NATO wants a punch in the face. They're running into trouble again...

Article by Marat Khairullin

The comparison with the events around Yeonpyeong Island is indeed relevant since NATO continues to demonstrate exactly the same aggressive intentions right now. In particular, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization conducted the comprehensive exercises “Steadfast Defender 2024” this year, simulating an attack on Russia. As part of the exercises, they also simulated a nuclear strike on five border regions of our country, including the Moscow and Leningrad regions. But for now, let’s leave the nuclear component aside and focus on conventional forces.

What did the Americans try to scare us with at the beginning of 2024? "Steadfast Defender" was divided into two stages. The first involved the transfer of troops from the United States and Canada. The second involved eight exercises in different directions: "Joint Warrior" - an exercise in English waters; "Crystal Arrow" - an exercise assessing the combat capability of the only Latvian infantry brigade; "Nordic Response" -
an attempt to coordinate the forces of Finland, Sweden, Norway and the United States; "Brilliant Jump" - an exercise assessing the deployment capability of NATO's rapid reaction forces; and finally, "Dragon 24" - an exercise assessing the deployment capability of two Polish divisions. In total, 90 thousand soldiers from 31 countries, 80 aircraft and helicopters, 50 ships, and 166 tanks were to take part in the NATO exercises.

However, the forces that looked formidable on paper turned out to be a sham in reality. For example, as part of the "Brilliant Jump" exercises, 600 vehicles were supposed to be moved from Britain to Poland. In the end, only 100 were sent from the islands. Less than half made it to Poland. And so it is with everything.

New NATO members Sweden and Finland were able to send only five Leopard tanks to the joint exercises. And it looked very funny: the tanks drove up to the supposed battle site on asphalt, and when they tried to leave it for soft earth, they immediately got stuck. So they practiced on asphalt.

Even funnier was the deployment of US and British Marines in the snows of Russia (the role of the latter was played by the snows of Norway). Two companies of Americans, British, and the Norwegians attached to them had to simply live for two weeks in tents in the winter forest. It turned out that the soldiers simply didn't know how to melt snow on a fire to get water. And on the third day, 54 people got frostbite on their penises (really, this is not a joke).

This happened because of poor quality equipment. The tents had holes and cracks, and the heaters broke down on the second day. The US and British Marines were unable to dig in or keep warm in the winter forest. On the third day, the exercises ended - the Marines defeated the conventional "Russia" and returned to their warm quarters.

Please, pay attention once again! These guys didn't fight at all! They, so to speak, went out for a picnic, and suffered such monstrous "losses." What can we expect from them when it comes to real fighting?!

I don't even want to talk about the planes and ships. Out of the declared 80-odd, including combat helicopters, only 15 flew for a little while. And even that was somehow unconvincing. That is, in the third year of the Ukrainian war, NATO decided to test its real capabilities in deploying the Rapid Reaction Force (RRF), and it turned out that (apart from the Americans), only the Poles, in an incomplete composition, somehow managed to travel the three hundred required miles. Two brigades out of six managed to reach the conditional destination (in a standard NATO division, there are three brigades - each with 4 thousand people).

In 2002, NATO created the so-called Rapid Reaction Force - mostly on paper. The idea was to be able to deploy at least 40,000 troops to a conflict area within 48 hours. In 2022, apparently to scare Russia, NATO announced that they had 300,000 people in the Rapid Reaction Force. Then they thought about it for six months and increased the number to five hundred thousand. These are, I emphasize once again, forces that must respond within 48 hours.

The icing on the cake was the creation of special high-readiness forces within these SBRs - as many as 5,000 people who were supposed to arrive at the site of the conflict within five days. I'm not kidding. Having initially written about 48 hours, NATO then honestly admitted that it would be good to send the first units at least within two or three weeks. That is why it had to create these special forces - super-rapid response... Overall, the results of the Steadfast Defender 2024 exercises showed that NATO will be able to deploy a maximum of 20-30 thousand people to the Russian borders within six months. And no more than 30-50 tanks out of the declared 166. And all this with a budget for the exercises of almost three billion dollars (including national budgets) - now that's what they call embezzlement 3 yards and 54 frostbitten members - sounds like they had a great time...

Now, let's calculate how many soldiers NATO can realistically deploy to fight Russia in the first two months. The three countries with the most combat-ready armies in Europe are considered to be France, Britain, and Germany. France has only one combat-ready infantry division, of which barely half will be able to leave the barracks within 24 hours.
Britain had three divisions and 47 tanks left. Of these, 14 were given to Ukraine. The British were able to transfer only three thousand people out of the declared 20 thousand to the aforementioned exercises. There is a suspicion that they deceived here too, since the figures were only on paper. Of the three divisions in Germany, the 10th tank division is considered the most combat-ready. It officially includes two German brigades and one Dutch one. It is now left without any tanks at all - those that could drive were given to Ukraine. They had to think of this - to take combat-ready tanks from a combat brigade. Overall, out of 270 "paper" tanks, the Bundeswehr (German army) had no more than 14 that were operational. The rest were given to the war with Russia.

The biggest joke in Europe right now is the initiative of the German Defense Minister to permanently deploy a brigade (5,000 men) from the 10th division in the Baltics. Truthfully, without tanks. All the tanks were destroyed in Ukraine, and it is not known when new ones will be produced.

In general, the minister got really angry since he demanded to create a whole brigade for the Bundeswehr from scratch. He was applauded for a long time, and they decided to do it by 2029.

Compare: Russia has created at least 70 new divisions in two years (2023-2024) And plans to create another thirty to forty in 2025. And that's not counting one air force from scratch. Now, the divisions are already at the front, equipped and actually fighting.

If Poland, with great difficulty, manages to field two combat-ready divisions, and the Scandinavians can send one each, then what will the Romanians, Bulgarians, Hungarians, Spaniards, and Greeks do?

It is believed that the Americans deployed about 80 thousand in Europe. But in reality, within the framework of the NATO Rapid Reaction Force, they were able to deploy no more than three brigades (15 thousand) and 5 forward headquarters. And the quality of the US expeditionary forces is a separate story (54 frostbitten idiots are just the tip of the iceberg). Hegemony has dealt a very strong blow to the combat capability of the American army.

And they are going to fight with us?!

I would like to draw special attention to the fact that all the NATO troops listed above are also undermanned. For example, the same combat-ready 10th division of the Bundeswehr has no artillery at all. Where it went is unknown. Therefore, it is extremely interesting to watch a combat clash between NATO troops and the Russian army. I think it is clear who will get a good punch in the face.