Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Sun)   NATO to deploy over 300,000 troops in biggest force since Cold War for showdown with Russia. Side benefit would be watching Putin piss his pants and threaten to nuke everyone again (possible nsfw content on page)   (thesun.co.uk) divider line
    More: Interesting, NATO, World War II, Cold War, member of NATO, NATO headquarters, NATO Response Force, new force model, Jens Stoltenberg  
•       •       •

4240 clicks; posted to Main » and Politics » on 27 Jun 2022 at 7:20 PM (6 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



142 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2022-06-27 4:41:02 PM  
300k gonna be enough?

We invaded with 100k for Iraq. But Iraq is much smaller than Russia.
 
2022-06-27 5:11:16 PM  
Have we got a slightly better source? I mean, it would be nice to see that sort of build-up ready to respond, because that would mean that the logistics chains would be setting in place, which will mean everything--and show Russia how nation states that don't rip up their rail tracks for scrap metal do things.
 
2022-06-27 5:18:34 PM  

hubiestubert: Have we got a slightly better source? I mean, it would be nice to see that sort of build-up ready to respond, because that would mean that the logistics chains would be setting in place, which will mean everything--and show Russia how nation states that don't rip up their rail tracks for scrap metal do things.


https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/6/27/nato-to-boost-rapid-reaction-force-ukraine-military-support
 
2022-06-27 5:19:44 PM  

Thoreny: hubiestubert: Have we got a slightly better source? I mean, it would be nice to see that sort of build-up ready to respond, because that would mean that the logistics chains would be setting in place, which will mean everything--and show Russia how nation states that don't rip up their rail tracks for scrap metal do things.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/6/27/nato-to-boost-rapid-reaction-force-ukraine-military-support


The Al Jazeera article says their boosting their QRF by 300k but says nothing about their deployment.

I hate getting swindled like that.
 
2022-06-27 6:11:15 PM  

Thoreny: 300k gonna be enough?

We invaded with 100k for Iraq. But Iraq is much smaller than Russia.


For a war of conquest? No. To wreck shiat and ensure the Russians tap out? Yes. (Assuming no nukes.)
 
2022-06-27 6:40:55 PM  
That's just the troops to reopen the McDonalds for the new Russian general.
 
2022-06-27 6:56:23 PM  

Thoreny: 300k gonna be enough?

We invaded with 100k for Iraq. But Iraq is much smaller than Russia.


That's the initial force in theater. A very large convoy of troops and hardware would be on their way over if hostilities break out. Air travel would get very weird when that goes down.
 
2022-06-27 7:25:15 PM  

Thoreny: 300k gonna be enough?

We invaded with 100k for Iraq. But Iraq is much smaller than Russia.


Militarily...Russia is a joke. It's what happens when your entire government is based on stealing as much as possible. It wouldn't be enough to occupy Russia, but they could put some serious hurt on Russian armed forces.
 
2022-06-27 7:27:41 PM  
Why are they armed with pistols?
 
2022-06-27 7:28:07 PM  

iheartscotch: Thoreny: 300k gonna be enough?

We invaded with 100k for Iraq. But Iraq is much smaller than Russia.

Militarily...Russia is a joke. It's what happens when your entire government is based on stealing as much as possible. It wouldn't be enough to occupy Russia, but they could put some serious hurt on Russian armed forces.


How well will the Russian Federation hold together if NATO invaded?
 
2022-06-27 7:28:20 PM  

Tr0mBoNe: Thoreny: 300k gonna be enough?

We invaded with 100k for Iraq. But Iraq is much smaller than Russia.

That's the initial force in theater. A very large convoy of troops and hardware would be on their way over if hostilities break out. Air travel would get very weird when that goes down.


Considering the plan is (or was) to put US troops into commercial airliners to fly them to Europe where they'd pick up their pre-positioned vehicles and equipment, I'd say there'd be a shortage of aircraft.
 
