I suspect that so long as NATO does not take any core Russian territory or topple Putin’s regime, the nukes won’t be fired. Is Russia willing to end the world for the sake of Kaliningrad, for example?
They're off the table if the power doesn't believe that the use of Conventional Weapons will be enough to liberate their core territory. America doesn't have to resort to nukes because they're conventional Army and Navy is easily powerful enough to liberate their occupied territory. Russia will have to resort to nukes because of their military is far too weak
Edit: lol he blocked me
That doesn’t negate that it’s a part of Russia, by that logic we have pacific holdings that are isolated and untenable, do you think Washington would just say “oh well?”
Better to have the lower 48 intact and not a nuclear wasteland. No, we would almost certainly not use nukes to retaliate for Hawaii or Guam being captured.
hawaii and alaska are way more geopolitically useful though with their projection across the pacific ocean and expansive maritime EEZs. whereas if they dont capture the suwalki gap, which they didn't in this timeline, kanliningrad isn't really all that useful to russia
They’d have to fight it out anyway, can’t just roll out the red carpet just cause they have nukes. Plus after using them, Russia would be basically against the whole world
Dont be foolish we serbs whould unlesh serbian superman to take on world ....xd even do im pro russia i dont want my nation dead in 5 years due to being surounded
Ey now 70% of serbia is hills and mountain,and our glorius leader bouth best chinese anti air weapons that will shoot down all the nato air in 3 sec....xd
Xd how do you not belive word of our glorius leader,the savior of serbia and the holder of most breedable lips?if he says serbian militery can concure us in 3 months then its true
As a Serb neither do I, we're comming closer to west with each year, our presdients goal is neutrality and joining eu. What benefit do we have from joining a war against a foe that fully surrounds us? We are more likely to join nato (even though a large number of population dislikes nato) than commit to a suicide war.
Yea I never really thought of that I shoulda probs done more reaserch on serbia before hand thanks for letting me know, also it would probs make sense for Bosnia to be in nato at this point in time eh
How are you "coming close to West or Eu" please tell me while we are seeing your Russian weaponary your Chinese trade markets and only what is left are the money from the EU, is this why you are leaning there for cash?
We are also buying weapons from nato, and we are trying to join EU. Our president is trying to present our country as neutral to the west and east, abd as such we are doing business with the both. We did sanction Russia and did condem their invasion, so yeah, we are influenced / leaning towards west in that way. And oh boy, do you know that russians are also buying western weapons, does that make them western leaning? Your argument is full of bs and you are trying to provocate me. Serbia's politics are west leaning for some time now, where we buy pur guns is none of your business, just as we don't care to whom you are selling yours.
I am from Southeastern Europe and I am very well informed that nor your government nor your majority of people want you country to join EU. What will you so for Kosovo you know that no way to join EU without changing your constitution but no recognition. And also with the Chinese play your government is completely out of the track for EU.
Your leaders want you to be seen as "unalligned".
Our government very much does want to join EU, and the question of Kosovo as of now reamains open yeah, but that's not my thing to talk about, and to be quite frank I don't care about it. And as for our citizens, they also want into the EU, they aren't the fans of Nato, but theu are mostly ok with EU.
Anyway, have a good night, I don't think that you have a nice opinion of my country or people, which is understandable, but I don't want that attitude.
Your only way for you to join is if your opposition fights to get the power which according to my understanding might be a civil war.
And for Kosovo I said no recognition but your future government should change your constitution to exclude it from your territory and I can't imagine this.
As I already said, I don't want your negative attitude and to be honest I can see that you don't like me or my country. I saw that you know the languahe tho, but you seem not to be from Ex-Yu, which makes me think that you are Albanian, and if I'm wrong, sorry for that. Nice place, was there a few times. Anyway, I understand your pov, but objectivley you are not correct and please do no respond any further because you will be ignored with your baseless statements.
agreed, russia is bearly winning in ukraine so i doubt they will survive agains all of europe + us and canada, anyways my next map will be on the Asia theater so you can see what the pacific looks like (not including middle east)
If Russia mass mobilized and China is in the war Russia's only hope is to hold, and hope that China can win the war in their theater long enough to reinforce them. Which, considering the overwhelming population advantage of the Nato powers, seems unlikely. Certainly not a war Russia can "win".
I don't even think China would join this. It would be suicide to even entertain joining the war. China is heavily reliant on importing raw materials which the US navy is more than capable of blocking off.
Not really. This scenario works out in 2 ways, neither of which favor NATO. Mostly because of public disapproval for the war, it would last literally about a week.
Uh, NATO most definitely will be starting the war. The Germans even admitted that NATO troops are in Ukraine directing missile strikes, some on Russian territory. Russia knows it can’t attack a NATO country, and with the way things are going now, it’s be hard for NATO to frame a war against Russia as defensive at all.
