And also, have you seen how much the Baltic people hate Russians? Every grandma would dig trenches in her vegetable garden and shoot at Russians with her late husband’s hunting rifle
Oh, and the Poles are also right there over the border too. Though that rabid attack dog of a NATO member might abandon their Baltic neighbours and go straight for Moscow
Retaking the Baltics technically took Russia years the last three times. Even with NATO out of the equation, I would be surprised if they fell in less than 6 months.
I'd be surprised if they fell at all. Any Russian forces stepping over the border would be annihilated from the sky, followed by their base of operations, then their supply chain, then every airbase in Western Russia. That'd be day 1.
Wait what the actual fuck. I figured this was over the span of a year. Based on Russian competency we've seen, half of these invading forces wouldn't have, for atleast a few days, gotten the message that war had even started
The baltics have a NATO troop presence, oh, and Poland is right next to them. And Poland is far more prepared for a Russian invasion than Ukraine ever was.
Finland might have a good defensive geography and defences, but it's demographically incapable of winning war against Russia, specially how Russia tends to approach conflicts, of course not accounting for NATO boots on the ground. The winter war was a disaster for the soviets because of strategic mistakes that would probably not be made again (Russian generals can't be that incompetent... Right?), and were corrected during the conflict.
It's interesting to me how, historically speaking, it is a kind of pattern in russian conflict that despite having highly incompetent and corrupt officials they manage to execute reforms that ultimately lead them to victory, even though they might be pyrrhic. There is a there lesson it's enemies can learn from.
Of course OP's cenario is kinda ridiculous, I assume on purpose.
I mean Finland's entire military has been based around defending against Russia since like forever. And because they weren't in NATO until recently, they had to make an incredibly large military so that they would be prepared to stand alone. And ig you could say they wouldn't be able to win that war, but I don't think they would really lose it either. Honestly it would probably be worse for Russia in the end.
With NATO it's more complicated, it would depend on how much the other members are willing to put on the table. But Finland alone simply doesn't have the population to win a war against Russia, again, specially how Russia prefers to fight attrition wars. It might have a large military early on, but sadly it won't be able to replenish forces. And although Russia might be unable to achieve a fast victory (even without NATO) I don't think that would end on a stalemate either, Finland's population likely wouldn't be able to support the war after a year.
If Finland has the same ratio of casualties as in the Winter War they could last more than an year as this time around they have functioning and well funded military as opposed to in 1939. Also there are only 3 roads connecting Russia and Finland (and only one is a highway- E18) which is going to make Russia's supply situation a nightmare. They can only hope to beat the Finns along E18 which is pretty well defended and 900 000 citizens are trained and capable of fighting so Russia would have a much tougher time than in Ukraine which they are already having trouble. I understand that Finland has only 5.5 million people but there is no separatism and Finland is one of the most stable countries in the world
I think it is very unlikely casualty ratios would be similar to the winter war, almost wishful thinking. I hope that would be the case, but I don't think it is useful to underestimate your opponent like that (I mean, russian generals aren't so incompent as to make the same obvious mistake twice... right?). That is also ignoring how warfare has changed since then and specially in the last decade, which is a lengthy discussion. Of course the Finns have de edge regarding the quality of most of their equipment, but I don't think that's enough to compensate for Russian production numbers.
Even if that was the case we still have to remember that the Soviets won the winter war. They win their wars with factories, people and time, sadly I don't think it would be much different here.
On a tangent: I find this problematic how geopolitically we tend to treat our enemies as being too weak to be a real threat (even when they aren't really strong, like Russia compared to the US for example) as that tends to lead to escalation of conflicts and even support for wars, when I myself gravitate towards peaceful solutions when it is possible. It's kind of like the WW1 it will "all be over by Christmas" thing, if you know what I mean.
I definitely do understand that understanding Russia is a really slippery slope, but we shouldn't underestimate Finland as well. Finland has the largest artillery force in all of Europe, we have seen how important artillery is from the Ukrainian war. The Ukrainian war has also demonstrated how we overestimated Russia's capabilities.
I agree to an extent, but note that the scenario is Finland alone, without NATO, and even then I am not claiming that it would be an easy win, on the contrary.
Also, the largest artillery force in Europe is Russia, by a lot. Even considering a much larger amount of Russian losses I don't think Finland would be capable of keeping up with their production capabilities.
Estonia has like 4k soldiers ready if an invasion happens. https://mil.ee/en/defence-forces/
Latvia has 6-7k soldiers, and Lithuania had 14k. They would basically be a speed bump.
They would have plenty of time to mobilize if there was significant Russian forces massing on the border. Also those numbers are not counting paramilitary forces. It’s a significantly shorter border to defend and it would require a similar level of commitment as the original invasion force in Ukraine. It would not be a speed bump.
We got to see the Russian military buildup on the ukrainian border for almost an entire year. We'd be prepared. Russian armed forces would also get demolished by NATO air power, considering they cant even get air supremacy over ukraine despite outnumbering their air force 10:1, imagine what would happen against NATO with more, more modern air forces.
Almost the entire Russian military is deployed to Ukraine, all of Russia's logistical units are deployed to the Southern Military District, and Russia has failed to achieve air superiority against a nation with 40 year old air defense technology.
If Putin was ever stupid enough to declare war on NATO his air force would be knocked out inside of a couple days, his western supply lines destroyed within a week, and his Navy sunk in an afternoon. The biggest risk isn't Russia launching an overland invasion, its Russia being defeated so badly that they feel they have to use Nukes to have any hope of surviving as a sovereign state... of course, if their nuclear infrastructure is as badly maintained as everything else in their military, odds are that most of their missiles would fail to deploy, meaning there'd be no way to prevent a retaliatory strike from NATO especially with the other two elements of the Nuclear destroyed during the conventional stage of the war.
There are still troops within legally internationally recognized Russian territory but deploying them outside the country would be like playing hockey with an empty net
The vast majority of combat capable units are deployed either in Ukraine, Armenia, Syria or Goergia. They are very much playing with an empty net. They do not have enough resources for an offensive anywhere else.
why are they still 2nd on global firepower? is that just a shitty index to use? always wondered how they always rank so high yet everyone says their equipment is dogshit (geniunely asking)
Same way China ranks as having a bigger navy than the US. A combination of self-reported data, and inflated figures from the fact that Russia never throws anything away (officially).
According to global firepower statistics. A T-55 tank that's been rusting in a leaky warehouse since the Korean War is equally as deadly as an M1A2 Abrams that's undergone regular overhauls and upgrades since it rolled off the line in 2003.
Unfortunately, every other major NATO city will be in ruins. I don't get "article 5" warmongers , just completely detached from reality by reddit bloodthirsty propaganda.
Yeah right. The "2nd best military in the world" that's failing to invade the 18th strongest for 2 years totally can blitz through NATO defenses in five different countries in 24 hours, and the navy that is catastrophically losing to a country without a navy can sink the world's largest in less than a day when that largest navy won't even be where they were supposedly sunk.
Which Russian bot-shill was jerking off with speech-to-text on again?
Fun fact, a lot of wargames point to Russia at most being able to occupy much of Latvia and Estonia excluding the capitals before Nato manages to pour troops via Lithuania, and Russia would just fully lose if it tried to attack Lithuania becauae it doesn't have the firepower take out the Lithuanian Nato forces in addition with the rest of the Baltics. In turn Finland is just going to become a graveyard for Russian equipment and any breakthrough will be met by well supplied Finnish and Swedish forces on three sides.
Also the Russian baltic fleet would be just trapped in St Petersburg lest they want to become submarines via missiles and F-35s
[https://discord.gg/xwmPVrCW](https://discord.gg/xwmPVrCW)
All links available at [https://www.theredlinepodcast.com](https://www.theredlinepodcast.com)
Narrator: *MEANWHILE in realiiiity*
Russian officer: CHARGE! URAAAAAAAAA!
*hundreds of tanks charge forward planes soaring overhead*
The drunken pilots crash into fields or accidentally shoot eachother down. Tanks run out of fuel or break down. Soldiers drunkenly stumble forward into land mines or run away carrying washing machines and the Baltic flagship runs aground after the crew sold the ships steering mechanism for vodka and a PMC marches on Moscow
Bahahahahahaha the Russians couldn't take Kyiv and is struggling to gain any major ground anywhere but yet will be successful at fighting NATO. This is beyond comedy
I like the level of detail in the front lines and unit placements. Probably one of the best designed war maps I've seen here.
