NATO vs. Russia

alphatarget1

Diamond Member
Dec 9, 2001
5,710
0
76
Russians are pissed that Kosovo declared independence and the EU + US is supporting it. I guess it's not fair to Russia that they don't have any allies, so let's throw China in the mix.

China + Russia vs. NATO

Who would win?
 

nonameo

Diamond Member
Mar 13, 2006
5,902
2
76
LOL

1v1 - n00bs only - 20 min build time, no AIR no NUKES


edit: russia has the oil.
 

TehMac

Diamond Member
Aug 18, 2006
9,976
3
71
NATO. Russia's military has degenerated over the past decade, which is why Putin had to suggest threats of a Nuclear nature to make Nato officials think twice of planting more missile defense systems in Europe.

EDIT: That isn't to say their military is BAD per se, they're amazing at engineering quality works of war for cheap, but that's really what they are; these weapons are mass produced in a very rough way, and while they're not the Shermans the Americans had in World War 2, they sure as hell aren't mercedes of war either.
 

TehMac

Diamond Member
Aug 18, 2006
9,976
3
71
The Mig29 (Mig35 now, basically a '29 with upgraded Avionics), Su-27s, and Su-37s are all really fine aircraft.
 

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
70,225
28,927
136
Since you threw China in the mix, and said no nukes, they would bury NATO, eventually.
 

alpineranger

Senior member
Feb 3, 2001
701
0
76
nato has proven force projection capability. There's a huge difference between having some competent weapons systems and bringing them to bear in a meaningful way outside your own neighborhood.
 

TehMac

Diamond Member
Aug 18, 2006
9,976
3
71
Originally posted by: ironwing
Since you threw China in the mix, and said no nukes, they would bury NATO, eventually.

The same way the Chinese buried NATO in the Korean War....right?
 

ta8689

Golden Member
Feb 5, 2006
1,116
0
0
Originally posted by: TehMac
Originally posted by: ironwing
Since you threw China in the mix, and said no nukes, they would bury NATO, eventually.

The same way the Chinese buried NATO in the Korean War....right?

Eh... things have come quite a long way since the Korean war...
 

destrekor

Lifer
Nov 18, 2005
28,799
359
126
NATO as in, full-scale involvement of the U.S. Military and assorted EU Military forces? Tough to say honestly. I would obviously root for the NATO forces, as well, I fully expect a potential conflict with Russia during my time in the service. And I am hoping to go Armor branch, specifically looking for either Tank, Cavalry, or Mounted/Mechanized Infantry command. Those three will be the bulk of any territory pushes and will be require a massive number of units.

and oil, thankfully, shouldn't be much of a worry. While yes, they have vast amounts of oil available. If melting in the arctic occurs, I envision the Navies will come into their own large-scale battles over the Arctic Ocean floor where we have been told unimaginable quantities of oil exist beneath the rock. This will be a precious commodity during the war so that the war can be waged effectively and to prevent transportation crises across the world due to the military consumption. Russia has already publicly pointed out that they want to claim it for themselves. This will almost certainly mean it would be a hotly contested territory during any US/Russian conflict. I've heard that Canada also would like to own the property.
Oh, and even if it weren't contested or Russia claimed it, the NATO war effort will be supported quite likely by quite a large percentage of the oil-producing nations. One, a lot of them in Asia have unfavorable opinions of Russia, due to history with the USSR. I am sure world opinion, except for a few nations nearby, such as N.K. and China, will heavily favor the NATO effort.

All of the above is at least what I hope will happen in the case of NATO/Russian conflict, because I don't want my command to be effectively neutered by lack of fuel.
 

roguerower

Diamond Member
Nov 18, 2004
4,563
0
76
Read Red Storm Rising by Clancy...basically that's what you're looking at, but with NATO being even better equiped and Russia, now no longer the Soviet Union in a much different state.

Russia + China makes no sense whatsoever, they are OOOOLLLDD enemies plus geographically it doesn't make any sense for China to attack NATO
 

TehMac

Diamond Member
Aug 18, 2006
9,976
3
71
Originally posted by: ta8689
Originally posted by: TehMac
Originally posted by: ironwing
Since you threw China in the mix, and said no nukes, they would bury NATO, eventually.

The same way the Chinese buried NATO in the Korean War....right?

Eh... things have come quite a long way since the Korean war...

Well, I'm assuming you know that the Chinese got pounded into pulps by the NATO (mostly the US) Meatgrinder machine, and yes I agree times have changed. But that's why I don't think China would get into a war with us. If China had to, with diplomatic entanglements with Russia, both would go down together.


Originally posted by: senseamp
NATO can't even handle Afghanistan, much less China and Russia together.

Sorry, but considering its not even a full scale war, your theory is bunk.

Originally posted by: roguerower
Read Red Storm Rising by Clancy...basically that's what you're looking at, but with NATO being even better equiped and Russia, now no longer the Soviet Union in a much different state.

Russia + China makes no sense whatsoever, they are OOOOLLLDD enemies plus geographically it doesn't make any sense for China to attack NATO

It doesn't make any sense economically either. However, tables change, so do times--if this was 1965 I'd say sure they could be allies--both were threatened by Capitalist enemies and they shared Marxist idealeologies so why not?

It's 2008, so I say heavily doubtful. If Japan re-arms, not going to happen.
 
Feb 24, 2001
14,513
4
81
You talking about a real war? Or pot shots back and forth?

