[Goose]

Considering obvious targets, NATO defense industries are probably much more distributed that the Russian version and it could be much easier to hurt Russian production.

True, because most of the production facilities are in CONUS and would be "immune" from attack in a limited war. However, since many European militaries use unique equipment made only in their own countries that doesn't help as much as it seems. We don't make Leopard 2A7s. We also don't make CAESAR howitzers or Eurofighter Typhoons. Those production facilities are within easy reach of Russian tactical ballistic missiles and various cruise missiles. There is also a great interdependence between NATO nations. Knocking out one factory can totally halt production because a required assembly becomes unavailable. It is estimated that around 25% of  the F-35 is from "international" sources. (https://simpleflying.com/how-many-intern...%20F%2D35s)

From what I have read, Russia is thought to be able to produce 150 to 250 new tanks a year.  They have lost almost almost 11,000 tanks in the Ukraine, a staggering number. Their losses in APC's and artillery are equally staggering.  How many relatively modern main battle tanks do they have left?

Russia is indeed in a bad way in terms of tanks and IFV/APCs. They are in OK shape artillery-wise. The government owned Lima Army Tank Plant (LATP) operated by General Dynamics Land Systems (GDLS) has the capacity to produce a whopping 135 M1A2s per year. When the tank was at full rate production the US produced 850 per year. It is highly unlikely we could do that again even given years to "ramp up". The workforce is just not available.

One other thing, Poland seems to be buying South Korean K2 tanks now, now M1's.  The K2 has certain advantages over the M1, but it still seems to me that the latest M1 is perhaps better suited to a European conflict on flat ground.

https://defence-blog.com/poland-gets-sec...ams-tanks/ Maybe, but that doesn't matter to the Poles. Their problem is the M1A2 production is so glacially slow that it can't come anywhere close to meeting Poland's immediate needs. K2s are in major production in Korea right now. Poland already has  M1A1s, M1A2 SEPV3s, and K2s. Apparently the K2s are "good enough". Unlike the US, Hyundai Rotem is also assisting Poland in developing the capability to manufacture K2s in Poland. Win-win for South Korea and Poland.

Today, the Russian infantry do not have to worry about opposing airpower making their chose riding place a very unsafe place to be.
 
Even though I am old army guy, I saw enough of what combined airpower, helos and fast movers can do that I still think Russia would have a hard time combating the NATO advantage in this area.

I totally agree. Those Russian infantry will also have to worry about a lot more than just getting blown up themselves. They will have to worry even more about their re-supply of food, ammunition, and FPV drones simply never arriving. The also have to worry about their artillery support disappearing not just because the guns are destroyed but because the shells for the guns didn't arrive. Russian logistics have not been good in Ukraine. They will be orders of magnitude worse when they are subject to constant air interdiction. The only fly in the ointment is that the airpower has to get there on day 1, not weeks later. By then Russia may have most of its immediate war aims and be able to convince most of NATO (and in particular the US) that the cost/risk to reverse that just isn't worth it.

As Iran has just shown us, you can have what you think is a robust air defense system only to see it made worthless in short order.

I doubt Iran was under any illusions about the state of its air defense system. They have been pushing Russia continually for more systems. They even paid up-front for systems they have yet to receive. I do think Iran expected it could inflict some casualties on the IAF, which they did not. They expected their point-defense systems to get a few kills. That was all they could hope for. They knew that.

As you point out, the political will of the NATO countries will be critical. That question may not be answered until a war has actually started.

Plus Putin is not a young man. Would his successor embrace his goals?

There are so many what ifs, maybe's and political questions that we are just engaging in what theoretical maybe's which are interesting to think about, but don't solve much.

Very true! Interesting to think about, but unfortunately not directly useful.

[Goose]

Considering obvious targets, NATO defense industries are probably much more distributed that the Russian version and it could be much easier to hurt Russian production.

True, because most of the production facilities are in CONUS and would be "immune" from attack in a limited war. However, since many European militaries use unique equipment made only in their own countries that doesn't help as much as it seems. We don't make Leopard 2A7s. We also don't make CAESAR howitzers or Eurofighter Typhoons. Those production facilities are within easy reach of Russian tactical ballistic missiles and various cruise missiles. There is also a great interdependence between NATO nations. Knocking out one factory can totally halt production because a required assembly becomes unavailable. It is estimated that around 25% of  the F-35 is from "international" sources. (https://simpleflying.com/how-many-intern...%20F%2D35s)

From what I have read, Russia is thought to be able to produce 150 to 250 new tanks a year.  They have lost almost almost 11,000 tanks in the Ukraine, a staggering number. Their losses in APC's and artillery are equally staggering.  How many relatively modern main battle tanks do they have left?

Russia is indeed in a bad way in terms of tanks and IFV/APCs. They are in OK shape artillery-wise. The government owned Lima Army Tank Plant (LATP) operated by General Dynamics Land Systems (GDLS) has the capacity to produce a whopping 135 M1A2s per year. When the tank was at full rate production the US produced 850 per year. It is highly unlikely we could do that again even given years to "ramp up". The workforce is just not available.

One other thing, Poland seems to be buying South Korean K2 tanks now, now M1's.  The K2 has certain advantages over the M1, but it still seems to me that the latest M1 is perhaps better suited to a European conflict on flat ground.

https://defence-blog.com/poland-gets-sec...ams-tanks/ Maybe, but that doesn't matter to the Poles. Their problem is the M1A2 production is so glacially slow that it can't come anywhere close to meeting Poland's immediate needs. K2s are in major production in Korea right now. Poland already has  M1A1s, M1A2 SEPV3s, and K2s. Apparently the K2s are "good enough". Unlike the US, Hyundai Rotem is also assisting Poland in developing the capability to manufacture K2s in Poland. Win-win for South Korea and Poland.

Today, the Russian infantry do not have to worry about opposing airpower making their chose riding place a very unsafe place to be.
 
Even though I am old army guy, I saw enough of what combined airpower, helos and fast movers can do that I still think Russia would have a hard time combating the NATO advantage in this area.

I totally agree. Those Russian infantry will also have to worry about a lot more than just getting blown up themselves. They will have to worry even more about their re-supply of food, ammunition, and FPV drones simply never arriving. The also have to worry about their artillery support disappearing not just because the guns are destroyed but because the shells for the guns didn't arrive. Russian logistics have not been good in Ukraine. They will be orders of magnitude worse when they are subject to constant air interdiction. The only fly in the ointment is that the airpower has to get there on day 1, not weeks later. By then Russia may have most of its immediate war aims and be able to convince most of NATO (and in particular the US) that the cost/risk to reverse that just isn't worth it.

As Iran has just shown us, you can have what you think is a robust air defense system only to see it made worthless in short order.

I doubt Iran was under any illusions about the state of its air defense system. They have been pushing Russia continually for more systems. They even paid up-front for systems they have yet to receive. I do think Iran expected it could inflict some casualties on the IAF, which they did not. They expected their point-defense systems to get a few kills. That was all they could hope for. They knew that.

As you point out, the political will of the NATO countries will be critical. That question may not be answered until a war has actually started.

Plus Putin is not a young man. Would his successor embrace his goals?

There are so many what ifs, maybe's and political questions that we are just engaging in what theoretical maybe's which are interesting to think about, but don't solve much.

Very true! Interesting to think about, but unfortunately not directly useful.