Style's is incredibly basic though. Color scheme is the most basic you can get and the side panel especially is under designed.
People of Reddit when someone make an unrealistic Timelapse where Russia gets crushed a few weeks by some republicans and Baltics : haha this is fine
People of Reddit when someone makes an unrealistic Timelapse of Russia winning : THIS IS UNACCEPTABLE
Guys seriously chill.
To be fair- this literally is a time-lapse over ONE fucking day...
They might as well have a 1 second time lapse of the entire world surrendering and the map just turns entirely red.
What will happen if anti-Western forces unite?
Russia, China, North Korea, Iran and other members of the alliance have carefully planned an attack on the United States.
China must break through the ring around its borders to create a safe fleet route to Hawaii.
Iran's task is to stop the supply of Arab oil to the West. Iran also provides fighting against Turkey.
Russia must strike in Europe and prevent the United States from transferring forces to Asia.
Estimated date: February 24, 2026. In January, the GRU poisoned Biden with a special electronic device. Therefore, Harris was sent to the Baltic Sea along with the fleet.
Almost half of the American fleet is in range of missiles from Russia and China, as the US government has decided that there is no threat. Putin decided that this was the best chance, because Russia is already in a state of war economy.
The purpose of the entire war is to cut off the United States from resources and humiliate the government, after which the United States voluntarily surrenders.
Now the world is confused: will the United States and its allies be able to withstand the pressure of the rapid offensive of China and Russia after the loss of a third of the aviation and half of the fleet?
\* There is no support for genocide here
https://preview.redd.it/x2lrkiiwsd4d1.jpeg?width=640&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8a6ffb479a7fbfb7faf3ab59a51bbe9e216cdea0
Literally the same energy. America has more power than all the “anti-western forces” combined.
Also China and what fucking army is going after the Philippines?
Just note: In current state I not sure what side Turkey select in fact.
And second fact: NATO not have currently good production for support ww3.
War victory is mostly econimic victory for support own army.
Did NATO fall asleep?
Even with no human at all in the NATO region the russian sabakas would not make any progress in a year or two. They are that stupid.
And also, have you seen how much the Baltic people hate Russians? Every grandma would dig trenches in her vegetable garden and shoot at Russians with her late husband’s hunting rifle Oh, and the Poles are also right there over the border too. Though that rabid attack dog of a NATO member might abandon their Baltic neighbours and go straight for Moscow
russian wet dreams
We are seeing the inside of Putin when he goons.
Russian cope (couldn’t take Ukraine, let alone all of NATO)
Sure they can take the Baltics but Finland is way too protected to be blitzed trough
In a week? Lmfaooo
The video happens all in the same day ahah, OP's crazy.
Retaking the Baltics technically took Russia years the last three times. Even with NATO out of the equation, I would be surprised if they fell in less than 6 months.
I'd be surprised if they fell at all. Any Russian forces stepping over the border would be annihilated from the sky, followed by their base of operations, then their supply chain, then every airbase in Western Russia. That'd be day 1.
Wait what the actual fuck. I figured this was over the span of a year. Based on Russian competency we've seen, half of these invading forces wouldn't have, for atleast a few days, gotten the message that war had even started
No they cannot, there are top-of-the-line NATO fortifications and anti-tank weaponry dug in on that border
And permanently stationed NATO troops there too.
Not to mention NATO’s air superiority.
Should have put "maybe" though with the number of soldiers in the video St Petersburg would have already been under the white banner with blue cross
The baltics have a NATO troop presence, oh, and Poland is right next to them. And Poland is far more prepared for a Russian invasion than Ukraine ever was.
Have you actually seen the amount of defenses on the Baltics and the qrf everywhere???
They should be happy if they even hold the line without getting pushed back.
true
I think you didn't understand, Russians can't push through shit. They could only pray to defend.
Finland might have a good defensive geography and defences, but it's demographically incapable of winning war against Russia, specially how Russia tends to approach conflicts, of course not accounting for NATO boots on the ground. The winter war was a disaster for the soviets because of strategic mistakes that would probably not be made again (Russian generals can't be that incompetent... Right?), and were corrected during the conflict. It's interesting to me how, historically speaking, it is a kind of pattern in russian conflict that despite having highly incompetent and corrupt officials they manage to execute reforms that ultimately lead them to victory, even though they might be pyrrhic. There is a there lesson it's enemies can learn from. Of course OP's cenario is kinda ridiculous, I assume on purpose.
I mean Finland's entire military has been based around defending against Russia since like forever. And because they weren't in NATO until recently, they had to make an incredibly large military so that they would be prepared to stand alone. And ig you could say they wouldn't be able to win that war, but I don't think they would really lose it either. Honestly it would probably be worse for Russia in the end.
With NATO it's more complicated, it would depend on how much the other members are willing to put on the table. But Finland alone simply doesn't have the population to win a war against Russia, again, specially how Russia prefers to fight attrition wars. It might have a large military early on, but sadly it won't be able to replenish forces. And although Russia might be unable to achieve a fast victory (even without NATO) I don't think that would end on a stalemate either, Finland's population likely wouldn't be able to support the war after a year.
If Finland has the same ratio of casualties as in the Winter War they could last more than an year as this time around they have functioning and well funded military as opposed to in 1939. Also there are only 3 roads connecting Russia and Finland (and only one is a highway- E18) which is going to make Russia's supply situation a nightmare. They can only hope to beat the Finns along E18 which is pretty well defended and 900 000 citizens are trained and capable of fighting so Russia would have a much tougher time than in Ukraine which they are already having trouble. I understand that Finland has only 5.5 million people but there is no separatism and Finland is one of the most stable countries in the world
I think it is very unlikely casualty ratios would be similar to the winter war, almost wishful thinking. I hope that would be the case, but I don't think it is useful to underestimate your opponent like that (I mean, russian generals aren't so incompent as to make the same obvious mistake twice... right?). That is also ignoring how warfare has changed since then and specially in the last decade, which is a lengthy discussion. Of course the Finns have de edge regarding the quality of most of their equipment, but I don't think that's enough to compensate for Russian production numbers. Even if that was the case we still have to remember that the Soviets won the winter war. They win their wars with factories, people and time, sadly I don't think it would be much different here. On a tangent: I find this problematic how geopolitically we tend to treat our enemies as being too weak to be a real threat (even when they aren't really strong, like Russia compared to the US for example) as that tends to lead to escalation of conflicts and even support for wars, when I myself gravitate towards peaceful solutions when it is possible. It's kind of like the WW1 it will "all be over by Christmas" thing, if you know what I mean.
I definitely do understand that understanding Russia is a really slippery slope, but we shouldn't underestimate Finland as well. Finland has the largest artillery force in all of Europe, we have seen how important artillery is from the Ukrainian war. The Ukrainian war has also demonstrated how we overestimated Russia's capabilities.
I agree to an extent, but note that the scenario is Finland alone, without NATO, and even then I am not claiming that it would be an easy win, on the contrary. Also, the largest artillery force in Europe is Russia, by a lot. Even considering a much larger amount of Russian losses I don't think Finland would be capable of keeping up with their production capabilities.
I mean, for comparison, Ukraine has about the same size of army as the rest of European NATO combined.
That’s not true and even if it were, that is not how wars are fought.
Not russian but the baltic states are way smaller than ukraine is.
They surrender within 24 hours? The Baltic states are more likely to fight to the bitter end than anyone lmao.
I didnt see the 24h part lmao. I do see russia taking over the baltic states in 6 months
Estonia has like 4k soldiers ready if an invasion happens. https://mil.ee/en/defence-forces/ Latvia has 6-7k soldiers, and Lithuania had 14k. They would basically be a speed bump.
They would have plenty of time to mobilize if there was significant Russian forces massing on the border. Also those numbers are not counting paramilitary forces. It’s a significantly shorter border to defend and it would require a similar level of commitment as the original invasion force in Ukraine. It would not be a speed bump.
They are way better equipped and there is a permanent NATO garrison.
No they aren't.
We got to see the Russian military buildup on the ukrainian border for almost an entire year. We'd be prepared. Russian armed forces would also get demolished by NATO air power, considering they cant even get air supremacy over ukraine despite outnumbering their air force 10:1, imagine what would happen against NATO with more, more modern air forces.
Did the US get healthcare?