If the former, NATO (the US really) could just shell them from the sea and just work the shots inland. Neither have the naval or air capacity to take out carrier battle groups.
 

destrekor

Lifer
Nov 18, 2005
28,799
359
126
Originally posted by: senseamp
NATO can't even handle Afghanistan, much less China and Russia together.

nobody appears to understand the difference between wars with massive unit tallies versus wars with very little overall unit tallies.

Afghanistan has what I believe is far fewer than the total force allocations the situation really requires. Same goes for Iraq. These places, success is being hampered by low unit totals. It's sad because we are limited by a low total number of servicemen due to the way military is viewed in the U.S. If it were more positively viewed (hard to hype it during a war, but it can be done, if civil/selfless service is more heavily pushed in society), our war efforts would consist of a much larger force. A larger force is necessary for tighter security and more territory control. The media doesn't advertise exactly how much good the 20k troop surge did for progress in Iraq.
Regardless, quality of equipment and ability to inflict mass damage with low civilian numbers will be important. If a war is waged across Asia with China there, it's likely there will be large division or army-sized battles across large regions, and in those instances, the best machines win. China is far from having the best machines, while Russia is quite capable of claiming some of the better machinery available, but not necessarily the best. That would be disputed in war. US has highly capable machinery, as does much of the EU. Provided proper maintenance and ability to maintain operating conditions in possibly more than one weather extreme of the Asian continent, then the U.S. and EU are definitely a mechanized force that should not be taken lightly. Quite possibly the best combined force in the world. China and Russia can sport numbers, but numbers are not definitive if the lower number has better equipment and leadership.
 

Pocatello

Diamond Member
Oct 11, 1999
9,754
2
76
The question is, when will the Chinese decide that Siberia, with so much natural resources and so far from Moscow, is up for grabs.
 

destrekor

Lifer
Nov 18, 2005
28,799
359
126
Originally posted by: Pocatello
The question is, when will the Chinese decide that Siberia, with so much natural resources and so far from Moscow, is up for grabs.

when global climate change defrosts the desolate regions and the oil is easily accessible?
 

videogames101

Diamond Member
Aug 24, 2005
6,783
27
91
Originally posted by: TehMac
The Mig29 (Mig35 now, basically a '29 with upgraded Avionics), Su-27s, and Su-37s are all really fine aircraft.

any vs. F-22 = fucking raped russian
 

Auggie

Golden Member
Jul 18, 2003
1,379
0
0
It already happened - remember Waterloo? Napoleon and the Czars went at it. Russia won because they burned and retreated, knowing they'd just come back in one or two years, after the damn French were frozen and starving. Russia could perhaps be contained... but there's probably a zero chance that Russia would ever be successfully invaded.
 

destrekor

Lifer
Nov 18, 2005
28,799
359
126
Originally posted by: videogames101
Originally posted by: TehMac
The Mig29 (Mig35 now, basically a '29 with upgraded Avionics), Su-27s, and Su-37s are all really fine aircraft.

any vs. F-22 = fucking raped russian

indeed
and the F-35 will rape and pillage just about anything it needs too.

Originally posted by: Auggie
It already happened - remember Waterloo? Napoleon and the Czars went at it. Russia won because they burned and retreated, knowing they'd just come back in one or two years, after the damn French were frozen and starving. Russia could perhaps be contained... but there's probably a zero chance that Russia would ever be successfully invaded.

remember World War II? For Germany, it was one of two massive simultaneous campaigns using the same types of combined forces, and yet they managed to rock the Soviets quite easily for awhile... but the Russian winters put a hurting on Germany, and they slowly were able to fight back. But also remember the numbers Stalin sported by forcing as many people as possible into the war effort. Then again, plenty were untrained. The point remains...
 

Pocatello

Diamond Member
Oct 11, 1999
9,754
2
76
Originally posted by: destrekor
Originally posted by: videogames101
Originally posted by: TehMac
The Mig29 (Mig35 now, basically a '29 with upgraded Avionics), Su-27s, and Su-37s are all really fine aircraft.

any vs. F-22 = fucking raped russian

indeed
and the F-35 will rape and pillage just about anything it needs too.

You forgot to mention the US Marines.
 

destrekor

Lifer
Nov 18, 2005
28,799
359
126
Originally posted by: Pocatello
Originally posted by: destrekor
Originally posted by: videogames101
Originally posted by: TehMac
The Mig29 (Mig35 now, basically a '29 with upgraded Avionics), Su-27s, and Su-37s are all really fine aircraft.

any vs. F-22 = fucking raped russian

indeed
and the F-35 will rape and pillage just about anything it needs too.

You forgot to mention the US Marines.

... because I don't bash the U.S. Military...
 

Pocatello

Diamond Member
Oct 11, 1999
9,754
2
76
Originally posted by: destrekor
Originally posted by: Pocatello
Originally posted by: destrekor
Originally posted by: videogames101
Originally posted by: TehMac
The Mig29 (Mig35 now, basically a '29 with upgraded Avionics), Su-27s, and Su-37s are all really fine aircraft.

any vs. F-22 = fucking raped russian

indeed
and the F-35 will rape and pillage just about anything it needs too.

You forgot to mention the US Marines.

... because I don't bash the U.S. Military...

I don't understand, the F-35 and and F-22 can rape and pillage and it's a good thing...why the US Air Force always get away with stuffs. They have the most expensive toys and they probably killed more people than Cecil DeMille.
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |