Modern Warfare and How it Would Work

>>33982160
way to broad of a scenerio. Nations involved and terrain/location a long with aggressor/defender and/or if proxy or main nation.

>>33982160
Russia would be a bitch to deal with.
Even with NATO jumping up and down and throwing the entirety of it's reserves in.

>>33982194
I thought that might be an issue. Say, China v.s. Russia and Mongolia just collapsed.

>>33982160
Is there non nuclear ICBM's involved? If not, then it'll come down to naval superiority and the winner of that establishing air superiority, then sending in ground forces.

You seen how israel fights in the west bank? they dont even use the streets. they just use shape charges and blown holes house to house.

It would looks like syria. Some ground troops breaching and clearing and fighting then tons of air ordinance would turn the place to rubble.

>>33982278
Yes, but cyber warfare is also present, so I figure that could slow or stop some of that.

>>33982282
What about forests, plains, mountains, and other land forms? How would large forces fight back for those cities if everyone's just split up in buildings? Maybe guerilla warfare?

>>33982160
I remember some years back based on an old history channel special (least i think it was H channel) that one of the first things 1st world countries would do in modern warfare (no icbm scenario) would be to strike down as many if not all the enemy's satellites while protecting their own

Big dick waving contests, economic warfare, cyber attacks, hacking, espionage, the occasional proxy war
Basically what China, Russia, and the United States have been doing for the past 10 years.

>>33982474
Seems like a cluster fuck if allied satellites got involved.

>>33982493
When would actual warfare occur?

>>33982493
When would actual warfare start and how?

>>33982652
Never, the leaders are happy at the moment. Too much to lose, not enough to gain.