Če so zahodne države podpirale vojno v Ukrajini, da Rusi ne bi prodrli v Evropo, zakaj so se potem v vmesnem času razorožile namesto oborožile?

Spodaj je dobro razmišljanje o zahodni propagandni kreaturi, da je bil smisel podpiranja vojne v Ukrajini v tem, da bi sicer ruska vojska vojska pregazila Varšavo in Berlin in prodrla do Pariza. Ob tem seveda pozabimo na dejstvo, da ko se je Hitler odpravil zavzemat Poljsko, je imel za seboj 1.5 milijona vojakov, Putin pa je pred napadom imel na ukrajinski meji le med 160 in 190 tisoč vojakov. Težko bi s to vojsko prišel do Kijeva. In tudi ni prišel.

V tej zahodni propagandni kreaturi je torej od vsega začetka nekaj hudo narobe. In tudi z nadaljevanjem te zgodbe, ki je pripeljala do razorožitve evropskih držav. Ki bi zdaj res lahko morda postale lahek (ali lažji) plen, če bi se Putin odločil, da po Kijevu nadaljuje svoj pohod proti zahodu. Bomo po skoraj dveh letih vojne v Ukrajini torej končno zagnali vojaško industrijo v Evropi? Ali pa se Putina zares sploh ne bojimo?

__________

So a large part of the stated justification for NATO supporting Ukraine is the supposed belief that “the West is next” – that Ukraine is merely the first domino to fall in a new Russian march to Berlin.

It’s very odd then that the actual members of NATO aren’t acting like it.

Over the last two years, Western nations – in particular European nations – have done little to nothing to actually prepare for war with Russia.  By and large they have all happily handed over their existing, modest stocks of military equipment and ammunition to Ukraine with no serious replacement plans, let alone genuine rearmament plans.  Just to provide an example: with the sole exception of Poland, I don’t think any member of NATO – including the United States – has actually taken delivery of a single new tank on account of the war in the last two years.

* Hungary received a few Leopard 2A7s from a prewar order earlier this month.

Military innovation in NATO has stagnated, with professional Western soldiers seeming to take little interest in battlefield developments.  Ukrainian soldiers trained in Europe have complained that Western tactical methods are old-fashioned and unrealistic on the modern battlefield, even to the point of mockery. The “just go around the minefield” remark of a Bundeswehr instructor comes to mind.

On the personnel side of the house, only known military titans (sarcasm) Denmark, Lithuania and Latvia have bolstered conscription efforts.  The British military has shrunk significantly, mirroring a similar decline in American force strength.  None of this is treated as the dire emergency that it would be if NATO actually intended to be ready for war with the Russian Federation in 2025.

So what are we to make of this?  It’s possible that NATO’s brain trust is absolutely marinating in hubris (“the Russians suck, we can take them easily“), but in light of articles coming out that the Bundeswehr has no ammunition at all it’s difficult to see Western arrogance stretching that far.  I think it’s far more likely that Western leaders – contrary to their public statements – do not believe Putin has any designs at all on NATO territory.

And it’s important to underline this last point.  This isn’t, “Putin has been deterred” because they’re not deterring anyone.  Once Ukraine falls over Europe is going to be a military basket case protected almost entirely by the dubious prospect of American nuclear attacks.  It’s “Putin isn’t going to move regardless of the balance of forces.”

Which then begs the question of why the hell, exactly, the collective leaders of the West have gone all in on a Russian-killing project in Ukraine when they seem to have a bone-deep confidence that Putin isn’t actually a threat to them.

It actually occurs to me there is a plausible explanation for this kind of behavior by NATO that doesn’t involve Western leaders being absolute ghouls – a sort of security version of the “tragedy of the commons,” where NATO has become such a large organization with such diffuse responsibility for outcomes that no individual member has any real urgency to actually prepare for war. So we end up with 31 countries that mostly expect to do token deployments and provide niche capabilities to the coalition while Russian tanks are rolling through Warsaw.

Vir: X