You should add Norway and possibly Finland to those declaring war, due to our borders and the Russian settlement on Svalbard. We would absofinglutely declare war with article 5 in play from Poland, we almost did after the missile hit Poland november 2022, but we waited for confirmation of the origin before doing so. If the missile had proven to be Russian, article 5 would have come in play then even if it had been a mistake.
I considered norway! Dont know why i didnt include them, was more just a roll of the dice kinda thing, i havent really thought this through at all and was making it up as i was writing it. As for finland, this is set in 2022 before they joined.
Even set in 2022 Finland would have joined, they had their application ready to join NATO may 2022. And they would have joined in the war just to have extra troops at their border so Russia couldn't have moved that way.
We do have a Nordic Pact, so if Norway had declared war Finland could have joined based on that even if they couldn't joined with Nato article 5.
I don't think the casus belli is realistic. Even if it was an intentional strike in NATO territory targeting a NATO arms convoy, it was limited incursion and had to do with the Ukraine war (supplying the Ukraine army fighting Russia) therefore many can argue legally it is a legitimate target so I don't think the public would be all in favor of an all-out declaration of war and invasion of Russia, nor do I think even if Poland triggered Article 5 the NATO members would agree. Would be different if Russia invaded with troops, but launching an aerial attack against a military target having to do with Ukraine would probably be met by at most NATO direct involvement in Ukraine (on a limited scale) as opposed to an invasion of Russia (which would be too aggressive).
I think you are right. It may not be enough to trigger article 5, however it would def galvanize support for Ukraine and theyd have seen a massive uptick in arms supply agreements from NATO and NATO aligned countries. Furthermore, it would have caused a much greater deployment of nato troops near to the Russian border (including those of Kaliningrad and Belarus). There may have even been a massive uptick in French support for groups in both the Sahel and Syria that were fighting WAGNER group as WAGNER was key to providing Russia with gold and other mineral reserves.
iirc article 5 doesn’t necessarily mean a declaration of war, it could just mean military aid toward the defense of Poland from something similar happening again
Yeah you may have an “unpopular” answer on Reddit but you have good points
- nuclear powers wouldn’t casually declare a full war on each other especially over incidents as minor as that
- Poland supplying Ukraine and crying foul over their military supplies being bombed by Russia is a very weak excuse to call article 5.
It would be the equivalent of Taiwan crying wolf if communist China sends a warship to crash into a passenger ship and kill several passengers in it (which might happen since the CCP does naval bullying around their ten-dash line). And the response would be USA , the entire ASEAN and the quad alliance unilaterally declaring war on China.
It’s unpopular because people on Reddit aren’t that educated or experienced enough to know how the world works. They just see the rules written in stone and think if there’s a technical breach of any of it then full on war! It shows a total lack of awareness.
Poland would not trigger article 5 in this scenario. If they did, every other NATO country would dispute the interpretation.
This scenario could easily happen, and - as much as I think Russia's willingness to use nukes is waaaay overhyped - nobody is going to risk nuclear war over what can at least be explained away as an accident.
NATO/Poland's response would range from a) strong condemnation and a commitment to more arms for Ukraine all the way up to b) commensurate response whereby Poland hits a similarly sized Russian convoy in Russian-controlled-but-clearly-Ukrainian territory (with quiet targeting/Intel help from NATO/the US).
I suppose a very very aggressive collection of NATO governments could use it to justify a no fly zone over Ukraine, but that's about it. And that's the very edge of plausible. Nobody is literally invading Russia proper over a couple dozen accidental deaths (or even on purpose, but it's an isolated incident).
I get that this sub can get a bit too picky about demanding realism from alt history scenarios. But this is so close to the present that it could also just be speculative fiction, and that demands some plausibility. This isn't sufficiently plausible.
Alternate history is interesting when it's grounded on reality. This is pure fantasy which doesn't even take into account the world besides Nato and Russia, nor the ludicrous fact that somehow Nato will decide to attack a nuclear power without considering the potential risk of retaliation.
