twice about getting involved if they are suddenly facing a rapidly rearming and strengthening NATO.
They have been shown up by Ukraine. They were supposed to be in Kyiv within 48 hours. Over two years later they are nowhere near. They may well have a massive group of people Putin doesn't mind throwing to the wolves and be rearming rapidly now but they would likely be annihilated by NATO very quickly. China and nukes are the wildcards here but nukes hardly help the dream of restoring the Soviet Union borders.
Putin is terrified of ending up like Gaddafi. Better to keep the west as the bogeyman to rule with an iron fist internally. Also a great explanation of why they have not already defeated Ukraine because they are 'fighting NATO'.
25% -But I'm extending your question slightly to direct NATO involvement in the conflict in next 12 Months or to put it another way: War with Russia.
Surprised people think it is so slow. If we extend beyond a year I think there is a very real possibility of war and it will go beyond just Russia as they also have powerful allies.
Countries including Sweden are already warning citizens of the possibility and let's not forget Sweden are now NATO.
We are in dangerous times and it doesn't need to be a missile to kick it off full fledged. It could be a major Cyber attack etc etc.
History tells us war are inevitable....
0
Rather grim Hive Mind question: on 13:57 - Mar 20 with 2931 views
Rather grim Hive Mind question: on 13:38 - Mar 20 by ElderGrizzly
Not quite the answer, but I think we'll see a nuclear strike in Ukraine within the next 12 months, potentially timed after the US election to 'test' the response of US and NATO. Especially if Trump wins.
It might not be on a NATO member, but there is an understanding that would change the narrative and would expect an escalated NATO response.
[Post edited 20 Mar 13:38]
Would you expect that to be a tactical or strategic strike? The former seems plausible but, however depraved and evil Putin is, I can't see him using a strategic weapon (yet).
1
Rather grim Hive Mind question: on 14:26 - Mar 20 with 2790 views
Rather grim Hive Mind question: on 13:38 - Mar 20 by ElderGrizzly
Not quite the answer, but I think we'll see a nuclear strike in Ukraine within the next 12 months, potentially timed after the US election to 'test' the response of US and NATO. Especially if Trump wins.
It might not be on a NATO member, but there is an understanding that would change the narrative and would expect an escalated NATO response.
[Post edited 20 Mar 13:38]
I'm not convinced he needs to go down such a risky route (not to mention heavy-handed), with relatively little reward. See the videos I posted elsewhere in the thread for a scenario with a far better risk/reward balance for Putin.
Rather grim Hive Mind question: on 13:44 - Mar 20 by Herbivore
I'd be even more surprised by that to be honest. A nuclear strike on Ukraine would be a bigger escalation than some form of direct military action against a NATO member. I would imagine that some of those countries that have previously been neutral or tacitly backed Russia would very quickly start to pull support if they launched a nuclear strike on Ukraine.
I think the Chinese would get very upset if that happened. They might be able to sit out a Russo-Western nuclear exchange (to an extent), but it would still affect them massively in terms of global radiation effects and destroying their trade possibilities.
Rather grim Hive Mind question: on 13:54 - Mar 20 by Nutkins_Return
25% -But I'm extending your question slightly to direct NATO involvement in the conflict in next 12 Months or to put it another way: War with Russia.
Surprised people think it is so slow. If we extend beyond a year I think there is a very real possibility of war and it will go beyond just Russia as they also have powerful allies.
Countries including Sweden are already warning citizens of the possibility and let's not forget Sweden are now NATO.
We are in dangerous times and it doesn't need to be a missile to kick it off full fledged. It could be a major Cyber attack etc etc.
History tells us war are inevitable....
Thing about Sweden is they are having to get their population used to the idea of potentially being in the firing line after a couple of centuries of peace/neutrality. As opposed to, say, the UK where we have fought major wars and conflicts within living memory (including destruction to the home country).
3.6% Not so much a military strike but Russian Army incursion into Romania to prevent supplies getting through to Moldovan forces in a new attempt to bring Transnitria back into the Russian orbit.
Rather grim Hive Mind question: on 14:43 - Mar 20 by Guthrum
Thing about Sweden is they are having to get their population used to the idea of potentially being in the firing line after a couple of centuries of peace/neutrality. As opposed to, say, the UK where we have fought major wars and conflicts within living memory (including destruction to the home country).
That's true to an extent but their military top brass certainly see it as a very real imminent possibly and are putting pressure on government to get people ready mentally. Government playing it down more.
Governments I think generally will play it down more but I think those in the military are very much preparing (though of course they would even a low likelihood).
0
Rather grim Hive Mind question: on 15:52 - Mar 20 with 2488 views
Let’s not forget behind the bravado and riding semi naked on horses, Putin is terrified of NATO. The military spending and economic power is completely unbalanced against Russia. Any military action against NATO would therefore only happen under hybrid warfare, under the guise of cyber attacks, sabotage, or deniable operations. Wagner seem more interested in making money out of African despots rather than going back to being cannon fodder in Eastern Ukraine.
Trump maybe a wildcard, but I suspect he’d (as Putin has already inferred) prefer a Biden Presidency due to the unpredictability of a Trump foreign policy (Trump will put himself before his country, and could just as easily turn on Putin if it suits Trump to do so).
More likely we’ll see a frozen conflict as both sides become fatigued. From what I’m seeing, the risk of the rest of Ukraine falling to Russia is deemed incredibly low, western companies and banks are continuing to finance trade in western Ukraine (deeming the risk of assets being reappropriated by Russia as they’ve done in the East very low).
0
Rather grim Hive Mind question: on 16:03 - Mar 20 with 2446 views
Let’s not forget behind the bravado and riding semi naked on horses, Putin is terrified of NATO. The military spending and economic power is completely unbalanced against Russia. Any military action against NATO would therefore only happen under hybrid warfare, under the guise of cyber attacks, sabotage, or deniable operations. Wagner seem more interested in making money out of African despots rather than going back to being cannon fodder in Eastern Ukraine.
Trump maybe a wildcard, but I suspect he’d (as Putin has already inferred) prefer a Biden Presidency due to the unpredictability of a Trump foreign policy (Trump will put himself before his country, and could just as easily turn on Putin if it suits Trump to do so).
More likely we’ll see a frozen conflict as both sides become fatigued. From what I’m seeing, the risk of the rest of Ukraine falling to Russia is deemed incredibly low, western companies and banks are continuing to finance trade in western Ukraine (deeming the risk of assets being reappropriated by Russia as they’ve done in the East very low).
I don't believe for a second he would rather a Biden presidency. In fact, I think he likely said that to aid Trump's chances. Trump can now say I am the one Putin fears where as really Putin will laugh his head off if Trump gets in.
Rather grim Hive Mind question: on 16:27 - Mar 20 by ChorleyBoy
0% Belarusian 0% Russian Who owns the Wagner group? If it's the Western allies, then 0%, if it's Russia 0%.
Russian and NATO false flag attacks are another question.
Fancy that, our resident Tory apologist is also a Vlad dissembler.
Explains why he's so grumpy though. Imagine being so low in the whole 'destabilise the West with misinformation' team standings that you get this place.
I'm one of the people who was blamed for getting Paul Cook sacked. PM for the full post.
0% unless Putin is about to be ousted and hits the button.
As much as they stick their chests out, and thump about a bit I can not see any logical reason why the leaders would escalate this to that level.
NATO members are supplying Ukraine weapons and information already, even Congress has passed numerous bills to aid them. So they are already in a defacto war with Russia. Russian would have struck by now if they were that pissed off by them.
Only other scenario I could see is that if Ukraine gets NATO membership in the next 12 months then all bets are off the table!
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
