Nato must prepare for Russian Blitzkrieg, warns UK generalAnonymous (ID: KhGtgWFR)
2015-02-22 12:31:48Post No. 41814947
>Nato forces must prepare for an overwhelming Blitzkrieg-style assault by Russia on an eastern European member state designed to catch the alliance off guard and snatch territory, the deputy supreme commander of the military alliance has warned.
>Openly raising the prospect of a conventional armed conflict with Russia on European soil, the remarks by Sir Adrian Bradshaw, second-in-command of Nato's military forces in Europe, are some of the most strident to date from Nato. They come amid a worsening in relations with the Kremlin just days into a second fragile ceasefire aimed at curbing continued bloodshed in Ukraine's restive east between Kiev's forces and Russian-backed separatists.
>Speaking at the Royal United Services Institute think-tank in London on Friday, Sir Adrian warned that as well as adapting to deal with subversion and other "hybrid" military tactics being used by Russia in Ukraine, allied forces needed to be prepared for the prospect of an overt invasion.
Seems unlikely. The reason the russians are still feared is because of their nukes. If they rolled into europe america wouldn't bother rushing to put boots on the ground, it would just become a drone/tactical missile battle.
Russia invading Europe would basically mean the end of Russia.
They simply do not have the manpower or technology to successfully wage a large scale ground war against NATO. They would be forced to use tactical nuclear weapons, which would open up NATO to use theirs as well, and then everyone knows what happens in that scenario.
The only way Russia would ever openly invade the west would be if they had a 100% assured way to prevent their territories from getting nuked, which is virtually impossible with mutually assured destruction.
One ballistic missile submarine would decimate and cripple the command and control capabilities of Russia, and NATO has a lot of nuclear subs...
Russias best bet would be to hope for a war to break out between China and the west, and then use than opportunity to capture territory.
>>41815089 >>41815253 I don't know whether you know it or not, but the Russians have been doing drills simulating this for years now.
>The Russian exercises Zapad 2009 and 2013 were rehearsals for a military occupation of the Baltic States with a blockade against NATO/EU assistance. The 2009 exercise ended with a simulated nuclear strike; as a de-escalation measure. Lt Gen David Deptula, the influential former USAF intelligence chief recently wrote: “It is not farfetched that at some point within the next two years [Russian President Vladimir] Putin makes a more aggressive move in Eastern Europe and uses a nuclear threat to deter a NATO response.” Clearly this would constitute a very serious threat to the Baltics. But, despite nuclear sabre-rattling from Moscow, it is by no means clear that there exists an intention to play the nuclear card. If it were to be played, it would leave Washington with only 2 options: to cede Europe to Russian influence and to see US credibility and foreign policy collapse worldwide; or to respond to the challenge.
If the West pussies out, Russians will go all the way to at least East Germany. I just imagine how Muslims in France and Britain start to riot when their dole money stops coming, instead going for the Military. War against Russians, and internal conflicts against the immigrant population.
Keep dreaming Baltic fags this will never happen. It's NATO propaganda to gain public support for expansion to Eastern Europe despite saying they wouldn't. NATO is the aggressor. Hopefully countries start leaving NATO soon
>>41815664 Kek, Russia is only making NATO more relevant and stronger. The more Russia continues to act as an aggressor, the more countries that are in NATO already realize they need it, and the more countries not yet in NATO realize they might want to join up.
>>41815524 I can't see Obama, the first black president, being the one to forever be the one who destroyed both Russia and the US in nuclear war. > He'd probably flinch and give up Europe but why shouldn't he? All the good countries in Europe became shit in the last 5 short years.
Let the Russians be their new friends, maybe they can stomp our Islam where our politically correct society can't.
>>41815768 >aggression Compared to what? America? Lol thanks to neocon hacks our foreign policy has been that of pic related. We need to look at ourselves before criticising others for responding to the actions of deliberate subversive/destabilization of governments around the world which is aggression and Ukraine is just the most recent example.
>>41815667 >We do the same drills. No we don't, I've taken part in them. Our drills simulate defence against an invasion. See Steadfast Jazz 2013 for more.
>>41815664 >It's NATO propaganda to gain public support for expansion to Eastern Europe despite saying they wouldn't. Can you seriously give source to this "saying they won't" crap? An actual document saying that, signet by NATO members of the time?
>NATO is the aggressor. Its easy for you to say, you don't have Russia breaking your airspace everyday. In 2014 allied aircraft intercepted Russian planes over 400 times, with 150 of these interceptions being carried out by NATO’s Baltic Air Policing Mission - almost four times as many as in 2013.
>>41815853 >maybe they can stomp our Islam where our politically correct society can't. You haven't been to Moscow, have you? Its full of muzzies. This "Russia will stop Islam" shit makes me laugh every time. See http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/01/19/us-france-shooting-chechnya-idUSKBN0KS0M720150119
>>41815927 >I know nothing about history or politics in Europe. I'm anti-imperialist
Although I might understand that your adventures in the Middle-east were a mistake, that cost the lifes of our soldiers as well, you can't say the same about the situation with Russia. You have treaty obligations towards us. We helped you after you got attacked on 9/11, we sent our troops to Afghanistan and some of them died there. When we get attacked, we expect the same from you. Oh, and please don't tell me you're a 9/11 troofer.
>>41816062 >I have personally taken part in every NATO drill ever
Fuck off retard. When the USSR collapsed Russia stopped doing drills. NATO kept doing them and expanding towards Russia.
>>41816062 >Its easy for you to say, you don't have Russia breaking your airspace everyday. In 2014 allied aircraft intercepted Russian planes over 400 times, with 150 of these interceptions being carried out by NATO’s Baltic Air Policing Mission - almost four times as many as in 2013.
Citation needed that Russia is breaking some law or violation.
You're nothing but a brainwashed warmongering moron
>>41816176 where did I say anything about Russians not breaking US and Canada's airspace? Of course they do, but not nearly as often as they do here. Which is almost daily. Now they've started to do flyovers over Britain as well. You still think its just by accident?
>>41816336 > You have treaty obligations towards us. We helped you after you got attacked on 9/11, we sent our troops to Afghanistan and some of them died there. When we get attacked, we expect the same from you.
Sure, of course! However if YOU get attacked your country needs to step the fuck up and pull it's own weight first just like America did in Iraq.
What we have happening in Europe is that nations are cutting military spending and using that money on welfare and handouts and expecting America to be able to do nearly all of the heavy work if they are attacked.
That's completely retarded and it mean's America is gonna have to step in a THIRD time in Europe's shitty mistakes.
I truly believe that even if NATO went into full hot war with Putin, there would be substantial chunks of the population (alienated little fags) sitting around on the internet, still shilling and sucking his balls.
They would end up in internment camps for treason, still crying 'b-but muh freedom of speech, h-how did this ever happen.'
>>41815232 No, this is how we fix everything. A shitty horrible war that last years and no one wanted. SJW's are killed within the first few years of the War, so when it's finally finished we'll have 60+ glorious years of post-War wunderlife.
>>41816442 >Nobody is willing to go to World War 3 over [insert country here] Ukraine, Latvia Then it will be Poland, Germany, Finland, eventually getting to Britain and the US, but "no one will be willing to go to war over them"
>>41816488 >What we have happening in Europe is that nations are cutting military spending and using that money on welfare and handouts Actually we have been raising our defence budgets here in the Baltics and we will continue to do so. But its unrealistic for us to defend against Russia long term when the time comes.
>Russia pushes into Europe >NATO declares war >Western economy collapses as capital flight takes place since nobody wants to keep assets in what is a big nuclear target
They know it'll happen so they won't declare war, much cheaper to face the humiliation of Russia taking over the Baltics before inevitably collapsing due to internal issues in a few decades without a single shot being fired by the western powers.
>>41816755 No it is reality. CIA has been directly responsible for the destabilizing of dozens of nations and starting of hundreds of conflicts both small and large http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4068.htm
>>41815089 >>41815121 >>41815253 >knowing this little about post-1949 strategy The threat to the Baltics (at a minimum) is very real. Thanks to Obammie's waffling, the Russians no longer believe that the US is willing to risk full-scale nuclear war to protect the Baltic States, or even Poland.
Now factor in the reality that Russia has a massive superiority in tactical nuclear capability (we're talking brand new SRBMs on the Russian side vs. a handful of old gravity bombs left over from the 80s on NATO's side) it leaves a tremendous opportunity for the Russians to drop a tactical nuke on Vilnius or Warsaw and dare the US to respond. If the US responds conventionally, it runs the risk of escalating into a tactical nuclear war where the Russians have a huge advantage. The US can try to pretend that they're going to DEFCON 1, but the Russians will just call our bluff and invade the rest of eastern Europe.
tl;dr - shit's a lot more fucked than it seems on the surface
Putin's plan is to destroy NATO by forcing member states to violate Article 5. They're not going to agree to go to war with Russia to protect a poor eastern European country. Countries will start pulling out of NATO because they recognize it will not protect them.
Nobody has explained to me where the fucking profit is for Russia to take the baltics.
Crimea makes sense, it has Russian deep-water ports and military bases capable of housing 16,000 soldiers full-time, along with 2 million + Russian citizens who have wanted to be part of the mainland for over 2 decades.
Donetsk makes sense, it's Ukraine's industrial capital, including military industry which Russia still relies on for its own arms, protecting it against EU and IMF meddling is perfectly reasonable.
What's there to take in Estonia? What do they have other than 4 million people who hate you?
>>41816946 Except since the cold war, this is literally how war with larger nations works. It's a system of bluff calling and knocking off allied countries. We've been going after countries allied with Russia for a long time now.
>>41817108 It's a way to break up NATO more than anything else. Putin, being the spymaster he is, isn't going to do this for a quick buck like Saddam in '91. It will be the coup de grace that carves a new Russian sphere of influence across Europe.
>The Kremlin’s intentions in the Baltic States are also quite different from those in Ukraine and other former states of the USSR. Russia does not expect the Baltics suddenly to have a change of heart and to vote for the Eurasian Union. However, pliant countries which look to Russia as their big brother, inside NATO and the EU, would be very useful. If, on the other hand, internal or external pressures on the Kremlin forced it to look for military solutions, then a defeat of NATO would be the ultimate success, removing Russia’s enemy and the perceived tool of US foreign policy. Such a defeat is conceivable if Article 5 of the Washington Treaty were to be shown to be ineffective. This is only possible in the Baltics where NATO is reluctant to station troops permanently and where Russia has at its disposal overwhelming conventional forces.
Yeah, I'll take seriously somebody that can't express himself in English sentences.
Yesterday I watched a completely mainstream BBC doc about the history of oil, which went to the National Security Archives, and read the files on the illegal coup launched against Iran in the 1950's, by the CIA, Eisenhower, and Churchill. These are banalities, not shocking facts.
You are not special, the things you know are not special.
The rest of what you believe is this: 'the Ukraine is not a sovereign nation, it's Putin's chew toy, hail Putin.' Pathetic power worship for it's own sake.
2pac aliv and real strong wizard kill all the ukrop farm aminal with rap magic now we the donetsk rule .ape of the zoo presidant husein obongo fukc the great satan and lay egg this egg hatch and poroshenko wa;s born. stupid baby form the eggn give bak our clay we will crush u lik a skull of pig. russia greattst countrey
>>41817452 >The rest of what you believe is this: 'the Ukraine is not a sovereign nation There was no issue until the american lead overthrow of a sovereign government of which Russia is responding to as any nation in the world would.
The idea that Putin is le ebin aggressor is simply not true
It's been done to death, nothing I say will change your mind. For all I know you're a paid Putin shill, so why would I even bother? THAT is the interesting thing at the moment, how his super-shill army have actually damaged the cause. He seems to have launched a second wave as well, thanks Putin.
Keep it as an internet hobby though, you don't want to start spouting this bullshit in public. Good luck anyway.
Poland could hold its own against Russia, yes it would be a bloodbath if they had to go it alone but they could do it.
I'm trying not to sound cold but their really is no other way to do it. Poland has a very large population of males that are moving west to look for work with the amount of aid and weapons they would get even if the rest of the west stayed out of it they could cut unemployment and grow their army into a force to be reckoned with. Not to say that in the case of a defensive war they couldn't hold their own tomorrow, Poland has a highly trained military even if it isn't the biggest and believe it or not has decent equipment to use.
That being said Poland would never go it alone, the US has a large population of people who are expatriates or people of Polish descent and the dems would not risk losing them and having to deal with another ethnicity that could help swing state elections like in Florida. Plus Poland had our back in recent conflicts and their is no way the US would betray them especially as the world continues to destabilize.
>>41814947 >Nato forces must prepare for an overwhelming Blitzkrieg-style assault by Russia on an eastern European member state designed to catch the alliance off guard and snatch territory, the deputy supreme commander of the military alliance has warned
He's serious? Not even crazed, yo.
Sure, Russia will do that. After NATO has declared war on Russia. But then it wouldn't be a surprise.
>>41818330 Did I say Russia would invade no, it is highly unlikely especially given the situation in Chechnya and the other Muslim dominant republics. That is not even taking into account their precarious economic situation.
>>41818004 >anyone who points out the fact that the situation in Ukraine was started by the west for their benefit against Russia and further expansion to the east and Putin reacting to it must be a shill.
>>41816336 Topkek. I served in the army, still am a reserve. Let me just make this clear: NO-ONE, absolutely NO-ONE would come to the aid of Latvia or any of the other shithole Baltic states. Poland? Sure. Latvia? Lol. Even Finland and Sweden, both non-NATO countries stand a better chance getting help in case of an invasion. Sorry m8, but that's the truth. No point in lying to ourselves.
>>41818004 >A Brit in charge of being objective about Russia
Dunno what it is, but you all have been acting absolutely hysterical about Putin.
Russia's doing nothing but trying to show the world it can play the same game the US has been playing all these decades since the fall of the wall.
This shit is ridiculous, the West is polarized into two extreme responses: Spinelessness and Hysteria. Constant eastward expansion of NATO and US soft diplomacy caused Russia to bite back, this should not be so shocking to people.
The fact that Russia's aggression is so unanticipated is more worrying than the aggression itself, I'm more concerned about US/UK/NATO leadership than Putin at this point.
>>41818405 You're not the solely reason why neither findland nor sweden joined Nato is because joining it means that you have to buy american military hardware which compromises both finland and sweden researchs into this area.
>>41819612 >UK posters are too loyal to their treasonous government. You can be proud of your country without sucking up to the traitors running the show. It's like another form of cuckoldry. Or in other words, we learned from WW2 and see the parallels now.
>>41819181 Even Henry Kissinger has said the coup in Ukraine was foolish and that NATO started this. He wouldn't go so far as to praise Russia, but he made it clear NATO is the aggressor here. When Henry Kissinger thinks you've gone too far...
Finland and Sweden have been thinking about joining forces for quite some time and something like this is just used as means to get that military union started. This is mainly done to save fucktons of money for both of the countries.
In this military union, Finland basically provides the ground forces while Sweden provides the planes and ships. That way we don't have to buy that expensive equipment.
For example, our air force is a complete joke. We have only a handful of planes and half of them are old training jets that don't even have radars installed. We would need to buy dozens of new planes if we were to modernize the air force, but that's simply out of the question. We can't sink billions into that.
Sverige could provide these planes basically for free if we were to join forces.
>>41816826 Can someone explain to me why the Russians would want to occupy the Baltics? How would they deal with the entire population being against them? It's plain stupid - typical Western fear mongering so people can forget about the real (economic) trouble.
