Who would win in a fight?

>>35049298
The US is like the meat of the Neato pie. Without them the pie deflates (implodes) and then some Russian takes a shit on your plate

>>35049298
EU would win in the end, but Russia probaly would make some serious advances into the Baltics at the beginning.

Depends, what does Turkey do? They're the biggest NATO army after the US, they have access to Russia's soft belly and they in turn decide whether it can operate in the Mediterranean or not. If mad Vlad gets the roaches on his side (promises them the Balkans or something) it'll turn the tide of the war.

>>35049298
It would likely start off favoring the Russian's but they would experience severe economic issues at home due to their near depleted financial reserves. It would also exacerbate their issue with their aging population.

>EU fist is smaller
What did they mean by this?

>>35049385
>What did they mean by this?
It's the hand of a woman.
>>35049298
Russia is basically a weaker Italy. Problem is, the fantasy of this story is the big EU players giving a shit about the Baltics. Italy /Spain is generally incompetent, France doesn't care, Germany (kek) is neutered. It'd be Finland, and Poland vs the bear and I doubt anyone but Poland would care about losing a couple of non countries desu.

File: 1498725532958.jpg (483KB, 864x687px) Image search: [Google]

483KB, 864x687px

Russian motor-rifle brigades and newer tank divisions are no joke, especially with the fact that the Baltic countries have no real armor, the first armor that Russia would encounter would be Polish and German, which in the event of a surprise bum-rush attack would take a while to get moving. That said once France, Britain and Germany start amassing their armor and aviation, Russian advance would come to a stand-still and the area between the Baltics and Poland would turn into a meat grinder (Belarus could provide some support too). Even without the US, the European part of NATO is still fairly formidable and still has in some cases a better naval force than Russia which would play a key part in the Baltic Sea, but Russian ASM batteries in Kaliningrad (if they exist) would be a problem. Overall, without US air-superiority, it would be costly for both sides in human lives and equipment.

File: cs.webm (332KB, 600x480px) Image search: [Google]

332KB, 600x480px

>>35049385

File: leg press.webm (3MB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 640x640px

>>35049298
Russians are superior.

>>35049481
NATO and the UK are nonfactors in a EU engagement.

NATO would bring in roaches, Norway, the US, and Canada + others which would change things considerably .

>>35049513
>the UK
You mean the country that has been one of the hardest on Russia with sanctions?

File: germany BTFO'd - russian rape of berlin.jpg (227KB, 1212x1600px) Image search: [Google]

227KB, 1212x1600px

>>35049465
>EU's hand is the hand of a woman.
LOL, what did they mean by this?

>>35049465
>Russia
>weaker Italy

The economic comparison is a meme. Russia gets more out of it's budget because wages are shit. You can't just compare overall available cash.

The EU certainly doesn't have the force projection to protect the Baltics on it's own.

>>35049614
>The EU certainly doesn't have the force projection to protect the Baltics on it's own.

They're a relatively short distance by rail and sea.

>>35049537
Since Brexit it is only fair to exclude them from this scenario, if you include the Brits you must then include the USA.

>>35049650
I don't think France or the U.K. are going to nuke anyone over the Baltics. Russia isn't looking to take over the EU in this scenario.

>>35049638
The EU is a framework that involves economies and laws of its members, it has no real military component because its an economic bloc and not a military alliance.

>>35049623
And who are they going to be looking to for local logistical support? Germany? Yeah, I'm sure they've got all their ducks in a row.

In addition they have a paucity of tankers to facilitate long-range strike and auxiliary ships to enable a longer time on station for naval forces.

>>35049674
OP said the EU so lets play by his rules or not at all, it also ceased to be just an economic bloc a long time ago which is why Brexit happened in the first place.

>>35049298
>>35049638
>USA goes full "America first" and leaves NATO
>EUs goal to prevent it
EU isn't a military alliance. UK, Turkey and rest of the NATO should be involved.

>>35049614
>The EU certainly doesn't have the force projection to protect the Baltics on it's own.
What are you talking about? Britain and France have great resources in their air forces and navies and those distances are not big anyways.