2022-06-27 7:28:51 PM  
There are few things we can always count on, even on NuFark...Duke will suck and The Sun will be there.
 
2022-06-27 7:29:16 PM  
NATO troops with NATO training and equipment? Considering what everyone is watching unfold........ 300k might be overkill.
 
2022-06-27 7:29:23 PM  

aleister_greynight: iheartscotch: Thoreny: 300k gonna be enough?

We invaded with 100k for Iraq. But Iraq is much smaller than Russia.

Militarily...Russia is a joke. It's what happens when your entire government is based on stealing as much as possible. It wouldn't be enough to occupy Russia, but they could put some serious hurt on Russian armed forces.

How well will the Russian Federation hold together if NATO invaded?


Better than they're doing in Ukraine. Their military was built for defense, and they have a lot of land to trade for time.
 
2022-06-27 7:29:38 PM  

Thoreny: Thoreny: hubiestubert: Have we got a slightly better source? I mean, it would be nice to see that sort of build-up ready to respond, because that would mean that the logistics chains would be setting in place, which will mean everything--and show Russia how nation states that don't rip up their rail tracks for scrap metal do things.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/6/27/nato-to-boost-rapid-reaction-force-ukraine-military-support

The Al Jazeera article says their boosting their QRF by 300k but says nothing about their deployment.

I hate getting swindled like that.


ROFL, maybe stop thinking articles from a British farking tabloid have any merit.

Their logo is RIGHT THERE next to the headline ferchissake.
 
2022-06-27 7:30:11 PM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-06-27 7:32:22 PM  

gopher321: Why are they armed with pistols?


Those look like they could be CZ 75s. I hear very good things about the CZ 75. So much so that the Israelis copied it (IWI Jericho).

/ it's a stock photo. It's probably the cheapest one.
 
2022-06-27 7:32:41 PM  
i.imgflip.comView Full Size
 
2022-06-27 7:34:02 PM  
Buying popcorn and soda on my way home.
 
2022-06-27 7:35:05 PM  

Thoreny: 300k gonna be enough?

We invaded with 100k for Iraq. But Iraq is much smaller than Russia.


Depends on the goal...

Occupy? Not even remotely close.

F**k them up beyond all recognition? Yes.
 
2022-06-27 7:35:18 PM  
Drop a MOAB on Moscow and get this crap over with.
 
2022-06-27 7:36:33 PM  

El Dudereno: aleister_greynight: iheartscotch: Thoreny: 300k gonna be enough?

We invaded with 100k for Iraq. But Iraq is much smaller than Russia.

Militarily...Russia is a joke. It's what happens when your entire government is based on stealing as much as possible. It wouldn't be enough to occupy Russia, but they could put some serious hurt on Russian armed forces.

How well will the Russian Federation hold together if NATO invaded?

Better than they're doing in Ukraine. Their military was built for defense, and they have a lot of land to trade for time.


Even skip the whole army bit, invading galvanizes people. Literally stop at the Russia / Ukraine border and shred anything threatening nearby.

People get tired of wars that lack a real threat.
 
2022-06-27 7:38:59 PM  
While I understand nuclear deterrence and why Nato exists and how we are using Ukraine as a proxy. I kinda wouldn't mind if we get the gang together and just finish this shiat.
 
2022-06-27 7:41:18 PM  

Thoreny: 300k gonna be enough?

We invaded with 100k for Iraq. But Iraq is much smaller than Russia.


I doubt there would be many actual boots on the ground in Russia. Tons in Ukraine, lots of stuff lobbed over the border, air strikes in Russian and Belarusian (Belarussian? What's the spelling?) territory, maybe some special forces targetted strikes and operations, but I don't think NATO would bother trying to occupy Russia--it would be costly and at best with limited benefits over just bombing the hell out of them. The only people who want to try ruling the Russian populace are Russians.

The only reason I can think of would be to physically secure nukes, and there's no way we're catching them all.
 
2022-06-27 7:42:50 PM  

aleister_greynight: iheartscotch: Thoreny: 300k gonna be enough?

We invaded with 100k for Iraq. But Iraq is much smaller than Russia.

Militarily...Russia is a joke. It's what happens when your entire government is based on stealing as much as possible. It wouldn't be enough to occupy Russia, but they could put some serious hurt on Russian armed forces.

How well will the Russian Federation hold together if NATO invaded?


The same amount of time the US would hold together if NATO invaded Russia... 28 minutes.
 
2022-06-27 7:42:51 PM  
Dubious source notwithstanding, it would be great to finally get these cold war blue balls dealt with. Kill em all. I want to see Russian mothers crying over caskets. Moscow in flames. Federation troops committing suicide and fragging their superiors. A nonstop horror show from Kaliningrad to Kamchatka.
 
2022-06-27 7:43:29 PM  

aleister_greynight: iheartscotch: Thoreny: 300k gonna be enough?

We invaded with 100k for Iraq. But Iraq is much smaller than Russia.

Militarily...Russia is a joke. It's what happens when your entire government is based on stealing as much as possible. It wouldn't be enough to occupy Russia, but they could put some serious hurt on Russian armed forces.

How well will the Russian Federation hold together if NATO invaded?


It's tough to say. The Russian military is built for defense. They, allegedly, had about 1,000,000 total soldiers (including reservists) before the invasion.

They're going to have a tough time diverting soldiers from their defenses for a second front and maintaining order. On the flip side of that...they'd much rather be fighting us then the Ukrainians.

It's very likely that it would be another long, drawn out shiat show that would create an even worse humanitarian crisis with refugees and Russians shelling their own civilians.

All of this assumes that the war stays conventional

/ it would take years, for no certain outcome. It would be better if Russia solved its own Vladimir problem.
 
2022-06-27 7:44:18 PM  

gopher321: Why are they armed with pistols?


Because the difficulty setting on the game doesn't go higher until the second playthrough, after you've unlocked Post-Nuclear Mode.
 
2022-06-27 7:45:14 PM  
Putin is a despot, the only thing he understands is escalation.
 
2022-06-27 7:47:27 PM  

Axeofjudgement: While I understand nuclear deterrence and why Nato exists and how we are using Ukraine as a proxy. I kinda wouldn't mind if we get the gang together and just finish this shiat.


I take objection to "we are using Ukraine as a proxy". We didn't start this war. We may be taking advantage of the situation somewhat, but we didn't create it. This is all on Putin.
 
2022-06-27 7:47:52 PM  
Putin: suxk by balls

Nato: present them please. By all means. Give your balls. We will handle your balls. Give them to us. We crave them. We will use them as a purse for shiny trinkets. The insides we can put on a sharp stick. Please. Give them to us.
 
2022-06-27 7:51:28 PM  
The best part of this is that it's so obviously entirely protective. Nobody in the modern post-WWII age has ever wanted to invade Russia & take ownership/responsibility for that total shiatshow. It just isn't worth it.

Keep them in the shiatty little miserable box of their own making? Hell yes forever. But the notion we'd ever invade Russia is laughable.
 
2022-06-27 7:51:34 PM  
It would probably be a terrible idea to march directly into Russia, but I think it might make sense to poke around near their borders at strategic locations, forcing them to move their already limited forces around, hopefully away from Ukraine. Let their army die a death of a thousand cuts.
 
2022-06-27 7:52:24 PM  

mikefinch: Putin: suxk by balls

Nato: present them please. By all means. Give your balls. We will handle your balls. Give them to us. We crave them. We will use them as a purse for shiny trinkets. The insides we can put on a sharp stick. Please. Give them to us.


c.tenor.comView Full Size
 
2022-06-27 7:52:28 PM  

mikefinch: Putin: suxk by balls

Nato: present them please. By all means. Give your balls. We will handle your balls. Give them to us. We crave them. We will use them as a purse for shiny trinkets. The insides we can put on a sharp stick. Please. Give them to us.


You alright there pal?
 
2022-06-27 7:52:31 PM  

iheartscotch: aleister_greynight: iheartscotch: Thoreny: 300k gonna be enough?

We invaded with 100k for Iraq. But Iraq is much smaller than Russia.

Militarily...Russia is a joke. It's what happens when your entire government is based on stealing as much as possible. It wouldn't be enough to occupy Russia, but they could put some serious hurt on Russian armed forces.

How well will the Russian Federation hold together if NATO invaded?

It's tough to say. The Russian military is built for defense. They, allegedly, had about 1,000,000 total soldiers (including reservists) before the invasion.

They're going to have a tough time diverting soldiers from their defenses for a second front and maintaining order. On the flip side of that...they'd much rather be fighting us then the Ukrainians.

It's very likely that it would be another long, drawn out shiat show that would create an even worse humanitarian crisis with refugees and Russians shelling their own civilians.

All of this assumes that the war stays conventional

/ it would take years, for no certain outcome. It would be better if Russia solved its own Vladimir problem.


Doubt it.  Air power supremacy in 48 hours.

Nothing leaves Russia's borders (oil, stolen grain, etc).

Their army basically gets locked in place and bonded to hell if moves.

A few months if we are being generous to the Russians.  But that's mostly waiting for a Russian to grow a pair to take out Putin.
 
2022-06-27 7:53:09 PM  

hubiestubert: Have we got a slightly better source? I mean, it would be nice to see that sort of build-up ready to respond, because that would mean that the logistics chains would be setting in place, which will mean everything--and show Russia how nation states that don't rip up their rail tracks for scrap metal do things.


Yeah, I now doubt the existence of NATO, troops, the Cold War, or Russia.
 
2022-06-27 7:55:26 PM  

iheartscotch: gopher321: Why are they armed with pistols?

Those look like they could be CZ 75s. I hear very good things about the CZ 75. So much so that the Israelis copied it (IWI Jericho).

/ it's a stock photo. It's probably the cheapest one.

I have a compact CZ 75D PCR and the Mrs. has a compact CZ 75D PCR and a subcompact CZ 75 D PCR.
The D stands for decocker. We maintain the guns in a decocked position for safety, but first shot is quickly available as it would be a double action shot and the subsequent shots single action.

These are cream of the crop handguns.

You heard correctly about them.

 
2022-06-27 7:57:48 PM  

newsvertisement: aleister_greynight: iheartscotch: Thoreny: 300k gonna be enough?

We invaded with 100k for Iraq. But Iraq is much smaller than Russia.

Militarily...Russia is a joke. It's what happens when your entire government is based on stealing as much as possible. It wouldn't be enough to occupy Russia, but they could put some serious hurt on Russian armed forces.

How well will the Russian Federation hold together if NATO invaded?

The same amount of time the US would hold together if NATO invaded Russia... 28 minutes.


People who watch Russia's military get
taken apart by farmers in tractors still lamenting the global threat of Russia's military power convinces me that all it would for some of you farkers to surrender to an antagonistic force would be the sound of a hard sneeze.
 
2022-06-27 7:59:53 PM  
So.....REFORGER?
 
2022-06-27 8:00:14 PM  

gopher321: Why are they armed with pistols?


Pretty sure that's a naval VBSS (visit, board, search & seizure) team training for boarding ships where the interiors don't have enough room to maneuver long guns.
 
2022-06-27 8:01:04 PM  

wrenchboy: Drop a MOAB on Moscow and get this crap over with.


Sure would take care of climate change.
 
2022-06-27 8:04:27 PM  

goodncold: iheartscotch: aleister_greynight: iheartscotch: Thoreny: 300k gonna be enough?

We invaded with 100k for Iraq. But Iraq is much smaller than Russia.