>>41820035 >Can someone explain to me why the Russians would want to occupy the Baltics? Why did they want to occupy them last time? >How would they deal with the entire population being against them? They wouldn't. Sizeable minorities in each state would be sympathetic if not supportive. For the rest, then fear would take care of them like it did the first and second times they were occupied by Russia. >It's plain stupid - typical Western fear mongering so people can forget about the real (economic) trouble. Or alternatively, those who support Russia's aggressions would like us to believe that it's just fearmongering so that we will drop our guard.
this, they already have enough land for them, occupying some shitty countries full of pesky immigrants and natives that hate you is just a pain to deal with when baltics don't provide any good economical advantage >hurr please don't forget russia is bad it will occupy us
>>41820260 >this, they already have enough land for them, occupying some shitty countries full of pesky immigrants and natives that hate you is just a pain to deal with when baltics don't provide any good economical advantage The previous occupations of the Baltic states by Russia never happened then.
>>41820322 >I'm worried the "global elite" is preparing for a third world war in order to thin the herd How would the "global elite" benefit from a nuclear war in which they would suffer just as much as everyone else?
>>41820214 >>41820278 But please share your expert knowledge on the Baltics. Last time was in WW2, they took them because the language was almost the same and because the Soviet army had to push to Germany. >Herp but Soviet Union hungry for territory Then why didn't they include Poland/Czech Republic/Romania/Bulgaria right into the USSR?
There's absolutely no advantage for Russia to invade the Baltics. Not even one. If you can think of any, please explain them.
>>41814947 it feels like things are getting boring again in the news
>some dumb virus outbreaks that barely kill anything in asia >pointless theory crafting by msm with russia
nothing is happening, nothing is interesting, the cold war nuclear standoff only has increased in complexity and increased in the nations involved. No wars will happen between these nations. Just fucking stop worrying already you dumb fucks.
>>41820387 You seem very desperate to convince everyone that Russia poses no threat to the Baltic states. I wonder why. However, history is not on your side. Russia has a history of fucking over the Baltic states and as soon as they were able to escape Russia's hold over them, they aligned themselves more with Europe and NATO. Maybe you ought to travel to the Baltic countries and explain to everyone how foolish they are to be suspicious of Russia given the history of Russia treating them like shit.
>>41820509 Since Russia has far more Muslims than any other European state, your post made me laugh a little bit. >implies that the choice for Europe is either Muslims, niggers and feminists, or conquest by Russia.
>>41820598 >You seem very desperate to convince everyone that Russia poses no threat to the Baltic states
No, I'm trying to understand your (and your Knight General's) reasons. I can't see a reason why they would invade them in the 21st century. Economic reasons? The Baltics are a burden. Geopolitical? The Russians already have the Baltic fleet. Ethnic? The borders are more or less open.
You on the other hand refuse to give any arguments at all. All you do is repeat the same thing over and over again >it's happened before it will happen again guys srsly Give me a few solid arguments or stop shilling
Russia doesn't have the capabilities for that. In a conflict they'd get stuck in Poland on their way to europe. only nukes could win this and after that everybody looses. Also europe in total war mode would go all sowjet union on Russias ass. Not even counting big brother merica with his fat fucking cock
>>41820762 Besides that all of this shit is Nato sounding the war drums so people buy more expensive toys. I'm not a fan of putin but everybody seriously thinking he wants a war with europe / nato is just a retard
>>41820678 Does the Russian government actively push for immigration from Muslim countries or nigger ones? No. Is Russia in bed with Saudi Arabia and Qatar and therefore allows them to fund mosques within its territory and spread Islam? Nope. Point dismissed.
>implies that the choice for Europe is either Muslims, niggers and feminists, or conquest by Russia.
Fortunately it's not. Europe needs to be free, from both Russia and the US. Now we are puppets of the US and that's ruining the continent, Russia is willing to help us getting rid of the American yoke, I don't see why turning away their help.
>>41820693 >I can't see a reason why they would invade them in the 21st century. Putin will check with you to see if you can see what he is doing before he will invade them. If you still don't understand by that time, then he'll call the invasion off.
I suggest that you go and have a big think about the way Putin's mind operates.
I don't go into much detail because I'm fully aware that there are paid Russian shills here (pointless arguing with them because they are being paid to embarrass themselves) and there are the edgy types who believe every word the paid shills say (pointless arguing with them because they employ a kind of religious-style thinking).
Suspicion that Putin has designs on the Baltic states is quite logical and reasonable. It may be that nothing will happen, but if something does happen then it pays to have considered that eventuality before it occurs and to prepare for it.
>>41820747 >To say that Russia would start a war with a country legally binded to a nuclear power is insanity. With the Baltic states, it's more likely that Putin will send in agents to stir things up so that the Russian populations of those countries can claim they are being "oppressed", just like he did in Ukraine, so that he has an excuse to arm them and to send in his troops who he will then claim are "on vacation", just like he has done in Ukraine.
It won't be an obvious invasion with tanks rolling across the borders firing their guns.
>>41820747 >To say that Russia would start a war with a country legally binded to a nuclear power is insanity.
Nukes are not an infallible invasion shield. They help a lot, sure, but if you rely on them completely to the point of not having a coherent response should they decide to invade then you are in for a bad time. Imagine the scenario - they actually do invade. What are you going to do about it? Commit suicide and hope they die too?
>>41819920 Just saying when a man as fucked as Kissinger is openly calling your actions stupid and reckless you need to take a look in the mirror.
At least he understood that the west cN get away with this shit in 3rd world isolated nations but doing it to the neighbor if a world power and not expecting them to try and secure their interest retard tier >>41820018 >increases the chance of a greater war down the line.
Hence Putin's response.
If irony was batter we would have pancakes to feed all of Africa for a day
>>41820968 Lol from the South? Where? Iran? Nope. Turkey? Definitely no. Azers? Neither. Kazaks? Pretty much the only ''safe'' Muslims.
Compared to: Lybians, Nigerians, Algerians, Turkish, Arabs, Moroccans, Pakis that flood Europe on daily basis. Not even close dude. And yes, the UK is by far the biggest cuck country in Europe. Not Russia, not even France that at least has a possibility of fixing things with FN, not even Sweden Yes that has SD.
UK is the lapdog of America and cucked by Pakistan, Arabs and Nigerians. ''Bohoho but Russia.... ''. Nope.
>>41821076 >A new regime that would re-start selling oil in USD (and not Euros). All the rhetoric for regime change existed before the Euro even existed and those that were pushing for war were the people who wrote this rhetoric and have been pushing for regime change for over a decade.
Gaddafi was about him making a debt free prosperous nation.
Saddam was about Zionist neocons and waging war on Israeli behalf. This cabal called themselves PNAC.
Seriously they wrote a paper titled "how to attack Iraq" before the euro even existed and even pushed Bush Sr to go unto Iraq in 1991 but Bush understood that it would turn into a quagmire and a drain on our forces.so he didn't do it.
>>41814947 One of the best ways to revive an ailing economy is to grab lands and resources from neighboring regions via war. The war itself props up the economy and the foreign resources sustain it. Putin needs something like this right now to recover credibility and get Russia out of the ditch economically.
FUCK YOU RUSSIA FUCK YOU RUSSIA FUCK YOU RUSSIA FUCK YOU RUSSIA FUCK YOU RUSSIA FUCK YOU RUSSIA FUCK YOU RUSSIA FUCK YOU RUSSIA FUCK YOU RUSSIA FUCK YOU RUSSIA FUCK YOU RUSSIA FUCK YOU RUSSIA FUCK YOU RUSSIA FUCK YOU RUSSIA FUCK YOU RUSSIA
Russia taking action to secure the industrial half of Ukraine and Crimea for its all seasons port makes sense. Taking the Baltic doesn't. They already have Kaliningrad and no amount of Westward Nato dickery will change that.
>>41821701 >Russia taking action to secure the industrial half of Ukraine and Crimea for its all seasons port makes sense.
They already controlled Ukraine. Covert influence was insufficient to satisfy them. The Russians are motivated by more than wealth and strategic security, they possess a burning desire to control their former subjects. Their leader is desperate to resurrect the Soviet Union.
>They already have Kaliningrad
The Russian do not care about Kaliningrad. They were willing to give it to the Germans for debt relief in 2001. The Germans looked at the place and declined - it is a shithole.
They did, then the country overthrew their government and moved to join the EU (with the help of a lot of shady back room stuff from the west). This meant Russia would lost their port in Crimea. They took it back. Everyone started crying.
>>41822022 >This meant Russia would lost their port in Crimea.
Untrue. The Russians were there until 2047 at the earliest. There was never any unrest in Ukraine - the idea the Russians would have somehow been evicted is a lie. Closer ties with the EU utterly preclude it, although it is nonsense from all angles.
>then the country overthrew their government and moved to join the EU
This means the Russian investments in the country would increase in value massively. It would be a back door to the European common market, without accepting EU regulations, immigration and labour market rules. EU trade agreements for Ukraine meant a bonanza for Russia - a barely regulated eastern European version of Hong Kong on the doorstep, which they already had their claws into.
It was never about the money, or strategic security. Neither were threatened, both were improved by the Yanukovych removal. We are not dealing with rational concerns by rational people - the Russians want to dominate, control, humiliate.
>Warns UK general I bet their army is just like their navy where they have 10x more admirals than they have command posts for them. Generals are always war drum beating alarmist hacks anyway. Might as well be asking /pol/ if its happening.
>>41815089 When someone threatens you with nukes, the best solution is to call their bluff and blast them.
Our biggest threat is Russia re-arming by bringing many of their missiles out of retirement. We MUST nuke them before they have a chance to double or triple their active nuclear arsenal since we all know what Russia would do if they had a 3:1 nuclear advantage.
>>41822478 >Generals are always war drum beating alarmist hacks anyway. Generals know whats going on. Sometimes, when you have a really really good hammer, it also just so happens that some of our problems ARE nails and need to be whacked.
>>41822568 Russia was smart, they got into the civilian satellite launching industry and now the Proton is the more common way to loft commercial satellites into orbit. It gave russia money and experience to develop the proton into a more effective ICBM and work on the Bulava. The USA only has the Minuteman III and the Trident. They're ancient. Nobody wants to launch a satellite via ULA because of the piss poor launch record.
>>41823051 So what? We are neutral, we don't pick sides and we don't judge. It's not our business if the rest of the world can't live peacefully. We just profit from it. Remember, guns don't kill people.
>>41823118 Switzerland is like North Korea: all your buildings and bridges and shit on your border are rigged with explosives so you can murder large numbers of your citizens in scorched earth tactics.
>>41822478 Yeah, our army is still very top heavy. We don't learn from history apparantly. The only reason the country hasn't fallen yet is due to the army's remarkable ability to rapidly get it's shit together after a major disaster jerks everyone awake.
Until then, our politicians, left and right, treat the armed forces as a piggy bank to be raided for fund for whatever pet project they think will win them votes and the MOD would prefer to cut away experienced NCOs rather than trim the bloated officer cadre.
>>41817565 That's just exploiting a FIFA rule Since their grandparents were around for the French Colonial times, they get to claim being French when the youth national team scouts give them the opportunity to play for France instead of Ivory Coast or Ghana. Shit America uses Mexicans, Germans, Norwegians, and whatever Freddy Adu was. England uses, Scots, Welsh, Irish, and Jamacians. Russia fucking gave Viktor Ahn a passport for the Olympics so he'd get better speed skating training.
And the KGB/FSB, which has been doing this kind of thing for longer, as the NKVD, has had zero impact on the state of current affairs? While I've respect your point, I think you might be a self loathing American that has been a victim of the incredible freedom of speech in your country.
>>41814947 Russia is strengehting troops in Crimea,Arctic and Kalinigrad enclave as part of their new defence plan and pumping $310bn extra into defence. They're also merging the air force with the space force into a new single organisation.
>>41815121 Why not? NATO is nowhere near as strong as you think. The UK power is non existent,the other countries are apathetic. NATO is literally the American foreign legion that just happens to use a broken swastika as its symbol.
>>41815089 Depends on how Russia treats the Muslims, if they treat them badly every single Jihadist organization is going to attack Russia, and they are going to see a lot of recruits, as well as more organizations propping up in Europe to fight Russia.
Also any of you chuckle fucks thinks US will do anything if russia does the same separatist creep into the baltic states are morons. War is political suicide for at least 10 more years in US thanks to dubya and his adventurism. we wouldnt do shit because who wants to send their kids to die in fucking latvia or lithuania. Politicians know beating the war drum will get them voted out/shouted down by other pols and pundits on TV.
>>41827831 Everyone knows that. That's the cost of doing the right thing.
Dead hand can only take out 150,000,000 Americans top. Its a huge cost but most of them are liberals so its not like that many humans will die as a result. In reality, it will probably never even go over 80,000,000 due to a combination of the arms reduction treaties coupled with the state of their weapons.
Also, probability is that most of Russia's missiles won't even hit America due to them being old as shit.
Yeah, nuclear war has its costs but the greater cost is born in doing nothing and letting Russia build more missiles so they can kill more Americans in the nuclear strike that everyone knows is inevitable either way.
>>41828664 >Also, probability is that most of Russia's missiles won't even hit America due to them being old as shit. This. Russians are always talking about their "advance" military. Truth is they couldn't take on 70,000 sand niggers running around in pajamas and sandals in Afghanistan.
>>41828664 Can you imagine the condition of the environment if 80,000,000 die in a nuclear strike of some sort. That's enough nuclear mess to give everyone in the northern hemisphere a rough time. At least another 80 million would die in the following months alone from starvation, cold, disease and social chaos.
>>41828807 We actually have the money to keep our missiltry up and running.
Out Trident 2 system is very new (1990) and out older Minuteman 3 system, while started in the 1970s, is highly modified. We rely on only 2 long-range missiles while the Russians rely on at least 10 different kinds which they don't upkeep. This means that our system may not be the most diverse but it works. The Russian system is just a numerous hodgepodge of shit with massive missiles like the SS-18 Satan (the thing that will kill NYC) and some smaller pieces of crap that are weak.
By having only 2 types of long range missiles, our nuclear forces are simplified and perfect for firing the first strike.
Also, due to the fact that our nuclear forces were full of people snorting lines off of the missiles and shit, we've improved our nuclear forces where all Russia has done is build more missiles while the same drunk fucks are manning their strategic forces. This means that our forces are less likely to fail on us than theirs will to them.
>>41828885 No one said their rockets suck. Hell, the SS-18 is impressive. Its their system and their level of upkeep that's the problem. Its like assault rifles: they may have the AK-47 which is a great gun but we can use the cheaper and shittier AR-15 more effectively since we can upkeep our weapons and fix them instead of just relying on their construction.
They have nice missiles but I doubt they'll work when its time.
We don't take over territory since we're not a territorial empire like the Soviet Union.
We put Afghanistan in the hands of the Northern Alliance (i.e. the people who now make up its major political parties) and Jordan and the United States are trying to make sure that Pakistan and Iranistan, the two countries that want hegemonic control over Afghanistan, can't use proxies to topple the Afghan government. So far, we've been pretty successful since we kept Afghanistan in the hands of Afghans and have since turned them into an ally of ours.
Our fuck up was Iraq but that's only because of its close ties with Iran - something Afghanistan doesn't have a huge problem with due to its strategic worthlessness in Iran's mind. Iraq is more contnetious because its is the "front" between the Arab Sunni lands and the Persian Shiite land. Since Iraqistan becoming either is an existential threat to the other, both sides are turning it into a shithole just like the Prisoner's Dilemma suggests they would.
Think about this: We got the Northern Alliance to sit down and become political parties and give up their lives of being warlords. That's a pretty big accomplishment unless you don't know jack shit about this war and just bitch about how ineffective we are at annexing land as if we were Russian scum.
TL;DR Russia couldn't annex Afghanistan. We chose not to and we got the warlords to become political parties.
>>41829194 ICBM testing, research and production is still very much a thing. They'll work. They have massive amount of experience with rocketry, as does the US. Don't fool yourself. If the time comes, missiles will hit their targets.
>>41829071 >Can you imagine the condition of the environment if 80,000,000 die in a nuclear strike of some sort. Would barely notice it considering that i'm not near any large cities. It would just be the major cities and military bases so its not like more than 1% of the country would actually get nuked. > That's enough nuclear mess to give everyone in the northern hemisphere a rough time. No its not. We've already exploded more shit than this nuclear war would be. Modern missiles are rarely over 1MT due to our reliance on MIRV systems. The main effect would be the American people coming together much like on 9/11 except on a massive scale. >At least another 80 million would die in the following months alone from starvation, cold, disease and social chaos. Nope, nope, and nope. America has farms and tons of stored carbohydrates in the midwest. We won't starve since we aren't shitty euros who don't know how to farm. >cold No big deal. We have trees and other shit to burn. >Social Chaos Yeah, like on 9/11 when firefighters shot civilians? Ha, there wouldn't be jack shit. The only people who could cause chaos (i.e. city people) would mostly be dead. Americans would come together, not try to kill eachother off since we're not like euros with ethnic issues. >disease Except population density would fall drastically
You seem to care a lot about the liberals who would be killed off in a nuclear war. I have family that would die but it would be for the greater good.
>>41829194 Wtf are you on about? There's a reason why Obomba and your government gonna spend $1.2 trillion over 10 years to upgrade the nuclear arsenals and boosting morale of the troops handling the launcher platforms/arsenals.
The Satan missile is not only impressive, it's the best ICBM on earth and they got more than enough ICBM/Submarine/Silos launchers to take down the world with them, if of course a war does break out. Don't use CoD(PC games)/Movies as a military source for real life, pls.
>>41829550 Even with 100% success, they won't be able to kill off over 70% tops. It would take probably at least 100X more missiles to get to 90% and at least a 10,000 missiles to kill off all Americans.
Taking out city centers is easy but Suburbs would be harder to kill and rural areas + small towns would be impossible to take out without having millions of missiles.
Russia's goal would be to use redundancy rather than risking letting a couple cities survive while going after small towns.
Also, remember this German: Nuclear war with Russia WILL happen, its just better that it happens while they have only about 1000-1500 ICBMs rather than when they get 10,000 online like they used to.
i'd rather have hundreds of millions of people die than be a smug liberal asshole, hold off for now, and let billions of people die 5 years from now. We must nuke Russia now for the sake of her potential victims.
>Civil War in Ukraine with Russian backed separatists >Russia Invasion of Estonia
Tom Clancy called it years ago, before he died, his last published novel is exactly about what's going on now, and "Vladamir Volodin" the Russian President in the Novel is a thinly veiled Putin in every respect (including killing a former Russian spy by poisoning him with Polonium-210)
>>41829973 tactical importance is irrelevant to the common man, aside from the needing-to-get-the-fuck-out factor Augusta is a beautiful city, even if it's tiny I'd rather be surrounded by white people who know how to live off the land when society breaks down, anyways
>>41830056 >not Cold War 2: Invisible War ya blew it in all seriousness I hope the next Deus Ex comes out before the apocalypse, I need my post-American cyberpunk fix
>>41830017 1. Who says that Russia want to nuke you? Drop the fucking cold war talk crazy american. 2. It's 2015, a nuclear war now would ruin the fucking earth. 3. You provide wrong information about the current arsenals, missiles, etc. 4. You are stupid.
>>41830054 >Have you thought even for a second, that maybe Russia doesnt want to nuke us, and you might be calling for nuclear war for absolutely no good reason you fucking psychopath 1) According to Game Theory, even if they don't want to do so, they still might due to their fear of us doing so. 2) Technical factors and 3rd parties working to incite a nuclear war could cause an attack. Just look how many near-misses there've already been. 3) Russia DOES want to nuke us. We're the only thing in their way to getting what they want. The only reason why they haven't is due to their knowledge that they would be fucked. If they feel they're fucked anyways, they would nuke us. Russians are the same fuckheads who were pushing leftism and communism in America and giving ICBMs to fucking Cuba. 4) If there is political or social instabilitiy in Russia, then the probability of a nuclear strike goes up. A coup might result in a nuclear strike from delusional Russians thinking CIA is trying to "Kiev" Moscow. 5) America and Russia are incomparable. Either one goes or the other or they both die. Due to the relative lack of active ICBMs recently, its entirely possible for America to survive but its impossible for Russia to live. Destroying the Russian Federation is in the best interests of the world and many of the various ethnic groups who are entrapped by Russia (chechens, etc). 6) Nuclear war is inevitable and arms reduction treaties, like I said, make nuclear war at least survivable. We should take advantage of this window of opportunity so that we don't have the war occur when Russia is well armed and actual nuclear holocaust occurs. 7) The Russian Federation must be destroyed. Its holding the world back, supporting Shiite terrorism which is keeping the Muslims from becoming moderate, and its causing pointless tension and waste in the world. A nuclear war could cure this cancer and keep China in line by removing their potential ally and tool.
