Soldato
- Joined
- 15 Aug 2007
- Posts
- 15,788
- Location
- Outside in the bushes
Duck & Cover!
"What if" we all woke up tomorrow at war with Russia
- Thread starter JBod
- Start date
Duck & Cover!
Last time they tussled with Russia at the end of WW2 they got pasted and had to surrender highly valuable land as well as pay remuneration.
I know you're joking, and referring to their battle at the start of WW2 when they fought off the poorly equipped version of the red army that Hitler later smashed, but just had to mention it
Umm..
Soldato
- Joined
- 23 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 13,597
Nobody wins if it blows up. If it goes nuclear bend over and kiss your ass goodbye. End of humans. Hope the next evolved creatures in next 100's million years are more intelligent.
Laugh my a** off as a lot of OCUK armchair warriors get conscripted.
No, it was a figure of speech to indicate how annoyed those countries would be, if you take a look non of them would be able to do anything to UKUSA or Nato even if we were the victims of the first strike, they're all military non entities except for China.
Tbh i underestimated the effects of a successful first strike on Russia, as research I did afterwards on a cobalt bomb indicates they have an auto 2nd strike capability so add that to the devestation and nuclear winter of our strike.
right given the damage Chernobyl did, and how much worse they say it would have been if the reactor had burnt through to the water and exploded throwing everything into the air (think half of Europe dead)
does anyone else think in the second strike auto system, that the targets will be every nuclear power station/storage facility in the enemy country it would render nearly the whole world contaminated and useless.
does anyone else think in the second strike auto system, that the targets will be every nuclear power station/storage facility in the enemy country it would render nearly the whole world contaminated and useless.
Associate
- Joined
- 28 Feb 2013
- Posts
- 2,468
- Location
- Birmingham
Where did you get that from?! I'm fairly certain someone was pulling your leg if they told you that...
In terms of raw damage and loss of life, Chernobyl wasn't actually that bad, the outskirts have lower level of radiation than naturally occurs in some parts of the world where humans live freely. Obviously the plant itself and the immediate area is dangerous, but the area is blocked off to appease the public more than anything else.
i know the actual damage it did was low but if it had burnt through to the water the entire reactor and every bit of radioactive charcoal and fuel would have been blasted into the atmosphere
that would have been a massive catastrophe and spread very radioactive fallout all over Europe, rather than the fairly safe radioactive fallout that reach but still affects Britain
NATO vs Russia isn't even a fight in conventional means. The US Navy alone could beat Russia's entire armed forces, and that's ignoring their incredible means to project power via their Air Force (they have 223 C-17 Globemasters which can carry 134 troops each, that's 30,000 troops) and the USMC which is basically a Military in itself
Associate
- Joined
- 15 Aug 2013
- Posts
- 357
I think you might be overestimating the American's military prowess. Plus what's the use in a troop carrying plane when it's been blown to pieces by a missile that has come from beyond visible range?
Personally I would prepare myself for conscription and hope beyond hope that peace talks occur before any real damage occurs
No, I do respect the fact they actually maintain a large Military though. The UK isn't as much of a push over as some people seem to believe either, especially when we get our new Carriers.
Well the fact NATO has things like the Type 45 Destroyer and F-22 Raptor basically ensures we would have Air supremacy in any conflict. You wouldn't be landing a C-17 in Russia, you'd land it in Allied countries and move the troops in Armour.
Last edited:
They do indeed. I'm not clued up enough to make a remotely accurate assumption. Although a quick google suggests the USA spends 6 times as much as Russia on about 3/4 of Russia's total military numbers. So better armed but outnumbered. And the Russians are nutters so they have that going for them 
.
Either of them outspend us by at least 1.5x and outnumber us by at least 4x.
This isn't including conscripts just active and reserves.
.Either of them outspend us by at least 1.5x and outnumber us by at least 4x.
This isn't including conscripts just active and reserves.
Last edited:
Actually, I think some members here could defeat a frontal assault by flanking them into a 50 page Internet argument and launching a full onslaught of vocal opinions.
I think as soon as the threat of nuclear war loomed the Russian population would quickly realise that great nationalistic pride and Putin's insane blame the west for everything wrong with Russia does not come before blowing yourself up. It would most likely start a massive internal power struggle inside Russia before it got to the point of anyone launching a missile.
Both sides are far more likely to continue fighting wars by proxy using other countries as go-betweens with equipped rebel forces before any serious military intervention, although the threat of nuclear war IS at its highest rating since the cold war.
Both sides are far more likely to continue fighting wars by proxy using other countries as go-betweens with equipped rebel forces before any serious military intervention, although the threat of nuclear war IS at its highest rating since the cold war.
We're all well practiced in boxing and after a decent curry my letterbox activities could be classed as chemical weapons. Some members can also aquire armaments in under 10 minutes
. I think we can hold our own.