Yeah, in my humble opinion anyone in Europe that considers wider war breaking out to be farfetched is not paying enough attention.

You can be forgiven however if you're a millennial (as I am) or younger, because the long peace has been so long that it seems crazy that Russia might start dropping bombs, say, on Copenhagen or London. "They wouldn't dare attack NATO" we would have said 10 years ago. But today, NATO is at risk since too much of its credibility is tied to the US and the US is now unpredictable. With one stroke of an "executive order" pen the US could just call backsies and pull out if one man considers it politically advantageous to him to do so. That has been unthinkable for 75 years and now it's just reality.

Russia is a lot less afraid of Western Europe than they were/are of NATO. Would they win? IDK. But my perception is that the very notion of war would shock the s**t out of the 20-somethings that Western Europe would need to conscript in order to fight an all-out war. If too many refused to fight, Putin might just roll in there relatively unchallenged.

Note: US civilians are certainly not any more ready to enlist than Europe's! But the US is the only Western country with (almost) enough people already enlisted to be a credible threat in a major war.

All out war shocked the shit out of the 20 somethings in Ukraine too, many fled, and yet Russia has not made significant advances in the following three years.

There's no plausible world in which Russia has the strength to take on the rest of Europe, in, say, the next ten years.

(Let's assume nukes are out of the question)

Actually, those who remember the 90s and, before that, the Cold War see and understand that Europe is much safer now that it was then. The USSR was much stronger relative to Western Europe then. Now Russia is probably at its weakest relative to NATO (it might have been weaker in the early 90s but NATO had also not expanded to its current footprint).

Rememeber also that there was a hot war in the middle of Europe (former Yugoslavia) during the 90s with the US even carrying airstrikes on an European capital (Belgrade).

Obviously this does not mean that European countries should have weak militaries or not show strength. But the threat of Russia is overblown and used to manufacture consent in public opinion for more spending and more EU integration at a time when people already suffer economically and are already squeezed, and growing disatisfied with the EU.

IMHO, the highest risk of violent instability in Western Europe now and in the coming years is not Russia but mass immigration and islamist terrorism at large. And perhaps that's also partly why governments are trying to deflect attention...

> it seems crazy that Russia might start dropping bombs, say, on Copenhagen or London.

Yes, that is totally crazy.

That is basically NATO propaganda to convince people it's ok to stop paying for healthcare because we need to buy weapons, so that guys like Crosetto can become even richer.

Is it true? No.

Also air force is not so useful and we are spending insane amounts into that.

> But my perception is that the very notion of war would shock the s*t out of the 20-somethings that Western Europe would need to conscript in order to fight an all-out war

as a 20-something western european i don't see why i should die because some politicians behave like absolute fucking pieces of shits. if war breaks out in my country or they start conscripting people like me i'll just flee the country together with whomever would like to join me.