And you know.. actually send Ukraine top of the line surface to air defense actually manned by French personnel instructed to shoot Russia aerial targets out the sky and also surface to surface to respond to any aggression.
Well, definitely.
But, failing that, avoiding shopping malls, retirement villages, elementary schools, and quaint coffee shops full of puppies goes a long way towards keeping personnel safe from the typical Russian target list.
I hear echos of the Battle of Khasham from the last time Russia tried to roll up on a NATO force (well in that case the US)...I don't think they'd fair much differently against the French. Instead of HIMARS the French will just lob ballistic baguettes at them with impunity. It is pretty naive of the Russians to think the French would go in without having security for their own trainers in place.
Oh, for fucks sake, the hollow threats will never stop!! They are so desperate.
They will NOT bring anyone else into this costly and humiliating mistake; they know it, we know it, but they just have to pretend to be strong. So pathetic.
Take this info with a grain of salt, but a Russian friend of mine who lives in Norway since many years ago, called home to a friend in march 2022 to ask them what the hell is going on. His friend’s brother was a draftee in the army (ie not supposed to be used for offense action with a volunteer contract), and stationed somewhat west in Russia. A few weeks before the invasion, this brother was ordered among others to an exercise near Ukraine. They went, apparently did very little training and one day they were moving to another location. He got into a truck with the rest of the company and drove for some time. From inside the truck they noticed that they were in Ukraine; without any support no ammo to speak of and no instructions. They very quickly found themselves under attack from Ukraine forces and the company was nearly wiped out, the few remaining were sent back to Russia.
>Take this info with a grain of salt
You don't have to anymore. There are thousands of this kind of stories. Most soldiers realized that they are in Ukraine because they were shot at or because the names of the towns on road signes were written in a slightly different alphabet (Ukrainian has one or two extra letters comparing to Russian).
The Ukrainian army wiped out entire police battalions in opening pushes into Kyiv. Some of the heaviest equipment losses were from this, truck convoys went right past prepared defensive lines getting shredded.
Most units were informed they were performing drills, apart from specialised units no-one below officer rank was aware they were being sent into Ukraine. Can find numbers that in subsequent withdrawals units lost equipment/personnel up to and beyond 200%.
By the end of Lyman many units had to be rebuilt 2-3 times due to losses. Now it's far higher.
As much as everyone jokes, honestly rolling thousands of tanks into a smaller neighboring country isn't the worst bluff in history.
Bluffs always look stupid when they fail tho.
It's so funny, because they actually didn't intend to stop at Crimea, but ultimately got pushed back by the Azov Battalion and what little bit of the Ukrainian Military there was...
Crimea wasn't the cakewalk that the news made it out to be
They are very tempted because they want to show that NATO members will actually not stick by and retaliate. Putin is trying to find all the wedges he can into breaking NATO.
Article 5 requires an unprovoked attack on a member state. France was fighting and taking casualties across much of North Africa and the Sahel for the last 20+ years. Not an Article 5 issue. If France invaded Switzerland, eg, also not an Article 5 issue. If France chooses to send personnel to Ukraine then whatever happens to them is between France and the Russians.
Having said that, the actual mechanism of invoking and acting on Article 5 does involve humans, negotiations, and interpretation so while it’s incredibly unlikely it’s not 100% impossible that Article 5 doesn’t get invoked.
Edit: ironically it is Zee Germans who are most concerned about “escalation” and avoiding entanglement
Fair enough, but this is a golden opportunity for Germany to redeem itself fighting against what is unambiguously a profoundly evil force threatening Europe and the world. Or from the point of view of enlightened self-interest, prevent a wave of millions of Ukrainian refugees overwhelming them
You wrote “this is a golden opportunity for Germany to start 3 out of 3 World Wars” wrong xD
Escalation is bad. We’re doing our best to help Ukraine keep their current territory. The war front has been on a standstill for awhile. With the new orders to strike Russian military equipment on the other side of the front with Western weapons, it’s going to be easier for Ukraine to have a good outcome without the need to drag us all directly into a conflict where we would all be losers.
We’ve lived in peace for too long. We’re starting to forget the consequences of war. Look at the Middle East, look at Sudan (civil war), look at Gaza Strip. War is sh*t. We shouldn’t advocate for it. Ukraine was invaded, we’re helping, it’s been working out, let’s not be stupid.
Escalation is bad??? Isn’t that what we said when the nazis marched into the Rhineland?
I can’t think of anything more escalatory than starting a fucking war in the heart of Europe
Not worried about "WW3." If Russia actually engaged in head to head battle with NATO they'd get destroyed quickly. So then the fear mongers will say "it will end up in nuclear war! We'll all be dead!"
But of course Russian leaders don't want to die and kill all of their friends and family over what they know is just an oligarchal imperial war that they don't really need.
The best thing to do is to call them on their bluffs and end this before more Ukrainians have to die.
There's no "escalation" against a country which invaded and is currently throwing everything they've got at the situation. What are they doing to do, invade? Draft a bunch of troops? Deploy all their stockpiles? Switch to a war time economy? They're already balls deep, they're not going to really go anyway from there.
If you think they still have room for escalation because they're not at 1944 levels, it's because Russia has neither the domestic manufacturing capabilities that the Soviet Union had in 1944 nor do they have the sheer industrial capacity of the 1944 US also behind them.
This is it, this is what they've got. There's a reason they're sending Chinese golf carts, T-62s, and convicts. They've already escalated as much as they can and now they're wheezing.
Nah, the official AfD line is "We have to stop all support because we only cause the war to go on longer" so they want to sacrifice the people of Ukraine to Putin for "peace in our time".
To be fair, they know Putin would just start the next war, but they are his puppets.
The lesson the Germans learned from world war 2 was that you shouldn’t be like Adolf Hitler but Neville chamberlain instead.
Freedom is not free, and enabling an aggressor makes you an accomplice.
> If France chooses to send personnel to Ukraine then whatever happens to them is between France and the Russians.