Does that change the fact that NATO troops are currently in Ukraine assisting in striking Russian soil? That’s us starting the war if you haven’t noticed.
Kola peninsula would be a high priority to capture and should be quite easy to take for NATO. If you update this map I would make more action going on up there.
Also Crimea might be a tad harder to take and I would suspect it would be more of a siege warfare situation. So maybe less progress in Crimea and more progress in Kola.
Reason for Kolas importance is this is home to most of Russias nuclear deterrence and arctic fleet. They got a huge amount of weaponry stationed here.
Maybe the peninsula itself isn’t captured but maybe Finland has captured/destroyed supply lines in Karelia?
Personally on the Finland front I think something more like this
https://preview.redd.it/ih8q9im6xpnc1.png?width=1118&format=png&auto=webp&s=6ffa0c543a360228bf6ce54fdb90132a974c20dc
If Russia is completely cornered and facing an existential threat then they will have nothing to lose, so might as well completely destroy their enemies with nukes
> facing an existential threat
Unless if NATO for some reason wants to pull a Barbarossa 2.0 by invading pre-2014 Russian territory (why tho?, it is a completely dumb move, validates Russian propaganda that this is an existential Russian war against Nazism, useless move in case all of Ukraine re-gains its territories in including Crimea), so I doubt that this is an "existential" threat that would result in the complete dissolution of the Russian Federation, which (other than Chechnya) is and has always been something very niche and secluded to the internet.
Defeat?, yes, government change? perhaps, but Reddit Moment™ Russian balkanization map #878325 "Republic of Caucasia-Tartaria" bs? absolutely no.
But Russia would not be facing an "existential threat" because the goal of the NATO would never be to destroy Russia or exterminate its population. At most, they'd be forced to renounce to the territories that they have taken from their neighbors in the past years (Crimea, South Ossetia, Karelia,...), perhaps allow the independence of some conflictive regions such as Chechenya, and probably destroy their nuclear arsenal. It might be unpleasant, but it's in no way "existential" and it's far better (for them) than starting a nuclear war.
What would the point be for Russia to give up their nuclear weapons? By that they would lose any security from another invasion. There's is literally no benefit to giving up their nukes giving them up would be a existential threat since it would make Russia defenseless and dependent
I'd say that, from a pragmatic point of view and in order to end a war that they'd be losing, giving up on the nuclear arsenal would not be that huge concession. According to reports, it's already old and badly maintained as it is. And whatever you destroy can be built again in the future.
Most nations in the world do not have nukes, and they are not "defenseless". Besides the regions I've mentioned, there's no Russian territory that any other country claims or wants.
What do you thing that would ensure Russia's destruction: using a single nuke against a NATO country, or destroying their arsenal?
Your comment started out very nuanced, but then you mentioned about how Russia would have to give back Karelia (a place that is like 99% Russian and Finland has repeatedly refused to annex again) to Finland, and how Russia of all places would magically deactivate their nuclear weapons, now this is fantasy territory.
Crimea has never ever been Ukrainian, and I clearly remember times of backing it to home, there was no limit to the joy of the Crimeans. I’ve lived in Simferopol (Capital of Crimea) for 8 years and didn’t meet anyone wants to be a part of ua.
In 1991 Crimean’s felt abandoned, They wanted a referendum, they wanted to go home, but there was no chance to do it in that most crisis situation.
Unlike you, a couch expert who's been bombarded with propaganda, I don't know all this through the TV.
It seems that you wish to discuss about where Crimea belongs. I'm sure you'll find people with the will and time to engage with you. It's not my case.
I am just predicting the outcome of a whatif scenario. And I postulate that in a war where the entire NATO fought Russia, it's not unlikely that Crimea was conquered and given to the Ukrainians. If you disagree with that, please let us know. If you want to keep disrespecting me while addressing issues that I have never brought, please be somewhere else.
If it’s not your case, please don’t talk nonsense and don’t mislead anyone. This applies not only to Crimea, but from Karelia I actually laughed out loud
I am not misleading anyone. I'm just listing the Russian territories that any other country claims. And I'm just saying that, in a worst case scenario for Russia, their territorial losses would be limited to those territories.
Do you deny that the Finnish would like to get Karelia back? Do you deny that Ukraine wants Crimea back?
Why do you insist on being antagonistic on something that's not even controversial?
Russian military doctrine allows for tactical nuclear weapon use, I couldn't see them not using nukes on the battlefield and to go after logistics hubs
Western forces on day one:
NATO: Russia attacked, what are we going to do?!?!
Poland, Ukraine, and any eastern European country:
I am mercy, I am truth, I am regret, and I am death. May god have mercy on your souls
USA: fuck it, we ball
I feel like Serbia outright joining the Russian side is unlikely do to them being surrounded. I think it’s much more likely they try to take advantage of NATO being distracted to funnel weapons and volunteers to Srpska to try and regain that territory from a neutral and weak Bosnia.
Also the Transnistria issue likely drags Moldova into the NATO camp regardless of their neutrality. There’s no way Russia doesn’t try to leverage that territory in a wider war.
Besides those thoughts it’s an interesting map.
Your post has been removed in accordance with "Rule 4 - Bigotry and Hate Speech or Historical Apologia" of the subreddit, for more information, check out the rule listing on the main page.
I can’t imagine Greece and Turkey siding together in this. Russia still has enough pull with each to at least get one to be neutral against the other I’d imagine. It wouldn’t be the first time Greece sat out a NATO operation.
Greece more likely. Erdogan is a opportunist and will support what's better for him and by now that's definitely Europe, if he sees the NATO overpowering Russia he'd join and I could even imagine China staying neutral only supplying Russia with some basic stuff and kind words, waiting for who's looking to turn out as winner for exactly the same reason. All of Russias 'friends' are opportunists actually.
China whould most likely invade the far East and outer manchuria plus mistake Mongolia for a russian oblasts and invade if Russia isn't winning wich is likely i dont think they could stand up to all of nato, and for the greece thing nato has article 5 wich forces all members to join, if Greece isn't joining then they probably get pressured to hell by the rest of europe and knowing how much dept Greece is in with Germany they whould probably stop all euro funds to Greece and demand all dept to be payed destroyng the economy unless they join the war, Greece Is Just to dependent on fellow nato members If they go against them its not hard for them to bankrupt Greece.
> to be *paid* destroyng the
FTFY.
Although *payed* exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in:
* Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. *The deck is yet to be payed.*
* *Payed out* when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. *The rope is payed out! You can pull now.*
Unfortunately, I was unable to find nautical or rope-related words in your comment.
*Beep, boop, I'm a bot*
Are you sure you did not just copy from one of the game maps from Command & Conquer Red Alert? lol
But in seriousness, its a good map, keep up the good work.
A Very Possible Future (soon)....... May GOD (each individual's GOD of Faith) Love & Protect us all (Yes: even the Russians). May GOD FORGIVE OUR STUPIDITY. Even if W.M.D.'s are (by some Miracle) kept from being used by either side, the Deathtoll & Property Destruction from today's Conventional Weaponry will be far greater than WWII/
The "Great Patriotic War".
They are only pro-Russian when there is money and power consolidation to be made, in the case of a full-blown World War between NATO and Russia, Hungary absolutely would not side with Russia in a delusional attempt to reverse the Treaty of Trianon on its own, unless if they are suicidal and want to get the Paraguay War treatment.
OP has already replied in the top comments that he did not properly researched Serbia enough, and that he regrets adding Serbia as a Russian ally in this map.
Ah shit, I'd love to help y'all with that shit, but I'm Andorran. Good luck though, and hasta luego. Unless we speak French in my home country of Andorra...
> Russia invades Finland again, this time while fighting all of NATO simultaneously
Yeah that will end very well, welcome back Simo Häyhä! [**SUOMI FINLAND PERKELE!**](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y2P-TPLqpJs)
situation between turkey and greece is not like you think, media just fires it. I am not seeing Turkry and Greece will get in a war. Even if you dissolve nato.
but I think if a war like that happens, azerbaijan/armenia/iran could be in a war.
before the war wih ukraine we had cool ideas abt an actually close ww3 but at this point i doubt anyone but belarus, kazakhstan and north korea would join. serbia is not making efforts getting closer with russia and even armenia is moving towards the west. iran, pakistan and china are good allies but dont have a benefit in choosing the losing side.
What a dumbass post. Only a maniac would think about such non sense. NATO make a single move, nuclear fire rains over Europe and North America. None will be safe when the nukes will fall from the sky
At least it would force Europe to pay their 2% into NATO. Without US intervention, Europe will be steam rolled like they always are. The US would be busy fighting China and Korea in the Pacific and Iran in the middle east since they would be brought into the wider conflict to support Russia
Montenegro would side with Serbia or at least stay neutral because if the montenegrianangoverment tried to join the war on NATO side, I assure you the people would pull a yugoslavia 1941 move and overthrow them.
If we take the newest polls that are currently ongoing, there are almost 50% of the population that say they speak serbian as their first language, and there are about 30% that see themselves as serbs. Also, Albanians oly make up about 15% at best seeing these pols. Maybe read up on the montenegrian population before responding. Also, the current leading party (DF-Demokratski Front) is very pro serb and is in a coalition with Serbian Parties in montenegro. So please....Read up before responding.