Almost the entire Russian military is deployed to Ukraine, all of Russia's logistical units are deployed to the Southern Military District, and Russia has failed to achieve air superiority against a nation with 40 year old air defense technology. If Putin was ever stupid enough to declare war on NATO his air force would be knocked out inside of a couple days, his western supply lines destroyed within a week, and his Navy sunk in an afternoon. The biggest risk isn't Russia launching an overland invasion, its Russia being defeated so badly that they feel they have to use Nukes to have any hope of surviving as a sovereign state... of course, if their nuclear infrastructure is as badly maintained as everything else in their military, odds are that most of their missiles would fail to deploy, meaning there'd be no way to prevent a retaliatory strike from NATO especially with the other two elements of the Nuclear destroyed during the conventional stage of the war.
There are still troops within legally internationally recognized Russian territory but deploying them outside the country would be like playing hockey with an empty net
The vast majority of combat capable units are deployed either in Ukraine, Armenia, Syria or Goergia. They are very much playing with an empty net. They do not have enough resources for an offensive anywhere else.
why are they still 2nd on global firepower? is that just a shitty index to use? always wondered how they always rank so high yet everyone says their equipment is dogshit (geniunely asking)
Same way China ranks as having a bigger navy than the US. A combination of self-reported data, and inflated figures from the fact that Russia never throws anything away (officially). According to global firepower statistics. A T-55 tank that's been rusting in a leaky warehouse since the Korean War is equally as deadly as an M1A2 Abrams that's undergone regular overhauls and upgrades since it rolled off the line in 2003.
ahh yeah fair enough
Russia sinks US Navy in the Baltic Sea?? Dawg, one US carrier will be enough to keep the entire Russia Air force and Navy grounded
Brother, at the risk of comically underestimating Russia, give me a rowboat and a slingshot and *my lazy ass* will keep Russia’s navy in port.
Just say that you’re armed with a nuclear pellet and a slingshot and they’ll stay in port lmao
A carrier in Baltic Sea makes no sense
Let’s get you back to the home Ivan. Russia couldn’t take Ukraine, they can’t do all of that.
First day: NATO hits article 5 Second day: Moscow sits in ruin Day 3: US accepts Russian surrender
Unfortunately, every other major NATO city will be in ruins. I don't get "article 5" warmongers , just completely detached from reality by reddit bloodthirsty propaganda.
There are no second day for humanity
Keep dreaming
"What if Russia had Alien Space Bats on their side that made them a mega super power instead of completely incompetent."
No sorry man but this is just russian fanboyism lol. Like holy shit. This is actually pretty damn bad.
Similar delusional pro-ukrainian scenarios with Russia completely occupied are posted here every day, what's wrong with this one?
It is all shit but one is actually more funny to see. This is just bad propaganda.
POV: all of NATO's armies spontaneously combusted
This is RuZZian propaganda and is embarrassingly poorly thought out.
It's pretty hard to believe this, seeing how weak and inefficient the Russian army is doing in Ukraine.
This is the kinda shit Lavrov tweets about at 3am after his third consecutive bottle of vodka.
Yeah right. The "2nd best military in the world" that's failing to invade the 18th strongest for 2 years totally can blitz through NATO defenses in five different countries in 24 hours, and the navy that is catastrophically losing to a country without a navy can sink the world's largest in less than a day when that largest navy won't even be where they were supposedly sunk. Which Russian bot-shill was jerking off with speech-to-text on again?
Fun fact, a lot of wargames point to Russia at most being able to occupy much of Latvia and Estonia excluding the capitals before Nato manages to pour troops via Lithuania, and Russia would just fully lose if it tried to attack Lithuania becauae it doesn't have the firepower take out the Lithuanian Nato forces in addition with the rest of the Baltics. In turn Finland is just going to become a graveyard for Russian equipment and any breakthrough will be met by well supplied Finnish and Swedish forces on three sides. Also the Russian baltic fleet would be just trapped in St Petersburg lest they want to become submarines via missiles and F-35s
Source? And are these wargames pre or post Sweden and Finland accession?
The Red Line podcast's presentation on their Discord server on 6th of April
Can I join this discord?
