• 14th_cylon@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    12 days ago

    It is more for a show I guess, which is not to say they shouldn’t do it.

    Surely first step in invasion over the bridge would be to just hit that bridge with some rocket…?

      • FundMECFSResearch@lemmy.blahaj.zoneOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        12 days ago

        I think it can be for two things at once. Definetly more for show, but increases annoyance/makes a possible invasion more annoying.

        Obviously I imagine they have a way to blow up the bridge too which sounds far more effective.

          • FundMECFSResearch@lemmy.blahaj.zoneOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            12 days ago

            Would make sense that main invasion would be from the east, but a second front may be opened to try and collapse the “enemy” who would likely be stretched thin.

            • protist@mander.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              12 days ago

              If Russia tries to go to war with NATO, Kaliningrad is instantly blockaded and defeated. Russia can hide nothing in Kaliningrad

              • FundMECFSResearch@lemmy.blahaj.zoneOP
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                12 days ago

                Unless Trump withdraws, Russian war would have to be won in a week. By the time american logistical supplies and reinforcements start coming in strong, Russia is fucked.