Would Russia face different security threats bordering the EU instead of NATO?

[Alexandrubaschet08]

- Russia has the largest land area.
- The earth is muddy in spring and autumn.
- It has the largest nuclear arsenal in the world, surpassing that of the USA.
- It considers itself to have the second most powerful tank in the world after Abraham.
- It has the largest army in Europe and after Ukraine, the largest GDP allocated to defense approximately 6%-8%
- The largest gas and oil resources are located near the Caucasus Mountains and in Siberia.
- It is considered the 2nd military power in the world.
- NATO is a defensive

alliance.

If Russia defended itself like Vietnam, who could defeat it?

EU is the first threat to Russia security!

NATO is the fist threat to Russia security!

Nobady is a threat to Russia security.

[strateguy632]

But both NATO' and EU' are defend unit. None attacked Russia even when it attacked ukraine. Finland joined NATO it borders! But still not a threat to Russia just defend unit. ... About power "Russia has the largest land area" hard to capture, but empty worthless, so nobody wants siberia! Except siberians want independent. 2 'land is muddy in spring and autumn' hard to conquer. But not skill. 3 "It has the largest nuclear arsenal in the world, surpassing that of the USA' but not maintained, due to no plans to use! due to "mutual destruction" danger , so just a waste of money. 4 "It considers itself to have the second most powerful tank" hahaha we saw those t90 fail in ukraine. Russians have many old tanks as weak as any truck. just more wasted money !

[Alexandrubaschet08]

Agree with you.
But if Russia claim thus to be true, why is Russia behaving like it does?
What is Russia problem when EU is economic alliance whit, zero army and NATO is a defense alliance.

[madhatters4]

i don't think so. the reality is most countries respect sovereign nations borders. this is certainly the case of the EU and NATO. so i don't think if they bordered the EU nations vs NATO nations (because NATO nations are generally in the EU) anything would be different

[Alexandrubaschet08]

Before Finland was EU but, non-NATO, border Russia and base on that, Russia never attack Finland after WW2.
But decide to attack Ukraine because it want to join EU and Russia say is a high risk for their (Russia) national security.

That why i put the quastion.

[madhatters4]

who decided to attack Ukraine because it wanted to join the EU? Finland didn't attack Ukraine. Russia attacked Ukraine and Russia has expressed no desire to join the EU

[Alexandrubaschet08]

Russia decided to invade Ukraine in 2014 because it wanted to join the EU.
And Russia cannot even dare to join the EU because it would contradict its own statements, that it is corrupt and decadent.
What I am pointing out is that, Finland being in the EU and on the border with Russia, was not invaded in the 50s/60s, when Finland joined the EU.
But they taught the Ukrainians in 2014.
The Moldovans in 1991 when they wanted to unite with Romania.
The Georgians when they also wanted to join the EU in 2008.
Russia is afraid that prosperity and democracy will come to its detriment.

[madhatters4]

i don't think the EU status made a difference in russia's decision to invade Ukraine. For example even if the talks for EU inclusion in 2014 had gone the way Russia wanted, they'd still want Ukrainian resources and port access. but perhaps you're right

[Alexandrubaschet08]

Russia rented the port of Sevastopol, where it kept a large part of its Black Sea fleet, and the invasion of Crimea in 2014 also started from Sevastopol.
The negotiations for Ukraine's accession to the EU had nothing to do with Russia, in fact, the president in 2014, Yanukovych, wanted to give up on joining the EU, which upset the protesters and especially the youth and students, which triggered the revolution in Ukraine.
Yanukovych was a very close friend of Putin. He later fled to Moscow when he could no longer face the protesters.
Shortly after, Ukraine adopted the resolution for accession to the EU, new elections were planned and RUSSIA INVASIONED CRIMEA IN 2014.
It all started from the European Union, and NATO had no involvement in this story, until the second invasion that took place in Don-Ban.

[CalmUntilAbused]

Yes, they would face different security threats. The security threats they would face if not for NATO would be null. Since most of Europe, save for Poland, Hungary, and probably Romania, is freeloading off the USA, if they left NATO (or if the USA left NATO, since the only reinforcement the NATO would be left with outside of Europe would be the negligible Canada), they would become a free meal for Russia (not that Russia would jump on this occasion recklessly). Like, honestly... Serbia by itself would prove to be a threat to the US-freeloading Europe, if the countries bordering Serbia were not Hungary and Romania, who treat their national independence seriously regardless of the EU. It really wouldn't take Russia to crush the US-freeloading Europe at this point, as soon as the USA leaves the NATO.

It's kind of funny, though, since Russia borders Poland, a country that is a member of both the NATO and the EU. Now, if we leave the EU, but stay in NATO/forge a separate defense agreement with the USA in case the USA decides to leave the NATO, we are fine. If we leave the NATO, but stay in the EU, we are toast by the end of the next six months, and that's an optimistic assumption that takes into consideration the time Russia would need to mobilize a sizeable enough force at the Polish border.

[Alexandrubaschet08]

The question was, if for Russia it represents a threat that it borders the EU or NATO.
Not if Russia is a threat to the Eastern bloc.
And even if the USA leaves NATO, which Trump can no longer do, he needs the approval of a very large majority to do so. A very difficult thing to do with those who kiss his ass there.

And also what danger can NATO and the EU represent to Russia, considering that NATO is a DEFENSIVE alliance, and the EU is an economic one?

[CalmUntilAbused]

@alexandrubaschet08 The NATO with the USA is a threat to Russia, that's why there is a conflict in Ukraine right now. In any other combination, neither the NATO nor the EU pose a threat to Russia.

[Alexandrubaschet08]

This is the biggest nonsense in the world.
NATO is a DEFENSIVE alliance!
NATO must be stronger than any other enemy. Including Russia.
NATO has never invaded anyone without being invaded! Activating only once in history!

The conflict in Ukraine broke out when Ukraine (an independent and sovereign state) decided to join the EU!
February 27, 2014 (Crimea was annexed by Russia)

Which it was perfectly entitled to do, if that's what it wanted! And that's what it wanted!

Ukraine did not want to join NATO until it was invaded in Donbas too! April 6-12, 2014 (Ukraine wants to join NATO!)

The Orange Revolution in Ukraine, which began in 2013 and ended in 2014, was focused on joining the EU, NOT NATO!

THIS CONFLICT IS 100% ONLY BECAUSE OF RUSSIA!

[CalmUntilAbused]

@alexandrubaschet08 That is untrue. The conflict is because of the indiscriminate shelling of Russian-speaking Ukrainian civilians by Ukraine ever since 2014 (and no, these civilians did not want to join the EU - and frankly, they are the smartest out there).

[Alexandrubaschet08]

It's very hard for me to believe that you are from Poland or that you would be Polish.

There was no discrimination against Russians in Ukraine, in order to enter the EU, the rights of minorities must be respected.
Otherwise, you wouldn't have entered Poland either, as you also have a population of Russians, especially since you border Kaliningrad and Belarus.
The so-called "discrimination" of Russians in the east is just Russia's modus operandi.
They did the same in Moldova in 89-92 and later entered with the army.
But neither Moldovans nor Romanians gave a damn about them.
THERE IS NO OPPRESSION OF RUSSIANS!

Russians shouldn't be more oppressed than in Romania, Moldova and Poland. And yet they aren't.

It's Russian propaganda.

[CalmUntilAbused]

@alexandrubaschet08 It's not Russian propaganda, the Russian-speaking Ukrainian civilians in the East were literally being shelled by Ukraine for 8 years, from 2014 to 2022...

[Alexandrubaschet08]

IT WAS UNDER RUSSIA OCUPATION!!!
THE RUSSIAN ARMY KILL THEM LIKE THEY DID IN OUR COUNTRYS AS WELL!

[CalmUntilAbused]

@alexandrubaschet08 No, Doneck and Lugansk were shelled by Ukraine since 2014 until 2022. Russia was not involved in it. Except for some basic humanitarian support for the Russian-speaking Ukrainian citizens.

[Alexandrubaschet08]

Who the hell would tell you this nonsense?
Russia invaded Ukraine in the east, Donbas.
Although until then there had been no major incident of persecution, Ukrainians wanting to join the EU!
If they were persecuted, why didn't Russia go there first?
What was it doing in Crimea in February 2014, when Crimea had the status of an AUTONOMOUS republic, and from there Yanukovych brought his Titusky troops!

In April, Russia invades Donbas after it had already annexed Crimea, due to the fact that Donbas was the industrial center of Ukraine!

The propaganda that Russians are persecuted and Russia is defending them was also used when it tore you, Poland in two with Germany!

And when it took Bessarabia from me, Romania in 1940!

THE RUSSIANS IN UKRAINE WERE NOT PERSECUTED, BUT THEIR OWN INVADING RUSSIANS, COMING FROM RUSSIA!

[CalmUntilAbused]

@alexandrubaschet08 Whatever lies You tell will not change the fact that Russian-speaking Ukrainian citizens were genocided with coordinated artillery strikes by Ukraine ever since 2014 up until 2022. Not even the small hint of a fact about the USSR (not Russia, so even that part is actually a lie) using the excuse of protecting their people to split Poland together with Germany does change that fact.

[blackeagle007]

Why anyone try to invade Russia? Biggest country in the world and dictators from France and Germany tried, led to their downfall.

[Alexandrubaschet08]

Napoleon was no dictator! Was emperor!

But Russia that what they say that they are in danger and they are just taking action to reinforce their national security.
That what Russia say.

[blackeagle007]

Emperor, dictator same thing. They are absolute governments with control of courts

[Alexandrubaschet08]

It is not the same thing.
The dictator rules only in his own interest out of selfish desire for his own desires
The emperor rules in the name of the people, for the people.
Rome had emperors, but only a few were also dictators.
Alexander the Great was an emperor.

