Summary
Denmark’s Defense Intelligence Service warns that Russia could launch a large-scale war in Europe within five years if NATO appears weak or divided, especially if the U.S. does not intervene.
The report outlines a timeline where Russia could attack a neighboring country within six months, escalate to a regional Baltic conflict in two years, and potentially engage NATO-wide by 2029.
The assessment comes as Trump pressures NATO members to increase defense spending and has suggested the U.S. might not defend allies who fail to meet financial commitments.
With what troops and hardware? This is ridiculous. I mean if Putin has a few working nukes, sure he could launch them. But he doesn’t have anything else left. It’s all been destroyed.
Russia has started up a war economy, scaling up production of weapons, tanks, etc.
Putin probably waits untill Trump destroys NATO and is just taking his time to prepare.
The only reason Ukraine has been holding on for this long is because all the stuff they got from the US and EU. If that stops it’s not going to last long.
Pete Hegseth already completely fucked Ukraine by saying they need to give up on joining NATO and just accept that Russia can keep all the occupied areas. It’s like the Trump administration just wants to kiss Putin’s ass.
the us has already started one in ukraine
Obviously the headline should have said “special military operation.”
What are they gonna start a major war with? Their one “functional” 5th Gen “stealth” fighter that has the radar cross section of a Boeing 747 and no replacement parts?
They gonna start shitting out t-34s again like it’s WW2?
They have lost the majority of their best vehicles and their trained soldiers.
If nukes didn’t exist they would already have been obliterated by now.
Time to start working on my Swedish more…
I think Russia is well aware that if they go to war with the EU, China will backdoor them hard.
Either France or the UK can easily fill in. Both have nuclear submarines. Mutually assured destruction baby.
France and the UK’s nuclear arsenal is minuscule compared to the US stockpile.
And a lot of the nukes at NATO bases are on loan from the US, so if the US pulls out there will not be nearly as many bombs close to Russia.
Anyone insane enough to start a nuclear war may decide that absorbing a hundred or so nukes isn’t so bad when they have hundreds of Cold War era bunkers and thousands of their own nukes.
The French strategy with nuclear bombs is not to wipe a country out of a map, but wiping out Moscow and Saint Petersburg (or New York and Washington DC for a USan example). The message is that you can kill us, but we will make sure that you are definitely crippled
France and the UK’s nuclear arsenal is minuscule compared to the US stockpile.
You only need a few.
And a lot of the nukes at NATO bases are on loan from the US, so if the US pulls out there will not be nearly as many bombs close to Russia.
Both UK and France have nuclear armed subs, those are all that matter.
Anyone insane enough to start a nuclear war may decide that absorbing a hundred or so nukes isn’t so bad when they have hundreds of Cold War era bunkers and thousands of their own nukes.
I’m going to go out on a limb and say even Putin doesn’t want to spend the rest of his life in a bunker.
Anyone insane enough to start a nuclear war may decide that absorbing a hundred or so nukes isn’t so bad when they have hundreds of Cold War era bunkers and thousands of their own nukes.
Russian bureaucrats may think that about the rest of the population, but fortunately even they are not dumb enough to believe in having safety in those bunkers (time passes, things rot, materials decay).
So Russia really using nukes is for a situation where somebody making decisions believes there will be no retaliation.
Considering that throwing your friends and allies to the wolves has become a really common thing in modern world, just like plainly disregarding any kind of agreements or international laws or moral principles, I think such a situation is possible.
And with the cucked way France’s foreign policy seems to work recently, and with the too realpolitik-style UK foreign policy, one might imagine a situation where both are not very active.
Also bureaucrats of various countries are class brothers. A bureaucrat, even a German or a French one, understands Putin and Xi better than somebody democratically elected. And Germany is traditionally (last 30 years I mean) friendly with Russia.
No conclusion.
Title is misleading, since there is already a major war in Europe started by russia
Headlines from 2011
Removed by mod
Would you like to tell the whole class how US is responsible for Putty bombing civilians?
Believe it or not, the U.S. cannot force the Russian military to cross its own border into a third country.
Poor widdle Russia had no agency, NO CHOICE, but to invade. They were OBLIGATED to violate the Budapest Memorandum and attempt to seize Ukraine.
It was Ukraine that violated the Minsk Agreements
You have the remarkable ability to confidently navigate the world with a mind so barren of critical thought that even a Magic 8-Ball would outthink you in a debate.
Says the person parroting US propaganda?