Finland, Poland, and Sweden also all have very strong and competent armies on their own who could hold down the fort, more or less, until Britain, France, and Turkey (if we're including NATO and not just the EU) got involved.

>>35049710
Let's be real, if USA was out, Turkey wouldn't go to war with Russia to defend Baltics

>>35049720
>USA out
>Let's be real

If EU became a military alliance to replace NATO, then some countries would likely leave it and others would join it and they would be reinforcing their armies to fill the gap that US left.

>>35049775
I'd be very interested to see a "can't rely on the US" war footing EU. An actual EU army, with the UK and Germany ramping up military production, would be a sight to see.
Given the involvement of nuclear powers and very good air forces, I would be willing to say the OP conflict would be extraordinarily bloody.

>>35049833
>Given the involvement of nuclear powers and very good air forces, I would be willing to say the OP conflict would be extraordinarily bloody.
You think so? I would assume both sides would try to keep civilian casulties as low as possible, in order not to escalate the war any futher

>>35049691
>And who are they going to be looking to for local logistical support? Germany?
There are many rail lines they can take, they go through Germany but there's no reason that all of the rail logistics would be run by the Germans.

>In addition they have a paucity of tankers to facilitate long-range strike and auxiliary ships to enable a longer time on station for naval forces.

You realize how short the distance is from friendly ports right? And how small the Russian navy is there.

>>35049863
Given what's happened in Ukraine, I would expect shock-and-awe from Russia. No holds barred.
The EU would reply in kind. At the end of the day the EU can dig up a dozen or so nukes. Russia has... more.

>Turkey
Not sure why this is such an important topic for you people? A war between Turkey and Russia would be Air only, neither side can properly invade each other and despite the fairly decent quality of Turkey's air force, the Russians simply have enough quality and more importantly quantity available to deal with Turkey's air force at one point.

Though, to be fair, a complete European-Russo war would divide those available air units obviously.

>>35049775
Given Germany still hasn't really done anything to fix their military, despite Russia becoming more and more aggressive, I sorta doubt they'd do much of anything.

The U.K. would probably pursue an exclusive defense pact with the US.

France might actually take shit seriously and finally start work on a second carrier and enlargened sub fleet.

>>35049298
They would eventually get defeated by Russia.

>>35049925
France will not be able to hold Russia during the 3 years it requires to build an aircraft carrier. Let's be honest, with nukes the shit will be out in a day, without, in a couple of weeks. We only have very expensive and difficult gear to produce, for russia it's just the opposite. Without the US russia will have air superiority.
If nukes aren't used by anyone from the start, when the last square km of France will be about to fall our subs will go for an honor round on Moscow and every capital in Europe not occupied by Russia will be glassed.

>>35049720
>Let's be real, if USA was out, Turkey wouldn't go to war with Russia to defend Baltics
Maybe the EU would offer them a deal out of desperation that they could not refuse.

If Russia were to take the Baltics, it could theoretically have the nationalistic confidence to go further into other ex-USSR countries.

>>35049966
ah yes, the samson option

>>35049925
>Given Germany still hasn't really done anything to fix their military
Technologically speaking we are doing absolutely fine. Pumas, Boxers, Leopard 2A6 and 7s, highly modern Frigates and subs. The air fleet is the only thing that is looking really bad, outside of overall quantity of course. It's not as bad as /k/ is always making it out to be.

>>35049966
in addition, this is why everyone wants to fight over middle east : resources, no russian winter, civilians aren't of any importance, no dozens and dozens of nuclear power plant that, in case of a war, might pollute the whole northern hemisphere, you can produce military gear in your country and send it to fight here. Middle east is just the arena of 1rst world countries. Let's keep it that way

File: trash supported by weak men.jpg (267KB, 1404x603px) Image search: [Google]

267KB, 1404x603px

>>35049545

File: 1358976018969.jpg (189KB, 1000x714px) Image search: [Google]

189KB, 1000x714px

To prevent war, The EU will let in all military aged Russian males to fuck their women.