Militarily...Russia is a joke. It's what happens when your entire government is based on stealing as much as possible. It wouldn't be enough to occupy Russia, but they could put some serious hurt on Russian armed forces.

How well will the Russian Federation hold together if NATO invaded?

It's tough to say. The Russian military is built for defense. They, allegedly, had about 1,000,000 total soldiers (including reservists) before the invasion.

They're going to have a tough time diverting soldiers from their defenses for a second front and maintaining order. On the flip side of that...they'd much rather be fighting us then the Ukrainians.

It's very likely that it would be another long, drawn out shiat show that would create an even worse humanitarian crisis with refugees and Russians shelling their own civilians.

All of this assumes that the war stays conventional

/ it would take years, for no certain outcome. It would be better if Russia solved its own Vladimir problem.

Doubt it.  Air power supremacy in 48 hours.

Nothing leaves Russia's borders (oil, stolen grain, etc).

Their army basically gets locked in place and bonded to hell if moves.

A few months if we are being generous to the Russians.  But that's mostly waiting for a Russian to grow a pair to take out Putin.


All the boys will be home by Christmas, no doubt.

I agree with sitting on the Ukrainian side of the border. But...it could be months or years before someone takes out Pooty or he dies of cancer.
 
2022-06-27 8:04:44 PM  

El Dudereno: aleister_greynight: iheartscotch: Thoreny: 300k gonna be enough?

We invaded with 100k for Iraq. But Iraq is much smaller than Russia.

Militarily...Russia is a joke. It's what happens when your entire government is based on stealing as much as possible. It wouldn't be enough to occupy Russia, but they could put some serious hurt on Russian armed forces.

How well will the Russian Federation hold together if NATO invaded?

Better than they're doing in Ukraine. Their military was built for defense, and they have a lot of land to trade for time.


I was referring to the "Federation" part specifically.  Not all of them love Moscow.
 
2022-06-27 8:08:43 PM  
NENA | 99 Luftballons [1983] [Offizielles HD Musikvideo]
Youtube Fpu5a0Bl8eY
 
2022-06-27 8:12:51 PM  

Gyrfalcon: hubiestubert: Have we got a slightly better source? I mean, it would be nice to see that sort of build-up ready to respond, because that would mean that the logistics chains would be setting in place, which will mean everything--and show Russia how nation states that don't rip up their rail tracks for scrap metal do things.

Yeah, I now doubt the existence of NATO, troops, the Cold War, or Russia.


Just you wait until they report on themselves, one picosecond before the universe implodes.
 
2022-06-27 8:13:39 PM  

fruit flies like a banana: Axeofjudgement: While I understand nuclear deterrence and why Nato exists and how we are using Ukraine as a proxy. I kinda wouldn't mind if we get the gang together and just finish this shiat.

I take objection to "we are using Ukraine as a proxy". We didn't start this war. We may be taking advantage of the situation somewhat, but we didn't create it. This is all on Putin.


Plus, please tell me what more we could be doing for Ukraine? The fact that all western countries are seriously asking themselves that question proves nobody is using them.
 
2022-06-27 8:13:39 PM  

Mr. Coffee Nerves: That's just the troops to reopen the McDonalds for the new Russian general.


i2-prod.mirror.co.ukView Full Size

general porkins reporting for duty comrade
 
2022-06-27 8:17:57 PM  

dv-ous: Thoreny: 300k gonna be enough?

We invaded with 100k for Iraq. But Iraq is much smaller than Russia.

For a war of conquest? No. To wreck shiat and ensure the Russians tap out? Yes. (Assuming no nukes.)


Agreed.

It helps to keep in mind these are NATO forces. Individual countries also have their own militaries, plus if hostilities kick off, mobilization would likely occur & you'd get a bunch more soldiers in a short period of time.
 
2022-06-27 8:20:01 PM  

Jake Havechek: Putin is a despot, the only thing he understands is escalation.


I made this a while back but it also seems relevant here

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
Displayed 50 of 142 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.