Man I thought I had squashed all the tankies. .ml is leaking again.
Thoughts drift far away, A tranquil mind, void and still, Silent echoes play.
This checks out… if you only include putin in the definition of “people”
No, it’s still a fucking lie even then. Claiming that Putin was somehow “forced” to invade another sovereign country because the US was some kind of boogeyman is purely demented, ass-backwards abuser “logic.”
but if putin is the only person, that means every country belongs to him!
well, the US now does for sure
With what? They can’t even handle war in Ukraine and they run out of plenty of hardware.
With the help of the US
I’d laugh at you if this was 2024. Today? I’m uncomfortable with such statements.
Yeah, but won’t Trump be busy with the Great War on Greenland, Panama and Canada?
The new Axis powers of Russia, China, North Korea and U.S.A against the European powers. 10 years ago that would seem ridiculous, now, not too far fetched.
USA’s secretary of defense is already saying that Ukraine should let go of the occupied territories, will not be allowed in NATO and will not get any security guarantees. Basically saying to let Russia win and opening the door for more invasions by Russia.
Well most of the rare earth materials Trump wants are in Russian occupied territory, or on the border of it.
I do not have an English translation but in this interview a lieutenant general of the German Bundeswehr says that they are observing that not all new supplies are being pushed to the Ukrainian front lines and instead new stockpiles are being created.
My personal expectation is that Putin will attempt one more push in Ukraine once mud season is over, take what he can get and then agree to another peace deal (Minsk 3 anyone?). He will then take some time to restructure and reinforce the military before again “coming to the aid of suppressed Russian minorities”, this time in places like Georgia, Moldova or Armenia. Ukraine is off the table because they will use the time to reinforce as well.
Could be, who knows. Though the countries listed are not part of NATO and are weak. And at least in Moldova it’s not easy as Russia doesn’t border it and for Armenia they have to go through Georgia first.
Though the countries listed are not part of NATO and are weak.
Perfect to get the collective confidence back on its feed after getting a literal bloody nose in Ukraine.
for Armenia they have to go through Georgia first
Two for the price of one. That’s a bargain!
Unfortunately, if they could foresee the consequences of their own actions, the war in Ukraine wouldn’t even have started
Hey, it’s just a quick special military operation to Kyiv, in and out in three days! Surely nothing can go wrong.
IIRC there was talk after it went south that the yes-men around Putin had made him believe that not only would Ukraine not fight back, but the people would join the Russian troops in celebration for being “liberated” and help them, and that’s why they didn’t even think that failure was a possibility.
TBH it’s still early for evaluating consequences - it might still prove beneficial for Russia, especially with orange in chief.
They wasted hundreds of thousands in the meat grinder… The final outcome would have to be absolutely massive in favour of Russia for it to still be beneficial. Unlikely.
Depends on the perspective. To Putin it’s not a problem, for him people are expandable and cheap. You just write some laws and they grow again in his view. As the land grab is forever. Your and mine views are non-dictatorish and as such don’t apply to Russian imperialism.
Anything less than total victory will lead to economic collapse for Russia and at this point it’s pretty much impossible even with Trump in office. They are cooked in any case.
If they capture Ukraine, they will have a fresh pool of conscripts, not to mention Ukraine’s impressive military technology.
And a never ending insurgency?
Good point. Ukrainians doesn’t have that much of weapons and are heavily reliant on west. Except for drones, but at least some major parts are bought from other countries. But yes, it would increase Russian military to some extent, though I doubt Ukrainians would be good Russian soldiers.
Ukrainian conscripts will have a line of known-loyal barrier troops behind them with orders to shoot them if they fail to obey. Old Russian Army tactic.
Yes, sure, but that still doesn’t make them good soldiers.
russians aren’t known for utilizing good soldiers anyway. they are known for utilizing meat shields, though
The agency offers three scenarios that could occur if the Ukraine conflict stops or becomes frozen, working from the assumption that Russia does not have the capacity to wage war with multiple countries at the same time.
Man Europe needs to build up their military quick. Too long you’ve relied on the US but now the US is unreliable depending on who is in office
Surely putin will be dead by then?
One can hope
Will. You meant “will”.
This is a ridiculous headline. They could start a war today, also could have started a war any time in the past 5 years.
You’re half right: it’s ridiculous because they did start a major war in Europe in the past 5 years.
I didn’t deny that, so I am entirely right. The point is that the headline is meaningless clickbait.
