Could Airstrikes against Russia work?

Strangely enough there's a difference between flying a couple of bombers on a standard reconnaissance mission and flying a fleet of the things - i imagine the radar operators at every military base from Lossiemouth to Tallinn would have a fit if they saw an entire squadron of bombers making a beeline towards western Europe.

Theoretically and with a bit of squinting you might be right [this is ignoring the fact Russia is within spitting distance of America to start with] but the simple fact of the matter is the Russian security council and their generals are more than well aware of the fact they cannot in any conceivable way launch any sort of normal attack against the US i.e. with planes or naval assets - the Americans would destroy them utterly. Moscow has long contented itself with the strategy of being able to burn America with their ballistic missiles instead. And given how many warheads they have dotted around this is something I know there is no doubt to be true.

Why? It's his money. He can buy and sell whatever he wants. Why should that be publicized?
Some people...

Why? It's his money. He can buy and sell whatever he wants. Why should that be publicized?
Some people...

lol who cares about the privacy and feelings of someone who bombed the UK

Lol, you crazy

the russian people will finally see putin's corrupt wealth and murders of political dissidents and support of nazi parties across europe.

putin will probably end up like gaddafi, killed by his own people on the street

Lol you really are crazy. Sounds like a nice action movie script. Real world is not like that hun

Do you also think that Russian agents are spying on you ? Lol

russia is a horrible country, the sooner it realisez to obey international law the better, otherwise its already 3rd tier economy is going to have a standard of living lower than that of zimbabwe

the russian people will finally see putin's corrupt wealth and murders of political dissidents and support of nazi parties across europe.

putin will probably end up like gaddafi, killed by his own people on the street

russia is a horrible country, the sooner it realisez to obey international law the better, otherwise its already 3rd tier economy is going to have a standard of living lower than that of zimbabwe

It's more of a poking mission than a reconnaissance mission, but that's neither here nor there really. What exactly do you think the amassed might of the baltic states are going to do when they see the Russians flying overhead? At most we might get a courtesy call giving us a heads up.

And yes, Russia is within range of the USA and would be highly unlikely to launch a land assault, but a missile base separate from the mainland/which doesn't have to pass over warning systems in Europe and the UK wouldn't be a bad thing by any means. That + resources means if they had a choice between turning us into a nuclear wasteland or carpet bombing the hell out of us and taking over, I know which one I'd put money on happening.

Thanks for the correction.
I wasn't really talking about the Baltic States - Poland has an exceptionally large airforce, Sweden, Germany, Norway etc. etc. all maintain armed forces who would take serious exception to a Russian bomber fleet. Not to mention the Americans maintain bases across Europe and Britain as well.

Again in theory I dont dispute your assertion, i just find it difficult to imagine the Russians would risk nuclear oblivion to try and colonize the UK. Not to mention the fact if they tried to bomb Britain the NATO states are obligated to return the favour.

The only other concern i'd raise in relation to this carpet bombing thing is that unlike the Americans the Russians dont maintain a fleet of heavy bombers of any significance [also bare in mind most of them are exceptionally old] the idea of the Russians carpet bombing Britain is somewhatdubious in these circumstances.

I don't think Russians would risk anything much, my point is though they'd be subject to certain nuclear oblivion if they nuked the UK, so they'd be more likely to conventionally bomb us into the ground, both for that reason and the island they'd gain.

Mmm with the nuclear point the only caveat I'd add is that the nuclear oblivion would come from Wyoming and Montana as opposed to Britain - whilst we can definitely give them a bloody lip Britain isn't really a party to the MAD doctrine

Russia has such a large area that I doubt any nation would completely obliterate it. We'd probably be able to knock out any semblance of government and anywhere up to 40% of the population depending how we targeted and how successful their defences were. I'd class that as more than a bloody lip. But yes, to ensure they wouldn't get back up some help from France, maybe India and the USA, would be needed.

Eah submarine carries what 16 missiles? Only one is usually at sea with the other two up as faslayne [or wherever] so itsa a fair assumption theyd dissapear pretty quickly.
Those 16 missiles that do go off though wouldnt likely be able to destroy that much of the country. I'm dubious about their effectiveness on Moscow for a start owing to them having, in some ways, the only reliable ABM system there.

Also i'm not sure you can count being responsible for a genocide as any kind of victory as opposed to an abomination against humanity. If the British were prepared to do that for no other reason than spite, to be honest they deserve it.

Do you think Russia is just some third world nation who can't strike back?

No, they are by definition a second world country, though.

I don't think I mentioned anything about a victory, but doing something purely out of spite is the entire basis of MAD.