This drives me nuts:
Therefore, the upcoming Zapad-17 exercise matters not so much in terms of demonstrating additional Russian military capabilities, which—regardless of Moscow’s claims to the contrary—are orders of magnitude less than the combined military resources of the United Stated and NATO.
Yes, NATO is much stronger than Russia. I've never questioned that.
But at the point of contact along NATO's eastern frontier, Russia has the advantage and would have the advantage for a long time.
The bulk of NATO's superior power is in North America. And even European NATO power is both stretched across Europe and not aggregated into larger formations.
It will take time to move that superior force to the eastern front (and about that)--and much of that power will not leave their home countries--and when it arrives it will be less effective than the Russian formations because of being multinational rather than one-country formations as Russia's army is.
And Russia has nukes.
So yes, NATO is stronger on paper. On the battlefield, Russia will start with the advantage and maintain it for some time.
Can NATO mobilize to defeat Russia when Russia is sitting on their conquests and threatening nuclear war if NATO comes at them?
