WW3 Scenario: Russia Can Annihilate NATO In 60 Hours

WW3 Scenario: Russia Can Annihilate NATO In 60 Hours
Russia Victory Day Parade President of Russia/Website CC by 4.0

Russia, NATO and member nations have been at odds with each other especially since the military build near Moscow’s borders. Several experts, however, believe that even with the alliance, Russia could be capable of taking over Germany and Poland in just several days should the countries really go at war. Is Russia really capable of such?


Russia is More Powerful than NATO

Michael Carpenter, U.S. deputy assistant secretary of defense for Russia, Ukraine and Eurasia, claimed that NATO is not yet ready to have a faceoff with Russia’s army. According to a think tank report, if NATO goes to war against Russia then it would only take around 60 hours for the latter to overtake its army. The comments came at a time when NATO is starting to hold military exercises and put up military forces near Russia’s border.

Several months back, RAND think tank released a report saying that Russia could take down NATO in the Baltic region in just 60 hours. Carpenter confirmed that contents of the report are true when Senator Cory Gardner asked him about it. Nonetheless, the United States could help bolder NATO’s presence and capability for better odds.

Like us on Facebook

“I’m confident by the end of 2017, when we have an additional armored brigade combat team worth of force posture on the eastern flank of the alliance, that we will be,” Daily Mail quoted Carpenter. 

Russia Must Be Stopped Now

Nadia Savchenko also warned that Vladimir Putin’s forces should be stopped now or they will be able to take over Poland or Germany.

“It might be uncomfortable for Europe or even America for some time. But they need to understand that if they don’t stop Russia on the border of Ukraine, next time it will be on the border with Poland or the border with Germany,” The Telegraph quoted Savchenko who is also considered Ukraine’s “Joan of Arc.”

Also read: WW3 Scenario: US, Canada, Britain, Germany, NATO Amass Battalions Against Russia In Poland & The Baltics

Liked this story? Subscribe to our newsletter or follow us on Twitter and Facebook for more updates on America.


  • Michael Richards

    LOL Quite a fantasy.

  • ano333

    Even taking these statements at face value, it is only considering the forces that Nato has in that particular region. After Russia “annihilates” the Nato forces in eastern Europe, it would still be at war with Nato proper (including the US). Russia’s forces would then be ground under the heel of the US Military.

  • Philo2

    Isn’t the real function of “think tanks” like Rand, concocting improbable scenarios, that those who pay for them, can use to justify increase military spending? NATO’s combined military spending is approaching 1 trillion dollars annually ($968 billion in 2013) and yet, it couldn’t hold out 60 hrs against some hypothetical Russian invasion. How much would 120 hrs cost?

  • Richard M

    Every nation in NATO, including the US, has drastically cut military spending at the same time that Mr. Putin has drastically increased military spending. According to their budget, Russia spends 4.3% of it’s GDP on military, but that doesn’t include the money spent by the “Department of Emergencies” which is really part of the military or the massive “border police. In addition, there is an even larger amount of money that is allocated outside the budget. Meanwhile, the US has gone under 4% and of NATO, only France and a couple of small countries spend the recommended 2%. In addition, Russia’s cost for military hardware is much less because their labor and material costs are less. They also aren’t saddled with tax, personnel, and environmental requirements that drive up costs as they do in the West. It’s like Winston Churchill observed, after winning the war the Western powers went back the the very same practices that almost led to their annihilation.

    • DFKoelling

      The Russian economy is doing terribly compared to the United States’.

      We don’t need such high levels of defense spending all the time considering how far most of our tech is ahead.

      AA systems not withstanding.

      • Richard M

        Our technology isn’t that far ahead. What we’ve got deployed is not much better than what they’ve got deployed. In areas where it is, they have more. Only in the surface naval forces do we have a clear edge.

    • Nikola Tasev

      “Russia spends 4.3% of it’s GDP on military”
      Yes, the Russian GDP is $1.178 trillion (2016) (nominal) $3.493 trillion (2016) (PPP), IMF data. Their economy is shrinking, because it is dependent on oil prices.
      NATO GDP is $18.35 trillion and growing.
      “In addition, Russia’s cost for military hardware is much less because their labor and material costs are less. ”
      This is included in the PPP calculations. What is not included in the calculations is enormous corruption, due to the authoritarian government, nepotism and lack of separation of powers or independent judiciary.
      Several smart people observed recently that the USSR fell because their economy was falling while their military expenditure was rising, in part due to the arms race, in part due to their involvement in Afghanistan. I’d say this is far more likely to cause annihilation than war with Russia.

      • Richard M

        Yes but their costs are proportionally smaller. If you look at what’s being acquired, they have more nuclear weapons, more tanks, and more troops than the US, possibly all of NATO. Their air force is weaker than the US but they have a lot more long range anti-aircraft missiles. Only in their surface fleet is inferior in all respects to the US, their sub fleet is comparable. However, the alarming thing is that they’re building up as fast as they can and NATO nations are tearing down. Germany now spends less than 1% of its GDP on defense, a true defense piker.

  • DFKoelling

    This is blatantly wrong.

    Yes, they could take the Baltic States but to mislead readers through a loaded title that they could “annihilate” NATO is just fearmongering and baiting.

    NATO is quite a few more countries than just Russia and their technology is better and geographical distribution fairly larger as a whole.

    The entirety of the Russian state (that matters) is in a small area concentrated around Moscow and western Russia. The rest is uninhabitable wasteland from any commonsense POV.

    Russia, in all the actual analyses I have read, would badly lose a conventional war between them and NATO. But considering nuclear arms, it would be bad for everyone.

  • Amit Rana

    It is not possible to Annihilate even north koria except through nuclear weapons let alone NATO…NATO also got nuclear missiles like Russia…WW3 will bring misery to both Russia and Europe and the world in general….so back off now and try tn reduce tensions..keep open communication channels..Russia not killing people living in Crimeia…Russia not committing genocide there..Russia just protected majority Russian speaking people from being killed by Ukraine government…there is a genuine dispute…..Europe and USA should engage Russia through dialogue…that is the only way forward.