|
|
Post by Jean Lannes on Oct 24, 2015 5:58:35 GMT
It would obviously be the us and co. The us has the most nukes, the biggest and most advanced navy (by a looooooong shot), the biggest and most advanced airforce, and lots of resources and military industrial capacity. And thats without considering all of its allies. Secondly, you guys have the misconception china and russia are true allies. While they may be somewhat friendly (on and off), they arent nearly the same lvl of alliance as nato for example. Plus China relies on the US for a lot of its trade, so they might be neutral or support the us block instead. Third, even if the Us allies are unprepared, they still are rich with large populations, and could easily get better if a war actually broke out. Plus there are countries like Israel that have large, well trained militaries to help train the others. Fourth, China has alienated many of its traditional allies with its actions in the south china sea. Even countries like Vietnam are cultivating closer relationships with the us to counteract Chinas power. North Korea was never really an ally, especially now that the nuclear program is up and china is worried about north korea instability. America has the most nukes? No, Russia has the most. The most advanced ships? Same, Russia will very soon be the #1. And in terms of Allies, Russia pretty much controls the Oil in the Middle East. The Huthis (Iranian (thus Russian) allies) control a major part of Yemen and Iran has the Strait of Hormus. Russia also has Europe's needed Gasoline which could be devastating for Germany if they cut it. |
|
|
|
Post by Philip II of Macedon on Oct 24, 2015 12:51:49 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by NetherFreek on Oct 24, 2015 13:43:10 GMT
in that last link it is said that pakistan is a major non-nato country. but i thought that pakistan was a big ally of usa??
|
|
|
|
Post by Philip II of Macedon on Oct 24, 2015 14:28:31 GMT
in that last link it is said that pakistan is a major non-nato country. but i thought that pakistan was a big ally of usa?? Not anymore. The us believes pakistan harbors terrorists, while pakistan believes the us hasnt done enough to combat them in certain areas. The us has done several operations behind pakistans back, which also worsens relationships. They try to work together but trust is strained. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pakistan–United_States_relations |
|
|
|
Post by NetherFreek on Oct 24, 2015 14:30:44 GMT
thanks for your explenation  its sad that some countries cant go well with eachother and create war against eachother... |
|
|
|
Post by Suvorov on Oct 24, 2015 15:37:00 GMT
thanks for your explenation its sad that some countries cant go well with eachother and create war against eachother... That's called "history" |
|
|
|
Post by Jean Lannes on Oct 24, 2015 18:57:04 GMT
You know there isn't a big difference between 5400 and 5200 when you let it rain. And I guess it also counts US nukes in foreign countries such as Germany, the NETHERLANDS, Belgium, etc And you said navy not air craft carriers, China has a bomb that could sink an air craft carrier. And Russia has the FOAB (Father of all bombs). Yes there are other sources, the country with the most is Venezuela (Russian ally) so Russia will definitely have more oil. |
|
|
|
Post by Mountbatten on Oct 24, 2015 19:10:13 GMT
I think nobody would win. Nukes and missiles flying across the world, devestating not only the target, but surrounding countries. Nuclear fallout, radiation, mass destruction. The aliens will have their work cut out for them.
|
|
|
|
Post by General William T. Sherman on Oct 24, 2015 19:10:07 GMT
You know there isn't a big difference between 5400 and 5200 when you let it rain. And I guess it also counts US nukes in foreign countries such as Germany, the NETHERLANDS, Belgium, etc And you said navy not air craft carriers, China has a bomb that could sink an air craft carrier. And Russia has the FOAB (Father of all bombs). Yes there are other sources, the country with the most is Venezuela (Russian ally) so Russia will definitely have more oil. I'd like to address the oil issue really quick. Venezuela may be a major oil exporting nation that's aligned with Russia, but NATO can blockade the Venezuelans and use Colombia a base against them and take their oil for the use of NATO. And while Russia may have a very large navy, I doubt that they could send a task force large enough to deal with the American home fleet in the Western Hemisphere before Venezuela is dealt with. Also, you've seemed to have forgotten about one major NATO asset:Canada. The U.S imports most of their oil from our neighbor to the north. That's not to say, however, that a possible Russian attack on the Saudis wouldn't hurt the oil imports, however, as the Canadians also get a lot of their oil from the Saudis. They then give that oil to the Americans. Speaking of the Saudis, the U.S also has far better relations with them than the Russians do with the Saudis. And about the fleet issue, Russia may be crawling up to the American navy's numbers, but how about all of NATOS combined navies? All those ships could blockade the Black Sea and Baltic Sea with ease. |
|
|
|
Post by Jean Lannes on Oct 24, 2015 19:20:29 GMT
I was talking about Venezuela in a theoretical way.
And alot of people seem to forget the problem of Europe, they (esp. Germany) rely on Russian gasoline.
In a modern WWIII scenario Russia could win by rushing Europe and attack Turkey with Iran and Saudi Arabia with Syria, Iraq, Huthis, and Iran. Israel would be a joke after that.
I'm guessing you could say Egypt is an ally of Russia as well?!
Russia would attack Poland from Königsberg and all countries in between by normal forces.
Paratroopers to Scandinavia and maybe Finland.
Then an attack on Germany and so on.
|
|
|
|
Post by General William T. Sherman on Oct 24, 2015 19:24:07 GMT
Dude, Syria and Iraq is not good territory to march through right now. ISIS would probably refocus their targets on Russia instead of the US now that they've invaded. It would be another soviet war in Afghanistan deal. Wouldn't end well.
I'd say Europe would simply need to hold out until American and Canadian reinforcement arrived (though mostly American) to blunt the Russian assault. From there on out, I'd say it would be a slow but steady NATO victory.
|
|
|
|
Post by Napoleon Bonaparte on Oct 24, 2015 19:30:31 GMT
in that last link it is said that pakistan is a major non-nato country. but i thought that pakistan was a big ally of usa?? Not anymore. The us believes pakistan harbors terrorists, while pakistan believes the us hasnt done enough to combat them in certain areas. The us has done several operations behind pakistans back, which also worsens relationships. They try to work together but trust is strained. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pakistan–United_States_relationsk let me do this for you all, Pakistan thinks that America always helps India and doesn't do a thing for us, the US is now thinking that Pakistan is actually training the terrorists (thanks to India, while it ain't) thus Pakistan can demand NATO membership if it allies itself with NATO or be neutral and stay away unless provoked. |
|
|
|
Post by General William T. Sherman on Oct 24, 2015 19:32:50 GMT
What do you think of the situation Khurram? Should Pakistan become neutral or become more aligned with NATO?
|
|
|
|
Post by NetherFreek on Oct 24, 2015 19:35:27 GMT
I was talking about Venezuela in a theoretical way. And alot of people seem to forget the problem of Europe, they (esp. Germany) rely on Russian gasoline. In a modern WWIII scenario Russia could win by rushing Europe and attack Turkey with Iran and Saudi Arabia with Syria, Iraq, Huthis, and Iran. Israel would be a joke after that. I'm guessing you could say Egypt is an ally of Russia as well?! Russia would attack Poland from Königsberg and all countries in between by normal forces. Paratroopers to Scandinavia and maybe Finland. Then an attack on Germany and so on. there are also possibilities for nato to win. there are a lot of people in russia and china that wants to be indipendence. if nato says that they get their own country if they help them they could be really convenient because they are in the middle of the enemey. if nato assigns a lot of troops their (they wil be letten in by the rebellions). they can attack wto from the inside. the possible regions are tibet, manchuko, a lot of populations above georgia. maybe nato can put kazakhstan against russia because there are a lot of kazakh people inside russua. and if nato promise more land to kazakhstan if they win, kazakhstan might turn against russia. nato have to take out russia, iran and china. first of them will be china. europe has to stand their ground in europe against russia, they have to get support from all nato members except south korea, japan and usa. those 3 countries invade china and conquer it. at the same time russia will be on the winning hand in europe. usa have to stop their winning-streak, to do that it has to raise money to create weapons. that money comes from china. with that they should take out russia. meanwhile in de middle east, wto will wreck saudi arabia and israel. the army of nato suffered a lot from russia and china. it isnt strong enough to beat iran and allies. so they can drop an atomic bomb on teheran |
|
|
|
Post by Napoleon Bonaparte on Oct 24, 2015 19:35:37 GMT
Don't really know, maybe be allied in NATO so the Indian threat could be removed or be neutral if nothing seems good
|
|
