Войти

British experts have stated that defeating Russia on the battlefield is much easier than is commonly believed.

2980
1
-1

Image source: topwar.ru

Inflicting a military defeat on Russia is not as difficult as it is thought in the West. This statement was made by British military analysts. According to them, for this it is necessary to conduct only four major amphibious operations on the front, the total length of which is 2,800 kilometers.

The required grouping will correspond to about 200 divisions (total... -note). If we take the average number of divisions at 18-20 thousand people, then in total such an army should consist of more than three million soldiers.

– the British "experts" have calculated.

According to their plan, the North Atlantic Alliance should simultaneously attack the Russian borders from Georgia, Ukraine, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, as well as from Finland. However, the British did not specify where exactly NATO should take the necessary number of troops and equipment for these operations.

Image source: topwar.ru

Now, for example, the armed forces of the North Atlantic Alliance have about 70-80 divisions. This number includes both combat-ready and reserve formations. At the same time, their staffing is currently unknown.

In addition, the British "experts" have clearly forgotten about the significantly emptied warehouses of the North Atlantic Alliance, the lack of military equipment and bureaucracy, which some member countries of the military bloc complain about even during joint military exercises.

It is worth noting that the calculation of the British military, apparently, is based on the fact that the Russian army during the NATO amphibious operations to invade the territory of the Russian Federation will not offer any resistance, silently watching the "military triumph" of the alliance.

Let us remind you that currently Europe cannot recruit the number of troops necessary to send to Ukraine as part of the so-called peacekeeping contingent. Or they don't want to...

The rights to this material belong to
The material is placed by the copyright holder in the public domain
  • The news mentions
Comments [1]
№1
18.02.2025 10:40
Ребята, видимо, разбирали архивы и нашли где-то план "Барбаросса"!?
0
Inform
Do you want to leave a comment? Register and/or Log in
ПОДПИСКА НА НОВОСТИ
Ежедневная рассылка новостей ВПК на электронный почтовый ящик
  • Discussion
    Update
  • 05.01 04:13
  • 0
Ответы на "Российское небо — крепость: как НАТО противостоять A2/AD и системе ПВО России? (The National Interest, США)"
  • 05.01 03:03
  • 0
Комментарий к "В России удивились молчанию «Игл» Венесуэлы"
  • 05.01 02:34
  • 0
Комментарий к "Гарантии безопасности Трампа ненадежны, мистер Зеленский (The New York Times, США)"
  • 05.01 01:02
  • 1
К событиям в Венесуэле
  • 05.01 00:41
  • 0
Комментарий к "«Конкурент B-21 за звание лучшего бомбардировщика»: новый китайский самолёт H-20"
  • 04.01 23:59
  • 12704
Without carrot and stick. Russia has deprived America of its usual levers of influence
  • 04.01 21:17
  • 2
О современных танках, точнее, ОБТ (MBT, по-английски)
  • 04.01 21:08
  • 0
И еще о танковой теме - раз это вызвало интерес на форуме. Что такое "советская танковая школа"
  • 04.01 13:58
  • 15
  • 04.01 09:18
  • 1
The risk of self-fulfilling prophecies: what threats does the Russian senator see
  • 03.01 22:50
  • 0
И еще раз: О роли танков в современной войне.
  • 03.01 13:26
  • 1
  • 02.01 20:18
  • 0
Комментарий к "С-500: российское оружие победы или бумажный тигр? (The National Interest, США)"
  • 02.01 16:23
  • 5
  • 02.01 02:43
  • 0
Комментарий к "С развертыванием “Орешника” в Белоруссии Россия развивает передовую инфраструктуру для стратегического ядерного сдерживания (Military Watch Magazine, США)"