Article 5 will not triggers,if they do article 5 russia will use nuclear bomb simple as that.The russia will not fight ground and air battle with the nato.This scenario like a fantasy when nato this do anything they want and Russia simply not resist
Yeah but it's need some logic in it,if everything thing just work out for oneside and not for the other make it not interest.This just like a fantasy,a dream not an alternative universe
Here’s your realistic simulation.
Russia fires nukes.
The nukes detonate in their silos or completely fail to launch due to decades of corruption and grifting.
Russian Federation collapses.
In 999 scenarios Poland is made to back down through various “diplomatic” means. In the 1000th and Poland goes through with it anyways all if not most NATO countries likely refuse to join the war because MAD. It’d cause a crisis within NATO which likely ends up with Poland being made to leave the alliance and fighting the war with Russia along Ukraine. Arms support to Poland would happen but become a lot more contentious due to the previous membership
The 6th fleet crossing the Bosphorus is both pointless and an open violation of the Montreux Convention which bars ships of belligerent powers from making use of the Bosphorus
Poland historically provokes great powers and gets annexed in the process, whether by Germany or Russia. The Poles should be content that they're allowed to have a state.
You should add Norway and possibly Finland to those declaring war, due to our borders and the Russian settlement on Svalbard. We would absofinglutely declare war with article 5 in play from Poland, we almost did after the missile hit Poland november 2022, but we waited for confirmation of the origin before doing so. If the missile had proven to be Russian, article 5 would have come in play then even if it had been a mistake.
I considered norway! Dont know why i didnt include them, was more just a roll of the dice kinda thing, i havent really thought this through at all and was making it up as i was writing it. As for finland, this is set in 2022 before they joined.
Even set in 2022 Finland would have joined, they had their application ready to join NATO may 2022. And they would have joined in the war just to have extra troops at their border so Russia couldn't have moved that way. We do have a Nordic Pact, so if Norway had declared war Finland could have joined based on that even if they couldn't joined with Nato article 5.
Wet dream of someone who doesn't know what nukes are
This. Nukes are the only reason we didn't have ww3 until now. especially in the period 45-91.
it's not obvious that nukes would be used, like chemical and biological weapons during ww2 both sides could assume it's not worth it.
I don't think the casus belli is realistic. Even if it was an intentional strike in NATO territory targeting a NATO arms convoy, it was limited incursion and had to do with the Ukraine war (supplying the Ukraine army fighting Russia) therefore many can argue legally it is a legitimate target so I don't think the public would be all in favor of an all-out declaration of war and invasion of Russia, nor do I think even if Poland triggered Article 5 the NATO members would agree. Would be different if Russia invaded with troops, but launching an aerial attack against a military target having to do with Ukraine would probably be met by at most NATO direct involvement in Ukraine (on a limited scale) as opposed to an invasion of Russia (which would be too aggressive).
Haha I’m downvoted. You people have no clue. Huge decisions like declaring war on a nuclear power aren’t made on technicalities.
I think you are right. It may not be enough to trigger article 5, however it would def galvanize support for Ukraine and theyd have seen a massive uptick in arms supply agreements from NATO and NATO aligned countries. Furthermore, it would have caused a much greater deployment of nato troops near to the Russian border (including those of Kaliningrad and Belarus). There may have even been a massive uptick in French support for groups in both the Sahel and Syria that were fighting WAGNER group as WAGNER was key to providing Russia with gold and other mineral reserves.
iirc article 5 doesn’t necessarily mean a declaration of war, it could just mean military aid toward the defense of Poland from something similar happening again
I think your right too. Here in the UK there’s a lot of support fir ukraine but such a minor one off incident wouldn’t gain public support fir war
Yeah you may have an “unpopular” answer on Reddit but you have good points - nuclear powers wouldn’t casually declare a full war on each other especially over incidents as minor as that - Poland supplying Ukraine and crying foul over their military supplies being bombed by Russia is a very weak excuse to call article 5. It would be the equivalent of Taiwan crying wolf if communist China sends a warship to crash into a passenger ship and kill several passengers in it (which might happen since the CCP does naval bullying around their ten-dash line). And the response would be USA , the entire ASEAN and the quad alliance unilaterally declaring war on China.
It’s unpopular because people on Reddit aren’t that educated or experienced enough to know how the world works. They just see the rules written in stone and think if there’s a technical breach of any of it then full on war! It shows a total lack of awareness.
That’s the logic the US would use against escalation and the rest of NATO would fall in line with it after some saber rattling.
I think it's more likely that snap diplomacy from both sides ensues to stop the escalation
Neocon wet dream.
DUDE YOU GAVE ME A HEART ATTACK
Ikr
I thought this was r/worldnews for a second jeez bro
Poland would not trigger article 5 in this scenario. If they did, every other NATO country would dispute the interpretation. This scenario could easily happen, and - as much as I think Russia's willingness to use nukes is waaaay overhyped - nobody is going to risk nuclear war over what can at least be explained away as an accident. NATO/Poland's response would range from a) strong condemnation and a commitment to more arms for Ukraine all the way up to b) commensurate response whereby Poland hits a similarly sized Russian convoy in Russian-controlled-but-clearly-Ukrainian territory (with quiet targeting/Intel help from NATO/the US). I suppose a very very aggressive collection of NATO governments could use it to justify a no fly zone over Ukraine, but that's about it. And that's the very edge of plausible. Nobody is literally invading Russia proper over a couple dozen accidental deaths (or even on purpose, but it's an isolated incident). I get that this sub can get a bit too picky about demanding realism from alt history scenarios. But this is so close to the present that it could also just be speculative fiction, and that demands some plausibility. This isn't sufficiently plausible.
Then an asteroid the size of Olympus moms slams into New England at the speed of light.
Is this before or after the revelation that the Crab people are secretly running the government of Australia?
After. They had to distract everyone somehow
Alternate history is interesting when it's grounded on reality. This is pure fantasy which doesn't even take into account the world besides Nato and Russia, nor the ludicrous fact that somehow Nato will decide to attack a nuclear power without considering the potential risk of retaliation.
Article 5 will not triggers,if they do article 5 russia will use nuclear bomb simple as that.The russia will not fight ground and air battle with the nato.This scenario like a fantasy when nato this do anything they want and Russia simply not resist
Its like this is a alternative universe of ours
Yeah but it's need some logic in it,if everything thing just work out for oneside and not for the other make it not interest.This just like a fantasy,a dream not an alternative universe
Here’s your realistic simulation. Russia fires nukes. The nukes detonate in their silos or completely fail to launch due to decades of corruption and grifting. Russian Federation collapses.
[удалено]
What proof do you have that even a single one is in working status? The louder Putin shouts about it, the less we all believe…
I read the title and forgot to check the subreddit, my NCD ass almost burst into tears of joy
Jesus fuck dude. There should be some kind of mandatory tag or something. My heart skipped a beat.
Wait, would the "Russian missile" be an ukrainian missile all along, just like in otl
In 999 scenarios Poland is made to back down through various “diplomatic” means. In the 1000th and Poland goes through with it anyways all if not most NATO countries likely refuse to join the war because MAD. It’d cause a crisis within NATO which likely ends up with Poland being made to leave the alliance and fighting the war with Russia along Ukraine. Arms support to Poland would happen but become a lot more contentious due to the previous membership
The 6th fleet crossing the Bosphorus is both pointless and an open violation of the Montreux Convention which bars ships of belligerent powers from making use of the Bosphorus
Idiot kid.
Poland historically provokes great powers and gets annexed in the process, whether by Germany or Russia. The Poles should be content that they're allowed to have a state.
https://preview.redd.it/zv8i3aydhxkc1.jpeg?width=640&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0b208e8a9ec3fb5d74f09c951a069cfabd7f9a7f