Topic: Who will win WW3? - page 44. (Read 66680 times)
Watoshi, China and Russia have many partner countries in the world.
There won't be a winner. There can never be a winner of an all out nuclear war, unless you're that rich guy who owns a fallout shelter.
There can be a winner if you own the best ballistic missiles (for nuking your opponents) and the best air-defense system (for protecting yourself from the rival nuclear attacks). Any nuclear attack is going to be conducted through ballistic missiles or aircraft. The other options are not that viable. Is there any air defense system with a 100% strike rate?
manis & bitcoinhopper, stop spamming. There will be a winner and the world is not going to end.
There won't be a winner. There can never be a winner of an all out nuclear war, unless you're that rich guy who owns a fallout shelter.
manis & bitcoinhopper, stop spamming. There will be a winner and the world is not going to end.
All countries involved know it will be the end, so I don't think there will ever be a world war 3 with weapons.
The intelligence warfare though started many years ago and so far china and russia are leading it.
The intelligence warfare though started many years ago and so far china and russia are leading it.
Chinese submarine tracked U.S. VBFC (Very Big Floating Coffin) off Japan
http://edition.cnn.com/2015/11/04/politics/chinese-submarine-u-s-aircraft-carrier-japan/
http://edition.cnn.com/2015/11/04/politics/chinese-submarine-u-s-aircraft-carrier-japan/
War is not about rational behavior, and if history teaches us about war it teaches us that the consequences are usually worse than we expect and that it is very hard to limit and control.
There will be only losers.
There will be no World War 4.
There will be no World War 4.
I think most American cities would be destroyed.
Dont think it will only destroy the american cities only, it will destroy the whole world and the human civilization.
Russia feels the breath of ex sovjet countries day in, day out + they have a lack of money.
"Money" doesn't matter in the coming conflict, Russia has a huge reserve of gold. USA and NATO countries doesn't.
It's funny people go for Russia and China.
Though China has the largest employed army in the world and Russia outcompetes any country in the world by land, people tend to forget about the enemies.
Russia feels the breath of ex sovjet countries day in, day out + they have a lack of money.
China on the hand can't focus their eyes on the EU or US, since Japan and India, are not friends with China..
The outcome will be changed by which side the middle east joins...
Though China has the largest employed army in the world and Russia outcompetes any country in the world by land, people tend to forget about the enemies.
Russia feels the breath of ex sovjet countries day in, day out + they have a lack of money.
China on the hand can't focus their eyes on the EU or US, since Japan and India, are not friends with China..
The outcome will be changed by which side the middle east joins...
China and Russia united are two powers would have no rival.
How about usa and world?
I think most American cities would be destroyed.
Dont think it will only destroy the american cities only, it will destroy the whole world and the human civilization.
China and Russia united are two powers would have no rival.
I think most American cities would be destroyed.
Often the mountains don't have large cities. This is because it is difficult getting to some mountainous regions. In addition, the mountains, themselves, protect from blasts that aren't directly overhead. So, it wouldn't pay to nuke mountainous regions, except some big cities like Denver.
We need to find rough, mountainous terrain and move there.
I think most American cities would be destroyed.
Nobody wants a nuclear war. Nuclear war might destroy everything. The world power elite know this. They don't really want to chance it. If nuclear war happens, they will do everything in their power to limit it as much as they can. They like the idea of being sent back into the dark ages even less than the rest of us do.
Our job is to determine what the targets would be in a limited nuclear war, and move elsewhere.
Our job is to determine what the targets would be in a limited nuclear war, and move elsewhere.
^^^ Aircraft carriers have become outdated in modern warfare. Even a medium-sized aircraft carrier will cost billions of USD in construction and maintenance costs. And still, it can be destroyed by a single ballistic missile (which costs 1/1,000th of that of the carrier). This is exactly the reason why China and Russia are not wasting their money by constructing these show off models.
Obsolete sitting ducks:
Report: U.S. aircraft carriers could become ineffective
(CNN)Calling the U.S. aircraft carrier the "backbone" of America's global military presence, the Navy's top brass highlighted the risks of failing to maintain a big enough fleet during testimony before the House Armed Services Committee Tuesday.
But a new report on the future of aircraft carriers suggests that the Navy's problems run deeper than the number of ships or planes on these mobile airfields.
The Pentagon's focus on developing a "jack of all trades, master of none" aircraft, while rival countries build technology capable of sinking American carriers, could make these expensive warships ineffective in the coming years, according to the naval expert who authored the report....
http://edition.cnn.com/2015/11/03/politics/aircraft-carriers-report-future/index.html
Report: U.S. aircraft carriers could become ineffective
(CNN)Calling the U.S. aircraft carrier the "backbone" of America's global military presence, the Navy's top brass highlighted the risks of failing to maintain a big enough fleet during testimony before the House Armed Services Committee Tuesday.
But a new report on the future of aircraft carriers suggests that the Navy's problems run deeper than the number of ships or planes on these mobile airfields.
The Pentagon's focus on developing a "jack of all trades, master of none" aircraft, while rival countries build technology capable of sinking American carriers, could make these expensive warships ineffective in the coming years, according to the naval expert who authored the report....
http://edition.cnn.com/2015/11/03/politics/aircraft-carriers-report-future/index.html
Last time I checked nobody won the war except gunlords. Pions will die, lords will get paid more.
Check the history from the previous two world wars, and find out which were the countries who benefited out of it.
WW I was beneficial for countries such as the United States, Greece and Romania. It was not beneficial for Russia, Germany, Hungary, and Turkey. Similarly, WW II was beneficial for the United States and a few other countries such as Brazil and Argentina, and it was not beneficial for the rest.
Jump to: