US/NATO/Nordic Alliance vs Russia
Discussion
MrBrightSi said:
Im all for stupid replies about nukes
Great , have these for free - http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/vla...
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/vla...
skyrover said:
Anyone think Russia would be stomping around Ukraine right now if Ukraine had not given up it's nukes in the early 90's?
I wouldn't want to imagine what would happen if Ukraine had nukes, they would probably get even worse dictator than Putin and no orange revolution could take him down as USA&EU certainly wouldn't want to shake his cage knowing he could fire back easily.AreOut said:
skyrover said:
Anyone think Russia would be stomping around Ukraine right now if Ukraine had not given up it's nukes in the early 90's?
I wouldn't want to imagine what would happen if Ukraine had nukes, they would probably get even worse dictator than Putin and no orange revolution could take him down as USA&EU certainly wouldn't want to shake his cage knowing he could fire back easily.Thankfully dictators for the most part like very much to be both alive and rich.
Islamic fanatics getting their hands on such a device is a far more worrying prospect.
jmorgan said:
Guessing if the Russians fought like they did in WWII then we would be rather worried.
Times have changed and such warfare doesn't really exist anymore - we'd have to try and invade them for that to happen and even still, the idea of marching tens of thousands of soldiers over the top of the trenches towards the enemy is probably a non starter in this day and age.Or they try and invade us, could be an interesting one, they do have the numbers but assaulting one island that simply makes up a part of a larger alliance - unlikely.
s2art said:
deckster said:
Both blocs would be largely bankrupted by the effort...
Bankrupt USA/NATO? You jest. Russia has a smaller GDP than the UK.The West has nothing to gain from war with Russia. Putin thinks he has something to gain but Russia isn't really going to win any up front conflict. Hence the sly moves and proxy wars. We probably just have to wait for Putin to pop his Portyanki and pray that someone less grumpy gets in next, or after the next, or...
AreOut said:
I can't see anything exceptional there, of course they will use nukes if needed(as anyone else would anyway), that's what those are for.
It was more around using them against NATO's conventional forces and the general tone of the whole situation, to even bring up using nuclear weapons is alarming in itself. This is Russia, not that fat t
t in NK.superkartracer said:
It was more around using them against NATO's conventional forces and the general tone of the whole situation, to even bring up using nuclear weapons is alarming in itself. This is Russia, not that fat tt in NK.
it's both western&russian doctrine to start firing nukes if they feel their conventional forces are losing the wart in NK.e.g. as mentioned in this nuclear debate from 30 years ago, it lasts one hour but it's worth watching
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0VcT-XWb7M
AreOut said:
superkartracer said:
It was more around using them against NATO's conventional forces and the general tone of the whole situation, to even bring up using nuclear weapons is alarming in itself. This is Russia, not that fat tt in NK.
it's both western&russian doctrine to start firing nukes if they feel their conventional forces are losing the wart in NK.e.g. as mentioned in this nuclear debate from 30 years ago, it lasts one hour but it's worth watching
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0VcT-XWb7M
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2014/11/20/...
Russia now have far more Tactical Nuclear weapons than NATO/USA so could wipe-out conventional forces with ease , maybe this is why they feel free to invade at will? , we'll see.
The question is, would the limited use of Tactical Nuclear weapons to fend off NATO forces , halt a wider scale war or trigger a wider global response in the form of ballistic weapons against the general populous . Would a few TN be enough to scare the west into backing right off, and would the Russians use them without much thought, it seems they were.
https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2014_01-02/Trapped...
Good read.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/pen...
And i'll leave you with that :0
Edited by superkartracer on Friday 26th June 23:25
AreOut said:
"Does Russia Think Their New Nuclear Weapons Could Win A War?"
nah they aren't that stupid, they would have trouble beating only Britain (or France for that matter)as Tridents would obliterate most of russian cities and practically make most of Russia not liveable for anyone
There is a hell of a lot of Russia to destroy compared with Britain or France. Fortunately I don't believe either side is in the grip of such utter insanity as to seriously contemplate such a thing.nah they aren't that stupid, they would have trouble beating only Britain (or France for that matter)as Tridents would obliterate most of russian cities and practically make most of Russia not liveable for anyone
Octoposse said:
I spent much of the 1980’s in forests ‘somewhere in Germany’ looking Eastwards, expecting the Russians to come at any moment (OK, poetic licence – it was mainly swimming galas and cleaning stuff, but the overall point holds true). Being young and possibly even more stupid than the average ISIS recruit nowdays, we were mildly excited by the prospect – despite knowing full well we were utterly and completely fked if they did. If I recall correctly, the MILAN gunners got one practice shot a year, and our Nuclear/Biological/Chemical ‘proof’ APCs leaked like sieves in the rain.
I was slightly older/wiser when I had tiny bit-part walk-on parts in two itsy bitsy little wars. Probably got mild PTSD (never been diagnosed/treated, but manifests itself in nothing more onerous than the occasional sob sparked by obscure reminders).
Absolutely horrific beyond words. Not so much for the soldiers – although it can be pretty grim for some at times. But for those ‘unfortunate’ families, children, ordinary people, caught up in it all – horrific.
