• cygnus@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    58
    ·
    24 days ago

    This is mind-boggling. Russia is 821 days into a 3-day invasion of Ukraine, and this is what they choose to focus on? Starting a border conflict with an EU and NATO member?

    • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      24 days ago

      My guess is that Russia is trying to create a threat to NATO countries so that those countries will want to hold onto their defense materials and weapons instead of those going to Ukraine. Its a short term gambit. NATO countries understand that if the threat exists now, then it will certainly be worse in the future if Ukraine is fully in Russian control.

      • xmunk@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        24 days ago

        I’d actually guess this is a bluff move to convince countries that a confrontation with Russia would be too potentially damaging - in the hopes that NATO would back down. It seems really bizarre to push specifically against Estonia though - rather than Norway/Sweden (Arctic Sea claims or Gotland) since Estonia has a high enlistment rate and is openly keeping force on the table in opposition to Russia - Norway and Sweden are much richer economies that would be more likely to give ground if pressured due to the high predicted economic damage.

      • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        24 days ago

        Not to mention the Russians will have 40 million ukranians to expend on the front line and /or work to death. Plus the Ukranian war industry is pretty impressive, even on global scale.

      • cygnus@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        24 days ago

        My guess is that Russia is trying to create a threat to NATO countries so that those countries will want to hold onto their defense materials and weapons instead of those going to Ukraine.

        NATO is not exactly strapped for materiel at the moment, especially if considering quality vs. quantity. Given the way that an Israeli F35 was able to operate with impunity a short while ago, I don’t think the old Soviet gear would fare too well. https://theaviationgeekclub.com/iriaf-commander-reportedly-fired-after-he-kept-secret-that-israeli-f-35-stealth-fighters-had-violated-iran-airspace/

      • kbin_space_program@kbin.run
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        22 days ago

        Or Putin is trusting that Nato will hold the baltic countries back and he’ll be able to do what he wants to them, provided no invasion.

    • massive_bereavement@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      24 days ago

      The experience for this last year was that once the US stopped supporting Ukraine, the rest of the west folded as well, which let them regain the initiative.
      I know nothing about anything but it seems like they’ve learned that with enough patience the US and most NATO allies support will wane with time.

      • Skua@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        24 days ago

        The European NATO members did continue supplying Ukraine. However, the US had previously accounted for roughly half of the total arms supplied and Europe didn’t do anything extra to make up for that sudden colossal shortfall.

    • Bookmeat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      24 days ago

      They’re preparing for Trump’s reelection. They’re not thinking a week into the future.

  • holycrap@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    24 days ago

    This is a golden opportunity to put new ones in closer to the Russian side