8/14/17 A Russian general was questioned by state media about

>>34895675
>wall of text
source - my ass

>>34895700
>hahahahahahahahahaha no

ftfy

>>34895700
>>34895714
>>34895718

Why should I trust the word of a random neckbeard on /k/ over a general?

>Russian general dick waving just like murican generals

They might be able to take most of Europe, but no way they could take the US. Gun behind every blade of grass etc etc. Plus the US has a shitload of vets that are used to fighting against insurgents, so they know what works against regular militaries.

>>34895728
Then why would you ask in the first place?

>>34895728
Why believe a wall of text without a source?

>>34895738
>>34895764

nice samefagging

>>34895675
It's understood at this point that Russia has no meaningful anti-ballistic missile capability and their submarines are no longer safe to operate for deterrence patrols. In the event of war most of Russia's arsenal would be destroyed on the ground and they would possess no real second strike capability.

>>34895839

S-400 can shoot down any American missile or bomber.

America has no defense against SS-18 "Satan" missile

>>34895839
Don't bother feeding the troll.

>>34895862

>troll
>i literally just quoted a Russian general

>>34895858
Economics, if your enemy has no money he cannot build weapons.

>>34895675
>A Russian general was questioned by state media
well there's your problem

>>34895839
>Russia destroys the entire GPS constellation of satellites
>the entire American military stops working and the average American can't find his way back home anymore
>Russia takes of all Europe and blocks the Baltic and Black sea
>USA doesn't do anything because Trump

>>34895928

>>Destroys the entire GPS constellation of satellites

Russia needs GPS and GLONASS for their weapons as well.

>>34895928
>>34895966
Newer weapons also tend to have multiple guidance systems.

>>34895928

> GPS satellites operate 20,000 km
> ASM-135 has a max altitude of 500 km
> Chinese ASAT was only tested at 870 km

News flash, anti-satellite is designed to knock down low orbit spy, communications, and radar satellites. GPS, Glonass, and Beidou are all too high up for any ASAT weapon to reach in the next couple decades or so.

There are many simple things in the world. Shovels. They are all different. Gardening shovel, unloading shovel, children's shovel. But there is also a different shovel. We use it when we come to the position. In short time, it helps us dig a trench which saves us from bullets. If a tank will pass over the trench, there is a high probability that it will not cause any harm to the soldier. We dig in the ground. Deeper. And then connect the trenches with our friends to the left. In just a few hours, trenches are all connected. When we do not have an axe, we can use a shovel to cut a loaf of bread. A soldier uses a shovel as a paddle, crossing the wide river under enemy fire. If we run out of ammunition...we will use the shovel again. And then we'll move on. And when we get the order to stop..we will take a shovel again, and build around us an impregnable fortress. This fortress is defended by the army of Ukrainia, our army.

>>34895966
but comrade, if everyone is blind no one can see!

>>34895858
Lol

>>34895675
Can't even push ukraines shit in lmao

>>34895675
Lel
Simply put in terms of match to match
American tanks , British tanks , French tanks , German tanks , polish tanks , vs Russian tanks
American planes , German planes , British planes , Polish planes , French planes vs Russian planes
American ships , German ships , French ships , polish ships , British ships , vs Russian ships
American nukes , German nukes , British nuks , polish nukes , French nukes vs Russia anti-Nuke missile system
Russian nukes vs French anti-nuke missile system etc.
we all Know how well a 3rd world war would go for Russia

They can cut through Ukraine and Romania like butter and steamroll through Southern Europe, Poland and Northern Europe is a non starter..
They can easily bust the Wermacht in Souther Germany
They could likely take a good chunk of Scandinavia as well

>>34895928
Russia has no ability to do any of those things, and is sliding into failed state status.

Watch next summer for Venezuela 2: Squatting Edition.

File: 1499393229849.jpg (61KB, 600x554px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 600x554px

>>34896208

>>34896160
>German nukes
Want to know how I can tell that you're a product of the American educational system?

Lmfao, is /k/ really this fucking retarded? No source, a total bull shit paragraph and you guys swallow the bait.

I get that you hate Russia, but damn at least use your brain first.

File: rv0SYgG.jpg (73KB, 1492x1080px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 1492x1080px

>>34895675
>"S-400 and S-500 make all nuclear ICBMs and bombers obsolete, Russia is simply untouchable."
> NATO cannot even defeat Russian tanks from The Great Patriotic War let alone modern ones.

You don't often get to see levels of delusion this powerful outside of the DPRK. They've lost almost all of their remaining support in Eastern Europe and they are going to run out of money pretty soon. Even Belarus has started to push away from them.

>>34897286
NATO shares nucleaar weapons with its members. Even Turkey has them and I believe certain numbers are allocated for the host nation's use.

>>34895735
>Gun behind every blade of grass
and i would gladly provide our russian liberators the positions of these resistors

>>34897437
They aren't shared with these nations in that sense, rather that nuclear equipped units in the USAF are stationed there.

>>34897356
>he thinks these are real quotes
you are the deluded one you fucking retard.

>>34895928
>NATO conducts coordinated strikes against vodka distilleries
>vodka supplies runs out
>Slavs stops raping each other
>Slavs begin to drink the antifreeze for their armored vehicles
>Slavs gets poisoned
>Slavs decides to rape each other again
>while their women desperately tries to find an American husband.

>>34897455
I'm pretty sure it's been said they'd use that nation's military to deliver the bombs. That's probably one of the main reasons the F-35 won the Belgium fighter competition for instance, the US wouldn't be too keen to certify the Gripen for example to drop a B61.

>>34897455
In what sense?

To my senses there are nukes in said countries.

>>34897488
>>34897506

There is a huge difference between storing nukes in other countries and giving countries nukes. And I've never heard of the USAF saying they'd let anyone but themselves ever drop a US nuclear weapon.

>>34897542
https://www.nrdc.org/sites/default/files/euro.pdf

>The 480 bombs deployed in Europe represent more than 80 percent of all the active B61 tactical bombs in the U.S. stockpile. No other U.S. nuclear weapons are forward-deployed (other than warheads on ballistic missile submarines). An additional 436 bombs are in reserve or inactive status but could be returned to the active stockpile quickly if necessary.

>Approximately 300 of the 480 bombs are assigned for delivery by U.S. F-15E and F-16C/D aircraft (capable of carrying up to five and two B61 bombs each, respectively) deployed in Europe or rotating through the U.S. bases. The remaining 180 bombs are earmarked for delivery by the air forces of five NATO countries, including Belgian, Dutch, and Turkish F-16s and German and Italian PA-200 Tornado aircraft (up to two weapons each). Control of the nuclear weapons at national air bases is performed by the U.S. Munitions
Support Squadron (MUNSS) at each base (see Table 3). Each MUNSS includes approximately 110 personnel that are responsible for the physical security of the weapons, maintenance and logistics of the weapons and the Weapons Storage and Security System (WS3), and handing over the nuclear bombs to the national air forces if ordered to do so by the U.S. National Command Authority. Prior to assignment to a MUNSS, officers undergo a two-day route orientation at Spangdahlem Air Base.

>>34895675
Ooh I've read this book. It goes poorly for the Pyccкий.

>>34897591
Well it looks like things really have changed, never would've assumed the Bundeswehr would ever get to touch nukes. Your well supported response gives me hope.

File: BUK_monkey.jpg (22KB, 344x285px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 344x285px

>>34895675
What I want to know is WTF is that monkey faced looking doodad?

>>34897641
The US has done nuclear weapons sharing since like the 60s. Canada used to have some.

>>34897670
A lot of the nuke stuff I've read dealt with the early cold war, I'd just assumed that the USAF would never hand over their nukes. Just seemed like a policy they'd never change.

>>34897299
I have no idea if this one is true or not but it certainly isn't too far off the batshit propaganda tier statements that come out of Russia periodically in regards to their miliatary

http://www.baka.com.au/world/russian-analyst-urges-nuclear-attack-on-yellowstone-national-park-and-san-andreas-fault-line-20150330-1mbl14.html

>>34897726
weird, this link should hopefully work

http://www.wnd.com/2015/03/russian-strategist-suggests-nuking-yellowstone/

>>34897748
>“a result, the U.S. will cease to exist.”

They say this like they don't have thousands of warheads spread across dozens of delivery platforms.

>>34897783
well the dude's retarded enough to think that
A. Geological events work that way to begin with
and B. That a potential global extinction event like Yellowstone going off wouldn't fuck Russia if not as hard as the US still hard enough to cause massive famine and enormous loss of life

File: 1496945414822.jpg (17KB, 542x540px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 542x540px

>>34895675
>NATO cannot even defeat Russian tanks from world war 2 let alone modern ones
Do russians actually believe this?

>>34897801
probably not

File: 1502944002001.jpg (24KB, 317x432px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 317x432px

>>34895675
Bullshit. Current Russian military doctrine relies on full depth strategic nuclear strike against infrastructure in case of total war and on a2ad and tactical nukes fighting at a maximum distance of 500km from their borders in case of a conventional regional war. The article is probably some adept of what is called today in Russian press 'as the shabby tank steamroll to the English Channel Soviet heresy'.

>>34897801
>he hasn't seen a T-34 mod. '17
it's air-droppable and plastered in enough ERA to obliterate 30 square city blocks when hit. They'll scatter them like jacks across Western Europe and NATO will be forced to surrender unless they want to cause heinous amounts of collateral damage.

>>34895675
>>34895675

OP, mind giving us a source? You are not state media and the "general" in question was probably some drunk taxi driver.

>>34897875
two bottles of vodka have been deposited in your ditch

Stupid thread to trigger stupid people. No credible source, no nothing.

File: rtn_205417.jpg (640KB, 3008x1960px) Image search: [Google]

640KB, 3008x1960px

>tfw the US has a simple little gadget that renders all of russias air defenses obsolete

What will vatniks do when bombed into the dirt without being able to retalliate?

>>34895675
S-400 was not designed for ICBM

S-400 was the respond for stealth aircraft

File: 0_119836_8a143874_orig.jpg (2MB, 1703x1135px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1703x1135px

>>34898086
>a MiG-31BM shoot down the vehicle carry that device

>>34898271
F-16's carry them as well. Also the EW environment around a decoy launching B-52 would make attacking one difficult, to say the least.

>>34897916
Underrated toast

>>34898086
Is that a MALD?

>>34895675
Gib source. I refuse to believe that any general is that retarded, even the Norks don't make claims like that.

File: IMG_3923.jpg (34KB, 413x367px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 413x367px

>>34895675
>America would immediately surrender or we would occupy Washington DC just like Berlin.

This potato-juice nigger is quite the LARPer

>>34898293
no defend is absolute
you cann't carry too many of these thing and Russian airforce don't just seating around doing nothing

remember Vietnam

>>34896187
It is called the bundeswehr now tho.

>>34898324
The issue is that a B-52 on a decoy launching mission won't be anywhere near enemy airspace. The newer MALDs have around a ~900km range and the launching aircraft will undoubtedly have escorts. Also you can carry quite a few of them and they work for quite a while.

>>34898324
>no defend is absolute
Remember this when thinking that the S-400 will protect you
>you cann't carry too many of these thing
The B-52 can carry over a dozen each and the MiG-31 can only carry four missiles.
>remember vietnam
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=60ihI7VU2OY
The last time a city was protected by a top of the line russian air defense system, said city was bombed into the stone age with minimal US bomber losses.

>>34895675

I don`t doubt they can steamroll up to Berlin fast, but that claim is out of this world

File: 14560075871590.jpg (53KB, 599x469px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 599x469px

>>34895675
To all people who thinks that this bullshit even means anything.
Putin and his oligarchs have all their money in foreign banks, their kids live and study in Britain and USA, they have numerous amount of most expensive real estate all over the world, especially in Europe and russian government invest billions in USA economy. Starting a war for them means losing everything they managed to steal and the end of the Putin's regime. It's nothing more than the dumbest propaganda they can come up with and all of this is a total bullshit.

>>34898401
>I don`t doubt they can steamroll up to Berlin fast,
They would hopelessly get stuck in Poland.
All russia might be capable is taking the baltics on account of that you can get across from the russian border to the sea on a single tank of gas in a T-72.

>>34895879
Wtf else would he say? "We would lose horribly! We are incompetent and useless! We love NATO!"

>>34898311
Of course there is no source, because Russian generals never mention the USA, officers of Russia just pretend that USA doesn't exist.

File: 1461809152532.gif (2MB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 320x240px

>>34896187
>1945+90-18
>Wehrmacht

>>34898389
S-75 was not top of the line in 1972

and they shoot down more than 3 dozen of B-52

American kill many civilian and most of the important infrastructure was undamaged

>>34897646
Optical / IR sights.

>>34898573

That interview never happened. You pulled this out of your ass. Give us a credible source, you cocksucking faggot

>>34898562

>They would hopelessly get stuck in Poland

Nah, mate. Berlin would be a walkthrough

Clearly Russian still makes good vodka. Cause that mofo has had more than his share.

>>34895675
LOL

>>34895773
Nice fake news.

>>34897356
Assuming they're actual, real quotes, I wouldn't call it delusion so much as simple survival. What's he supposed to say, "Naw dawg, we're fucked. Like, so hard." The very next story in the state news cycle would be about how a poor Russian general accidentally shot himself multiple times in the back of the head while watering the lawn.

>>34895675
>They mistakenly rely on their air forces which are impotent against air defense."

The only part where it actually had some content.

But anyway this might have true in 1980-1985, right now, their idea of relying on powerfull radars behind the front for target acquisition and very long range SAMs is as much outdated as their equipment.

>>34898324

Ah yes Vietnam, the war where the USAF had a loss rate of 0.4 per 1000 sorties, five times lower than in Korea, and over twenty times lower than in WW2. I'm sorry, but if Russia's IADS is only able to inflict that kind of loss rate, then the Russian Army would be doomed to death by a hail of PGMs in a war.

>>34895675
>questioned by state media
Haha

But seriously, source? No way Russians are this delusional.

>NATO carrier groups were defeated by patrol boats on exercises
>US humvees stuck in sand on exercises
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zaz6HdbOuN0&t=18s
>humvee airdrop fail
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kjF8ju7YeLI
Why US is such a joke?

>>34895675
Russia doesn't even have the logistics to reach Berlin in a week if they were unopposed.

>>34898746
>S-75 was not top of the line in 1972
Yes it was, of it's role at least.

>and they shoot down more than 3 dozen of B-52
Nope, the Linebacker II only had 12 lost B-52s and a loss rate of only than 1% per mission

>American kill many civilian and most of the important infrastructure was undamaged
Nope, the first strikes where so effective that they more or less ran out of targets and had to bomb already destroyed targets is subsequent runs as there was nothing left worth bombing in Hanoi.
This forced the dirty commies to sign the Paris Peace Accords which was the goal of the bombings.

>>34899271
>Deutschland+Russland
Literally vomiting.

>>34898766
>Nah, mate. Berlin would be a walkthrough
Maybe so but they would never reach Berlin. Poland is in the way and russia is so weak and rotted that they would not be able to reach even Warsaw.

>>34895675
>A Russian general
isn't this the shit they get paid to say?

>>34899309
Don't forget the mining of Haiphong harbor.

File: Dr-Cox2.png (2MB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1024x768px

>>34895675
>"We would completely crush NATO,
>especially the Americans. Their militaries
>simply do not stand a chance, NATO is weak.
> We have the ability to take all of Europe in
> under 1 week. America would immediately
> surrender or we would occupy Washington
> DC just like Berlin. Our military is the
> greatest and strongest in the world.
>No country can even hope to match us."

>>34899309
"we totally won vietnam i swear"

>>34899309
>Yes it was, of it's role at least.
No, it wasn't. S-125 was top of the line at the time, S-125M specifically.

>>34899886
S-175 was a complement to the S-75

>>34895675
No. Russians are mentally retarded and also massive liars, don't believe anything they say.

They can't even take Ukraine.

>>34899935
they would take Ukraine in 2 days if they wanted

>>34895858
How many S400s does russia have in it's inventory?
150?

>>34899938
You mean like they took Georgia? And proceeded to lose millions and millions worth of equipment to absolute nobodies? Lol.

How does Russia do this with next to no force projection?

>>34899948
they almost took Georgian capital in less than a week and captured more equipment than wasted

>>34895675
One might ask why a man posts such a qoute without a source.

File: 1477425843600.png (115KB, 599x491px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 599x491px

>>34895675
Anybody from Russia? I can't speak in vodka, is that bullshit or true? Faggot OP still refuses to share the source.

>>34899915
Due to the simple fact, that they couldn't make it both maneuverable and have a longer range. Tactically - they fill the exact same niche.

>>34900003
>Tactically - they fill the exact same niche.
No.

File: 040715-F-JZ509-038.jpg (1MB, 3688x2512px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3688x2512px

>>34899945
i checked russia has 19 divisions with 112 missiles each
so that's 2128 missiles total
the USAF has 5414 fixed wing aircraft
so a full frontal assault by every allied aircraft would completely overwhelm Russian air defences

>>34899938

Absolutely. The only reason why they did not in the Donbass conflict was because they would not be able to hide a massive invasion under the cover of "miners and truck drivers."

>>34895858
They rely on liquid storable propellant this makes these rockets slow on ascent compared with Tridents and easy to take down

File: 1477426251573.png (60KB, 860x650px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 860x650px

>>34899980
Lotsa Russian shills here who try to flail around their limp dick. Your army is shit and US/NATO will beat the shit out of you.

But fucking seriously, give me the fucking source from OP, REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE. Don't stoop down to their level and spread fake bullshit.

>>34895675
>russians
kek

>>34897286
> are you retarded or something ?
of course the Germans have nukes

>>34899948
NATO couldn't even take Afghanistan, what makes you think you stand a chance against Russia?

>>34895839
>their submarines are no longer safe to operate
Could have just ended it right there, tbf

File: Gimli_Shovelmaster.jpg (21KB, 263x285px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 263x285px

>>34896038
we dwarf now

>>34901317
They weren't safe to operate in the '90s because we were broken than Zimbabwe, but these days every equipment gets some form of maintenance and safety tests.

>>34899146
This
/k/ willingly took the bait for shit and giggles I hope so

>>34900011
Assuming all aircrafts were combat ready and on european soil
Not saying this whole scenario is retarded though

>>34897286
The german Luftwaffe has access to nuclear arms via NATO's nuclear arms sharing policy.
The only German nuclear base is located in Büchel Air Base, near the border with Luxembourg. The base has 11 Protective Aircraft Shelters (PAS) equipped with WS3 Vaults for storage of nuclear weapons (maximum capacity of 44).
Around 20 B61 nukes are stored there.

On top of that Germany is a "nuclear threshold state".
These countries possess the technology to quickly build nuclear weapons, without having actually yet done so. Because such latent capability is not proscribed by the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, this is sometimes called the "Japan Option".
Japan as Germany are considered paranuclear countries with complete technical prowess to develop a nuclear weapon quickly, or as it is sometimes called "being one screwdriver's turn" from the bomb.

>>34901797
I think that any country that implies being able to build a nuclear bomb should be attacked with ICBMs instantly with no early warning or anything.

>>34901832
That's it!
Hans, let's build nukes!

>>34895675
In a word: no

Russia hasn't been a global power since the 80s. They are at best a regional power. They simply do not have the force projection requirements to get very far. Their subs are obsolete and one step removed from nuclear freighters. Russia has no serious ABM capability. They have no armor safe from man-portable anti-tank weapons. Their air forces are in a word pathetic.

>>34902145
>Their subs are obsolete and one step removed from nuclear freighters.

On par with all top American subs.

>Russia has no serious ABM capability

Neither does the USA.

>They have no armor safe from man-portable anti-tank weapons.

Neither does the USA.

>Their air forces are in a word pathetic.

How many F-18s crashed this year alone again?

>>34897875
>T-34-125mod.17

Would be interesting to see in operation.

>>34898299
Many MALDs, yes.

>>34897685
It was/is a big part of NATO my dude.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_sharing
NATO allies would be home to "US" nukes, but in the event of a shooting war they would be deployed by the host countries.

File: 1502827851813.jpg (111KB, 408x408px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 408x408px

>>34897916
Is that what FOAB actually is? Paradropped Modernized T-34/75 Obr. 2017?
It all makes sense now.

Just use nukes against USA and problem solved.

>>34901473
>>34901317

Deltas are absoloutly not safe to operate and form the primary deterrence force for the Russian Federation. In the unlikely event they were put to sea they'd be glad for the Americans shadowing them, at least there'd be someone nearby to mark the location when they go down.

Dolgorukiy theoretically addresses these problems and can operate for deterrence patrols, but to avoid exposing them they haven't so far.

>>34895675
cite your sources or you are a jew
A jew is a follower of satan in human flesh
Note that the human vessel he or she is steering has a long nose, inbred genes and a thirst for free money, meaning being the unlawful middle man in a transaction of goods and wealth

Im not firing a round at a russian until every kike in the world is dead, kike babies too

>>34902188
>How many F-18s crashed this year alone again?

More than the number of hours flown by the entire Russian Air Force in the past two years combined, so...

>>34904425
>How many F-18s crashed this year alone again?
>More than the number of hours flown by the entire Russian Air Force in the past two years combined, so...
when double digit iq merican trolled himself

>>34902188
>On par with all top American subs.
Certainly not.

>Neither does the USA.
Yes we do. It's not perfect and it's for only certain stages but we have it.

>Neither does the USA.
But Javelin's are significantly better based on the fact that they're top down.

>How many F-18s crashed this year alone again?
One. It's worth noting that the Russian Air Force really doesn't do that much training. The operations in Syria are really taxxing them to their limits.

>>34897442
with how jewed america is i mightt do the same

File: lmao.png (558KB, 531x902px) Image search: [Google]

558KB, 531x902px

>>34902188
how many of your garbage su33s crashed launching from that rotting tumor of a ship Kuznetsov?

>>34897455
I'm pretty sure we share B-61's with several NATO members who fly F-16s.

>>34904817
You have to go back.

I would murder babies if Russia gave me the order

>>34895675
Wow, so the Vatniks posting on /k/ are actually high ranking Russian Generals? That's actually kind of cool.

>>34904467
>What is reading comprehension?: The post

>>34895928
>Russia destroys the entire GPS constellation of satellites

Inertial navigation was around decades before GPS. Still works fine.

>>34905160
I would murder Russia if babies gave me the order.

>>34907466
>Implying amerilards can hit anything without gps guidance

File: 1470651996848.jpg (4KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 200x200px

>>34895928

>>34895728
>Why should I trust the word of a random neckbeard on /k/ over a general?

One is a lying Russian drunk living in a psychotic fantasy. The other is not.
Hint it is not the neckbeard

>>34895858
>S-400 can shoot down any American missile or bomber.America has no defense against SS-18 "Satan" missile


Except 80s tomahawk cruise missiles in Syria. Can't do shit about those.

>>34897542

The Tornado was designed to carry us nukes

also the bundeswehr had cruise missile with nuclear warheads in the pre 89/90s

>>34897641

Retard the bundeswehr had nuclear tipped MGM 52

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/MGM-52_Lance

>>34899312

As a german i would like to kill every of those east german commie-nazi subhumans

File: IMG_0215.jpg (89KB, 300x319px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 300x319px

>>34895700
I have a hard time believing any Russian generalissimo said this; it just doesn't make sense. No one seriously believes NATO couldnt handle T-34s from WWII. Moreover, no one would seriously believe that Russia steamroll Europe with virtually no resistance.

The argument can be made that Russia could win a land war in Europe if they could eliminate resistance and push NATO into the Atlantic before the US can mobilize and bring the bulk of their forces to bear--especially considering REFORGER exercises have been kill for like 3 decades. But even that is a long shot.

>>34896160
>implying that Russia would stand alone in a Third World War

>implying that cold hard battle calculus is the deciding factor in wars

>implying that numerical/technological advantages are insurmountable by opposing forces

>>34901158
>Oh boy the "US lost in Iraq and Afghanistan" meme yet again
Even if it were true, you do realize that the Soviets lost in Afghanistan as well, right?

>>34910437
>>implying that Russia would stand alone in a Third World War

Implying there is anyone else near enough to Europe to help Moscow who also wants to die for them.

Implying wars aren't combat between systems of systems of systems and that the US hasn't focused on that since WWII.

Idiots compare tank for tank, plane for plane etc. because they are lazy, ignorant and their mind is not more than internal shitposting believed by the shitposter.

>>34908615
Why would you shoot down you ally's missiles?