Is Global War Fast Approaching?

[SabreFan1]

9 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said:

Russia has the most advanced icbm on earth. Careful what you wish for.

Russia claims to have a super-sonic ICBM.  Even if they did, all that would mean is that their nukes reach the US first.  Both Russia and the US have so many nukes that no anti-missile shield could possibly ever shoot enough down to stop the end of the world. 

 

They also claim to have a missile that's in effect a giant dirty bomb.  If they did make that one, it's a waste of research and money because the second they irradiated the US or any NATO ally, the regular ICBM's would launch and irradiate everything everywhere.

[Ryan Strome]

26 minutes ago, SabreFan1 said:

Russia claims to have a super-sonic ICBM.  Even if they did, all that would mean is that their nukes reach the US first.  Both Russia and the US have so many nukes that no anti-missile shield could possibly ever shoot enough down to stop the end of the world. 

 

They also claim to have a missile that's in effect a giant dirty bomb.  If they did make that one, it's a waste of research and money because the second they irradiated the US or any NATO ally, the regular ICBM's would launch and irradiate everything everywhere.

Absolutely a conflict with Russia spells the end of civilization I was just pointing out the advancement of their weapons. The US military's upper echelon being concerned about that missile tells me all I need to know.

[CBH1926]

14 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said:

Absolutely a conflict with Russia spells the end of civilization I was just pointing out the advancement of their weapons. The US military's upper echelon being concerned about that missile tells me all I need to know.

U.S military very often exaggerates Russian nuclear capabilities in order to get more funding.

Case in point is Borei vs Ohio class subs armed with nuclear weapons.

 

RSM 56 Bulava missile has failed 40% of times during test launches. 

Trident D 5 on the other hand has had 140 consecutive successful launches.

 

[Ryan Strome]

1 minute ago, CBH1926 said:

U.S military very often exaggerates Russian nuclear capabilities in order to get more funding.

Case in point is Borei vs Ohio class subs armed with nuclear weapons.

 

RSM 56 Bulava missile has failed 40% of times during test launches. 

Trident D 5 on the other hand has had 140 consecutive successful launches.

 

I don't doubt your point at all I just think this assumption by many in the west that russia has a rag tag military and the us is always superior is a little silly.

 

Tbh if not for the US I think Russia could steamroll a united Europe.

[CBH1926]

2 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said:

I don't doubt your point at all I just think this assumption by many in the west that russia has a rag tag military and the us is always superior is a little silly.

 

Tbh if not for the US I think Russia could steamroll a united Europe.

Russia has very capable military fore sure, they do also like to exaggerate their weapons capabilities for sure.

In early 1990’s I would describe them as rag tag because they were falling apart.

As far as Europe goes, their military has been descending for the last few decades.

[SabreFan1]

2 hours ago, Ryan Strome said:

Absolutely a conflict with Russia spells the end of civilization I was just pointing out the advancement of their weapons. The US military's upper echelon being concerned about that missile tells me all I need to know.

Yeah that they want to get hired into a cushy job by a defence firm.  All they have to do is tell the all too willing to listen politicians that the sky is falling and all of a sudden billions of dollars is funneled into an unnecessary weapons program and the generals responsible immediately retire into the lap of luxury provided by the defence companies and the taxpayers.  Then it's the next group of general's turns to do the same ad infinitum.  Same idea with conventional wars.

 

That's how the military industrial complex works and it is why Eisenhower warned the country decades ago.

Edited July 5, 2019 by SabreFan1

[SabreFan1]

2 hours ago, Ryan Strome said:

Tbh if not for the US I think Russia could steamroll a united Europe.

 

1 hour ago, CBH1926 said:

As far as Europe goes, their military has been descending for the last few decades.

That's why I laughed when Europe made grand proclamations a couple years ago that they were going to start taking control of their own security and beef up their militaries in response to Trump's attitude toward NATO.

 

They eventually saw what that would cost and realized how much they would have to give up domestically to do it and eventually sat down and shut up.

 

You can't let your military deteriorate over the decades and expect to cheaply and quickly rebuild it.  Not to mention, only the US and to a much smaller extent, the UK have any real experience conducting modern wars.

 

It would be in Europe's best interest to slowly over the next 20-30 years rebuild their militaries.  That way they don't have to slash domestic spending to the bone.

[Ryan Strome]

2 minutes ago, SabreFan1 said:

 

That's why I laughed when Europe made grand proclamations a couple years ago that they were going to start taking control of their own security and beef up their militaries in response to Trump's attitude toward NATO.

 

They eventually saw what that would cost and realized how much they would have to give up domestically to do it and eventually sat down and shut up.

 

You can't let your military deteriorate over the decades and expect to cheaply and quickly rebuild it.  Not to mention, only the US and to a much smaller extent, the UK have any real experience conducting modern wars.

 

It would be in Europe's best interest to slowly over the next 20-30 years rebuild their militaries.  That way they don't have to slash domestic spending to the bone.

+1 but honestly the uk could never run a full scale war. 

[SabreFan1]

Just now, Ryan Strome said:

+1 but honestly the uk could never run a full scale war. 

No, but they at least know how to coordinate with the US militarily and can hold large cities on their own like they did in Iraq.  Everyone else had token ground forces that stayed mixed in closely with US ground troops.

 

With the exception of course of special forces.  All large allied countries have comparable special forces especially the US, UK, France, and Canada.

[Ryan Strome]

13 minutes ago, SabreFan1 said:

No, but they at least know how to coordinate with the US militarily and can hold large cities on their own like they did in Iraq.  Everyone else had token ground forces that stayed mixed in closely with US ground troops.

 

With the exception of course of special forces.  All large allied countries have comparable special forces especially the US, UK, France, and Canada.

I actually think both Canada and the UK have the best special ops forces but without nato sadly at the current time both nations are screwed without the US.

[CaptKirk888]

 

[Ryan Strome]

35 minutes ago, SabreFan1 said:

Yeah that they want to get hired into a cushy job by a defence firm.  All they have to do is tell the all too willing to listen politicians that the sky is falling and all of a sudden billions of dollars is funneled into an unnecessary weapons program and the generals responsible immediately retire into the lap of luxury provided by the defence companies and the taxpayers.  Then it's the next group of general's turns to do the same ad infinitum.  Same idea with conventional wars.

 

That's how the military industrial complex works and it is why Eisenhower warned the country decades ago.

So excuse the insult but why are Americans so stupid?

[SabreFan1]

3 hours ago, Ryan Strome said:

I actually think both Canada and the UK have the best special ops forces but without nato sadly at the current time both nations are screwed without the US.

There's no real "better".  All of the allied special forces occasionally cross-train with one another.

 

Experience-wise the US has a definite edge whereas since the UK and Canada are mostly training rather than being continually active in the field, they pretty much have some of the best long distance snipers on the planet.

[SabreFan1]

3 hours ago, Ryan Strome said:

So excuse the insult but why are Americans so stupid?

People know all about it, but since it creates tens of thousands of jobs spread over many states, politicians won't put a stop to it. 

 

War is big business.

[D'Angelo Russell]

Actually I feel like we are already in a sort of global war, not a physical one but an economic one. China's belt and road and Made in China 2025 is basically a declaration of war which imo triggered the "trade war" by the US. 

 

Whether that will lead to actual war remains to be seen. Conflict with one of China's "allies" like Iran or N Korea could be the spark. 

[Lancaster]

18 hours ago, Ryan Strome said:

I don't doubt your point at all I just think this assumption by many in the west that russia has a rag tag military and the us is always superior is a little silly.

 

Tbh if not for the US I think Russia could steamroll a united Europe.

 

15 hours ago, SabreFan1 said:

 

That's why I laughed when Europe made grand proclamations a couple years ago that they were going to start taking control of their own security and beef up their militaries in response to Trump's attitude toward NATO.

 

They eventually saw what that would cost and realized how much they would have to give up domestically to do it and eventually sat down and shut up.

 

You can't let your military deteriorate over the decades and expect to cheaply and quickly rebuild it.  Not to mention, only the US and to a much smaller extent, the UK have any real experience conducting modern wars.

 

It would be in Europe's best interest to slowly over the next 20-30 years rebuild their militaries.  That way they don't have to slash domestic spending to the bone.

There are pretty good youtube videos of a hypothetical war between Russia against the EU.

 

Pretty much Russia will have quick initial advances, but due to actual difference in manpower, funding, equipment, infrastructures, etc.... Russia would probably get curb stomped.

[SabreFan1]

4 hours ago, Lancaster said:

 

There are pretty good youtube videos of a hypothetical war between Russia against the EU.

 

Pretty much Russia will have quick initial advances, but due to actual difference in manpower, funding, equipment, infrastructures, etc.... Russia would probably get curb stomped.

 

There are also some "pretty good" YouTube videos on a flat 5,000 yr. old earth, dinosaurs being a hoax, the world being controlled by UK royalty and/or families that aren't even considered powerful anymore, CERN ending the world and/or universe, etc., etc.

 

It's tough to give credence to amateur videographer's opinions no matter how well informed they present themselves to be.  It's even tough to do it with some professionals (ie: Oliver Stone and Michael Moorer).

[SabreFan1]

5 hours ago, D'Angelo Russell said:

Actually I feel like we are already in a sort of global war, not a physical one but an economic one. China's belt and road and Made in China 2025 is basically a declaration of war which imo triggered the "trade war" by the US. 

 

Whether that will lead to actual war remains to be seen. Conflict with one of China's "allies" like Iran or N Korea could be the spark. 

The world is always in an economic war.  Sometimes it's just more public than other times.  Like when an orange clown is bloviating all over TV and the internet about it.

[CBH1926]

20 hours ago, SabreFan1 said:

 

That's why I laughed when Europe made grand proclamations a couple years ago that they were going to start taking control of their own security and beef up their militaries in response to Trump's attitude toward NATO.

 

They eventually saw what that would cost and realized how much they would have to give up domestically to do it and eventually sat down and shut up.

 

You can't let your military deteriorate over the decades and expect to cheaply and quickly rebuild it.  Not to mention, only the US and to a much smaller extent, the UK have any real experience conducting modern wars.

 

It would be in Europe's best interest to slowly over the next 20-30 years rebuild their militaries.  That way they don't have to slash domestic spending to the bone.

When it comes to NATO spending, some of the biggest spenders are Poland, Latvia, Romania and Estonia.

In terms of GDP spending, Estonia is 2nd to USA, Poland is way ahead of Germany and France.

 

Turks and Greeks have respectable armies as well, the rest is joke.

If Russians moved on Europe, western nations would fold like a cheap tent.

 

 

[CBH1926]

4 hours ago, Lancaster said:

 

There are pretty good youtube videos of a hypothetical war between Russia against the EU.

 

Pretty much Russia will have quick initial advances, but due to actual difference in manpower, funding, equipment, infrastructures, etc.... Russia would probably get curb stomped.

I am going to be honest, I have never been huge fan of Soviets/Russians.

Also military history is hobby of mine, and honestly without the USA Western Europe would get annihilated.

I don’t think they would be even able to hold out long enough to get help from the states.