this post was submitted on 15 Sep 2026
156 points (93.3% liked)

Europe

12012 readers
609 users here now

News and information from Europe 🇪🇺

(Current banner: La Mancha, Spain. Feel free to post submissions for banner images.)

Rules

  1. This is an English-language community. Comments should be in English. Posts can link to non-English news sources when providing a full-text translation in the post description. Automated translations are fine, as long as they don't overly distort the content.
  2. No links to misinformation or commercial advertising. When you post outdated/historic articles, add the year of publication to the post title. Infographics must include a source and a year of creation; if possible, also provide a link to the source.
  3. Be kind to each other, and argue in good faith. Don't post direct insults nor disrespectful and condescending comments. Don't troll nor incite hatred. Don't look for novel argumentation strategies at Wikipedia's List of fallacies.
  4. No bigotry, sexism, racism, antisemitism, islamophobia, dehumanization of minorities, or glorification of National Socialism. We follow German law; don't question the statehood of Israel.
  5. Be the signal, not the noise: Strive to post insightful comments. Add "/s" when you're being sarcastic (and don't use it to break rule no. 3).
  6. If you link to paywalled information, please provide also a link to a freely available archived version. Alternatively, try to find a different source.
  7. Light-hearted content, memes, and posts about your European everyday belong in other communities.
  8. Don't evade bans. If we notice ban evasion, that will result in a permanent ban for all the accounts we can associate with you.
  9. No posts linking to speculative reporting about ongoing events with unclear backgrounds. Please wait at least 12 hours. (E.g., do not post breathless reporting on an ongoing terror attack.)
  10. Always provide context with posts: Don't post uncontextualized images or videos, and don't start discussions without giving some context first.

(This list may get expanded as necessary.)

Posts that link to the following sources will be removed

Unless they're the only sources, please also avoid The Sun, Daily Mail, any "thinktank" type organization, and non-Lemmy social media (incl. Substack). Don't link to Twitter directly, instead use xcancel.com. For Reddit, use old:reddit:com

(Lists may get expanded as necessary.)

Ban lengths, etc.

We will use some leeway to decide whether to remove a comment.

If need be, there are also bans: 3 days for lighter offenses, 7 or 14 days for bigger offenses, and permanent bans for people who don't show any willingness to participate productively. If we think the ban reason is obvious, we may not specifically write to you.

If you want to protest a removal or ban, feel free to write privately to the admin that applied the rule (check modlog first to find who was it.)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
federalreverse@feddit.org
poVoq@slrpnk.net
anzo@programming.dev
EuroMod@feddit.org
156
Nato would defeat Russia quickly if ‘we took our gloves off’, says Poland (www.independent.co.uk)
submitted 3 days ago by tardigrade@scribe.disroot.org to c/europe@feddit.org
84 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

...

Polish Foreign minister Radoslaw Sikorksi said a victory against Vladimir Putin’s forces would be swift due to the “overwhelming superiority” of its air forces, even without support from the United States.

“If Russia attacked us and we took our gloves off, I think we would defeat Russia quite quickly. We have overwhelming superiority over Russia in air power. General, correct me if I’m wrong, but it’s something like 2,500 aircraft,” he said during a discussion at the Yalta European Strategy meeting in Kyiv on Saturday.

“Even without the US it’s still overwhelming, and I haven’t checked recently how many F-35s and JASSMs and all the deep-strike capabilities we have.”

...

He went further to say that Poland could knock out half of Russia’s refining capacity in a matter of weeks. The comments were in relation to a potential conflict between Russia and Nato and not about the prospect of a direct war between Russia and Poland.

“But if the Ukrainians have knocked out half of Russia’s refining capacity in six months, we could do it in six weeks and take out the other half,” he continued.

Russian foreign ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova accused Sikorski of “Russophobia of the brain” in discussing the conflict.

Speculation has abounded that Moscow is plotting to attack Nato, claims that the country has denied.

...

Last month CIA director John Ratcliffe made a short trip to Moscow - the last time that a CIA chief visited the country personally was in the weeks before Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Several sources familiar with the discussions told CBS News that Ratcliffe had made the visit to warn Russia against an attack on Nato.

...

Archived

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] lokalhorst@feddit.org 4 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (2 children)

I don't want to act like I am a military expert, but as far as I understand, the drone war has changed the battlefield drastically - they can be produced in masses, they are cheap and they fly low. This guy is talking about Russian energy infrastructure that has shown to be very vulnerable towards the Ukrainian drones. Your hypothesis is this could be carried out easier with bombers, I am not so sure about this. Getting your jet the whole way to Siberia to drop a bomb on an oil plant seems to be very risky to me.

Don't get me wrong, I have no doubt NATO can easily reach air superiority over Russia, but transforming this air superiority into something useful, and that over a large country as Russia, is not as easy.

[–] Skua@kbin.earth 4 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I'm no expert either, just trying to assume that the experts in charge of each country are operating rationally (which I assume you're doing too). As far as I understand, the advantages a full-on human-piloted jet has over drones for something like striking Russian oil refinieres are:

  • Far bigger payloads. A drone can damage the refinery, but you need a shitload of drones or one big plane to destroy it

  • The ability to get past air defence. Ukraine has been rapidly switching up where it attacks to avoid Russia's air defences. Hit one place for a while, Russia moves anti-air stuff to defend it, start attacking somewhere else. If you're attacking with something much more capable, you can choose the targets that you think will hurt Russia the most rather than the ones Russia is defending the least

Russia has substantial drone production of its own and hasn't stopped using its own air force. Similarly, Ukraine is still absolutely using what aviation it has

It's also worth remembering that we hear a disproportionate amount about drone usage because a) it's new and b) they inherently all have cameras on them streaming to a computer, so it's incredibly easy to get footage of them working

[–] foenkyfjutschah@programming.dev 1 points 2 days ago

guess there's only armchair generals here anyway

[–] AAA@feddit.org 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

If there's no doubt that NATO can reach air superiority, then what's the doubt about bombers reaching far into Siberia? Air superiority means that any aircraft can get anywhere uncontested.

In any case most NATO bombers are just heavier jets (oversimplified). ONLY the USA and China have purpose built strategic bombers.

[–] Skua@kbin.earth 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

To be fair, any air superiority scenario is always about some kind of specific geographic area, and Russia is big enough that there are likely to be targets beyond the range of the fighters that enforce air supremacy

Also there is a third country which operates strategic bombers: Russia. It has been using them against Ukraine, and Ukraine's Operation Spiderweb (the raid with trucks full of drones) was specifically an effort to take out a big chunk of that strategic bomber fleet

[–] AAA@feddit.org 2 points 3 days ago

All correct. The sheer size works both in favor and against Russia. It's harder to gain air superiority, but it's also harder to cover everything with defense.

(I totally blocked out the Tupolev bombers in my mind, unintentionally.)