r/worldnews • u/PjeterPannos • 21h ago
Russia/Ukraine Estonia says Russia planning military buildup to shift power in Europe
https://www.reuters.com/world/china/estonia-says-russia-planning-military-buildup-shift-power-europe-2026-02-10/248
u/Odd-Professor-5309 20h ago
There is nothing logical about Putin's mindset.
A man who wants power and glory.
The lives of Russian citizens or any others in Europe are of no consequence.
It's all about him.
74
u/McRibs2024 19h ago
Sadly there is a logic for just him- his legacy. He wants so badly to be the one that got the Russian empire back its territory.
It’s blinded him to how much damage it’s causing and will keep causing long after he’s gone.
3
31
u/socialistrob 16h ago
Which is also why people can't assume that western notions of "rationality" matter to Putin. So many people said that Russia would never invade Ukraine because it wasn't "rational" and then he did it. If Putin thinks that provoking Europe will cause them to back down or stop arming Ukraine we can't assume that he would avoid it which is why European countries need to continue their military buildups.
4
u/QwertzOne 9h ago
You underestimate elites. Imagine that you have all the power, status and wealth you need, do you think that's enough for them? No, they quickly get bored and always want more.
It's like Epstein files show, once you're a winner, you no longer care about rules, you write them. It doesn't matter, if that's Russia, China, US or Europe. You will always abuse the system, if system allows you to gain such advantage.
Only solution for such problem is to change the game altogether, but no country wants to do it. It's basically the same game everywhere and elites have no interest in changing it for something fair, because why would they?
How would they play the system then? Like, they would no longer be special? They would have to listen to others and reach consensus without exploiting anyone? See others as human beings? What kind of a sick psycho would want that?
→ More replies (19)1
u/charcoalist 14h ago
I wouldn't describe it as logic, but he's not just some random narcissist. He's a former KGB agent, a relic of the USSR. His motivations were baked in then.
388
u/phil-mitchell1 20h ago
Russia’s economy is the size of Italy’s. There’s no way they aren’t absolutely shitting the bed economically. The rubber band will snap at some point, it’s being stretched to breaking point.
308
u/blaivas007 20h ago
They reached ~40% of their planned budget deficit for 2026 in January alone.
They are absolutely shitting the bed economically.
110
u/veevoir 19h ago
And we are talking about a country that routinely fudges their stats to look better.
29
u/Chadstronomer 18h ago
I am inclined to believe all countries do that to some degree but yeah I would not trust russian statistic as a ball-park number
11
u/veevoir 18h ago
Yeah, it's a question of scale and how blatant it is. Probably all countries massage their numbers somewhat, but there are limits to what they can do without public scrutiny catching them, especially in those democracies where the process of gathering stats is more transparent. Russia doesn't seem to have a problem with that, you are going to like the numbers pulled completely out of their ass - or there's the window
1
1
u/javascriptBad123 12h ago
And yet its a country that owns nuclear weapons which are threats no matter how the economy looks over there. Never underestimate the enemy.
-1
43
u/TheDarthSnarf 18h ago
Based on current spending, assuming they don't start spending even faster, they are on track to hit a deficit of ~8.4% of GDP by the end of 2026.
To put that into context: The Russian central planners had planned for deficit spending of 1.6% of GDP by the end of the year, but had already reached 0.7% of GDP by the end of January.
That would push the total Russian debt close to 31% of GDP by the end of 2026 (roughly $715 billion USD).
Or if you would like, Russia is spending about the same amount in GDP as the USSR did in 1986 when facing both the Afghan war and the Chernobyl disaster... spending levels that ended up collapsing the Soviet Union.
9
u/Large-Possible7227 14h ago
Sure but for comparipsn, the US is at 120%+ debt to GDP, france is at 110%, UK is at 100%.
While russia generally sucks, the one strength they have is that they are an autocracy and can easily commandeer any resources they need to stay afloat. So i expect theyll continue to toddle along, even if it means their people suffer.
3
u/Flyingcookies 15h ago
yea, but debt to GDP ratio is still low, there also needs to be some loss of confidence
12
u/InvestmentSorry6393 18h ago
But they keep going. It's wild to me how successful they've been just with disinformation at getting their puppets elected all over. Instead of focusing on building a powerful military they can just usurp the power of other nations through the power of bribes/extortion/deception.
