Topic: Who will win WW3? - page 26. (Read 66607 times)
I think there won't be world war 3 in short range. I am sure it won't happen.
-snip
I don't know... I don't want Russia to use nuclear weapons of any kind. But then if an invasion is confirmed, there is no point in waiting for it to actually happen. And there is a strong chance that Hitlery Clinton will be elected as the POTUS in 2016. She is "more open" to invading Russia, when compared to the other presidential candidates. 
It´s tactical nukes. Relatively low yield. It´s just about getting rid of an invasion before it happens or very soon after it gets going. And because of this eventuality no invasion is possible to begin with. So it won´t happen..
I don't know... I don't want Russia to use nuclear weapons of any kind. But then if an invasion is confirmed, there is no point in waiting for it to actually happen. And there is a strong chance that Hitlery Clinton will be elected as the POTUS in 2016. She is "more open" to invading Russia, when compared to the other presidential candidates.
If they really want to invade Russia they´re simply insane. This isn´t Iraq or Afghanistan or someone else that can´t defend themselves. This opponent has serious destructive capabilities. Any military commanders that would go along with such plans would have to be totally crazy as well.
It´s tactical nukes. Relatively low yield. It´s just about getting rid of an invasion before it happens or very soon after it gets going. And because of this eventuality no invasion is possible to begin with. So it won´t happen..
I don't know... I don't want Russia to use nuclear weapons of any kind. But then if an invasion is confirmed, there is no point in waiting for it to actually happen. And there is a strong chance that Hitlery Clinton will be elected as the POTUS in 2016. She is "more open" to invading Russia, when compared to the other presidential candidates.
It´s the same problem. That invasion force will soon cease to exist, either at the staging area or when it´s on the move. It´ll be wiped out with tactical nukes. Or that may not even be needed. The Russians have plenty of other extremely effective stuff. It´s simply impossible to invade Russia and expect to get anywhere.
I don't know whether Russia will use the nukes first. So far the policy has been to use them as a last resort, as a retaliation against the enemy nuclear strikes. Even without the nuclear weapons, the Russians can wipe-out the enemy forces by using thermobaric weapons such as KAB-500KR and the 9M133F-1. These weapons can be used with cruise missiles or can be dropped from bomber aircraft.
It´s tactical nukes. Relatively low yield. It´s just about getting rid of an invasion before it happens or very soon after it gets going. And because of this eventuality no invasion is possible to begin with. So it won´t happen..
It´s the same problem. That invasion force will soon cease to exist, either at the staging area or when it´s on the move. It´ll be wiped out with tactical nukes. Or that may not even be needed. The Russians have plenty of other extremely effective stuff. It´s simply impossible to invade Russia and expect to get anywhere.
I don't know whether Russia will use the nukes first. So far the policy has been to use them as a last resort, as a retaliation against the enemy nuclear strikes. Even without the nuclear weapons, the Russians can wipe-out the enemy forces by using thermobaric weapons such as KAB-500KR and the 9M133F-1. These weapons can be used with cruise missiles or can be dropped from bomber aircraft.
Anyway, it´s difficult to see how they´d attack Russia through Europe. There are no armies there up to the task. U.S. forces would have to be amassed at a staging area somewhere in Eastern Europe and the Russians probably wouldn´t wait to be attacked, they´d take preemptive action and wipe that force out. So, it won´t happen.
The strategy is likely to be different. The Europeans will never grant permission to use their land as a gathering point for Russia invasion. Even the Russophobic nations such as Poland and Latvia know about the consequences. So in my opinion, the Americans will try invading Russia through the Caucasus route, with help from Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Azerbaijan, and probably Georgia.
It´s the same problem. That invasion force will soon cease to exist, either at the staging area or when it´s on the move. It´ll be wiped out with tactical nukes. Or that may not even be needed. The Russians have plenty of other extremely effective stuff. It´s simply impossible to invade Russia and expect to get anywhere.
Majority of muslims in the world are not for war, but scenario for war already is already created .
Central place for starting war will be flammable EU .
Russia will be caught by flame of war because have good population of muslims like you said.
And at the end US will have a war but not directly on their ground.
Central place for starting war will be flammable EU .
Russia will be caught by flame of war because have good population of muslims like you said.
And at the end US will have a war but not directly on their ground.
I think there is no chance US will lead this war against Russia.
They know this is suicide for them, and possibly for the rest of the world.
War with muslims is something that will be created by US. Whole EU and Russia will be affected.
They know this is suicide for them, and possibly for the rest of the world.
War with muslims is something that will be created by US. Whole EU and Russia will be affected.
The Americans are more likely to instigate a proxy war inside Russia, rather than going for an all out invasion. But their options are limited. Although around 6% to 7% of the Russian population is Muslim, most of them are well integrated in to the Russian society. Even in Muslim majority regions such as Daghestan and Chechnya, a majority of the population favors staying in Russia.
The strategy is likely to be different. The Europeans will never grant permission to use their land as a gathering point for Russia invasion. Even the Russophobic nations such as Poland and Latvia know about the consequences. So in my opinion, the Americans will try invading Russia through the Caucasus route, with help from Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Azerbaijan, and probably Georgia.
I think there is no chance US will lead this war against Russia.They know this is suicide for them, and possibly for the rest of the world.
War with muslims is something that will be created by US. Whole EU and Russia will be affected.
Yea, US might just seem more talk than they are. But they really are still capable. But then again, what if Trump wins! That will surely change everything.
The strategy is likely to be different. The Europeans will never grant permission to use their land as a gathering point for Russia invasion. Even the Russophobic nations such as Poland and Latvia know about the consequences. So in my opinion, the Americans will try invading Russia through the Caucasus route, with help from Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Azerbaijan, and probably Georgia.
I think there is no chance US will lead this war against Russia.They know this is suicide for them, and possibly for the rest of the world.
War with muslims is something that will be created by US. Whole EU and Russia will be affected.
Anyway, it´s difficult to see how they´d attack Russia through Europe. There are no armies there up to the task. U.S. forces would have to be amassed at a staging area somewhere in Eastern Europe and the Russians probably wouldn´t wait to be attacked, they´d take preemptive action and wipe that force out. So, it won´t happen.
The strategy is likely to be different. The Europeans will never grant permission to use their land as a gathering point for Russia invasion. Even the Russophobic nations such as Poland and Latvia know about the consequences. So in my opinion, the Americans will try invading Russia through the Caucasus route, with help from Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Azerbaijan, and probably Georgia.
It is eminently clear that the NATO/U.S. conventional forces are pretty much useless as has been confirmed in all the train wrecks they have left since the turn of the century. Since they can´t even defeat small forces that can´t really defend themselves and bite back the chances against Russia and China are zero. So, any way for them to win anything would have to be with nuclear weapons. Which probably would also mean losing.
I wouldn't under-estimate the American Armed Forces. They are the largest professional fighting force in the world. But in the recent past, the capability of the American forces have been considerably weakened as a result of issues beyond their control such as corruption, incompetence (remember the 1.5 trillion USD wasted for F-35?), and internal politics. The remaining NATO nations are useless.
The Americans are certainly experts at blowing things up at a grand scale but I have my doubts about their operations down on the ground. But then again they´ve been repeatedly sent into hopeless missions with dead end objectives. Result total mess, quite predictably. And a campaign against Russia would be just another of those only much bigger.
Anyway, it´s difficult to see how they´d attack Russia through Europe. There are no armies there up to the task. U.S. forces would have to be amassed at a staging area somewhere in Eastern Europe and the Russians probably wouldn´t wait to be attacked, they´d take preemptive action and wipe that force out. So, it won´t happen.
I am not sure who will win but sure who will lose. ALL OF HUMANITY!
It is eminently clear that the NATO/U.S. conventional forces are pretty much useless as has been confirmed in all the train wrecks they have left since the turn of the century. Since they can´t even defeat small forces that can´t really defend themselves and bite back the chances against Russia and China are zero. So, any way for them to win anything would have to be with nuclear weapons. Which probably would also mean losing.
I wouldn't under-estimate the American Armed Forces. They are the largest professional fighting force in the world. But in the recent past, the capability of the American forces have been considerably weakened as a result of issues beyond their control such as corruption, incompetence (remember the 1.5 trillion USD wasted for F-35?), and internal politics. The remaining NATO nations are useless.
It is eminently clear that the NATO/U.S. conventional forces are pretty much useless as has been confirmed in all the train wrecks they have left since the turn of the century. Since they can´t even defeat small forces that can´t really defend themselves and bite back the chances against Russia and China are zero. So, any way for them to win anything would have to be with nuclear weapons. Which probably would also mean losing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8lw7oKhIu60
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hLYYNd8q9Vk
This is all i need to make my decisions.
Russia have more A bombs than everybody else combined.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hLYYNd8q9Vk
This is all i need to make my decisions.
Russia have more A bombs than everybody else combined.
Dooming the whole planet. If 10k nukes are ever launched at the same time it won't matter on which countries they'll fall, only rats and cockroaches will survive if they're lucky.
I don't think that it is possible to lunch 10,000 nukes at the same time. No country, including the United States and Russia has the ability to do that. Even with the nuclear triad, at the most they may be able to launch 100 or 200 of them, of which more than 99% will be shot down by the air-defense systems and fighter jets.
Do you even understand how things work?
You know what happen when a submarine launch a nuclear weapon?
The time it is detected, it's already nearly here! You don't have the time to react, it's not like a plane entering slowly your aerian space!
Especially considering how close to the sea most cities of China and Russia are...
Would you care of adding me too?
Cause it's perfectly out of the topic. He's right.
Cause it's perfectly out of the topic. He's right.
I will add you when you indulge in name calling. Have some patience.
Oh, it's the "dumbass" part you don't like?
Well have it sir: you're not only a dumbass, you're also a dangerous person. You keep spreading huge hoaxes because you don't care about what you say or what source you provide as long as it goes in your sense. You have no logic, no argument and no figures to prove your claims. Claims that are also totally ridiculous ans from the stone age.
Better here? You're not much better than BADecker in fact.
That post of yours is so emotional
Thank you, it came from the heart
And what will they do with their 1.3 billions of soldier against a few thousands nuclear heads?
Using nukes against a combined force of China and Russia? That will be suicidal. USA + France + United Kingdom + Israel + Pakistan is in the possession of close to 6,000 nuclear warheads. The most powerful nuclear weapon ever built (Tsar Bomba) was capable of incinerating everything within 100 km of its radius. That gives a maximum effective surface area of 30,000 sq.km per weapon.
Now the question is how many of these nukes the NATO will be able to use in a relatively short time (say 4 to 6 hours). Even if they manage to use all the 6,000 weapons, only around 1% or 2% are likely to land in Russia / China, as the air-defenses are very advanced. That means that around 10% of the surface area of Russia / China will be devoid of life. That might kill at the most 50% of their soldiers. But the remaining 50% will use nukes on the NATO nations, completely exterminating the life there.
WTF are you talking about? What air defenses? Why air defenses would matter in any way? Oo
Jump to: