How America Could Lose a Land War in Europe to Russia (Thanks to Old Tanks)

Discussion in 'Latest US & World News' started by Ostap Bender, Jul 16, 2017.

  1. Baff

    Baff Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2016
    Messages:
    9,641
    Likes Received:
    2,003
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I have a much better vehicle to do all those things. I call it "a car".
     
  2. Baff

    Baff Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2016
    Messages:
    9,641
    Likes Received:
    2,003
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I think they shoot higher than you can fly.
    They shot Tom Hanks down over Moscow once.
     
    Last edited: Jul 26, 2017
  3. st256

    st256 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2017
    Messages:
    1,779
    Likes Received:
    432
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    The American car is a very bad car. The Russian tank is more better.
    [​IMG]
     
  4. Draco

    Draco Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2012
    Messages:
    11,096
    Likes Received:
    3,393
    Trophy Points:
    113
    After 60 years of planning for war, why don't we just agree that war between us would suck and call it a day
     
  5. Baff

    Baff Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2016
    Messages:
    9,641
    Likes Received:
    2,003
    Trophy Points:
    113
    @st256

    Is that an IS 3?



    The tank that put the willies up Patton?

    My car is Japanese. Just like the girls I like to put in it.
     
    Last edited: Jul 26, 2017
  6. Draco

    Draco Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2012
    Messages:
    11,096
    Likes Received:
    3,393
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Unless you are willing to wipe out an entire population of hundreds of millions of people, fully conqoring modern nations is impossible without nuclear weapons.

    Even then, populations like the US which are spread out in a massive variation of cities/areas would be extremely tough to do. It could actually be argued that getting rid of some of the major city centers may be good for the American economy in the long run! JK ...kinda

    Anyways, along that line the population density of Russia would be a negative as well.

    18.19% of all Russians live in their top 10 cities.
    Likewise
    9.32% of all Amerians live in their top 10 cities.

    There are a hundred other small yet important and often overlooked factors that would come into play. If we go to war however, over the lame arse issues that are currently going on between our great countries, our ancestors will laugh at us and call us a joke. This would make Mr Ferdinand look like child's play

    Let us all just agree that a war between Russia and the US would be an absolutely horrible almost Armageddon like event and there is no reason to go there.
     
    Last edited: Jul 26, 2017
  7. Draco

    Draco Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2012
    Messages:
    11,096
    Likes Received:
    3,393
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Meh, just a fun hypothetical then these are a lot of fun!

    While I agree the way this post is written and the person it is coming from, makes it fairly obvious that the reasoning behind it IS NOT good old fashioned "what if" fun and is meant to be of extreme propaganda in nature. (is PROPOGANDIC a word? It should be!)

    But ignoring that, as well as the fact that you are correct ... it would be much more difficult to wage an "all land war" against Russia for several reasons; They know the terrain better than we do,Their logistics would be MUCH easier than The West, Unlike most other countries while our land forces as whole have a large advantage in tech, the Russian equipment is better in some areas and worse than The West in otehrs. Overall however from the discussion I have had and the research I have done, it would be a fairly equal and DEFINITELY bloody arse war.
     
  8. st256

    st256 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2017
    Messages:
    1,779
    Likes Received:
    432
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Yes, it's the Soviet Tank "Joseph Stalin 3" (in Russian - Iosif Stalin).

    You are not a patriot, sir!

    Japanese girls only? :)
     
  9. tsuke

    tsuke Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2015
    Messages:
    6,087
    Likes Received:
    227
    Trophy Points:
    63
    its in real amounts. Your comparing the raw budget for the chinese with the raw budget for the US without adjusting for anything.
     
  10. Baff

    Baff Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2016
    Messages:
    9,641
    Likes Received:
    2,003
    Trophy Points:
    113
    @st256
    I've owned one and only one British car, my first and worst car. What a piece of **** that was. I doubt I'll buy another. Never got laid in that ride.
    Maybe a Jag one day. But probably not.

    The first time girls paid any attention to the car I drive was the first time I got Merc.

    Japanese girls, yes. Only Japanese girls and only one Japanese girl in particular.
    I have developed an addiction.


    I really like that tank. Totally sci fi looking.
     
    Last edited: Jul 27, 2017
  11. tsuke

    tsuke Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2015
    Messages:
    6,087
    Likes Received:
    227
    Trophy Points:
    63
    ive come to the conclusion that if the world was wiped out and only one country could carry on and rebuild civilization it should be japan.

    hentai and anime must not dissapear ^_^
     
  12. Questerr

    Questerr Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2007
    Messages:
    63,174
    Likes Received:
    4,995
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Then it's not a realistic measure.
     
  13. Destroyer of illusions

    Destroyer of illusions Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2014
    Messages:
    16,104
    Likes Received:
    2,371
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The US will soon have nothing to control. Maybe only the Panama Canal. But it soon will not matter much. Because the Nicoraguan Canal will soon be built, which Russia and China are control.
     
    Ostap Bender likes this.
  14. tsuke

    tsuke Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2015
    Messages:
    6,087
    Likes Received:
    227
    Trophy Points:
    63
    if were in a combat situation and its near the sea US will have control of it period.
     
  15. Tijuana

    Tijuana Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2017
    Messages:
    2,357
    Likes Received:
    1,260
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I guess but, wars are simply not fought that way anymore. Air power can just dominate tanks now, unlike in say, WWII.
     
  16. Baff

    Baff Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2016
    Messages:
    9,641
    Likes Received:
    2,003
    Trophy Points:
    113
    They got more tanks kills from the air in WW2 than they did in Iraq.

    Witmann, the tank ace, left Germany with 46 tanks and arrived in Normandy two days later with 6.

    And then made up for it, of course, being as he was Witmann.
    Who is a man you definitely would not want to play Call of Duty against.



    I think he had about 150 tank kills to his credit, when they finally got him.
    He's do entire tank battalions on his own. Repeatedly.
    Hella tanker. Hella.

    In that war, tank crews and bomber crews had a 1 in 50 survival rate.
    It was a death sentence.

    Today it's just as bad.
    Air power does not dominate SAM alley.

    In Serbia aerial domination was not achieved.
    The Serbs flew Foxbats in combat missions every day of the war, and despite being outnumbered about 100 to one, they never got them.
    Serbian SAMS on the other hand got a few American planes.

    Zero tanks were destroyed from the air. They have more missiles than you have planes. Oh so many, many more.

    s400 system, the one they all yap on about is dangerous for this reason, it's an AWACS killer.
    It's a mid air refuelling tanker killer.
    It still shoots down all your other planes, but it has range on your support systems.

    If we think that Top Gun schools rehearse dogfights around the principle of protecting your AWACS, your command and control, you will see that fighting the Russians by air is nerfed in capability.
    You now have to base your aircraft on the ground inside artillery range. They can't sit on station in she sky. They have to fly NAP.
    Do Americans even train or have ground radar systems for that any more?
    They'll kick your arse.
    Plane isn't a very safe place to be either.

    (Armoured for ground fire and slow, Warthogs are ideal for this role, F35 jump jets will handy too. Short runways FTW. Harrier was designed for this role).
     
    Last edited: Jul 27, 2017
  17. Tijuana

    Tijuana Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2017
    Messages:
    2,357
    Likes Received:
    1,260
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I fixed your thread title below:

    How Russia Could Lose a Land War in America (Thanks to not having ships to bring their army to our shores, and therefore never being able to even start the war, let alone win it)
     
  18. Throughout

    Throughout Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2016
    Messages:
    184
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Do the russkies tanks have the French Thales thermal imagers? :) Or maybe flying russkie buckets already have French Sagem avionics? :)
     
    Last edited: Jul 28, 2017
  19. Ninian

    Ninian Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2017
    Messages:
    3,902
    Likes Received:
    756
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ye, vile colonial peasants, will be deafeated by our superior couch strategists..! And will be CRUSHED by our superior cutting edge technology..!
    [​IMG]


    Keep having fun with each other, boys...
     
    Blücher and Baff like this.
  20. Destroyer of illusions

    Destroyer of illusions Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2014
    Messages:
    16,104
    Likes Received:
    2,371
    Trophy Points:
    113
  21. Destroyer of illusions

    Destroyer of illusions Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2014
    Messages:
    16,104
    Likes Received:
    2,371
    Trophy Points:
    113
  22. Throughout

    Throughout Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2016
    Messages:
    184
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Okay, it's getting boring. All those Putin loving spammers..

    A FACT: RUSSIAN WEAPONS ARE INFERIOR TO WESTERN WEAPONS.
    Proof: All the rich and developed countries buy western made weapons and only third-world countries buy weapons from Russia.

    Why is that western weapons are better then the russian?
    Because West has better technology.
    Why does West have better technology?
    Because of the long history of free market. Free market makes people develop companys, which produce all kinds of stuff, because it's profitable. Free market makes developing new technologies profitable.

    Meanwhile Russia suffered from self-inflicted, communist, central-planned economy, for almost a century. The only reason it was able to almost keep up with the West during The Cold War, was because it was commiting much greater part of it's economy to military production.
    History taught Mankind a lesson: central planning will never work better then the free market, even if you threaten everybody with death and kill milions of people.
    Soviet Union couldn't handle it, finally broke up and switched to capitalist economy.

    Why didn't Russia reach the western level of technology then?
    Because free market without democracy won't work.
    You need democracy to make sure it won't become rotten by corruption. I'm not saying there isn't any corruption in democratic countries, but i'm saying there is a colossal diffrence between corruption levels of a averagely run democracy and every autocratic regime.

    While West developed a commonly educated population through out XIX and XX century, Russia killed all it's elites in 1917 (communist revolution) and never developed any new elites during communist times.
    They had a unique chance to develop quickly and catch up with the west. They were finally free and were making bilions, suppling half of Europe with gas and oil. They could finally reduce military spending, drop imperialism and invest, develop.