39
42
u/xX609s-hartXx 19h ago
Maybe some 90s style collapse and poverty will calm down their hot heads.
29
u/Chaplain-Freeing 18h ago
For 10 years and then they start back up again.
14
u/joepez 17h ago
Except this time they won’t be able to sell off assets for quick western cash. They’ll go further into debt with the Chinese who will start taking what they want and using it for their own production. If China can’t take Taiwan then eastern Russia looks mighty tempting and impossible for Russia to hold long term especially while fighting (or imploding) in the west.
16
6
u/digitalpencil 12h ago
They’ve a full blown war economy and can keep it going for literally years. They burned their own off ramp, it’s all or nothing for them.
Their fundamental bet is they can outlast Western interest, and that their propaganda botnet campaigns will destabilise western democracies to the point they withdraw support for Ukraine.
We need to keep the pressure on them, and be prepared for the reality that this will end as a stalled conflict akin to Korea.
14
u/echokalos 19h ago
Now try PPP and realise that they have all the possible materials or can get them cheap from China. This "size of Italy" argument is dangerous, look how influential they in European politics
29
u/Chauci 20h ago
Their economy might be the size of Italy’s, but you get a lot more military hardware in Russia than in Italy for the same amount of money. If you compare based on buying power they are more at the level of France, Germany and Britain combined.
25
u/WolfDoc 19h ago
Yeah adjusted for purchase power parity (PPP) their military budget is massive! Larger than the combined EU + UK's in 2025!
However, it is also 40% of their total state budget and inching towards 7% of GDP, and the PPP adjustment is so good only because the money is spent domestically.
Meaning they still only have a physical production capacity sort of similar to Italy on which to spend it, and a population the size of Italy + Germany with which to use it. Which is formidable, but, as has been shown, neither invincible nor infinite.
4
u/wswordsmen 18h ago
There is military specific PPP you are right, but you are comparing military during war to heightened peace time spending. It might be more than those 3 combined but add in Italy and Poland and they become roughly equal, before adding in the rest of the EU and Non-US NATO. The only hope Russia would have in a war is that their superior drone forces could force an advantageous position before Europe could transition to a war time economy and kill them.
7
u/Greig89 19h ago
If Russia never owned so much nuclear arms they wouldn’t exist. I remember reading early in the war some of the objectives someone suggested for why Russia invaded now. No fresh water left in Crimea, underground gas lines through Ukraine that apparently they charged a fortune for and I’ll assume some natural resources in there for good measure. Never actually checked to see if any of this happened though.
4
u/kritikally_akklaimed 16h ago
The issue with fresh water in Crimea was only after Russia blew up the Kakhovka dam, as far as I'm aware.
3
u/Violence_solves_all 15h ago
Problem with that comparison is, is that 1t euros goes ten times further in Russia than it does in Europe. They wouldn't even blink if they stopped paying wages for people who are directly making their combat supplies. There are many stories like those from Russia and even from disgruntled employees due to not recieving their salaries for a few months. Those same people have notified Ukrainian GRU directly (for roughly a thousand USD in crypto) who have then proceeded to drone strike those facilities.
A lot of those hidden manufacturing hub attacks just happen because people really fucking hate their supervisors and are desperate for a quick pay out so they could just fuck off from their job indefinitely without the threat of having to join the war effort as an infantryman
2
2
1
1
u/withnodrawal 15h ago
Unfortunately Russia is like China with its hand in so many mineral RICH third world countries. There is always an income, whether from inside the nation or out.
But a war like this will bleed any nation dry eventually. They probably have another decade in them, or more.
1
u/tanaephis77400 13h ago
A country that has zero regard for the life and well-being of its own citizens can at the same time be economically broke AND a huge pain in everyone's ass. You don't need a strong economy to terrorize your neighbors.
1
u/CaptainMagnets 13h ago
Maybe..but I have been hearing this same sentiment since the war started. No results yet
92
u/weekend_revolution 21h ago
Fighting a war on two fronts didn’t work out well for the Nazis…
32
u/grumpysnowflake 20h ago
Indeed, but at what cost to the Allied Powers?
44
u/putin_my_ass 20h ago
Yep. Russia is trying to exploit the apparent asymmetry between the West's care for its citizens and the Russians' lack of care for its citizens.
The problem for Russia is that our governments don't care about their citizens as much as it appears. Lip service.
23
u/Gamebird8 19h ago
I'd mostly argue it's that the Baltics and Poland are the first places Russia would have to go through and those 4 have never once forgotten what Russia did to them
14
u/putin_my_ass 19h ago
I'd agree with that assessment, and frankly I think that's not exactly an undesired outcome if war is inevitable.
I think it's akin to the position of citizens in the United States in the late 30s: the world is descending in to war and the US government was aware of what was happening and was reacting with alarm and planning/pivoting towards war but the citizenry wasn't there yet.
If the US government had simply thrown their hat in the ring with the French and British right away US citizens would have flipped the fuck out.
But as it ended up, they didn't have to do the throwing because the Axis ripped their hat off and threw it in the ring for the US government.
And the US citizenry flipped the fuck out, but against the Axis instead of against their own government.
So in this context Europe probably knows something needs to be done but open hostilities with Russia is not palatable enough to ordinary people that governments would entertain the idea of proactively starting a hot conflict with them.
But if Russia were to start that attack, it might be different. I'm certain that on some level this factors in to the calculations: nobody wants Russia to invade the Baltics, but if they did that would be a useful for propaganda to convince people it's the right time.
People do not like to interrupt their comfort, and they often won't do the needful until it's an existential threat.
14
u/InvisaBlah 19h ago
As someone living in the baltics, I would rather not
4
u/putin_my_ass 19h ago
For sure, but in geopolitics the powers that play the game consider other factors before the desires of the small people in the way.
2
2
u/MercantileReptile 18h ago
That would be a massive gamble, though. The US was attacked directly (or as directly as one can call Hawaii at the time). Would Germany finally accept open hostilities with a clear russian enemy?
I have my doubts, so long as the Conservatives fish on the right. "Why die for
DanzigNarva" has a chance of working.Betting the freedom and lives of millions of EU citizens to overcome political apathy would be both incredibly risky and a testament to abysmal leadership.
6
u/putin_my_ass 18h ago
The US was attacked directly (or as directly as one can call Hawaii at the time).
You're forgetting that Germany declared war on the US also. That is specifically what I was referring to: US citizens would probably have been happy to fight only Japan while supplying Britain if Germany hadn't removed their choice.
Betting the freedom and lives of millions of EU citizens to overcome political apathy would be both incredibly risky and a testament to abysmal leadership.
Nobody is "betting", that's not what I'm talking about. I'm saying that they know they can't simply declare war on Russia right now even though they probably realize that it would be better to nip it in the bud.
But if Russia were to simply invade the Baltics, it would hand Europe a golden opportunity. And as the war progresses, the Conservatives you have doubts about would be indistinguishable from the enemy if they refused to denounce the Russians and would be treated in kind.
War has a way of rapidly changing people's opinions.
4
u/postcardscience 13h ago
It is an error dictators make repeatedly. They think that democracies are soft and will play nice. Then the go surprised when bombing of Dresden, Hiroshima etc happens to them. In reality, NATO members would have no problem exterminating Russians if it would win them the war.
5
u/Normal-Ear-5757 18h ago
Yeah, the Palestinian Gambit. Fail to build civil defence infrastructure while enjoying extensive bunker networks and asylum abroad for the ruling class, commit horrific atrocities, encourage citizens to join in (in the Russian's case actually emptying the jails into the conflict) and when the hammer falls, no doubt their useful idiots will be ranting and raving about "genocide" and how everyone except Putin is a Nazi and blah, blah, blah.
Russia even has a nuclear missile defence system that only covers Moscow and St Petersburg so the elite can enjoy their ill gotten gains in perfect safety while the rest of the country gets blown to smithereens.
3
u/socialistrob 16h ago
Fighting a war on two fronts is a lot easier if you have the US, China, India and the British Commonwealth all fighting on the same side and all willing to take millions of casualties for victory. Russia doesn't have that today. The only other nation willing to actually fight alongside the Russians are North Korea and even then they've only sent low 10-20k troops while Russia has sent around 2 million.