>>41829732 The radioactivity alone would kill the rest. Even if we ignore fallout and the long term effects of your poisoned continent, killing even just 40mil citizens is enough to make your nation irrelevant for a century or so. No government on earth can take such a catastrophe. There'd be a change in political power at the very least, possible even several follow up states to the US. Even if your leaders manage to salvage your political structures soonish, the loss in population and the effort required to rebuilt and cleanse your land ends the global presence of US. There's just no way you'd be the important global player you are today after a nuclear war. This also goes for Russia in the event of nuclear war and quite possible Europe too.
>>41830078 Newsflash: with far fewer nukes than in the 1980s due to START and SORT treaties. There's a big difference between a nuclear war in the 1980s and today due to all the treaties.
You're using your ignorance of the present state of the worlds' nuclear arsenals as justification for your ignorant anti-nuclear-war stance.
Yeah, I know you euros are fucked since its probably illegal in your countries for you to live in small towns or in rural areas but America isn't like that. We aren't all jammed into large cities and the ones who are are expendable.
>>41830144 >1. Who says that Russia want to nuke you? Game Theory, common sense, and Russia's attitude towards nuclear war and war in general. Russians are a paranoid bunch as outlined by George Kennan in the "long Telegram". They WILL nuke America if they can get away with it or if they feel that they're going to be fucked otherwise. Considering that a conventional war over the shit they're starting WILL result in their dissolution due to their demographic issues, they WILL have the just reason to launch the missiles. >Drop the fucking cold war talk crazy american. 1) The Cold War never ended 2) Americans aren't crazy. We run the world and have kept you fags so safe you get to abandon your national interests and instead experiment with faggotry due to us footing the bill for your defense. >2. It's 2015, a nuclear war now would ruin the fucking earth. No it wouldn't. 1) Modern ICBM warheads are smaller than old-time nuclear bombs 2) Nuclear winter and all the other "earth will end if X" bullshit has been nothing more than Cold War propaganda from the Soviets to get Americans to unilaterally disarm. We won't know how bad nuclear war is until we try it. >3. You provide wrong information about the current arsenals, missiles, etc. I don't know the numbers off the top of my head but I'm well aware of the aprox. number. Here's the numbers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_START
>4. You are stupid. No, you are foreigner and, considering that feminists have probably made it illegal for you fags to leave your large cities, you're all going to be turned to charcoal and the world will rejoice.
God will save us and let you burn: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-5i4ZGVQGa8
>>41830155 >Columbus, Wisconsin did (which has like 5k and absolutely no strategic value, as far as I know) It must have access to a river or something. Its just like that shithole Duluth (which I hope suffers as it dies) which is only targeted due to its port at the mouth of the St. Louis.
>>41830454 >The radioactivity alone would kill the rest. No it wouldn't. High levels of Alpha and Beta particles would be deadly but they're the easiest to avoid and usually have very short half-lives. Also, modern bombs are relatively "clean" in that they don't leave tons of radiation like the older kinds (i.e. like Hiroshima where humans have "never" moved back). >killing even just 40mil citizens is enough to make your nation irrelevant for a century or so. No its not. This isn't europe where the deaths of a large number of civilians will result in getting gange-raped by neighbors. America is still strong enough to survive and our power comes from our control of the oceans; something that isn't going to end due to a nuclear war. >There'd be a change in political power at the very least, possible even several follow up states to the US. We're not a multinational shithole like european countries are and thus won't have such regime changes. Even if there is regime change, it will be based on our original system. Also, no one has any reason to break up the country right after the country as a whole has been attacked. A post Treaty-of-Versalles-German like yourself should know what happens when an entire country gets attacked; people come together.
I'm happy Berlin will get fried though and then gang-raped by various european national groups.
>>41830454 >There's just no way you'd be the important global player you are today after a nuclear war. Everyone else would be brought down by a few pegs too. There's no way Russia would let you eurofuckers have the right to gang-rape their "motherland" and thus you can expect probably 1/3 to 1/2 of their missiles raining down on your cities. It'll be nice having europe taking a bunch of the shots for us but the european populations will fracture on ethnic lines like never before. The Prisoner's Dilemma, brought out by the mutual fear and lack of restraint, will cause endless bloodshed in europe from euros themselves. >This also goes for Russia in the event of nuclear war and quite possible Europe too. Which is why America will be the first to bounce back. Without any competition, coupled with our relative lack of national division in our country, America will be able to bounce back and restore order faster than anyone else. Wanna invade us? Guess who didn't get wiped out: the right-wing gun owners of America who will cause the American percentage of gun owners to skyrocket when the missiles land. America will be the best defended and most powerful country following the war.
oh, and Russia will also nuke China for obvious reasons.
Please support this website by donating Bitcoins to 16mKtbZiwW52BLkibtCr8jUg2KVUMTxVQ5 If a post contains copyrighted or illegal content, please click on that post's [Report] button and fill out a post removal request
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows an archive of their content. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.