"What if" we all woke up tomorrow at war with Russia

[Akagi]

I'd break my legs to avoid conscription.

 

[anything I don't mind]

Seriously though. I think infantry in ww3 will be a disaster compared to previous wars. I think we would see mass evacuations like we have never seen in the history of the world, if serious war broke out. There is not underground bunkers for 50 million that i am aware of.

I would fight if infantry invaded but I doubt they would, it would just be remote rockets and air attacks.

 

[neil3k]

What exactly would happen though? In a ground war with Russia we would fair worse than Ukraine, in an air war we would be annihilated. Aside from rattling a sceptre the is nothing we can do to them so they probably would just ignore us lol.

We can't nuke them because we don't have enough to cause massive damage and they would nuke us back completely obliterating us.

They can't nuke us because we would nuke them back and they would miss a couple of major cities. Plus the would be no point in nuking us, because if our ships/planes/troops have been sent to the theatre of battle then we have nothing left here anyway.

so much incorrectness.

The Trident II submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM) can be armed with up to 12 W88 warheads (Mark 5 re-entry vehicle) or 12 100 kt W76 warheads (Mark 4 re-entry vehicle), but it is limited to 8 warheads under the Strategic Offensive Reductions Treaty.

Each sub has 16 missiles and we have three submarines. As Hiroshima KT yield was 13-18 and these put out 475kt.

Hopefully they never get used though.

 

[Andybtsn]

Hide under the bed.

 

[Castiel]

Buy a new blanket and prepare for a new 50 year Cold War. Because that's all that would happen. We won't be getting into any shooting war with Russia.

 

[anything I don't mind]

Finally I could put my BF4 training to use. We have all secretly been trained for war for years without realizing it.

 

[Danny75]

I really don't think we should be putting our country at risk for the sake of former soviet states, I think we screwed up at the end of the cold war when we could have formed better relations with Russia and instead put a load of funding into former Soviet states while not assisting Russia with aid and expanding NATO borders right up to their border.

+1

Gorbachev has been making similar statements. He's unhappy that NATO broke their promise to him and that the West pursued a policy of excluding Russia instead of inviting them into the club.

Here's ex-Australian PM Malcom Fraser's take on it as well.

 

[ubersonic]

so much incorrectness.

The Trident II submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM) can be armed with up to 12 W88 warheads (Mark 5 re-entry vehicle) or 12 100 kt W76 warheads (Mark 4 re-entry vehicle), but it is limited to 8 warheads under the Strategic Offensive Reductions Treaty.

Each sub has 16 missiles and we have three submarines. As Hiroshima KT yield was 13-18 and these put out 475kt.

Hopefully they never get used though.

Actually you just agreed with what I said "We can't nuke them because we don't have enough to cause massive damage and they would nuke us back completely obliterating us". If you think a few MIRVs are going to cut it you don't understand how Russia's military is spread, we simply do not have enough missiles to make a dent militarily speaking, all we could do is take out some heavily populated cities which is a very stupid way to launch a first strike lol.

Annihilated in an air war? How did you work that one out?

They have more planes, they have more missiles, they have more AA. It doesn't matter that the Typhoon is superior to every plane they have bar the Su-35BM, you cannot fight the type of numbers game in question here, it would be like sending Bruce Lee to fight a 50 strong mob.

 

[Vidar]

A future war with Russia would be absolutely devastating for us Brits, we no longer have the military resources to project power without assistance as it stands and that's against Guerrilla type advisories in the middle east...

We have a bare bones army, stretched so thin that any more cuts would break it, a navy with no operational aircraft carriers and aging destroyers etc and an air force with a barely functioning Eurofighter and some seriously obsolete Typhoons... do we even have bombing capability now?

Russia, despite our opinions of it, have a massive military and a naturally tough mentality.... and given the state of France, Germany, Spain, Italy and the UK would probably crush us through sheer weight of numbers.

So War looks inevitable, conscription hits but we still lack in the infrastructure to build, tanks, Planes, Helicopters and ships... we rely on America for support who will stay out of the fight as long as they can.... Sound familiar?

Personally if I was Russia I'd surprise spank the U.S out of the fight early with a massive assault on their soil..... Preferably none nuclear, the rest of nato etc wouldn't then be in a position to intervene, and would then be playing the waiting game to see who wins.

 

[ubersonic]

We have a bare bones army, stretched so thin that any more cuts would break it, a navy with no operational aircraft carriers and aging destroyers etc and an air force with a barely functioning Eurofighter and some seriously obsolete Typhoons... do we even have bombing capability now?

You mean Tornados? Typhoons are Eurofighters (They were renamed Eurofighter Typhoon after they became so delayed that Eurofighter 2000 sounded more like a joke than a name).

 

[touch]

You'd try to sale a large yacht up the canals to Tamworth? Why

Maybe he thinks that's where he'd get the best price?

Where would you try to sell it?

 

[Rroff]

I think people over-estimate Russia ground war wise (they do have a massive advantage in terms of artillery) but even just what we + poland have on exercises would put a massive dented in an offensive with Russia's current modern capabilities.

As Vidar said though I think one of the big issues would be that they can pull a lot of 60-90s era hardware out of retirement, we'd be on the back foot trying to manufacture hardware.

 

[ebilcake]

Britain + Nato + USA vs Russia.

I think we would win to be honest.

I can't see the Chinese coming to the aid of the Russians?

If they did might be a different story.

Nobody would win, in such a situation with Russia backed into a corner Nuclear weapons would be used.

Wouldn't be that great for those that surrive.

 

[arc@css]

 

[Rimsy]

Probably re-watch Threads just to see if I find it as disturbing as I did when i was a teenager!
Does seem rather unlikely at this point - type attacks on our soil are more of a threat and likelihood

 

[Josh]

I'd link up with these guys, a true Tier 1 outfit.

Failing that I would join the Mumsnet Militia.

 

[boxman2000]

West will probably supply further arms to parts of Middle East nations in order to help us, we will win and then continue oppressing their own people.

Good job history never repeats itself though.

 

[Castiel]

Probably re-watch Threads just to see if I find it as disturbing as I did when i was a teenager!
Does seem rather unlikely at this point - type attacks on our soil are more of a threat and likelihood

I watched threads in YouTube recently and it was more disturbing than I remembered.

 

[dunker]

i thought we are all safe from any nukes, don't we have american/nato defense shield here?

 

[Felon]

As Vidar said though I think one of the big issues would be that they can pull a lot of 60-90s era hardware out of retirement, we'd be on the back foot trying to manufacture hardware.

Distance is a problem,

Most fast-jets, including stuff like the MIG-35 only have a maximum range of 1200-1500 miles - which would make life very difficult in taking air superiority from the RAF, with only one aircraft carrier (which would get torpedo'd if it came anywhere near the UK) I think they'd have their work cut out.

This is why America is such an awesome force when it comes to air power, with 10x Nimitz carriers, it can project it's air power anywhere in the world, Russia can't.