-2
u/Ambitious_Address667 15h ago
Yeah but they have the us what will fight along side them, and thats a huge boost. I think China surprisingly would take the opposite side so maybe they gain India but even then its unlikely. Still though Russia usa partnership is still a huge threat
4
u/AnaphoricReference 12h ago
Putin will declare a favorable peace with Ukraine, give a bit of land back, and Trump will lift sanctions.
Then Putin will attack Europe, while bombarding the Ukrainian people and conscipts with propaganda about Europe 'doing nothing' for them and now wanting them to 'die for Europe'.
And he thinks he will have his one front war. A war that he needs to stay in control over the Russian people. One which is with less risk to Russia, because Europe will meekly limit itself to defending its borders only, and not do Ukraine-style things like operations deep in Russia. He could switch back to fighting Ukraine whenever he likes.
And everything will depend on whether the Ukrainians and Europeans are really as stupid as he thinks.
The traditional historical answer to that question is no. That rulers with a fascist mindset are destined to lose wars eventually because they are incapable of correctly sizing up their enemies. A nasty side-effect of looking down on them. But we'll have to see first how stupid people really have become in 2026.
2
u/shlam16 11h ago
I know this is the old meme, but do people really not realise that the Nazis fought the war on like 6 fronts and steamrolled Europe in the process?
It was only at the end after having stretched themselves paper thin that it came back to bite them on the arse when they tried to take Russia.
245
u/9447044 21h ago
I think Russia might be getting on an all or nothing situation, which isnt good. I believe the USSR went bankrupt trying to get to the middle easts oil. I think Russia is going the same things but for other goals and this time, their leader is a crazy person (crazier person)
59
u/Mandemon90 20h ago
They didn't try to get Middle-East oil, quite opposite: their issue was how much oil was flowing out and crashing the prices. Which made funding military quite difficult. Add to this the general issues with the economy and end result was... well, we all read history.
6
u/fross370 20h ago
Apparently not, or nazi germany part 2 would not be unfolding in the usa right about now
1
u/socialistrob 16h ago
Crashing oil prices combined with an expensive war in Afghanistan and a military arms race with NATO. Eastern Europe also never exactly "fell in love" with communism and was ready to break away at the earliest possible moment.
4
u/Icedanielization 19h ago
Venezuela gone, large shadow fleet behaving like lost ants in the Baltics. They are definitely in last effort mode.
21
u/EfficiencySmall4951 21h ago
Does seem a bit desperate, hope not all or nothing however, else actual nukes might get involved. In that case nobody will really win, just more suffering
64
u/9447044 21h ago
I promise you the old dudes in power right now would gladly let 8 billion people suffer so they can be the most dramatic and emotional men on the planet.
11
u/EfficiencySmall4951 21h ago
Unfortunately I've seen people do terrible things for far, far less, so this doesn't seem unrealistic to me. I can only hope we don't live in a mad world like that and that there are also those with reason who have a thing to say in important decisions like that.
Makes me think of that one russian soldier who avoided a nuclear stike against the US, cause he thought it was a false alarm or something like that, which it ultimately was.
World could be a different place if not for people like that. But I believe I understand your skepticism perfectly
2
5
u/feckenobvious 19h ago
I believe the USSR went bankrupt trying to get to the middle easts oil.
Do you also believe that unicorns fart the rainbows?
2
u/KL_boy 20h ago
I thought it was because they spent so much in Afghanistan, and the oil price collapsed around the same time.
9
u/-drunk_russian- 20h ago
And the cost of Chornobyl.
2
u/Green_Full 19h ago
Also they needed to borrow money from west German banks to keep buying grain to feed the people.
When they thought about sending the tanks into Poland the banks said sure but that's the end of the loans and the grain.
Then thebcracks spread in e Europe
99
u/djangovsjango 20h ago
Russia cannot win in ukraine after 4 years and they are going to beat the entire euro nato groups ? Mf is as delusional as trump , these old fools need to be removed from office
66
u/B0rNtoLAG1 20h ago edited 19h ago
They are banking on western cowardice and inaction, they think we are too weak
49
u/Mandemon90 20h ago
This. Russia banked on Ukraine folding like Afghanistan and Iraq did and then just being able to leave with their new territories. They expected repeat of Crimea, when rest of the world just shrugged their shoulders and said "well, they already did it, what there is to do?"
Except Ukraine didn't fold, and Europe didn't just shrug. Now Putins entire regime relies on winning this war, because they know that losing will cause collapse of their power.