At bedtime, in his powder-blue attic room with pictures of Captain Barnacle and dinosaurs, my five year old snuggles up for re-assurance about swimming lessons, learning to ride a bike, an invitation (or not) to x’s party, the Lego Ninjago he’s seen in a shop window. The pit of horror and despair I’d feel in a cellar, feeling the vibration of artillery shells, wondering who’s dead out there in the smashed school, where the boy’s mum is, did that last mortar shell hit the bread queue where his grandmother is . . . distracting the child with talk of ‘what we’ll do next year’. And that’s mild compared with the situation multiplied several million times over in Syria, Ukraine, etc.
That’s why I want an ‘grown up’ and engaged relationship with Russia, not one that makes it appears that ‘games theory’ shapes our government’s actions as much as it does Greece’s hugely successful negotiations with its creditors, and where ordinary Ukrainians and others are expendible.
You couldn’t begin to measure the human misery that would flow from even the most limited of armed conflicts in populous Europe.
Great post - too many of us theorise about the Military capabilities of a War, and give no thought to the real consequences. Even 70 years after WW2, and a war with Russia would be much the same as WW2, the fate of the civilian population of countries is largely ignored. Have a quick read of this article for an insight. ked if they did. If I recall correctly, the MILAN gunners got one practice shot a year, and our Nuclear/Biological/Chemical ‘proof’ APCs leaked like sieves in the rain.I was slightly older/wiser when I had tiny bit-part walk-on parts in two itsy bitsy little wars. Probably got mild PTSD (never been diagnosed/treated, but manifests itself in nothing more onerous than the occasional sob sparked by obscure reminders).
Absolutely horrific beyond words. Not so much for the soldiers – although it can be pretty grim for some at times. But for those ‘unfortunate’ families, children, ordinary people, caught up in it all – horrific.
At bedtime, in his powder-blue attic room with pictures of Captain Barnacle and dinosaurs, my five year old snuggles up for re-assurance about swimming lessons, learning to ride a bike, an invitation (or not) to x’s party, the Lego Ninjago he’s seen in a shop window. The pit of horror and despair I’d feel in a cellar, feeling the vibration of artillery shells, wondering who’s dead out there in the smashed school, where the boy’s mum is, did that last mortar shell hit the bread queue where his grandmother is . . . distracting the child with talk of ‘what we’ll do next year’. And that’s mild compared with the situation multiplied several million times over in Syria, Ukraine, etc.
That’s why I want an ‘grown up’ and engaged relationship with Russia, not one that makes it appears that ‘games theory’ shapes our government’s actions as much as it does Greece’s hugely successful negotiations with its creditors, and where ordinary Ukrainians and others are expendible.
You couldn’t begin to measure the human misery that would flow from even the most limited of armed conflicts in populous Europe.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2119589/Ho...
deckster said:
But that's the point. Both blocs would be largely bankrupted by the effort and the real winners would be China and the other Asian economies. Regardless of who 'wins', everybody involved will lose.
Also, and something very much to consider; although we 'won' WW2, if an outsider today took a look at the standards of living and relative economies of Germany and the UK they would probably come to the opposite conclusion.
It has been the blinkered let's not invest in properly Britain mentality of successive governments. American grew wealthy out of our conflict. When we (Britain) rebuilt Germany, we didn't put in as much effort into rebuilding our own infrastructure.....and it's been the same sad story ever since. Also, and something very much to consider; although we 'won' WW2, if an outsider today took a look at the standards of living and relative economies of Germany and the UK they would probably come to the opposite conclusion.
Also we've had a much lower wage economy than the German's since then - if you keep wages low, then people at the bottom have less opportunity to spend.
There's plenty of empirical evidence that if you have a higher wage economy, then the country's standard of living is much higher - it's not rocket science.
Axionknight said:
jmorgan said:
Guessing if the Russians fought like they did in WWII then we would be rather worried.
Times have changed and such warfare doesn't really exist anymore - we'd have to try and invade them for that to happen and even still, the idea of marching tens of thousands of soldiers over the top of the trenches towards the enemy is probably a non starter in this day and age.Or they try and invade us, could be an interesting one, they do have the numbers but assaulting one island that simply makes up a part of a larger alliance - unlikely.
"You couldn’t begin to measure the human misery that would flow from even the most limited of armed conflicts in populous Europe."
Some of us have no need for imagination..
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Srebrenica_massacre
for balance
http://verdade.no.sapo.pt/199810/wtadtext.htm
Some of us have no need for imagination..
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Srebrenica_massacre
for balance
http://verdade.no.sapo.pt/199810/wtadtext.htm
NATO has by far the largest and more capable armed forces - bigger airforce, more powerful navy, perhaps less number of tanks than the Russians though , massively higher military expenditure, far bigger population if more soldiers were needed via conscription etc, however if you take the USA out of the equation then it's a different story, the sheer size of the US armed forces dwarfs every other NATO member.
Personally though I would not like to face the Russians!
Personally though I would not like to face the Russians!
Supernova190188 said:
NATO has by far the largest and more capable armed forces - bigger airforce, more powerful navy, perhaps less number of tanks than the Russians though , massively higher military expenditure, far bigger population if more soldiers were needed via conscription etc, however if you take the USA out of the equation then it's a different story, the sheer size of the US armed forces dwarfs every other NATO member.
Personally though I would not like to face the Russians!
Really?Personally though I would not like to face the Russians!
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff