Poland is going DOWN

[techs]

The real question is whether Americans will be willing to get into a nuclear war with Russia over Poland.
If Russia builds its forces back up to where they can roll over Poland, than would you be willing to die for Poland?

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: sammyunltd
Russia wins....

Russia will get help from China, Iran and all Arab States. At the same time, Arab States will cut the West's supplies in oil.

Western World will be owned by the East (Russia, China, Middle East).

Bring it on, misssion accomplished

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: techs
The real question is whether Americans will be willing to get into a nuclear war with Russia over Poland.
If Russia builds its forces back up to where they can roll over Poland, than would you be willing to die for Poland?

Over a NATO country, yes.

For the deterrent to be credible the opponent has to think you are willing to use it.. Though to gamble one side or the other would not is an insane risk that nobody since the dawn of nuclear weaponry has taken for obvious reasons.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Russia wins....Russia will get help from China, Iran and all Arab States. At the same time, Arab States will cut the West's supplies in oil. Western World will be owned by the East (Russia, China, Middle East).

The Chinese lack the resources and equipment to project their forces into Taiwan, let alone support a Russian war against the "western world"...not to mention that China has more to gain economically in the long run from maintaining ties to the west, so I doubt they would join forces with Russia.

Similarly, what Arab states are we talking about? I could see maybe Iran jumping into the fray, but they don't pose much of a threat...they could barely handle Iraq, so I don't see Iran helping the Russians much.

So you have America, Canada, the British, France, Germany, Italy, Spain and every other NATO/western nation...with some of the most advanced military hardware in the world...going up against the Russians, who still have Soviet equipment that is falling apart, and perhaps the Chinese, who has no way to force project its "million man" army past the Great Wall.

No, I am afraid the Russians are quite a lone in their stupidity, and they should cease the saber rattling.

 

[SoundTheSurrender]

People still have the mentality that Russia has old Soviet era technology.

 

[RichardE]

Originally posted by: sammyunltd

Originally posted by: waggy
heh i think sammyunltd got pretty owned in this thread.

Not at all, man.

Seriously, looking at the USA's past three big wars, Iraq, Afghanistan and Vietnam, its power is widely overstated. Not only are the other countries (China and Russia and others) catching the US in terms of technology (see China's newest fighters and submarines) but they greatly outnumber the USA (provided Putin imposes conscription, and that may work over there...). Furthermore, Europe is pretty small whereas China and Russia are two of the biggest countries and so far, every power that has tried to take down Russia couldn't (France - Napoleon and Nazis - Hitler) manage it.

The USA proved to the world that their logistic is flawed, by the number of casualties, by their difficulty to crush the resistance in Iraq and Afghanistan, by their costly technology failing to "produce" (ie. many $2B B-2 crashing, etc.). Their soldiers are badly trained (widely known, they take any "volunteer" and not the best of the best) and the infantry is not well equipped (M16 sucks).

As for the Arab States, they might as well join Russia and kick out the "infidels" from their holy soil (i.e. USA's bases in Saudi Arabia). So, they can cut off the USA and Europe's supplies in oil (easy to do, stop sending cargos to their ports..., as easy as that). So, Russia can still have some and China as well.

Furthermore, China, to help Russia and also gain from a weakened West, will sell its US Gov't Bonds to crush the US currency for good. Oil shortages will cause its price to dramatically increase... and on and on.

It is possible..

Those were not total wars, but wars found with diplomatic strings. Big difference

 

[rchiu]

Originally posted by: sammyunltd

Originally posted by: waggy
heh i think sammyunltd got pretty owned in this thread.

Not at all, man.

Seriously, looking at the USA's past three big wars, Iraq, Afghanistan and Vietnam, its power is widely overstated. Not only are the other countries (China and Russia and others) catching the US in terms of technology (see China's newest fighters and submarines) but they greatly outnumber the USA (provided Putin imposes conscription, and that may work over there...). Furthermore, Europe is pretty small whereas China and Russia are two of the biggest countries and so far, every power that has tried to take down Russia couldn't (France - Napoleon and Nazis - Hitler) manage it.

The USA proved to the world that their logistic is flawed, by the number of casualties, by their difficulty to crush the resistance in Iraq and Afghanistan, by their costly technology failing to "produce" (ie. many $2B B-2 crashing, etc.). Their soldiers are badly trained (widely known, they take any "volunteer" and not the best of the best) and the infantry is not well equipped (M16 sucks).

As for the Arab States, they might as well join Russia and kick out the "infidels" from their holy soil (i.e. USA's bases in Saudi Arabia). So, they can cut off the USA and Europe's supplies in oil (easy to do, stop sending cargos to their ports..., as easy as that). So, Russia can still have some and China as well.

Furthermore, China, to help Russia and also gain from a weakened West, will sell its US Gov't Bonds to crush the US currency for good. Oil shortages will cause its price to dramatically increase... and on and on.

It is possible..

Yeah, possible in your dream. China has absolutely nothing to gain by going against the US outright. Right now they are more interested in strengthening their own economy, their country, and starting a war against the west doesn't exactly help them. Plus Russia and China has plenty of conflicts between them, and there is absolutely no love between China and Russia.

And the ME, USA owns the kings, prince, and all the royals in the ME, and unless bin ladin becomes the ruling class of ME, no one is gonna go against the US and the West.

US still have the technical and military advantage in traditional warfare. Plus they do not have to occupy Russia to win this war, they just have to drive Russia out of countries like Poland if Russia starts the invasion. So no local resistance, no guerrilla warfare and no unclear objectives to worry about.

If I were Russia, I wouldn't do anything drastic to start a full scale war with the west.

 

[nonameo]

These military pissing contests just get the citizens all wet.

 

[daniel49]

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: Skoorb
Your example of a crashed B2 is silly, these things happen all the time. I can find endless vids of Russian military craft crashing.

Saying the US is overstated because of Iraq is like saying Germany was overstated in WWII because it couldn't fully crush the underground resistance. The US never, ever had a problem against Iraq's military; it was more a training exercise than anything else. Its problem is in controlling the local population, something an invading force often has to worry about, but is a non-issue if a country is trying to defend itself.

China has quantity over quality. How would they move those troops around? How would Russia? US' navy is eons beyond either of those countries in navy and air force, both key parts of the equation.

Their soldiers are badly trained (widely known, they take any "volunteer" and not the best of the best)

US soldiers badly trained compared to other countries? You clearly don't know jack squat about the US military (which spends way more per troop on training than most if not all other countries and superiorly equips them as well) and news flash: any country with a volunteer army is likely to have it more likely filled with mechanics' kids than law students.

China could not do as you say because they need the US more than the US needs China.

Yes, to put this in perspective Russia operates one broke ass carrier that almost never leaves port because its to expensive to sortie and has never worked right. The US has 11 operational super carriers complete with battle groups. The USN would take the Russian navy apart in a couple days.

maybe you haven't heard but Russia is now rolling in Billions of petro dollars
Text

quote from article:
In 1998, with oil selling at $14 a barrel, the country defaulted on debts and devalued the ruble. In 1999, Russia's public debt amounted to 96 percent of its gross domestic product. Following Monday's payment, it will fall to 9 percent, officials said.

Russia is now the world's largest exporter of natural gas and the world's second-largest exporter of oil. With prices at historic highs, the country is swimming in cash.

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: sammyunltd
Russia wins....

Russia will get help from China, Iran and all Arab States. At the same time, Arab States will cut the West's supplies in oil.

Western World will be owned by the East (Russia, China, Middle East).

Err, we only get like 8% of our oil from the ME.

 

[Buck Armstrong]

Originally posted by: daniel49

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: Skoorb
Your example of a crashed B2 is silly, these things happen all the time. I can find endless vids of Russian military craft crashing.

Saying the US is overstated because of Iraq is like saying Germany was overstated in WWII because it couldn't fully crush the underground resistance. The US never, ever had a problem against Iraq's military; it was more a training exercise than anything else. Its problem is in controlling the local population, something an invading force often has to worry about, but is a non-issue if a country is trying to defend itself.

China has quantity over quality. How would they move those troops around? How would Russia? US' navy is eons beyond either of those countries in navy and air force, both key parts of the equation.

Their soldiers are badly trained (widely known, they take any "volunteer" and not the best of the best)

US soldiers badly trained compared to other countries? You clearly don't know jack squat about the US military (which spends way more per troop on training than most if not all other countries and superiorly equips them as well) and news flash: any country with a volunteer army is likely to have it more likely filled with mechanics' kids than law students.

China could not do as you say because they need the US more than the US needs China.

Yes, to put this in perspective Russia operates one broke ass carrier that almost never leaves port because its to expensive to sortie and has never worked right. The US has 11 operational super carriers complete with battle groups. The USN would take the Russian navy apart in a couple days.

maybe you haven't heard but Russia is now rolling in Billions of petro dollars
Text

quote from article:
In 1998, with oil selling at $14 a barrel, the country defaulted on debts and devalued the ruble. In 1999, Russia's public debt amounted to 96 percent of its gross domestic product. Following Monday's payment, it will fall to 9 percent, officials said.

Russia is now the world's largest exporter of natural gas and the world's second-largest exporter of oil. With prices at historic highs, the country is swimming in cash.

Germany's rich too. Big deal. No force projection = OP is living on Fantasy Island.

 

[TechAZ]

I fail to see the problem here. The missile defense system is...a defense system. Poland is not going to attack Russia, and Russia is just getting their panties in a wad because of the cooperation with the US. This missile defense system is not a bad thing IMO.

 

[2Xtreme21]

Q: Why does the US feel it needs to put a missile defense system in Poland anyway? Unless it wants to sit and provoke Russia and the East?

 

[TechAZ]

Originally posted by: 2Xtreme21
Q: Why does the US feel it needs to put a missile defense system in Poland anyway? Unless it wants to sit and provoke Russia and the East?

A: This shield provides security to the world...not just the US. It could also potentially protect Russia.

 

[2Xtreme21]

Originally posted by: TechAZ

Originally posted by: 2Xtreme21
Q: Why does the US feel it needs to put a missile defense system in Poland anyway? Unless it wants to sit and provoke Russia and the East?

A: This shield provides security to the world...not just the US. It could also potentially protect Russia.

But isn't the threat over ICBM's all but over at this point? Any kind of modern nuclear threat would come from something small and from a rogue terrorist cell. I don't see why we're throwing billions of our dollars and just needlessly provoking people all for a very antiquated threat.

 

[Buck Armstrong]

Originally posted by: 2Xtreme21

Originally posted by: TechAZ

Originally posted by: 2Xtreme21
Q: Why does the US feel it needs to put a missile defense system in Poland anyway? Unless it wants to sit and provoke Russia and the East?

A: This shield provides security to the world...not just the US. It could also potentially protect Russia.

But isn't the threat over ICBM's all but over at this point? Any kind of modern nuclear threat would come from something small and from a rogue terrorist cell. I don't see why we're throwing billions of our dollars and just needlessly provoking people all for a very antiquated threat.

Good point. Let's discuss that at length after the magic missile shield is finished and in place.

 

[Fox5]

Originally posted by: SoundTheSurrender
People still have the mentality that Russia has old Soviet era technology.

I'd bet on China's tech over Russia's.
Russia is still behind us where it really counts...computers and electronics.

China can at least shamelessly reverse engineer our old hardware and then produce it in numbers we never could. China could come close enough to our capabilities to overwhelm us with sheer numbers.

 

[datalink7]

Originally posted by: sammyunltd

Originally posted by: waggy
heh i think sammyunltd got pretty owned in this thread.

The USA proved to the world that their logistic is flawed, by the number of casualties, by their difficulty to crush the resistance in Iraq and Afghanistan, by their costly technology failing to "produce" (ie. many $2B B-2 crashing, etc.). Their soldiers are badly trained (widely known, they take any "volunteer" and not the best of the best) and the infantry is not well equipped (M16 sucks).

M4/M16 doesn't "suck." How many times have you used one? While certainly there are better weapons out there, and I wouldn't be opposed to an upgrade, if you take care of it, it is a solid weapon.

And the US Army isn't badly trained. I've interacted with armies from about ten countries, including special forces from three different countries, we certainly don't lack against any of them. A volunteer army is genreally stronger than a conscripted army. The morale is higher, which leads to higher motivation to both train harder, and fight better.

 

[gevorg]

Originally posted by: 2Xtreme21
Q: Why does the US feel it needs to put a missile defense system in Poland anyway? Unless it wants to sit and provoke Russia and the East?

Those radars used in the missile defense can be used to spy on the whole western Russia. Much more accurate and stronger than current radars and spy satellites.

 

[sunzt]

Why the hell would China fight with Russia against their primary customers?

LOGIC FAIL

 

[sunzt]

Originally posted by: gevorg

Originally posted by: 2Xtreme21
Q: Why does the US feel it needs to put a missile defense system in Poland anyway? Unless it wants to sit and provoke Russia and the East?

Those radars used in the missile defense can be used to spy on the whole western Russia. Much more accurate and stronger than current radars and spy satellites.

I'd imagine it wouldn't be hard to replace ant-missile missiles with freedom missiles.

 

[StinkyPinky]

Originally posted by: sammyunltd

Originally posted by: waggy
heh i think sammyunltd got pretty owned in this thread.

Not at all, man.

Seriously, looking at the USA's past three big wars, Iraq, Afghanistan and Vietnam, its power is widely overstated. Not only are the other countries (China and Russia and others) catching the US in terms of technology (see China's newest fighters and submarines) but they greatly outnumber the USA (provided Putin imposes conscription, and that may work over there...). Furthermore, Europe is pretty small whereas China and Russia are two of the biggest countries and so far, every power that has tried to take down Russia couldn't (France - Napoleon and Nazis - Hitler) manage it.

The USA proved to the world that their logistic is flawed, by the number of casualties, by their difficulty to crush the resistance in Iraq and Afghanistan, by their costly technology failing to "produce" (ie. many $2B B-2 crashing, etc.). Their soldiers are badly trained (widely known, they take any "volunteer" and not the best of the best) and the infantry is not well equipped (M16 sucks).

As for the Arab States, they might as well join Russia and kick out the "infidels" from their holy soil (i.e. USA's bases in Saudi Arabia). So, they can cut off the USA and Europe's supplies in oil (easy to do, stop sending cargos to their ports..., as easy as that). So, Russia can still have some and China as well.

Furthermore, China, to help Russia and also gain from a weakened West, will sell its US Gov't Bonds to crush the US currency for good. Oil shortages will cause its price to dramatically increase... and on and on.

It is possible..

China would never ally with Russia man. Even if they did, they would still be overmatched against Nato. They have zero force projection compared to Nato which has the US navy and airbases to work from. Not to mention the UK and France also have some carriers and air bases. Nato wouldn't even need to do a land war. Just fortify its borders and bomb the shit out of Russia from afar. And lastly, Nato troops are better trained and have better equipment.

 

[Carlis]

Russia is not soviet. Soviet had something like 300m citizens, Russia has 145m. Also, the EU economy is seven times larger than that of Russia (and the American economy is roughly the same size as that of the EU). When developing high tech weapons like missile shields these things matter.

That said it IS time for the EU to accept a new constitution and pool military resources to an EU army. One of the things that strike me now when China is coming so strong is how crucial the dissolution of the east block was. Without it, America and half Europe would face Soviet and China. What if the Soviet was reformed to capitalism like China? Then we would be fvcked...

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: badkarma1399
All Russia is saying is that if a conflict were to arise between the US and itself, then Poland would be a target due to the American installations there. Well no shit Sherlock. Poland would be a target for Russia whether or not the missile defense system was there, just like they have always been.

finally, someone who gets it... thank you! Now, let's see how many people bother to try and understand what you wrote...

 

[Modelworks]

Originally posted by: sammyunltd

Originally posted by: waggy
heh i think sammyunltd got pretty owned in this thread.

The USA proved to the world that their logistic is flawed, by the number of casualties, by their difficulty to crush the resistance in Iraq and Afghanistan, by their costly technology failing to "produce" (ie. many $2B B-2 crashing, etc.). Their soldiers are badly trained (widely known, they take any "volunteer" and not the best of the best) and the infantry is not well equipped (M16 sucks).

M16 does NOT suck.
Ever fired one ? Stop watching tv and playing soldier.
You are clueless.