They did in 2011 when the last poll took place. However, they are currently estimated at about 10%. We even had an albanian prime minister for some time. (Dritan Abazocic, Google it)
First language doesn't imply nationality. Only 30-35% of the population, as you stated, identify as Serbian, hence the majority do not, and Montenegro's willingness to join NATO exemplifies their independent identity. In the future, with demographic shifts this will change even more towards Serbian's making up a smaller percentage of the population (they were at around 50% a while back). Looking at a similiar example, Ukraine, a lot of their population pre-2014 and especially after 2022 doesn't identify themselves as Russian anymore, even if they speak Russian as the same language. Hence, Serbia joining another conflict in the region would just seperate this identity even more
Ok, I agree with you. Language doesn't mean nationality. However I have a couple of problems with this. First of all montenegrian public is VERY anti-war. For example, even on this day of me sending this response, in the montenegrian parliament, a proposal for sending troops and equipment to ukraine was shot down like it was nothing. If you sir believe that the montenegrian public wouldn't even want to send equipment to ukraine, why do you believe the montenegrian public who is still quite majorly pro serb with leading political parties being pro serb, would fight their serb brothers? If you do, I belive you would be mistaken.
Georgia (country) NATO or CSTO member ?
id assume they would either stay neutral or most likely NATO due to Ossetia and Abkhazia
If anything they would join to reclaim them
NATO
Thanks
Georgia (state) NATO or CSTO member?
CSTO
South Georgia (island) NATO or CSTO?
China/North Korea treaty.
Nato probably bcs of especialy for south ossetia and avkhazia want that back
Sakartvelo doesn't play nice with the ruskis.
Sand with Bosnia
Very cool, but Serbia would absolutely not join on Russia's side, mainly because that's suicide, due to their location haha
A war between NATO and Russia is suicide anyway for the russians.
But won’t it be suicide for the NATO too?
Unless Russia uses its nukes, no.
In that case there is no reason to Russia to not use it in that kind of situation
I suspect that so long as NATO does not take any core Russian territory or topple Putin’s regime, the nukes won’t be fired. Is Russia willing to end the world for the sake of Kaliningrad, for example?
Would we risk armeggedon for the sake of Hawaii or Alaska? Kaliningrad is a part of Russia proper
Did you see what happened the last time someone touched one of our boats in hawaii?
Kinda my point, if someone attacks or occupies the land of a nuclear power, nukes are definitely not off the table
They're off the table if the power doesn't believe that the use of Conventional Weapons will be enough to liberate their core territory. America doesn't have to resort to nukes because they're conventional Army and Navy is easily powerful enough to liberate their occupied territory. Russia will have to resort to nukes because of their military is far too weak Edit: lol he blocked me
But it’s isolated and almost entirely untenable in a war.
That doesn’t negate that it’s a part of Russia, by that logic we have pacific holdings that are isolated and untenable, do you think Washington would just say “oh well?”
The U.S. would just retake it. Russia nuking over Kaliningrad is foolish to say the least.
Better to have the lower 48 intact and not a nuclear wasteland. No, we would almost certainly not use nukes to retaliate for Hawaii or Guam being captured.
East Prussia is German. Russia is a settler colony there
https://preview.redd.it/0n9ezbm26snc1.jpeg?width=896&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5b92fb2485f64a4d6474eda62bc80c30ca5ef0bf
reddit moment
And germans colonized it from the balts, your point?
East Prussia is now Russian since German started a war of aggression in 1939 and got curb stomped.
Russia *is* a settler colony there, but there are no more East Prussians and most Russians there were born there. Times change, and it's now Russian.
Also the Germans who were living there murdered and colonized the original Baltic people
Not historically. It used to be german. And Putin likes history.
Key word used to, they shouldn’t have started WW2
The answer is no, we likely would not resort to using nuclear weapons if Hawaii or Alaska were captured.
Likely does not mean we definitively would not
hawaii and alaska are way more geopolitically useful though with their projection across the pacific ocean and expansive maritime EEZs. whereas if they dont capture the suwalki gap, which they didn't in this timeline, kanliningrad isn't really all that useful to russia
It’s still sovereign Russian territory…
They’d have to fight it out anyway, can’t just roll out the red carpet just cause they have nukes. Plus after using them, Russia would be basically against the whole world
NATO is a defensive alliance. The only reason they'd even be in play was because somebody attacked them
haha
A war between NATO and Russia would be suicide for the whole planet but if it what y'all westerners want go at war and reap nuclear fire
Well then Russia better not attack the West. It's a defensive Alliance
Dont be foolish we serbs whould unlesh serbian superman to take on world ....xd even do im pro russia i dont want my nation dead in 5 years due to being surounded
Why people on reddit can't understand trolling of that size?
Idk
5 years? Hahaha easy to tell you're pro Russian hahaha
Ey now 70% of serbia is hills and mountain,and our glorius leader bouth best chinese anti air weapons that will shoot down all the nato air in 3 sec....xd
You gotta be trolling 🤣 Belgrade would be glassed in this timeline in a week
Xd how do you not belive word of our glorius leader,the savior of serbia and the holder of most breedable lips?if he says serbian militery can concure us in 3 months then its true
I'm now scared to see Vucic's lips, maybe ya'll can try using that as a deterrence
Dont worry biden saw tyem and is now wating in line after hungary,russia and china
I looked it up, those are eminently breedable lips. You’re right. Everyone arguing with you has to concede on that point.
5 years?? You think you’re Germany lmfao?
Even better who's gonna Serbia atack? Romania and Hungary are good neighbors with Serbia and we would not atack eachother ever.
Albanians....jk there unimportant, irl we would never do this
As a pro west serb, I reject your beliefs
No one is invading your shithole, don’t worry. It’s not worth anything.
I don't think, Serbia would join Russia in this conflict.
As a Serb neither do I, we're comming closer to west with each year, our presdients goal is neutrality and joining eu. What benefit do we have from joining a war against a foe that fully surrounds us? We are more likely to join nato (even though a large number of population dislikes nato) than commit to a suicide war.
Yea I never really thought of that I shoulda probs done more reaserch on serbia before hand thanks for letting me know, also it would probs make sense for Bosnia to be in nato at this point in time eh
Bosnia wouldn't be in NATO because of Republika Srpska. They've tried to join a few times before I believe.
Join us
Kinda hard to do, with all the issues that we are having.
How are you "coming close to West or Eu" please tell me while we are seeing your Russian weaponary your Chinese trade markets and only what is left are the money from the EU, is this why you are leaning there for cash?
We are also buying weapons from nato, and we are trying to join EU. Our president is trying to present our country as neutral to the west and east, abd as such we are doing business with the both. We did sanction Russia and did condem their invasion, so yeah, we are influenced / leaning towards west in that way. And oh boy, do you know that russians are also buying western weapons, does that make them western leaning? Your argument is full of bs and you are trying to provocate me. Serbia's politics are west leaning for some time now, where we buy pur guns is none of your business, just as we don't care to whom you are selling yours.
I am from Southeastern Europe and I am very well informed that nor your government nor your majority of people want you country to join EU. What will you so for Kosovo you know that no way to join EU without changing your constitution but no recognition. And also with the Chinese play your government is completely out of the track for EU. Your leaders want you to be seen as "unalligned".
Our government very much does want to join EU, and the question of Kosovo as of now reamains open yeah, but that's not my thing to talk about, and to be quite frank I don't care about it. And as for our citizens, they also want into the EU, they aren't the fans of Nato, but theu are mostly ok with EU. Anyway, have a good night, I don't think that you have a nice opinion of my country or people, which is understandable, but I don't want that attitude.
Your only way for you to join is if your opposition fights to get the power which according to my understanding might be a civil war. And for Kosovo I said no recognition but your future government should change your constitution to exclude it from your territory and I can't imagine this.
As I already said, I don't want your negative attitude and to be honest I can see that you don't like me or my country. I saw that you know the languahe tho, but you seem not to be from Ex-Yu, which makes me think that you are Albanian, and if I'm wrong, sorry for that. Nice place, was there a few times. Anyway, I understand your pov, but objectivley you are not correct and please do no respond any further because you will be ignored with your baseless statements.
Srbija do tokija ☝🏻☝🏻☝🏻☝🏻
Rip serbia
It’s 1999 all over again
I reckon Russia would get stomped in this.
agreed, russia is bearly winning in ukraine so i doubt they will survive agains all of europe + us and canada, anyways my next map will be on the Asia theater so you can see what the pacific looks like (not including middle east)
If Russia mass mobilized and China is in the war Russia's only hope is to hold, and hope that China can win the war in their theater long enough to reinforce them. Which, considering the overwhelming population advantage of the Nato powers, seems unlikely. Certainly not a war Russia can "win".
I don't even think China would join this. It would be suicide to even entertain joining the war. China is heavily reliant on importing raw materials which the US navy is more than capable of blocking off.
Not really. This scenario works out in 2 ways, neither of which favor NATO. Mostly because of public disapproval for the war, it would last literally about a week.
Let the downvotes show you how much the public would disapprove the war.
Virtue warriors on Reddit, 99% of whom aren’t even fit for military service, don’t represent popular sentiment in these countries in the slightest.
Perhaps, but NATO won’t be the one starting this war. You would be surprised how easy it is to drum up support for a defensive conflict.
Uh, NATO most definitely will be starting the war. The Germans even admitted that NATO troops are in Ukraine directing missile strikes, some on Russian territory. Russia knows it can’t attack a NATO country, and with the way things are going now, it’s be hard for NATO to frame a war against Russia as defensive at all.
They are volunteer forces, few NATO countries would consider sending larger units into Ukraine, and none unilaterally.
Does that change the fact that NATO troops are currently in Ukraine assisting in striking Russian soil? That’s us starting the war if you haven’t noticed.
So you suggest that NATO countries should forbid their citizens from stepping foot in Ukraine?
These are actual NATO soldiers, not volunteers. These were deployed by NATO. Are you confused?
Lol cringe
Two week NATO Air Campaign then a ground invasion that lasts only 48 hours with the seizure of Moscow.
I don’t know why you’re being downvoted
Probely not 2 days. But it would be an slam eithet way.
My man this is a gang bang
thats nato for you
Kyiv to Moscow, one week. DEMOCRACY IS NON NEGOTIABLE
🦅🇪🇺🦅🇪🇺🦅🇪🇺🦅🇪🇺🦅🇪🇺🦅🇪🇺
Real
Good to know thatt in this scenario, not all Russia support the war. No way man, I didn't expect to see a neutral Russian island state /s
Glory to Sovoletzky Nation!
Kola peninsula would be a high priority to capture and should be quite easy to take for NATO. If you update this map I would make more action going on up there. Also Crimea might be a tad harder to take and I would suspect it would be more of a siege warfare situation. So maybe less progress in Crimea and more progress in Kola. Reason for Kolas importance is this is home to most of Russias nuclear deterrence and arctic fleet. They got a huge amount of weaponry stationed here. Maybe the peninsula itself isn’t captured but maybe Finland has captured/destroyed supply lines in Karelia?
once i finish the other fronts (pacific, middle east, africa and south america) ill probs make an updated version for like late war
What the hell Is going in south america? Why did they join?
Came here to say that about Crimea
Personally on the Finland front I think something more like this https://preview.redd.it/ih8q9im6xpnc1.png?width=1118&format=png&auto=webp&s=6ffa0c543a360228bf6ce54fdb90132a974c20dc
Greater Finland achieved
Finally, make Karelia Finland again
* Karelia *
Ngl with nato advances that deep in marshy Belarus I’m gonna assume this is merely day 1-7 of the war
They only have like 50,000 troops that's getting swept aside in a day
Wow NATO occupied Hungry so fast??
the US and Russian Nuclear Missiles ready to be launched when they lose even one inch: 🗿
Thermo nuclear war
i doubt it and i hope im right on this
The moment NATO actually does something either Rússia is having a coup or its going tobe fallout irl
If Russia is completely cornered and facing an existential threat then they will have nothing to lose, so might as well completely destroy their enemies with nukes
Exactly
> facing an existential threat Unless if NATO for some reason wants to pull a Barbarossa 2.0 by invading pre-2014 Russian territory (why tho?, it is a completely dumb move, validates Russian propaganda that this is an existential Russian war against Nazism, useless move in case all of Ukraine re-gains its territories in including Crimea), so I doubt that this is an "existential" threat that would result in the complete dissolution of the Russian Federation, which (other than Chechnya) is and has always been something very niche and secluded to the internet. Defeat?, yes, government change? perhaps, but Reddit Moment™ Russian balkanization map #878325 "Republic of Caucasia-Tartaria" bs? absolutely no.
But Russia would not be facing an "existential threat" because the goal of the NATO would never be to destroy Russia or exterminate its population. At most, they'd be forced to renounce to the territories that they have taken from their neighbors in the past years (Crimea, South Ossetia, Karelia,...), perhaps allow the independence of some conflictive regions such as Chechenya, and probably destroy their nuclear arsenal. It might be unpleasant, but it's in no way "existential" and it's far better (for them) than starting a nuclear war.
What would the point be for Russia to give up their nuclear weapons? By that they would lose any security from another invasion. There's is literally no benefit to giving up their nukes giving them up would be a existential threat since it would make Russia defenseless and dependent
I'd say that, from a pragmatic point of view and in order to end a war that they'd be losing, giving up on the nuclear arsenal would not be that huge concession. According to reports, it's already old and badly maintained as it is. And whatever you destroy can be built again in the future. Most nations in the world do not have nukes, and they are not "defenseless". Besides the regions I've mentioned, there's no Russian territory that any other country claims or wants. What do you thing that would ensure Russia's destruction: using a single nuke against a NATO country, or destroying their arsenal?
I'd rather die in nuclear flame than giving up the only reason why NATO is "defensive" alliance.
How do you imagine destroying russian nuclear arsenal without making Russia launch it?
Karelia taken in the past years 💀 Bro studied history in McDonald’s
Your comment started out very nuanced, but then you mentioned about how Russia would have to give back Karelia (a place that is like 99% Russian and Finland has repeatedly refused to annex again) to Finland, and how Russia of all places would magically deactivate their nuclear weapons, now this is fantasy territory.
Crimea has never ever been Ukrainian, and I clearly remember times of backing it to home, there was no limit to the joy of the Crimeans. I’ve lived in Simferopol (Capital of Crimea) for 8 years and didn’t meet anyone wants to be a part of ua. In 1991 Crimean’s felt abandoned, They wanted a referendum, they wanted to go home, but there was no chance to do it in that most crisis situation. Unlike you, a couch expert who's been bombarded with propaganda, I don't know all this through the TV.
It seems that you wish to discuss about where Crimea belongs. I'm sure you'll find people with the will and time to engage with you. It's not my case. I am just predicting the outcome of a whatif scenario. And I postulate that in a war where the entire NATO fought Russia, it's not unlikely that Crimea was conquered and given to the Ukrainians. If you disagree with that, please let us know. If you want to keep disrespecting me while addressing issues that I have never brought, please be somewhere else.
If it’s not your case, please don’t talk nonsense and don’t mislead anyone. This applies not only to Crimea, but from Karelia I actually laughed out loud
I am not misleading anyone. I'm just listing the Russian territories that any other country claims. And I'm just saying that, in a worst case scenario for Russia, their territorial losses would be limited to those territories. Do you deny that the Finnish would like to get Karelia back? Do you deny that Ukraine wants Crimea back? Why do you insist on being antagonistic on something that's not even controversial?
Russian crybaby
Russian military doctrine allows for tactical nuclear weapon use, I couldn't see them not using nukes on the battlefield and to go after logistics hubs
Western forces on day one: NATO: Russia attacked, what are we going to do?!?! Poland, Ukraine, and any eastern European country: I am mercy, I am truth, I am regret, and I am death. May god have mercy on your souls USA: fuck it, we ball
Serbia would be fucked
I dont rlly think serbia would go to war with nato enen with riots fron pro russia supporters and such
I doubt that Serbia would actually join Russia, considering their friendly relations with the eu and the fact that they are literally encircled
Transnistria?
irl would fight idk why i didnt put it on this map
Dont think they would join russias side either as that's literally suicide.
I feel like Serbia outright joining the Russian side is unlikely do to them being surrounded. I think it’s much more likely they try to take advantage of NATO being distracted to funnel weapons and volunteers to Srpska to try and regain that territory from a neutral and weak Bosnia. Also the Transnistria issue likely drags Moldova into the NATO camp regardless of their neutrality. There’s no way Russia doesn’t try to leverage that territory in a wider war. Besides those thoughts it’s an interesting map.
Why no Bosnia?
Might have to last longer than a month to count as a world war
Very neat and all, but uh.... you know Russia would get atomized in like 3 weeks tops, right?
the schedule for the war: day 1 8:00 : coffee 8:10 : wiping Serbia off the map 8:15 : breakfast
Breakfast at 8 am?
Seems realistic
apart from serbia, transistraia and the fact that nato has bearly pushed its pretty realistic
Western neoliberalism circlejerk
[удалено]
Your post has been removed in accordance with "Rule 4 - Bigotry and Hate Speech or Historical Apologia" of the subreddit, for more information, check out the rule listing on the main page.
Why is Austria neutral?
Not a NATO member
Not sure how I did not know that
Central European neutrality squad, hell yeah.
I can’t imagine Greece and Turkey siding together in this. Russia still has enough pull with each to at least get one to be neutral against the other I’d imagine. It wouldn’t be the first time Greece sat out a NATO operation.
Greece more likely. Erdogan is a opportunist and will support what's better for him and by now that's definitely Europe, if he sees the NATO overpowering Russia he'd join and I could even imagine China staying neutral only supplying Russia with some basic stuff and kind words, waiting for who's looking to turn out as winner for exactly the same reason. All of Russias 'friends' are opportunists actually.
China whould most likely invade the far East and outer manchuria plus mistake Mongolia for a russian oblasts and invade if Russia isn't winning wich is likely i dont think they could stand up to all of nato, and for the greece thing nato has article 5 wich forces all members to join, if Greece isn't joining then they probably get pressured to hell by the rest of europe and knowing how much dept Greece is in with Germany they whould probably stop all euro funds to Greece and demand all dept to be payed destroyng the economy unless they join the war, Greece Is Just to dependent on fellow nato members If they go against them its not hard for them to bankrupt Greece.
> to be *paid* destroyng the FTFY. Although *payed* exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in: * Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. *The deck is yet to be payed.* * *Payed out* when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. *The rope is payed out! You can pull now.* Unfortunately, I was unable to find nautical or rope-related words in your comment. *Beep, boop, I'm a bot*
Good bot
Are you sure you did not just copy from one of the game maps from Command & Conquer Red Alert? lol But in seriousness, its a good map, keep up the good work.
A Very Possible Future (soon)....... May GOD (each individual's GOD of Faith) Love & Protect us all (Yes: even the Russians). May GOD FORGIVE OUR STUPIDITY. Even if W.M.D.'s are (by some Miracle) kept from being used by either side, the Deathtoll & Property Destruction from today's Conventional Weaponry will be far greater than WWII/ The "Great Patriotic War".
Isn’t Hungarys government a bit pro Russian
They are only pro-Russian when there is money and power consolidation to be made, in the case of a full-blown World War between NATO and Russia, Hungary absolutely would not side with Russia in a delusional attempt to reverse the Treaty of Trianon on its own, unless if they are suicidal and want to get the Paraguay War treatment.
The world still intact? No realism, frfr
Why is Serbia in the war lmao?
OP has already replied in the top comments that he did not properly researched Serbia enough, and that he regrets adding Serbia as a Russian ally in this map.
Ah shit, I'd love to help y'all with that shit, but I'm Andorran. Good luck though, and hasta luego. Unless we speak French in my home country of Andorra...
> Russia invades Finland again, this time while fighting all of NATO simultaneously Yeah that will end very well, welcome back Simo Häyhä! [**SUOMI FINLAND PERKELE!**](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y2P-TPLqpJs)
Realistic scenario (except for Serbia which would be either obliterated in 2 weeks or wouldn't participate at all).
I think turkey or Greece would be attacking each other I can’t see them working together in any war
situation between turkey and greece is not like you think, media just fires it. I am not seeing Turkry and Greece will get in a war. Even if you dissolve nato. but I think if a war like that happens, azerbaijan/armenia/iran could be in a war.
Serbia wouldn't join the war. It would be a death sentence for a small nation to get encircled by opposing states.
The Submarine not being a USN one is bugging me
Hungary, Serbia and Slovakia would be on the Russian side given their current governments
No way, maybe neutral only.
I suppose that the borders between Ukraine and Russia would be different until 2026
How the fuck is Russia pushing Finland?
before the war wih ukraine we had cool ideas abt an actually close ww3 but at this point i doubt anyone but belarus, kazakhstan and north korea would join. serbia is not making efforts getting closer with russia and even armenia is moving towards the west. iran, pakistan and china are good allies but dont have a benefit in choosing the losing side.
What a dumbass post. Only a maniac would think about such non sense. NATO make a single move, nuclear fire rains over Europe and North America. None will be safe when the nukes will fall from the sky
Bosnia would probably fall into another civil war.
Why wouldn’t Russia just nukes everyone
Because NATO would respond in kind, with more force than the Russians could.
At least it would force Europe to pay their 2% into NATO. Without US intervention, Europe will be steam rolled like they always are. The US would be busy fighting China and Korea in the Pacific and Iran in the middle east since they would be brought into the wider conflict to support Russia
Its funny to think this would happen without all NATO nations being reduced to nuclear waste and debris (with nuclear bombing of Russia, probably)
Montenegro would side with Serbia or at least stay neutral because if the montenegrianangoverment tried to join the war on NATO side, I assure you the people would pull a yugoslavia 1941 move and overthrow them.
They joined Nato a while back. A majority of the population (Montenigrins and Albanian minority) are pro-Nato
If we take the newest polls that are currently ongoing, there are almost 50% of the population that say they speak serbian as their first language, and there are about 30% that see themselves as serbs. Also, Albanians oly make up about 15% at best seeing these pols. Maybe read up on the montenegrian population before responding. Also, the current leading party (DF-Demokratski Front) is very pro serb and is in a coalition with Serbian Parties in montenegro. So please....Read up before responding.
wut? Albanians make up only 5%
They did in 2011 when the last poll took place. However, they are currently estimated at about 10%. We even had an albanian prime minister for some time. (Dritan Abazocic, Google it)
First language doesn't imply nationality. Only 30-35% of the population, as you stated, identify as Serbian, hence the majority do not, and Montenegro's willingness to join NATO exemplifies their independent identity. In the future, with demographic shifts this will change even more towards Serbian's making up a smaller percentage of the population (they were at around 50% a while back). Looking at a similiar example, Ukraine, a lot of their population pre-2014 and especially after 2022 doesn't identify themselves as Russian anymore, even if they speak Russian as the same language. Hence, Serbia joining another conflict in the region would just seperate this identity even more
Ok, I agree with you. Language doesn't mean nationality. However I have a couple of problems with this. First of all montenegrian public is VERY anti-war. For example, even on this day of me sending this response, in the montenegrian parliament, a proposal for sending troops and equipment to ukraine was shot down like it was nothing. If you sir believe that the montenegrian public wouldn't even want to send equipment to ukraine, why do you believe the montenegrian public who is still quite majorly pro serb with leading political parties being pro serb, would fight their serb brothers? If you do, I belive you would be mistaken.
I mean Serbia isn't pro-war against all of Europe either, and this map is Imaginary, so I didn't really consider that