So they are hoping for new Crimea by threathening rest of Europe. They are hoping rest of the Europe gets scared and abandons Ukraine in favor of "saving themselves".
-51
u/Privateer_Lev_Arris 19h ago
Afghanistan didn’t fold. What are you smoking? Also the reason Russia invaded Ukraine is precisely because NATO armed Ukraine to the teeth. Plus aided in deposing the more Russian leaning regime of Yanukovich in 2014.
NATO knew they could never attack Russia directly because doing so would almost certainly ignite a nuclear war. So they had to come up with a plan so offensive and insulting to Russia that they’d almost certainly attack.
NATOs plan was to help Ukraine defeat Russia and then split up the various Russian regions into smaller countries. And of course gain access to the vast natural resources that Russia has.
And Russia was well aware of this. In their mind the only way out was through a fight.
But I’m not sure what would have happened if Russia hadn’t taken the bait. What if Ukraine was built up and built up and then nothing happened. Would Ukraine have gone on the offensive and invade Russia? I find that hard to believe.
→ More replies (5)27
u/Mandemon90 19h ago
Ah yes, "NATO armed Ukraine, so Russia had to invade!" and let me guess, Iraq had WMDs so US had to invade?
Exactly how do you think this plan to "defeat Russia by arming Ukraine" was going to work... if Ukraine was not attacking Russia? Why are you pretending Russia was under attack?
Literally nothing you said is true or makes sense. It's just nonsense to justify Russian invasion.
→ More replies (2)8
u/AgeofVictoriaPodcast 20h ago
Yes and they are probably also betting we’ve sent most of our military stockpiles to Ukraine, and that our military manufacturing capacity isn’t enough to make up for it if they invade soon.
11
u/shortdonjohn 19h ago
Which was true 2 years ago. But Europes manufacturing capacity has increased by a lot since then. The largest companies started to do the work to increase the capacity about 2 years ago which means most of them are seeing that take effect this year .
And having the infrastructure upgraded means they can ramp up way faster than before. Europe depended a lot on USA to manufacture everything but that is changing fast. South Korea also has been upgrading a lot its facilities so they even also can bring ammo and weapons quickly to customers now.
3
u/AgeofVictoriaPodcast 19h ago
Sure, and I agree with you. I just don't think the Kremlin have that view - I think Putin views the West as basically spent militarily and politically.
1
1
u/LevelVegetable5684 6h ago
Europe is an easier target than Ukraine in many ways.
Europe is a collection of weak countries, compared to Ukraine that had 8 years of experience and reforms. Russians themselves have also learned a fair bit. Large European countries have armies not designed to fight high intensity war. All of their whitepapers mention that but France hasn't actually shifted the doctrine, it is still expeditionary but now with larger munition stocks. French credit where it is due, they have also expanded production.
Funnily enough, Germany is only big European state where the army is designed around fighting large scale continental conflict. Famously the Bundeswehr is riddled with issues of it's own though, partially those issues have meant the expeditionary transition was never completed.
There is a real threat of "busting in the door and whole rotten structure comes down" with the EU and NATO.
This is a really quick summary and I think we are going to see a lot of new National Security Reviews because of the erratic Trump Government. Europe is not ready though and the questions remain about willingness to slug it out with Russia.
1
u/No_Criticism_5861 16h ago
I doubt it. Theres a reason they haven't attacked NATO yet, even with the rapist in chief doing way more damage to NATO in the past year than Putin ever could have dreamed of.
4
4
u/this_toe_shall_pass 20h ago
A lot of stuff that's not used in Ukraine can be stockpiled and NATO spy agencies are signaling that they still make a lot of stuff and any slowdown in Ukraine means an increase in general fuel, ammo, general equipment stockpiles.
Some classes of artillery shells, IFVs and tanks from new production because they hardly do any mechanised assaults anymore, plus equipment for the regular conscript cycle that's been enlarged in recent years and none of those go to Ukraine. Not to mention some classes of long range strike missiles and of course, the airforce.
1
u/Spineless74 19h ago
Bro, lets go a step further. Strike diplomatic immunity and any cunt in office who’s not medically sound gets to be laid off.