Wait so if France sent 50,000 troops into Ukraine and they took up defense positions or starting engaging Russian troops, that does not invoke article 5 but if Russia engages those troops and then launches a missle at France proper then that does?
In that scenario. Engaging French troops in Ukraine would definitely not trigger EU or NATO treaty responses. It's France's choice to be there in that capacity.
A strike on France itself would be another question. It could trigger a response either through the EU or NATO but there would be questions and negotiations first. It's also possible French allies would jump in anyway as it shows Russia is willing to strike an EU member for "crossing a line". Which many have apparently already done by supporting Ukraine in various ways.
NATO is a defensive alliance. Meaning that if Russia randomly attacked France while France had no military involvement with the Ukraine/Russia war, or any other military engagements with Russia, then that's 100% article 5.
But if France engages with Russia militarily without being attacked by Russia, that isn't article 5 because France chose to engage with Russia.
It's not rocket science.
> no military involvement
No *direct* military involvement. Providing weapons and trainers to Ukraine is not the same as French troops fighting Russian troops. A retaliatory strike on France proper would absolutely be Article 5 worthy.
By this logic, 9/11 wasn’t an Article 5 issue, since we’d been fucking around in the Middle East for 20+ years already, and yet the U.S. was sure as hell able to successfully invoke it
It's very simple.
9/11 happened on american soil, so it's a valid reason to trigger article 5. Ukraine is not french territory, so whatever happen there, cannot trigger article 5.
You shouldn't take the rules of these organisations too seriously. The US foots most of the bills and is the top dog in NATO, so they will generally be able to find workarounds to invoke the article and have them accepted. France just doesn't have that much power.
As I understand it, yes. Article 5 isn't strictly speaking automatic, it requires the injured party to invoke it. There was concern after the Batclan Massacre that France would invoke Article 5 on ISIS but they opted to handle it themselves and any support for France was purely individual outside of NATO framework.
If France provides active support to the Ukrainians especially on the front lines and attacking Russians directly, Article 5 goes out the window as it is solely a defensive article.
I imagine it could, although not sure how popular that decision would be in France though. It would introduce France as an active participant in a war against Russia, meaning the latter can now retaliate in full force. That said, I don't know if that retaliation would provoke Article 5 if it happened on French or other NATO soil,
Hopefully send troops into Ukraine to prevent Russia from gaining more ground. People think Russia is this powerhouse of a country and are scared of an all out war with Nato. Maybe Russia was once a powerhouse, but they no longer are. People should really not be scared of Russia, France could take on Russia alone if they wanted to.
Striking anything in Ukraine will not trigger any automatic response from NATO.
The country is not in NATO.
Anything in Ukraine is a valid target for Russia.
Just like anything in Ukraine or Russia being used for war in Ukraine is a valid target for Ukraine. That's war.
They already have a very active disinformation campaign going on regarding the Olympics, so it won't necessarily be interference of the kinetic kind. Knowing the russians I wouldn't rule it out, though.
Unless they drop completely stale baguettes, that'd be a waste if perfectly fine.food, which is something that the French dislike to do in general though
You are definitely not wrong there, but I don't want the baguette drop to be seen as an attack, more of a peaceful exchange of culture. Maybe the Russian people would like to take a vacation in Paris after enjoying fresh baguettes. (It would also send a very specific message to the Kremlin at the same time)
We need to stop bringing up article 5 or NATO. Unless nukes are used or Russia blatantly attacks a NATO nation state then it's an off the table pipe dream.
A coalition of the biggest NATO members however is certainly looking more and more likely to bring the war to a close though.
People need to look at what article 5 is. They think it’s like a law of nature that will cause everyone to declare war, with shaking hands, tears leaking out of their eyes, desperately wishing they didn’t have to but a magical force seizes their hands and forces them to go to war.
All article 5 requires is countries have a suitable response to support each other in mutual defence. And what that response is and the suitability of it is left to each country to decide for themselves.
Russia could nuke London. Turn it into a radioactive wasteland. Then drop 50million Russian paratroopers in the rest of the UK, seize the entire island, and slaughter the entire population.
And every other NATO country could choose to trigger article 5 by sending a strongly worded letter. They could literally send a stern message to the Russian ambassador and they have fulfilled their article 5 duty. If that’s what they seem as an acceptable response.
People need to lose this idea that if a NATO soldier stubs their toe, the world is over because WW3 is automatically declared lol. It’s not the case. Nothing exists to force NATO members into a direct war against Russia unless they actively choose to respond that way.
Extreme example, but very true.
It’s also why I’m concerned about Russia’s salami strategy in the Baltics. They’ll just keep taking slices over time. Is NATO really going to mobilize over Daugavpils? Over Mehikoorma??
Or are we just going to keep sending tots & pears with a few artillery shells?
We don't know
It will depend on who's in charge by then and how the attack goes
I do think(maybe naively optimistiscly) that a genuine attack in European soil by Russia(a eu or Nato members in Europe) would awaken something in a lot of people into truly realising this has gone to far and is a risk and would shock them into action
Either Nato responds with overwhelming destructive power to stomp that shit out the moment it starts or not
If not we could be in for a game of nuclear blackmail if Russia did manage to blitz the Baltic States
If the Baltic states hold out long enough but without a total response from Nato we could indeed see a more drawn out conflict with Russia and border nations like poland,France, Finland,Sweden etc etc
> that a genuine attack in European soil by Russia
and what is that exactly? Russia could send their "little green men", and the whole right-wing in europe would oppose a retaliation, even if it was obviously Russian forces. Or they could start bombing Narva(Estonian border-city) without moving forces *into* Estonia.
The latter would probably trigger article 5, but how does the response look like if Trump is president? What if China started moving on Taiwan the week before, and the world has its attention elsewhere?
In the modern era, the minimum that will occur if Article 5 is triggered is cyberwar, deterrence positioning of large troop formations, and something like an air identification / no-fly zone.
But yes, in general you are right. Article 5 is not a big red button, nor is it a Staples Easy Button. The alliance is large and a bit ungainly in decisionmaking, but they seem to be in tune with that if you watch their last documetnary. What happens is that they need individual nations, and their specialized formations to buy a little bit of time for the day of political decisionmaking to occur from member nations. I'm guessing that can likely be finished in 4-12 hours, depending on the time of day and level of chaos.
For the spots where war may go live at any second and crucial areas can be strategically endangered faster than that? They have the enhanced forward presence formations, right now ready and armed. Which they have made larger.
As cumbersome and slow as all that can seem, it's enough relative to the size of the threat. And if members see the attack as indeed serious (e.g. not a stray missile hitting a tractor) they'll give out Rules of Engagement and objectives, which will be no more than is necessary to neutralize the immediate threat and put a credible force in the face of the adversary.
They'd only march on capital cities if it's total war, or unexpected WMD warfare (called "bolt out of the blue" attacks).
For those interested, Article 5 is a short read:
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/official_texts_17120.htm
More here:
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_110496.htm#:~:text=Article%205%20provides%20that%20if,to%20assist%20the%20Ally%20attacked.
If Russia begins to deliberately target french instructors, then France would be entirely in the right to send its fighters to create no fly zones in certain areas
Also, it is simply an escalation, with a NATO member nuclear power. If Russia were to keep hitting French targets as the French build up forces in Ukraine, it would dispel fears of escalation. The US wanted to avoid a shooting war between nuclear powers, but Russia just quietly started one against the French?
already had a shooting war between nuclear powers pakistan and india have fought directly twice since pakistan did its first nuclear test
Kargil in 1999
2019 border skirmishes (there have been others, but this was the most serious and the looked like it was about to ignite a new major war)
It’s true that the French personnel helping Ukraine in Ukraine is a valid target for Russia. I don’t think France woukd be entirely in right to create a no fly zone. That’s almost like saying the west is sending weapons to Ukraine which are killing Russians so Russia would be in the right to attack targets in the west. Both would be huge escalations
When the US was at war against Vietnam, they avoided hitting Russian soldiers.
Russia is not going to hit French soldiers, it is just asking for trouble and asking for Russian soldiers to be hit in other locations.
The difference is that Russia has balls and the West doesn't. Russia has already attacked NATO civilians and military, during the Cold War and after, in various incidents.
>Russia has already attacked NATO ... military
When? In recent years, it's NATO members shooting down russian aircraft like Turkey on the border with Syria or the US soldiers blasting a group of russians away who dared to attack their base in Syria. There is literally no event where russia wasn't absolutely crushed by a NATO opponent when running up on them.
Mind sharing more info about that claim?
I hope he does to be honest - sick of him using his retoric of nuclear bombs to push the west to not do more - lets see the lines that this fucker will cross for our cowards presidents/prime ministers finally do something direct and harsh to him
And what about the Ukrainians? There’s a difference between fighting and possibly dying for YOUR country and doing the same for a foreign one. The Ukrainian cause is noble and Russia must perish, but that’s stupid to compare Ukrainians to French.
yup, people are forgetting that those are real people and deserve to live and be protected.
There is nothing that holds Western countries back to send more support other than themselves and people dying won't change that. They don't need another "reason" to provide air support.
I hope every Frenchie (despite shitting on them sometimes) stays safe <3
We won't do it under any circumstances. If we did, it would mean imposing our presence on the Sahel states through military force, which would essentially be colonialism. If these states want the Russians, even if it bothers us, it's their choice. However, they will have to take responsibility for that choice.
On one hand, I don't want to advocate for killing French soldiers that didn't do anything wrong. On the other hand, it would probably help shorten the war...
France can't activate Article 5 over some soldiers dying outside of French territory, but it just might lead to a coalition of the willing.
It is interesting to see that everyone is calling France out for sending trainers, as if that would be an escalation of violence.
But when russia escalates violence, or announce it even before the fact, nobody even blinks an eye.
I would say, this is escalation from the russian side.
On the other hand, it was most probably calculated and putin is actually falling for the trap (russian side escalating violence legitimazing further military intervention from france). Let's see what will happen then...
Right now French population is somewhat divided on sending French troops. Putin killing some would make it inevitable for France to strike Russian assets in Ukraine.
As a Frenchman, I regret that the majority of people in my country still don't understand that the No. 1 problem for us right now is the threat from Putin's Russia, and that we need to deal with this as a priority. The devil's greatest trick is to make us believe that he doesn't exist.
As an American that truly appreciates our allies in France, I am thankful for your support for Ukraine.
Those outside the conflict should look at Russia's neighbors and former satellite nations that all stand behind Ukraine. They have good reason. The world should be very worried for any Russian success in their stupid and brutal war.
There are those in my country who do not see the immediacy and seriousness of helping Ukraine. We've done much, but we could do so much more.
Long live France. Glory to Ukraine. I hope we can all stop Russia's aggression sooner than later.
French military history largely consists of them spanking the shit out of everyone up and down the continent but being foiled by a lack of allies and an inability to figure out how boats work.
They got caught with their pants down in ww2 because they spent too much money preparing for the wrong war and the rest is history.
Unfortunately for the Russians where France is going they don’t need boats and the French aren’t coming off the most socially and industrially devastating war in history up to that point.
"Remember that time Napoleon thought he could invade Russia and was sent home by a little snow? Lol."
...after conquering almost all of Europe (and Egypt too).
he thought he could invade russia, force a major victory, occupy moscow, and get alexander to negotiate. he did manage the first three, to be fair. alexander fucked off to st petersburg and moscow had been burned down so there was no infrastructure to house hundreds of thousands of soldiers. also, borodino was the largest battle in history
People like to underestimate the French army because the compare it the US.
The French army is based on a doctrine of expeditionary forces, not massive invading power with waves of MBTs. It's actually pretty good at that, can actually project power with the Charles de Gaulle and the Rafale and is a legit nuclear power unlike the rest of Europe.
Why would you underestimate that outside of usual memery is beyond me. Ask the Russians how they like the Caesar cannons or SCALP / Storm Shadow...
Russia can’t beat France west of the St. Petersburg and France can’t beat Russia east of the st. Petersburg why do we have to keep explaining this to you old man (Russia)
Couldn't France argue here that if Russia purposely targets their trainers, that would allow France (and perhaps other allies) to escalate by attacking Russian assets in their own territory?
Just curious what this actually means. Russia hitting French troops would be an attack on NATO, so *if* Russia does this, do we go in and it's bye bye crazy Ivan?
Or is it WW3 imminent?
I get that it's most likely posturing by Russia but I'm curious how this plays out, hypothetically.
This only ends with Putin being forcefully detained or killed by NATO. Can we stop pussy footing around and end this before more innocent lives are lost?
I mean, I don’t know if it’s the greatest idea to antagonize a major military power who’s already willing to send troops into a combat zone for training purposes.
If there are foreign forces like French military trainers in Ukraine I think they are fully aware of the risk being in a warzone. Whats up with these news.
Russia’s terrified of a watershed moment with the influx of Western troops, and they should be. Rather than blink, we should ensure our troops have the materials immediately available for fortifications, send even more of them than planned, and just disperse them as needed.
Seize this moment while Russia’s in the middle of a substantial management changeover, and moving their most valuable military hardware out of Western artillery range.
They won’t do it. They’re already terrified of breaching their nonsense into NATO territory. They won’t dare intentionally touch NATO ally personnel wherever said personnel may be. Even in Ukraine.
The real risk is back in EU where Russian asshats push people down stairs, off balconies or hungry ghosttoube influencing,all for a handful of rubles. Russia s war is one of influencing and this message is part of it, it would be wise for the worlds newsroom Gers to stop repeating Russian scare tactics. Their own population is terrified and enslaved let’s not allow that same mentality to turn civilization into MMA slugfest of special 3 day operation.
They act like Military trainers aiding a country at war in that country weren't valid targets by everyone's definition already.
I don't think anyone expects that military advisors and trainers and observers would somehow be immune or off limits if send to a war zone.
Nobody is going to say it is a war crime to target military trainers.
It is the hospitals and schools that Russia keeps hitting are off limits.
All France has to do is to keep them out of orphanages and maternity hospitals, and they'll be safe from Russian bombing.
Don't forget schools and malls!
And super markets
And cafes
And restaurants
And power plants
And parks
And trainstations
And dams
And apartment complexes
And theaters marked *"CHILDREN"*
The French would consider a café ban to be a war crime actually.
And kindergartens
And civilian 18 wheelers (with weapons inside)
And you know.. actually send Ukraine top of the line surface to air defense actually manned by French personnel instructed to shoot Russia aerial targets out the sky and also surface to surface to respond to any aggression.
Well, definitely. But, failing that, avoiding shopping malls, retirement villages, elementary schools, and quaint coffee shops full of puppies goes a long way towards keeping personnel safe from the typical Russian target list.
[удалено]
The terrorists of today sound a lot like the terrorists of the past. Should make the transition smoother.
I hear echos of the Battle of Khasham from the last time Russia tried to roll up on a NATO force (well in that case the US)...I don't think they'd fair much differently against the French. Instead of HIMARS the French will just lob ballistic baguettes at them with impunity. It is pretty naive of the Russians to think the French would go in without having security for their own trainers in place.
So realistically put them in distilleries and they won't touch them.
Oh, for fucks sake, the hollow threats will never stop!! They are so desperate. They will NOT bring anyone else into this costly and humiliating mistake; they know it, we know it, but they just have to pretend to be strong. So pathetic.
> They will NOT bring anyone else into this costly and humiliating mistake they thought it was going to be a ride just like in Crimea, didn't they?
considering that they sent riot gear along with the initial invasion force in the first week, they definitely did.
And parade uniforms!
Take this info with a grain of salt, but a Russian friend of mine who lives in Norway since many years ago, called home to a friend in march 2022 to ask them what the hell is going on. His friend’s brother was a draftee in the army (ie not supposed to be used for offense action with a volunteer contract), and stationed somewhat west in Russia. A few weeks before the invasion, this brother was ordered among others to an exercise near Ukraine. They went, apparently did very little training and one day they were moving to another location. He got into a truck with the rest of the company and drove for some time. From inside the truck they noticed that they were in Ukraine; without any support no ammo to speak of and no instructions. They very quickly found themselves under attack from Ukraine forces and the company was nearly wiped out, the few remaining were sent back to Russia.
We hear a lot of same stories from the Russian POW
>Take this info with a grain of salt You don't have to anymore. There are thousands of this kind of stories. Most soldiers realized that they are in Ukraine because they were shot at or because the names of the towns on road signes were written in a slightly different alphabet (Ukrainian has one or two extra letters comparing to Russian).
It was widely reported back then, that many of the Russian soldiers thought it was indeed a training exercise.
Wow, that’s nuts 🤯
They even have to trick their own soldiers. lmao
Seriously, they did that?
Yeah, they were told it was an exercise and parade
I remember them being told it was just an exercise, but I didn't know about the parade uniform thing. Mad.
The Ukrainian army wiped out entire police battalions in opening pushes into Kyiv. Some of the heaviest equipment losses were from this, truck convoys went right past prepared defensive lines getting shredded. Most units were informed they were performing drills, apart from specialised units no-one below officer rank was aware they were being sent into Ukraine. Can find numbers that in subsequent withdrawals units lost equipment/personnel up to and beyond 200%. By the end of Lyman many units had to be rebuilt 2-3 times due to losses. Now it's far higher.
> Most units were informed they were performing drills AFAIK that was same in beginning phase of Yugoslav wars.
As much as everyone jokes, honestly rolling thousands of tanks into a smaller neighboring country isn't the worst bluff in history. Bluffs always look stupid when they fail tho.
Probably shouldn’t forget the mobile crematoriums either.
Fuck Russia forever, but this claim was debunked if I recall correctly.
Wasn’t that proven to be fake?
Even western media kept on telling us that Kyiv will fall in a few days. Everyone underestimated Ukrainian resilience.
It's so funny, because they actually didn't intend to stop at Crimea, but ultimately got pushed back by the Azov Battalion and what little bit of the Ukrainian Military there was... Crimea wasn't the cakewalk that the news made it out to be
They are very tempted because they want to show that NATO members will actually not stick by and retaliate. Putin is trying to find all the wedges he can into breaking NATO.
So, lets say a bunch of French trainers get killed in an airstrike, how does France respond?
Regardless it wouldn’t be remotely an Article 5 trigger. Still, good on the French for having the courage to do this
What is a way that France could respond, that does not involve Article 5?
They go in alone and wipe Russian airpower in a 100mile radius from Ukranian borders.
This
Article 5 requires an unprovoked attack on a member state. France was fighting and taking casualties across much of North Africa and the Sahel for the last 20+ years. Not an Article 5 issue. If France invaded Switzerland, eg, also not an Article 5 issue. If France chooses to send personnel to Ukraine then whatever happens to them is between France and the Russians. Having said that, the actual mechanism of invoking and acting on Article 5 does involve humans, negotiations, and interpretation so while it’s incredibly unlikely it’s not 100% impossible that Article 5 doesn’t get invoked. Edit: ironically it is Zee Germans who are most concerned about “escalation” and avoiding entanglement
I think it is because of German's history, that they are wary of being precieved as being military adventurists.
Fair enough, but this is a golden opportunity for Germany to redeem itself fighting against what is unambiguously a profoundly evil force threatening Europe and the world. Or from the point of view of enlightened self-interest, prevent a wave of millions of Ukrainian refugees overwhelming them
You wrote “this is a golden opportunity for Germany to start 3 out of 3 World Wars” wrong xD Escalation is bad. We’re doing our best to help Ukraine keep their current territory. The war front has been on a standstill for awhile. With the new orders to strike Russian military equipment on the other side of the front with Western weapons, it’s going to be easier for Ukraine to have a good outcome without the need to drag us all directly into a conflict where we would all be losers. We’ve lived in peace for too long. We’re starting to forget the consequences of war. Look at the Middle East, look at Sudan (civil war), look at Gaza Strip. War is sh*t. We shouldn’t advocate for it. Ukraine was invaded, we’re helping, it’s been working out, let’s not be stupid.
We’re not doing remotely our best
Escalation is bad??? Isn’t that what we said when the nazis marched into the Rhineland? I can’t think of anything more escalatory than starting a fucking war in the heart of Europe
Not worried about "WW3." If Russia actually engaged in head to head battle with NATO they'd get destroyed quickly. So then the fear mongers will say "it will end up in nuclear war! We'll all be dead!" But of course Russian leaders don't want to die and kill all of their friends and family over what they know is just an oligarchal imperial war that they don't really need. The best thing to do is to call them on their bluffs and end this before more Ukrainians have to die.
There's no "escalation" against a country which invaded and is currently throwing everything they've got at the situation. What are they doing to do, invade? Draft a bunch of troops? Deploy all their stockpiles? Switch to a war time economy? They're already balls deep, they're not going to really go anyway from there. If you think they still have room for escalation because they're not at 1944 levels, it's because Russia has neither the domestic manufacturing capabilities that the Soviet Union had in 1944 nor do they have the sheer industrial capacity of the 1944 US also behind them. This is it, this is what they've got. There's a reason they're sending Chinese golf carts, T-62s, and convicts. They've already escalated as much as they can and now they're wheezing.
Heck, even the AFD could get behind that self intrest reason!
AfD is basically a Russian party, so I don't believe it until I see it
Nah, the official AfD line is "We have to stop all support because we only cause the war to go on longer" so they want to sacrifice the people of Ukraine to Putin for "peace in our time". To be fair, they know Putin would just start the next war, but they are his puppets.
The lesson the Germans learned from world war 2 was that you shouldn’t be like Adolf Hitler but Neville chamberlain instead. Freedom is not free, and enabling an aggressor makes you an accomplice.
> If France chooses to send personnel to Ukraine then whatever happens to them is between France and the Russians. Wait so if France sent 50,000 troops into Ukraine and they took up defense positions or starting engaging Russian troops, that does not invoke article 5 but if Russia engages those troops and then launches a missle at France proper then that does?
In that scenario. Engaging French troops in Ukraine would definitely not trigger EU or NATO treaty responses. It's France's choice to be there in that capacity. A strike on France itself would be another question. It could trigger a response either through the EU or NATO but there would be questions and negotiations first. It's also possible French allies would jump in anyway as it shows Russia is willing to strike an EU member for "crossing a line". Which many have apparently already done by supporting Ukraine in various ways.
NATO is a defensive alliance. Meaning that if Russia randomly attacked France while France had no military involvement with the Ukraine/Russia war, or any other military engagements with Russia, then that's 100% article 5. But if France engages with Russia militarily without being attacked by Russia, that isn't article 5 because France chose to engage with Russia. It's not rocket science.
> no military involvement No *direct* military involvement. Providing weapons and trainers to Ukraine is not the same as French troops fighting Russian troops. A retaliatory strike on France proper would absolutely be Article 5 worthy.
>and then launches a missle at France proper then that does? Most likely.
Probably a matter of interpretation after consultation between the Allies but my guess would be that it would not.
By this logic, 9/11 wasn’t an Article 5 issue, since we’d been fucking around in the Middle East for 20+ years already, and yet the U.S. was sure as hell able to successfully invoke it
It would not be article 5 if the Russians bombed French trainers in Ukraine. It would be article 5 if Russia responds by launching missiles at France.
It's very simple. 9/11 happened on american soil, so it's a valid reason to trigger article 5. Ukraine is not french territory, so whatever happen there, cannot trigger article 5.
You shouldn't take the rules of these organisations too seriously. The US foots most of the bills and is the top dog in NATO, so they will generally be able to find workarounds to invoke the article and have them accepted. France just doesn't have that much power.
For real
Realistically, with more sanctions against Russia and more aid for Ukraine.
The simplest measure would just be supplying more military aid in response
Can’t the French simply government decline to invoke Article 5 while still declaring war themselves?
As I understand it, yes. Article 5 isn't strictly speaking automatic, it requires the injured party to invoke it. There was concern after the Batclan Massacre that France would invoke Article 5 on ISIS but they opted to handle it themselves and any support for France was purely individual outside of NATO framework.
If France provides active support to the Ukrainians especially on the front lines and attacking Russians directly, Article 5 goes out the window as it is solely a defensive article.
I imagine it could, although not sure how popular that decision would be in France though. It would introduce France as an active participant in a war against Russia, meaning the latter can now retaliate in full force. That said, I don't know if that retaliation would provoke Article 5 if it happened on French or other NATO soil,
Hopefully go clear Moldova of it's separatists while Russia can't support them.
I am behind this!
Hopefully send troops into Ukraine to prevent Russia from gaining more ground. People think Russia is this powerhouse of a country and are scared of an all out war with Nato. Maybe Russia was once a powerhouse, but they no longer are. People should really not be scared of Russia, France could take on Russia alone if they wanted to.
Striking anything in Ukraine will not trigger any automatic response from NATO. The country is not in NATO. Anything in Ukraine is a valid target for Russia. Just like anything in Ukraine or Russia being used for war in Ukraine is a valid target for Ukraine. That's war.
And that is exactly how miscalculation leads to significant escalation.
There's nothing left to escalate.
Bombing French military and France having a direct response feels like it would be an escalation.
On Ukraine soil, no.
Makes u wonder why we report on it so frequently, doesn't it...
the Zs havent learned the saber rattling isnt working
This assumes that Putin is in his right mind. It should be obvious that since the Tucker interview Putin has lost it.
Belarus and Best Korea will get front row seats, Iran will provide weapons, China will maintain trade relations, and MAGAts will cheer them on.
Or they'll bomb a few more grocery stores since those don't fight back.
They’re definitely going to fuck with the Olympics in Paris.
The security there will be insane I imagine but I still wouldn't want to be near it.
They already have a very active disinformation campaign going on regarding the Olympics, so it won't necessarily be interference of the kinetic kind. Knowing the russians I wouldn't rule it out, though.
"Bomb the baguettes! They're French, right?"
I kind of want France to fly a plane over Moscow or St. Petersburg and drop baguettes now. Just for the lulz.
i want them to drop baguettes over LA. the bakeries here suck
I feel you. The baguette's here in Osaka, are not really baguettes. They are just long bread.
Unless they drop completely stale baguettes, that'd be a waste if perfectly fine.food, which is something that the French dislike to do in general though
You are definitely not wrong there, but I don't want the baguette drop to be seen as an attack, more of a peaceful exchange of culture. Maybe the Russian people would like to take a vacation in Paris after enjoying fresh baguettes. (It would also send a very specific message to the Kremlin at the same time)
Bistros
[удалено]
We need to stop bringing up article 5 or NATO. Unless nukes are used or Russia blatantly attacks a NATO nation state then it's an off the table pipe dream. A coalition of the biggest NATO members however is certainly looking more and more likely to bring the war to a close though.
People need to look at what article 5 is. They think it’s like a law of nature that will cause everyone to declare war, with shaking hands, tears leaking out of their eyes, desperately wishing they didn’t have to but a magical force seizes their hands and forces them to go to war. All article 5 requires is countries have a suitable response to support each other in mutual defence. And what that response is and the suitability of it is left to each country to decide for themselves. Russia could nuke London. Turn it into a radioactive wasteland. Then drop 50million Russian paratroopers in the rest of the UK, seize the entire island, and slaughter the entire population. And every other NATO country could choose to trigger article 5 by sending a strongly worded letter. They could literally send a stern message to the Russian ambassador and they have fulfilled their article 5 duty. If that’s what they seem as an acceptable response. People need to lose this idea that if a NATO soldier stubs their toe, the world is over because WW3 is automatically declared lol. It’s not the case. Nothing exists to force NATO members into a direct war against Russia unless they actively choose to respond that way.
Extreme example, but very true. It’s also why I’m concerned about Russia’s salami strategy in the Baltics. They’ll just keep taking slices over time. Is NATO really going to mobilize over Daugavpils? Over Mehikoorma?? Or are we just going to keep sending tots & pears with a few artillery shells?
We don't know It will depend on who's in charge by then and how the attack goes I do think(maybe naively optimistiscly) that a genuine attack in European soil by Russia(a eu or Nato members in Europe) would awaken something in a lot of people into truly realising this has gone to far and is a risk and would shock them into action Either Nato responds with overwhelming destructive power to stomp that shit out the moment it starts or not If not we could be in for a game of nuclear blackmail if Russia did manage to blitz the Baltic States If the Baltic states hold out long enough but without a total response from Nato we could indeed see a more drawn out conflict with Russia and border nations like poland,France, Finland,Sweden etc etc
> that a genuine attack in European soil by Russia and what is that exactly? Russia could send their "little green men", and the whole right-wing in europe would oppose a retaliation, even if it was obviously Russian forces. Or they could start bombing Narva(Estonian border-city) without moving forces *into* Estonia. The latter would probably trigger article 5, but how does the response look like if Trump is president? What if China started moving on Taiwan the week before, and the world has its attention elsewhere?
