Could NATO win a war against a major power like Russia or China

File: 1489904745180.jpg (44KB, 640x782px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 640x782px

>UK, France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Spain and all the other countries vs Russia
>Russia winning in a conventional conflict

>>33362277
because you know wars just happen with a snap of finger and don't boil down from years of tension

This question is almost impossible to answer without getting some grounding assumptions. Like how many years after the US withdrew and what caused it? Are current relations with Europe and US strained? Is that enough for total strategic retreat? Does the US still maintain alliances with certain European countries without being in NATO? Have the remaining NATO members made efforts to plug the gap that the US left? By what means? Nuclear or convetional?

And then the answer would only be relevant to that particular set of assumptions. When people bicker over these types of threads their all playing of a certain set of assumptions in their heads. Not ideal for "productive" wargaming.

The modernised China armed forces have zero/or very limited operational experience, whilst many NATO nations have operational experience, but very few have done anything at scale. Even fewer have the actual capability to do it at scale. Only France and the UK have capablility to go well beyond their region and support / sustain large scale operations.

>>33362402
Half to two thirds of the EU bloc are resource pits that would be ineffectual at best and actively detrimental at worst. It comes down to France and Germany doing the bulk of the work with smaller countries like Poland supporting. Without UK getting involved, Russia has decent odds.

If anything it'd end with US taking partisan action on behalf of the EU, not strictly NATO, as has been the trend with all modern European superwars

>>33362539
>Half to two thirds of the EU bloc are resource pits
And Russia is shit despite all their resources, you think that gets better when they are at war with their infrastructure getting shred to bits?

>>33362277
Only if Italy is kicked out too.

>>33362402
this is how it would happen

File: Untitled.jpg (270KB, 1341x900px) Image search: [Google]

270KB, 1341x900px

>>33362402
Yes.

NATO is an extension of US military industrial complex in Europe. The US constitutes 90% of allied collective firepower. The US 'withdrawing' from NATO means that US gives up on its market in Europe, and a status of global power. Stop for a minute and ponder what a non-question you're asking.

>>33362277
>>33362277
>NATO members countries being fairly lax with operational readiness and spending

And Russia is so much better how? At least West European NATO's warmachine are not rusted and based on 60's tech or aftermarket Amazon personal buys. Russia is broke. It knows this. Which explains all the psyops it's playing with the US and you ate it hook line and sinker.

Totally depends on the scenario. If Russia had limited war aims, like annexing the Baltic States, I can't imagine European NATO dislodging them quickly.

>>33366530
its also worth noting that NATO armerment is going to hit max in 2024 with every nation state pitching in 3% of its gross GPD

NATO (-us) would stomp Russia today.
5 - 10 years from now?

China would just Zerg rush them.

>>33362277
>Could NATO win a war against a major power like China
>major power
This is bait right? They're practically going to war on themselves with how much they kill and torture their own kind.

>>33366146
>Russia doesn't know how to run command post exercises.