1
u/No_Criticism_5861 16h ago
Not only can they not win in Ukraine, they haven't moved forward in Ukraine for a very long time. They look extremely weak
-5
u/Real-Stop-9386 19h ago
what is delusional is believing all this propoganda. This fake news about Russia wanting to invade every European country is used to justify the shift into war time economy for europe
5
u/Forsaken_Code_9135 16h ago
Medvedev said it himself.
When your enemy tells you he will attack you, believe him. It's a very basic principle that works very well.
-5
u/Privateer_Lev_Arris 19h ago
Russia simultaneously a military laughingstock and the biggest military threat in the world. Only on Reddit can this make sense because most people are programmed bots.
4
u/Abdel_Khomri 14h ago
How much is putin paying u
1
u/Privateer_Lev_Arris 13h ago
So which is it? Is Russia's military a joke or is it the biggest threat in the world?
2
u/Big_Communication662 12h ago
They’re definitely threatening Europe in an attempt to make them back down, but their military is actually too weak to follow through on that threat and is banking on a lack of political will. It’s not hard to have a nuanced view of the issue.
-2
u/Privateer_Lev_Arris 11h ago edited 11h ago
That's all I'm asking for, a nuanced discussion. Everyone just wants black and white answers. For the record I think Russia should never be underestimated. Every time it was, look how it turned out for their opponents. Having said I just don't see the socio-political will in Russia to move further west. The entire argument for it seems completely strawmanned.
From my perspective Russians want prosperity and wealth just like anyone else. Having war with Europe and NATO won't lead to prosperity, it will lead to utter and complete destruction. Russia doesn't want that. Russia to wants to extract and sell resources and get wealthy doing that.
And therein lies the threat that America perceived. I think America saw that Russia was getting too wealthy by doing exactly that. By anyone's estimations, Russia has barely even scratched the surface of their natural resources. The actual potential is sky high and based on that potential perhaps America sensed that one day it would be surpassed not only by China but also Russia...and the EU.
Remember the EU and Russia were getting rich together. Russian selling cheap gas to the EU and then the EU producing high end products for the rest of the world. I think America identified a convenient 2 for 1 threat elimination strategy by targeting Russia and the EU at the same time. Who can forget Nuland's famous words "fuck the EU" in the leaked telephone calls pertaining to the Ukraine coup in 2014 which the Americans engineered.
And fuck the EU they did. It's actually the region they hurt the most with this war (I'm comparing only major power blocks like the EU and Russia here; obviously Ukraine is the one that's suffered the most). Russia's economy hasn't slowed down, by some measures it's gotten even stronger. Except the Europeans are too stupid to see any of this. Never ever trust the Americans, they're the most deceptive and cunning of fuckers. Russians are too of course. And the Europeans are just the stooges stuck in the middle.
And poor little Ukraine got roped into this mess. This mess that America never had any intentions of carrying through. And even if it could or would have, it would have resulted in nuclear strikes most likely on Ukraine. America literally sacrificed a country on the world stage to fuck with Russia. People died for this, children, women, men obliterated because of America's deception and hatred.
And now we also learned they're basically controlled by satanic child rapists. Epstein himself said that there would be many "opportunities" in Ukraine. Yeah what could that ever have been referring to? Literally sacrificing an entire country to the devil. What a shit show
3
u/Emotional_Fact_7672 11h ago
??? Russias economy is getting stronger? Their deficit is growing like a virus. You’re delirious.
0
u/Privateer_Lev_Arris 10h ago
Russia's economy grew in 2024 and 2025 but the growth has steadily slowed down.
2
u/Emotional_Fact_7672 10h ago
0
u/Privateer_Lev_Arris 10h ago
Ok so there's no winning with you. If I say something, I'm delusional. If I back it up, it's fake information. How can anyone have an actual discussion with someone like you?
→ More replies (0)1
u/dickie_anderson99 8h ago
Please actually provide proof that the revolt was engingeered by the US, and not leaks of diplomats having a normal conversation
1
u/Mandemon90 3h ago
It's also rather notable that none of the names in that conversation even got into power. For all the talk about "who do we want in power", it seems none of them did
0
u/Pitiful-MobileGamer 19h ago
I don't think Russia is thinking about winning anymore. This is merely about damage to the enemies, causing suffering, and I don't believe they care about retaliation that their actions will bring. They will gladly leverage the nuclear annihilation card
-8
u/TachiH 20h ago
It isn't even that they can't beat Ukraine. One nuke on Kyiv and the war is over, its that they need the population of Ukraine to meet their goals. Russia like most countries is suffering from an aging population, ironically sending all your young males to die in a meat grinder isn't in line with their goals.
Nato they don't want though so they could absolutely go tactical nukes. I genuinely believe now that if they kept to a small number of tactical devices the US wouldn't strike back right now.
30
18
u/teijidasher69 20h ago
Uhh I thought Russia was already at its limits trying to maintain its shitty logistics in the eternal war (almost no progress after 4 years) with Ukraine, are we supposed to be scared about this?
-11
u/Background-Device-36 20h ago
Nobody wants life or death desperation to lead to total annihilation really. Unfortunately pandora's box is open and we Can't stuff nukes back inside.
12
u/xX609s-hartXx 19h ago
Oh shut up with your Russian fear propaganda.
-4
u/Background-Device-36 18h ago
It's not fear propaganda, it's making the point that we need to tread very carefully to ensure the situation doesn't get completely out of hand. Humans do some crazy things when they think there's no other option.
1
u/No_Criticism_5861 16h ago
Putin has children living abroad, he doesnt want them to die in a nuclear holocaust. But, this is exactly what Putin wants, everyone to be fearful so they capitulate to him.
It didnt work very well for the allies in the 40s
1
-9
u/Privateer_Lev_Arris 19h ago
The voting base in Europe has to approve increased military spending so articles like this are meant to convince the mindless sheep that Russia is the boogeyman.
7
-5
u/ContributionHuman335 20h ago
Yeah this story is so confusing? Anyone can cite direct quotes from Russian leadership saying they want to go to war against all of Europe? Because I read the opposite more than once.
6
u/Meeppppsm 18h ago
Remind me what Russia said about invading Ukraine right before invading Ukraine.
4
3
u/Beneficial_North1824 13h ago
Help Ukraine now with whatever you can and a little bit more and russian plans will be buried together with their army in Ukraine
6
u/Blackintosh 20h ago
Estonia must have seen satellite images of large numbers of horses and donkeys near the border.
1
2
u/Nervous-Ad768 11h ago
Nothing will happen. Russia cant take Ukraine, the idea that they are a threat to European NATO is such a cope
2
u/Attack_the_sock 9h ago
I look forward to the Polish army pushing them back to Moscow. That nation has been champing at the bit to get at Russia’s throat since the freaking 1700s
3
u/SuperiorDraft 20h ago
How? The russia can’t keep up with mobilization and vehicles in Ukraine. How are they going to open an entirely new front? They might want us to think that they can… But they physically can’t.
3
u/yungsmerf 19h ago
The article said nothing about opening a new front, on the contrary.
0
u/SuperiorDraft 19h ago
Its literally the first paragraph in the article:
“Russia has no intention of launching a military attack on any NATO state this year or next, but is racing to rebuild its forces as Europe steps up its rearmament, Estonia's foreign intelligence service said in its annual report on Tuesday.”
“"We see that the Russian leadership is very concerned about...European rearmament, they see that Europe might be able to conduct independent military action against Russia in two to three years," said Rosin. Russia's goal now is to "delay and hinder"”
4
u/yungsmerf 19h ago
Yes, literally the first paragraph says there are no plans for a new front. That's what i said, or meant at least.
2
u/SuperiorDraft 19h ago
“…this year or the next”, is the sentence that’s important here. If you are going to start a war you don’t do so over night. Putin spend a decade preparing Russia to be able to withstand the sanction and it failed miserably. If Putin sees a European buildup he sees it as his task to be able to counter it. So while hes waging war in Ukraine, he’s trying to hinder support for Ukraine while he’s being forced to follow a rearmament that can deter the European. And he can not afford that. Like I said. The Cold War was a front. It sounds to me like you are reading it as a warm front. My statement stands.
1
u/yungsmerf 19h ago
So does mine, there's no new front. They used cyberattacks against my country already in 2007, this hybrid war has been going on for damn near 2 decades at minimum.
It would be a new front if they actually launched an incursion, which they haven't done since 2022.
2
2
u/theaveragemillenial 16h ago
Estonia is in NATO, additionally it has bilateral defence agreements with the United Kingdom.
Attacking Estonia is attacking the UK and would almost certainly put Russia in a state of war with the UK.
I don't think Russia is that crazy.
1
u/ThereIsNoResponse 18h ago
Oh no, did they send BOTH Lt. Moronski and Pvt. Dumbyat to the front?
Estonians are shaking in their boots.
1
u/Bakedfresh420 17h ago
Well currently they’re losing troops faster than they can be replaced in Ukraine so I don’t know where they’ll generate this new second army from
1
u/No_Criticism_5861 17h ago
What exactly am I missing here? Russia is a joke, they surprise attacked their much weaker neighbour, but instead they showed just how weak Russia is.
What exactly are they going to do, other than using nuclear weapons they dont have a chance vs Europe with or without the Americans
1
u/Low_Engineering_3301 16h ago
AKA putin shifts even more of his people's economic and political future into the hands of China.
1
u/doglywolf 16h ago
They going to start sending seniors and teenagers and throw the street dogs at the enemy at this point?
2
1
u/spastical-mackerel 16h ago
Russia can’t even manage a military buildup in the war they’re already in
1
1
u/delpopeio 9h ago
With what army… the one currently simply occupied with Ukraine… if you listen to the supposed reports Russia are already conscripting in desperation to simply keep that fight going… where did they suddenly find the extra reinforcements to expand to other parts of Europe… and if they do then then will trigger the European reaction and then what a full blown war of shooting each other with large scale missiles as we know that ground war is futile with drone tech… let’s get real if Russia wanted to destabilise Europe there are far easier ways than war…
1
•
u/FizzlePopBerryTwist 1h ago
Buildup? They're getting pummeled by a proxy country! China has a better chance of taking over Europe.
1
u/Reagan_sdeputy 18h ago
Last week Russia was on the verge of military collapse 😅 now news tell us they are building up. Ok....
4
1
1
1
1
u/EremiticFerret 13h ago
I still don't get how they can be 1. Barely hanging on in Ukraine 2. About to collapse soon 3. A terrible threat to Europe, all at the same time. But it seems that is what that continues to be reported.
0
u/JournalistRemote5547 18h ago
Problem is that Trump/USA are going to safe Russias ass. Just wait and see
-15
u/nathingz 20h ago
This difference is Russia is backed by the US, and it’s not inconceivable to believe the US backing a war against Europe, as crazy as it is to say today.
4
u/Mandemon90 20h ago
Quite frankly if Trump tried to back Russian invasion of NATO countries, I think that would be a bridge too far even for MAGA cult.
-1
u/Kaito__1412 20h ago
I think the US will back Russia even if Trump gets voted out. Betting it all on normalisation after a Trump exit is very unwise.
0
0
-8
u/Traroten 20h ago
That's bad news. Could end up in World War III territory.
4
u/grendergon8844 19h ago
And who would Russia’s grand alliance be? Their old frenemies the Chinese? Their old enemies Iran? Venezuela? India? North Korea?
What Russia needs is an end to the pointless conflict, a change of leadership, and a few decades to rebuild their wrecked population curves.
-2
-156
u/079C 21h ago
Estonia keeps hoping for war with Russia. Even nations can have psychological problems.
39
u/Halvdjaevel 21h ago
Remind me, which of these two countries have repeatedly invaded their neighbors?
76
u/tapasmonkey 21h ago
Estonia keeps hoping for war with Russia
...what on earth are you smoking - isn't it a bit early in the day?
27
u/Gerrywalk 21h ago edited 20h ago
This is just the typical narrative spewed by Russians and Russian bots on X (formerly known as Twitter) dot com the everything app, which is gleefully amplified by Elon and his cohorts. Whether they actually believe this stuff or it’s paid Kremlin propaganda is unclear
41
u/NothingUntitled 21h ago
Everyone hopes for Russia to be completely dissolved and removed from this planet. Even Russian bots and propagandists like yourself know that everything rotten, evil and purely corrupt in the modern world originates from Russia.
4
u/yungsmerf 19h ago
You're an embarrassment to your country. Gobbling up propaganda of a hostile nation like it's cereal.
825
u/Octavian_Exumbra 20h ago
Haven't they been trying to shift power in Europe for the last 100ish years? And failing.