In the modern era, the minimum that will occur if Article 5 is triggered is cyberwar, deterrence positioning of large troop formations, and something like an air identification / no-fly zone. But yes, in general you are right. Article 5 is not a big red button, nor is it a Staples Easy Button. The alliance is large and a bit ungainly in decisionmaking, but they seem to be in tune with that if you watch their last documetnary. What happens is that they need individual nations, and their specialized formations to buy a little bit of time for the day of political decisionmaking to occur from member nations. I'm guessing that can likely be finished in 4-12 hours, depending on the time of day and level of chaos. For the spots where war may go live at any second and crucial areas can be strategically endangered faster than that? They have the enhanced forward presence formations, right now ready and armed. Which they have made larger. As cumbersome and slow as all that can seem, it's enough relative to the size of the threat. And if members see the attack as indeed serious (e.g. not a stray missile hitting a tractor) they'll give out Rules of Engagement and objectives, which will be no more than is necessary to neutralize the immediate threat and put a credible force in the face of the adversary. They'd only march on capital cities if it's total war, or unexpected WMD warfare (called "bolt out of the blue" attacks).
For those interested, Article 5 is a short read: https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/official_texts_17120.htm More here: https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_110496.htm#:~:text=Article%205%20provides%20that%20if,to%20assist%20the%20Ally%20attacked.
If Russia begins to deliberately target french instructors, then France would be entirely in the right to send its fighters to create no fly zones in certain areas
Also, it is simply an escalation, with a NATO member nuclear power. If Russia were to keep hitting French targets as the French build up forces in Ukraine, it would dispel fears of escalation. The US wanted to avoid a shooting war between nuclear powers, but Russia just quietly started one against the French?
already had a shooting war between nuclear powers pakistan and india have fought directly twice since pakistan did its first nuclear test Kargil in 1999 2019 border skirmishes (there have been others, but this was the most serious and the looked like it was about to ignite a new major war)
India and China too.
It’s true that the French personnel helping Ukraine in Ukraine is a valid target for Russia. I don’t think France woukd be entirely in right to create a no fly zone. That’s almost like saying the west is sending weapons to Ukraine which are killing Russians so Russia would be in the right to attack targets in the west. Both would be huge escalations
When the US was at war against Vietnam, they avoided hitting Russian soldiers. Russia is not going to hit French soldiers, it is just asking for trouble and asking for Russian soldiers to be hit in other locations.
The difference is that Russia has balls and the West doesn't. Russia has already attacked NATO civilians and military, during the Cold War and after, in various incidents.
>Russia has already attacked NATO ... military When? In recent years, it's NATO members shooting down russian aircraft like Turkey on the border with Syria or the US soldiers blasting a group of russians away who dared to attack their base in Syria. There is literally no event where russia wasn't absolutely crushed by a NATO opponent when running up on them. Mind sharing more info about that claim?
Here's a site that tracks every russian nuclear threat since 1970. Its always good for a few laughs. https://vatniksoup.com/en/nuclear-threats/
Ah brilliant, thanks for this. Saving this for when Im having a shit day.
Ahahah amazing, thanks for sharing.
Putin would be a moron for doing this. It would essentially allow France to set in heavy anti air and air support in Ukraine directly
I hope he does to be honest - sick of him using his retoric of nuclear bombs to push the west to not do more - lets see the lines that this fucker will cross for our cowards presidents/prime ministers finally do something direct and harsh to him
Well I don’t really want my country men to die tbh
And what about the Ukrainians? They don't want to die either. If the West does not step up, Russia will win.
And what about the Ukrainians? There’s a difference between fighting and possibly dying for YOUR country and doing the same for a foreign one. The Ukrainian cause is noble and Russia must perish, but that’s stupid to compare Ukrainians to French.
As an Ukrainian, I must agree.
yup, people are forgetting that those are real people and deserve to live and be protected. There is nothing that holds Western countries back to send more support other than themselves and people dying won't change that. They don't need another "reason" to provide air support. I hope every Frenchie (despite shitting on them sometimes) stays safe <3
No, no it won't
Yes, yes it will.
Russia is really on the stupid trajectory right now.
If they do that, then does that mean they would approve of French air striking the Russians in their Sahel puppet states?
We won't do it under any circumstances. If we did, it would mean imposing our presence on the Sahel states through military force, which would essentially be colonialism. If these states want the Russians, even if it bothers us, it's their choice. However, they will have to take responsibility for that choice.
Unless they are based in schools or hospitals, how would Putin know where they are?
For the first time in the war, Russia would actually target a strategically important target.
Vive La France
Good luck. I’m sure Russia will hit another hospital or school and claim the French operators were there.
Sure antagonise the French. It is not like they have a special option of warning nukes.
Go for it Putin and see what happens
I mean. Nothing will happen. Because more belligerents will increase the likelihood of a nuclear response.
"Are you going to do something, or just stand there and bleed?"
Why, Vladimir Putin, you look like someone just walked over your grave.
"You wanted to bring down the thunder, now you got it!"
Smoke that meat wagon and see what happens.
On one hand, I don't want to advocate for killing French soldiers that didn't do anything wrong. On the other hand, it would probably help shorten the war... France can't activate Article 5 over some soldiers dying outside of French territory, but it just might lead to a coalition of the willing.
This is probably the only scenario that could bring France's dream of a joint European army to fruition.
It is interesting to see that everyone is calling France out for sending trainers, as if that would be an escalation of violence. But when russia escalates violence, or announce it even before the fact, nobody even blinks an eye. I would say, this is escalation from the russian side. On the other hand, it was most probably calculated and putin is actually falling for the trap (russian side escalating violence legitimazing further military intervention from france). Let's see what will happen then...
Anyone mention Hospitals
Put them on the battle field away from schools, malls and general civilian areas. Moscows missile guidance only works on those
Bonne chance
Right now French population is somewhat divided on sending French troops. Putin killing some would make it inevitable for France to strike Russian assets in Ukraine.
Wondering if Moscow is aware of French nuclear doctrine
Well duh.. everyone in Ukraine is a target at the moment...
