Only Amateurs think NATO can win a conventional WAR against Russia. Total Rank Amatuers.

Only if China the helps the US can NATO win a war invading Russia.

didn't you hear? the F35 super stealth fighter has been declared combat capable!!! that means Russia will lose for sure as NATO super jets bomb them back to the non-commie age!

Why do you think that NATO would even attempt to wage a conventional war against Russia when there are these (of nuclear warhead variety):

[link to en.wikipedia.org (secure)]

Since U.S. preparations for tactical nuclear war against Russia is now a foregone conclusion, let's look at what that actually means.

a) Pentagon is looking at ICBMs as very expensive, but ultimately, obsolete and now completely useless toys,
b) Russians are still holding the old mindset of relying on their superior MIRVs, which, according to Pentagon, will pose no threat to U.S. in the war, and
c) While Russian strategic forces are genuinely superb, their tactical nuclear forces are severely lacking, primarily in the area of defensive measures.

In short, Russians have allowed U.S., due to their overconfidence in their strategic nuclear forces, to position their (U.S.) tactical nuclear weapons along the whole NW-W-SW Russian borders, leaving Russian belly completely exposed to a sudden tactical nuclear strike against all major Russian civilian centers (including Moscow) from multiple vectors... which is exactly what seems to be Pentagon's plan.

A "clean Russian slate", you may call it. If you're into black humor, that is. After all, if there are no Russians left on the Russians territory, can it still be called Russia?

If that's not a terrible, nay, a deadly oversight on the Russian part, I don't know what it is.

The question now is, what can Russians do to patch up their defenses in the short time they have left (approximately, 3 months)?

Relocating some of their own tactical nuclear forces closer to U.S. territory is out of the question. Available time frame simply doesn't allow it.

Holding onto their existing mindset and expecting to fend off aggressor with strategic forces would be a guaranteed suicide.

Finding a way to defend against tactical nuclear threat for long enough to preserve civilian centers and then turn the tide of war seems like the only way to approach this problem.

To make things short, what Russians should do is refit some of their tactical nuclear missiles to act as... a sort of nuclear flak.

Russians have neither anti-missile laser systems nor anti-missile missile systems worth mentioning (for the purpose of guaranteeing that not a single U.S./NATO tactical nuclear missile is going to reach Moscow), so why waste time (they don't have) on trying to develop anti-missile systems, when they can use their existing nuclear-tipped missiles just as effectively.

An air buffer zone, a nuclear curtain if you like, preferably (detonated) outside Russian borders, is what can make a difference here. But in order to have that buffer zone, Russians will have to deploy those (refitted) missile systems all along their borders. And they'll have to do it in 3 months or less.

Is it doable? Definitely, yes. Will they do it? Now, that's the question worth asking.

Either way, if Russians manage to survive the element of "surprise" (that will surprise literally no one who's been paying any attention to U.S. moves so far), they have pretty good chances of wiping out U.S./NATO forces in Europe in a counter strike, and then turning their attention towards U.S. mainland.

Well, what can I say. Blitzkrieg looked like a perfectly good strategy to Nazis as well, and look at where it got them. U.S. variation on the theme seems to be suffering from the same shortsightedness.

No one will win ww3. Everyone loses.