    Nope. Not so easy.
    Country was ruled by terror System for almost a century. That System of Terror isn't so easy to disassemble.
    People from KGB, GRU, NKVD used thier connections to gain power and wealth, uneducated, eliteless society wasn't able to resist. Result: Oligarchocracy, rule of small group of powerfull people.

    Oligarchocracy has no interest in developing the russian nation. It's easier to rule over uneducated people. They don't protest, they believe propaganda, they admire the powerfull.

    And you can't just develop one branch of industry, the weapon industry, without developing entire nation.
    Oh, did i mention russian export? It says a lot about russian economy.

    80%-mineral products, metals, precious stones and articles thereof
    2.5%-weapons

    I hope that gives you impresion of how technologicly dveloped russian economy is.

    Seriously, go around your house and try finding something russian.
    Car? Nope.
    Computer? Nope.
    Software on the computer? Nope.
    Phone? Nope.
    Cosmetics? Nope.
    RTV? Nope.
    AGD? Nope.
    Facebook, Twitter, Youtube, Netflix, any internet service you're using? Nope.
    Maybe credit card in you wallet? Nope.
    Your bank? Nope.
    Shoes? Nope.
    Cloths? Nope.
    Bicycle? Nope.
    Sport equipment? Nope.
    See?
    Even arabs who lived in the middle of the desert for 10.000 years and suddenly found oil, know how to invest oilmoney better then the russians.

    Did you know how Soviet Union lost the cold war?
    Ronald Reagan, in agreement with Margaret Thacher, paid arabs to produce more oil, in order to lower oil prices, in order to deprive Soviet Union of it's only source of foreign currency. Soviet Union bankcrupted. That's how much it was dependent on the oil. Russia haven't developd any new branch of industry since.
    It's still addicted to oil and it's running only on that oilmoney, wasted on caviar, champagne and massive nuclear arsenal.

    How can i say that russian population is underdeveloped?
    Look at universities.
    Shanghai ranking: first 78 universities: NATO countries, Australia, Japan, Sweden, Izrael, Switzerland
    First russian university appers on 79th position.

    lol, all that writing to explain one simple fact:
    RUSSIAN WEAPONS ARE INFERIOR TO WESTERN WEAPONS.

    :p
     
  23. Throughout

    Throughout Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2016
    Messages:
    184
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    18
    https://jamestown.org/program/mistr...mark-natos-first-post-summit-defeat-part-two/

    Moscow’s shopping list for military equipment, outlined in general terms by mid-2010, is now taking a somewhat clearer shape. It includes:

    1. Italian “Lynx” multipurpose light armored vehicles. A product of the Industrial Vehicles Corporation (Iveco, a division of the Fiat concern in Turin), the first batch of 10 units are due to be assembled in 2011 at Russia’s largest truck manufacturer, the KamAz plant in Naberezhnye Chelny, for testing and comparing with other foreign models. If this proves satisfactory, Iveco and KamAz intend to set up a joint enterprise on a parity basis for serial production in Russia. They envisage producing 2,500 units, gradually to replace Russia’s own BTR-80 and Tiger armored vehicles. Prime Ministers Vladimir Putin and Silvio Berlusconi reached this agreement in December 2010 in Sochi, delegating the implementation to the respective defense ministers (La Stampa, December 4; Izvestiya, December 23, 27, 2010).

    2. French “Felin” [abbreviation for “infantryman with integrated equipment and communication gear”], also known as the “soldier of the future” combat kit. France is now starting to equip its troops with this state-of-the-art gear while also envisaging its selective export. Russia’s defense ministry has acquired a batch of the Felin for testing and possible procurement of the French equipment, or joint production under license (Agence France Presse, December 9; Trud, December 24, 2010).

    3. French Sagem avionics. Russia’s defense ministry plans to upgrade the obsolete MiG and Sukhoi fighter planes with modern avionics technology produced by the Safran-Sagem company. Prime Ministers Putin and Francois Fillon confirmed this intention during Fillon’s recent Moscow visit (Agence France Presse, December 9, 2010).

    As latest additions to its shopping list, Moscow is discussing possible acquisition of the French Thales thermal imager for Russian T-90 battle tanks, as well as German mountaineering gear for the troops of two divisions in Russia’s North Caucasus. A more theoretical wish list includes air-independent propulsion plants, from either France or Germany, for diesel-powered submarines of Russia’s Navy (Trud, December 24),
     
  24. Destroyer of illusions

    Destroyer of illusions Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2014
    Messages:
    16,104
    Likes Received:
    2,371
    Trophy Points:
    113


    You write nonsense. The Russians appoint US presidents. But you tell nonsense about facebook and twitter.:roflol::roflol::roflol:
     
  25. Destroyer of illusions

    Destroyer of illusions Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2014
    Messages:
    16,104
    Likes Received:
    2,371
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Unfortunately the moderators forbid me to speak about the level of your intellect. :roflol::roflol::roflol:
     
    Last edited: Jul 28, 2017

Share This Page