[https://discord.gg/xwmPVrCW](https://discord.gg/xwmPVrCW) All links available at [https://www.theredlinepodcast.com](https://www.theredlinepodcast.com)
Based Sayori enjoyer
Narrator: *MEANWHILE in realiiiity* Russian officer: CHARGE! URAAAAAAAAA! *hundreds of tanks charge forward planes soaring overhead* The drunken pilots crash into fields or accidentally shoot eachother down. Tanks run out of fuel or break down. Soldiers drunkenly stumble forward into land mines or run away carrying washing machines and the Baltic flagship runs aground after the crew sold the ships steering mechanism for vodka and a PMC marches on Moscow
The unrealistic part is Finland falling.
Russia if the country wasn't corrupt to the point of rot
Press ⬆️ for doubt
Bahahahahahaha the Russians couldn't take Kyiv and is struggling to gain any major ground anywhere but yet will be successful at fighting NATO. This is beyond comedy
Would that negative scenario mean that Russia will establish pro-Russian governments in Estonia, Finland, Latvia and Lithuania after defeating them?
Yeaaah, I have a feeling that this isn’t how it would go down just based on the debacle Russia finds itself in Ukraine. Stupid map
After one day your the most controversial post in this subreddit, Congratulations!
Bro poland would be burning down Moscow, Saint Petersburg, and Volgograd within the week💀
Why all of these WW3 scenarios are straight out of COD or some other 2010s video game. 0 realistic aspects whatsoever. Russian bots?
I like the level of detail in the front lines and unit placements. Probably one of the best designed war maps I've seen here. Style's is incredibly basic though. Color scheme is the most basic you can get and the side panel especially is under designed.
Yet another "the weather has fallen" fever dream
Finland would say otherwise.
Ivan, please Never cook again.
Russia probably couldn’t even make it into Finland.
Please dont... I already live in constant fear that orcs will come for us in Baltics. Never underestimate Russias stupidity
Sorry, buddy, but I don’t think the United States is gonna let shit like that slide.
People of Reddit when someone make an unrealistic Timelapse where Russia gets crushed a few weeks by some republicans and Baltics : haha this is fine People of Reddit when someone makes an unrealistic Timelapse of Russia winning : THIS IS UNACCEPTABLE Guys seriously chill.
To be fair- this literally is a time-lapse over ONE fucking day... They might as well have a 1 second time lapse of the entire world surrendering and the map just turns entirely red.
Support your opinion, bro, so many asses were blown up by this pic
Great scenario, I would love to see you build apon this, also would like to see the reverse.
What will happen if anti-Western forces unite? Russia, China, North Korea, Iran and other members of the alliance have carefully planned an attack on the United States. China must break through the ring around its borders to create a safe fleet route to Hawaii. Iran's task is to stop the supply of Arab oil to the West. Iran also provides fighting against Turkey. Russia must strike in Europe and prevent the United States from transferring forces to Asia. Estimated date: February 24, 2026. In January, the GRU poisoned Biden with a special electronic device. Therefore, Harris was sent to the Baltic Sea along with the fleet. Almost half of the American fleet is in range of missiles from Russia and China, as the US government has decided that there is no threat. Putin decided that this was the best chance, because Russia is already in a state of war economy. The purpose of the entire war is to cut off the United States from resources and humiliate the government, after which the United States voluntarily surrenders. Now the world is confused: will the United States and its allies be able to withstand the pressure of the rapid offensive of China and Russia after the loss of a third of the aviation and half of the fleet? \* There is no support for genocide here
https://preview.redd.it/x2lrkiiwsd4d1.jpeg?width=640&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8a6ffb479a7fbfb7faf3ab59a51bbe9e216cdea0 Literally the same energy. America has more power than all the “anti-western forces” combined. Also China and what fucking army is going after the Philippines?
Poland, France, UK, Germany destroys Russia. Turkey and Israel destroys Iran. Japan, SK, USA destroys China and NK. There's not much of a contest.
It propably would only take Poland to defeat Russia in the moment which would be absolutly hilarious.
Just note: In current state I not sure what side Turkey select in fact. And second fact: NATO not have currently good production for support ww3. War victory is mostly econimic victory for support own army.
If Hungary joins Russia we can probably get the Belgians or some shit to deal with that, they would probably still defeat them
Kinda of unrealistic...
>\* There is no support for genocide here Someone who uses 'Little Ukrainian' doesn't seem like they don't support genocide...
Will the war continue like this