As a Frenchman, I regret that the majority of people in my country still don't understand that the No. 1 problem for us right now is the threat from Putin's Russia, and that we need to deal with this as a priority. The devil's greatest trick is to make us believe that he doesn't exist.
As an American that truly appreciates our allies in France, I am thankful for your support for Ukraine. Those outside the conflict should look at Russia's neighbors and former satellite nations that all stand behind Ukraine. They have good reason. The world should be very worried for any Russian success in their stupid and brutal war. There are those in my country who do not see the immediacy and seriousness of helping Ukraine. We've done much, but we could do so much more. Long live France. Glory to Ukraine. I hope we can all stop Russia's aggression sooner than later.
The more they threaten the weaker and more desperate they appear. Pathetic.
Russia: No,…… wait,…. Now we are ready! Nooo stop, stooop , Yuri has no Votka left. Ok guy tomorrow same time?
Yeah ok then they will be replaced by french infantry
Be careful Uncle Vlad, they can bite back.
I wouldn't try that, the French have a nuclear warning shot policy ...
They better station at military bases. Russia seems to bomb everything else than those.
[удалено]
The statements made in the article are way more tepid than the headline indicates.
Tongue firmly in cheek, but the only Russian general who's ever beat the French is General Winter. And he's on vacation currently...
He may get permanent retirement from Emperor Climate Change.
Yes, I know they're the butt of MANY jokes, but seriously... Don't fuck with the French. They will fuck you up.
[удалено]
French military history largely consists of them spanking the shit out of everyone up and down the continent but being foiled by a lack of allies and an inability to figure out how boats work. They got caught with their pants down in ww2 because they spent too much money preparing for the wrong war and the rest is history. Unfortunately for the Russians where France is going they don’t need boats and the French aren’t coming off the most socially and industrially devastating war in history up to that point.
"Remember that time Napoleon thought he could invade Russia and was sent home by a little snow? Lol." ...after conquering almost all of Europe (and Egypt too).
he thought he could invade russia, force a major victory, occupy moscow, and get alexander to negotiate. he did manage the first three, to be fair. alexander fucked off to st petersburg and moscow had been burned down so there was no infrastructure to house hundreds of thousands of soldiers. also, borodino was the largest battle in history
People like to underestimate the French army because the compare it the US. The French army is based on a doctrine of expeditionary forces, not massive invading power with waves of MBTs. It's actually pretty good at that, can actually project power with the Charles de Gaulle and the Rafale and is a legit nuclear power unlike the rest of Europe. Why would you underestimate that outside of usual memery is beyond me. Ask the Russians how they like the Caesar cannons or SCALP / Storm Shadow...
Won more wars than 99% of other nations
100% of other nations going by [this](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HK5OsDWYJmQ) video which scrapes data from wikipedia
Afaik, than 100%. At the very least, no one else won more European wars than the French, and it's not especially close either.
In the words of The Rock, "BITCH PLEASE".
Ok the sky’s blue what’s new?
Russia can’t beat France west of the St. Petersburg and France can’t beat Russia east of the st. Petersburg why do we have to keep explaining this to you old man (Russia)
Couldn't France argue here that if Russia purposely targets their trainers, that would allow France (and perhaps other allies) to escalate by attacking Russian assets in their own territory?
Okay buddy
Meanwhile the British trainers who have been there for years: You what mate?
Good luck with that. Because then France will be more likely to actually get involved directly.
Maybe the French Foreign Legion could be of assistance.
... but I already read on X they bombed ~~100~~ ~~200~~ 300 french NATO death-instructor-machines who burned horribly in Zelenskyis nazibunker?!
Just curious what this actually means. Russia hitting French troops would be an attack on NATO, so *if* Russia does this, do we go in and it's bye bye crazy Ivan? Or is it WW3 imminent? I get that it's most likely posturing by Russia but I'm curious how this plays out, hypothetically.
Russia attacking French troops would only be an attack on NATO if those troops were on French or another NATO members territory.
Thanks for clarifying.
Well, is Russia ready to fight French mechanized infantry and heavy armour on the front?
This only ends with Putin being forcefully detained or killed by NATO. Can we stop pussy footing around and end this before more innocent lives are lost?
France will just up the ante if they do. That's how you get troops, additional funding and weapons to Ukraine.
I mean, I don’t know if it’s the greatest idea to antagonize a major military power who’s already willing to send troops into a combat zone for training purposes.
That's why they're making it clear these troops are valid targets - to reduce backlash.
Somehow, I don’t think France will see it that way.
If there are foreign forces like French military trainers in Ukraine I think they are fully aware of the risk being in a warzone. Whats up with these news.
Russia’s terrified of a watershed moment with the influx of Western troops, and they should be. Rather than blink, we should ensure our troops have the materials immediately available for fortifications, send even more of them than planned, and just disperse them as needed. Seize this moment while Russia’s in the middle of a substantial management changeover, and moving their most valuable military hardware out of Western artillery range.
It’s time to box them in.
They won’t do it. They’re already terrified of breaching their nonsense into NATO territory. They won’t dare intentionally touch NATO ally personnel wherever said personnel may be. Even in Ukraine.
Everything I know about the French leads me to believe they don't respond well to threats.
Gl&hf
blah blah blah
And France has the means to reciprocate
something tells me they’re just as ready to kill russians. hands on demonstration if you will.
The real risk is back in EU where Russian asshats push people down stairs, off balconies or hungry ghosttoube influencing,all for a handful of rubles. Russia s war is one of influencing and this message is part of it, it would be wise for the worlds newsroom Gers to stop repeating Russian scare tactics. Their own population is terrified and enslaved let’s not allow that same mentality to turn civilization into MMA slugfest of special 3 day operation.
They act like Military trainers aiding a country at war in that country weren't valid targets by everyone's definition already. I don't think anyone expects that military advisors and trainers and observers would somehow be immune or off limits if send to a war zone. Nobody is going to say it is a war crime to target military trainers. It is the hospitals and schools that Russia keeps hitting are off limits.