[Dargil]

EU could be defeated by a wet paper bag.

Russia can't defeat a state with the population of Florida.

[Alexandrubaschet08]

what do you mean?

[Dargil]

What don't you understand?

[Alexandrubaschet08]

"EU could be defeated by a wet paper bag." this

[Dargil]

The EU is perfect except for three things.1 They have almost no standing war fighters. 2 They have almost no significant combat arms. 3. They don't have the will to fight.

[Dargil]

They have been on America's tit for 70 years and Russia knows that they are weak.

[Alexandrubaschet08]

UE nu a stat pe spatele americanilor. Tarile occidentale si-au achitatii datoriile din planul Marchal si s-au unit intr-o alianta economica pentru a preveni noi conflicte.
UE, daca se uneste intr-un singur stat, depaseste SUA la economie, iar EURO si Lira sterlina din UK sunt mai valoroase decat dolarul.

[Dargil]

That's exactly what I was thinking. Whatever you said.

[CalmUntilAbused]

@Dargil I could not agree more with Your description of the EU military capacity... That was a good one!

[Dargil]

@CalmUntilAbused they were on America's high in tit for so long that they became just like dependent children and they act like them. Full of emotion and full of nonsense. They have no will and no capacity to fight. I wish it weren't true.

[CalmUntilAbused]

@Dargil I don't think I do wisjh it wasn't true, unless we lived in a much better parallel world when us men are properly respected. I am Polish, and I would not fight in defense of the current regime, which basically follows the #KillAllMen directive. If the regime changes and the USA supports us, I might. And in most of the EU, men have it at least as bad as in Poland. There is simply nothing for us to defend here (and with Poland, there is also next to no hardware to perform the defending with).

[Dargil]

Germany is the worst. The men have no testicles.

[Alexandrubaschet08]

The EU did not stand behind the Americans. Western countries paid off their debts from the Marshall Plan and united in an economic alliance to prevent new conflicts.
The EU, if united in a single state, surpasses the US in economy, and the EURO and the UK Pound are more valuable than the dollar.

[Avicenna]

Russia's biggest threat is the Communist Chinese, who would love to grab Siberia and other resource-rich areas. NATO is no threat to Russia.

[Alexandrubaschet08]

Russia have atomic bomb, more then China and so much land that is questionable if China as well can cover all Russia land in order to control even the empty pices of lands.
The hardest challenge is Russia will alwase be the occupation, is even more harder then the qoncuest

[Avicenna]

China has the manpower to occupy Siberia and Russia can't deter them solely with nukes (China is hugely increasing its own nuclear arsenal). China has tens of millions of surplus men it would be happy to use as cannon fodder.

[Alexandrubaschet08]

The entire Chinese army represents 2.5 MILLION people, if atomic bombs are dropped on major Chinese cities, there will be carnage, and China's population will decrease like no other country in world history.
No country with nuclear weapons attacks another with nuclear weapons.
No total mobilization of the population can be done, you need a war economy, some are not fit for military service, others need to be trained, but even so, the Chinese army can hardly reach the order of tens of millions AND IT IS STILL NOT ENOUGH to occupy Russia.
Germany has 80 million people, you look at the map of Russia and think about how many Germans fit in Russia, with so many armies you would need to occupy Russia in the best case scenario.

[Avicenna]

LOL, China is increasing its nuclear arsenal and Russia's population isn't dispersed evenly throughout the country. Think China wouldn't respond to a nuclear attack?

Who said anyone has to occupy all of Russia to seize the resource-rich areas? Only you. No one but you thinks they have to do that. I sure don't.

China would merely need to prevent access to them. Does anyone think the Russian Army can expel millions of invaders?

[Alexandrubaschet08]

As everyone who invaded Russia has said.
It's very easy to get in, but almost impossible to get out.
All that land mass of Russia you have to think of as hostile land.
Even China wouldn't be big enough to cover all of Russia.
Look at how big Vietnam was and yet they were successful with their guerrilla warfare.

RUSSIA CANNOT BE OCCUPIED!
Russia can be defeated economically or through wars of attrition.

[beefcakebradybatson]

What nation is called "Abraham?" Do I detect some anti-Semitism, bud?

[Alexandrubaschet08]

Misspelling.
The sentence is about tanks and i mean Abrams.
upload.wikimedia.org/.../Abrams-transparent.png

i

[beefcakebradybatson]

Oh. You had me worried for a minute.

[Alexandrubaschet08]

I my language we pronounce Abraham. Like, Abraham Linkon.
Not Abram Linkon

[Alexandrubaschet08]

And is imposible for me to be anti-semitic. I'm pro Israel and even Abraham was a jew.

[PolarPoint]

Are you jew?

[beefcakebradybatson]

I'm black there there are right-wing, Trump-loving c**ns.

[PolarPoint]

The EU and NATO are very different things.

[Alexandrubaschet08]

I know.
Just give an answer, considering the question.
Who is puting Russia security more in danger, EU, NATO or nobady?