It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

india,russia n china military alliance

page: 1
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 15 2006 @ 06:46 AM
link   
With US being the only superpower in the world.What are the prospects of a new military alliance between India, Russia n China,n can they take on the US




posted on Feb, 15 2006 @ 10:33 AM
link   
I honestly dont know. I mean, thats a lot of troops, a land war would be hell, but the US could still control the skies. India I would say probably has the best airforce out of the 3. They have planes such as the SU30MKI that did well against the US in the games they had. But they dont have them in the quantity they would need to gain air superiority. Russia and China cant hold air superiority with the US either. I would say also the US could control the seas, which in my opinion is more important that airpower because if you look at history, if you failed at sea, you lost the war.

A land war is a place I dont think the US could win, but I would imagine if a situation such as this arose the US would impose a draft and the military industry would come to life, pumping out tanks, planes, weapons ect. Russia and India both have hte T-90 MBT, which is formidable on the battlefield. It is the replacement to the problematic T-80, and I havent heard anything bad about it, so it must be a good tank. All in all this scenario would require more research into equipment and training of each country as well as doctrine.



posted on Feb, 15 2006 @ 10:39 AM
link   
The USAF would be crushed in an air war, if those 3 powers were united. US seapower would be seriously challenged as well.
Actually come to think of it, the US could not win a war against those 3 nations combined.



posted on Feb, 15 2006 @ 10:41 AM
link   
silly post really, no country could beat china ALONE never mind those 3 TOGETHER!!


but just for laughs lets take a look,

CHINA - tipped as the next superpower (outnumber the manpower of the US army by 4-1).

RUSSIA - former superpower, still very much a powerful nation

INDIA - also tipped as future superpower

= battered

----

even if it was the US and UK (world 1st and 2nd most powerful nations) together we'd be hammered!!

and when i say 'most powerful nations' the US invests most in its military followed by the UK. The shear manpower alone of china would kill us.

[edit on 15-2-2006 by st3ve_o]



posted on Feb, 15 2006 @ 01:53 PM
link   
Youre telling me that the US couldnt maintain air, and sea superiority. The US has the ships and manpower to do so. 12 Carrier groups(will be 13 when GWB comes online), 52 LA Class nulcear subs, 3 Seawolf Class Subs with 17 more planned, 6 brand new Virginia Class subs with 25 more planned. 14 Ohio Class Ballistic Missile Subs. 22 Ticonderoga class Missile Curisers(upgraded with AEGIS system), 31 Arleigh Burke class Destroyers with many more authorized. 30 Oliver Hazard Perry class Frigates. Not to mention logistics and other support ships as well as ASW aircraft and helos. The US could maintain the seas in my opinon.

Now onto air power. The F-16 can still handle this mission today. Not to mention the fact that the USAF still operates over 1,500(of over 2000 produced) of them today. It is an all weather multi-role fighter that can also clear and hold airspace efficiently. Especially with the latest upgrades to its airframe, avionics, and electronics giving them the capability to engage targets BVR.

The F-15 is officially still an air superiority fighter as its role will continue well into the future untill phased out with the F-22 and lives out the rest of its service life. It has many variants for many different missions, and can be configured for air superiority( F-15 A,B,C,D all of which have perfect air-to-air combat records), and to deliver ground attack munitions(F-15E Strike Eagle). The US has 396 on active duty, and 126 in reserve. Is durabel as shown in the incident in which and Israeli F-15 collided with another lost its wing up to 2 feet from the body of the aircraft and the pilot still managed to safely land it. The F-15 will not even outlive its service life by the time the F-22 stops being produced in 2013, its service live is said to run until 2014.

The F-18, designed to protect carrier fleets and complement the F-14, is a great fighter/bomber. It is in use by the US Navy, Marines, and also by NASA(making for a grand total 1048 aircraft. Its variants include the F/A-18A/C are single seat aircraft designed for multi role missions includeing Carrier protection, bombing, dog-fighting, and SEAD(suppression of enemy air defenses). The F-18/B is mainly used for training and is a two seater. The F-18C/D were block upgrades on the aircraft, improving versatility and enemy detection abilities. The F-18E/F Super Hornet was slated to replace the retiring F-14's and first saw sevice in 1991. It has a 25%larger airframe than the previous F-18's.

The F-22 which is now in service as of late 2004. I have been unable to pinpoint a specific number of these fighters in service now, but it appears to be between 48-58. With around 180 being delivered by the time production is supposed to cease. The Raptor is more advanced than any fighter to come into production from now until 2020. Giving you an Idea of how advanced this aircraft really is. Should any conflict of this nature arise, you can bet your ass it will own the sky.

More to come, Ive gotta head off to work.



posted on Feb, 15 2006 @ 04:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by 2smart2curious
With US being the only superpower in the world.What are the prospects of a new military alliance between India, Russia n China,n can they take on the US


I think the question is just dumb.

Does all of Europe not exist in your world? and not just that...If the Alliance that you have proposed happens...It would become WWIII.
And whatever nation is loosing the war then they will probably (as a last ditch effort) launch there nukes...then no one wins.

And whats the point of them going to war with the US...Surely it cant be about land, since all 3 of them have large chunks.
So if that alliance happened...I’m assuming that your dumb concept is that they would attack the US...on US soil. So if nukes weren’t used, then I would go with the US...Airpower is EVERYTHING these days...I dont care if they filled hundreds of huge ships with millions of soldiers, US Sats would see the ships, and Bombers would be sent out to blow them up...because yes...these days, bombs are that accurate.
So it wouldn't even be a 3 Navy on 1 Navy scenario. And The US has (by-far) the best fighter aircrafts in the world.
The Raptor could eliminate any/every aircraft that tried to fly in the US.


[edit on 15-2-2006 by Murcielago]



posted on Feb, 15 2006 @ 05:36 PM
link   
Aren't these the same countries opposing (our ally) Israel, and nuclear sanctions Iran?

[edit on 15-2-2006 by pdo3]



posted on Feb, 15 2006 @ 06:21 PM
link   
In all out war the U.S. would obliterate those three nations as long as it is total warfare not like the peacekeeping/ police state that we're trying to maintain in iraq because in that sense we are vastly outnumbered troop per troop, but our tech gives us an astronomical balance of power, not even accounting nuclear arms.



posted on Feb, 15 2006 @ 06:59 PM
link   
The one thing I've noticed about the comments made on China is that they have this huge army that will overwhelm anyone. Not true. Manpower doesnt mean what it used to. Its a simple fact of modern combat. Unless youre in all out infantry combat, which has been ditched in favor of combined arms combat since WW2(first used by Germany and their Blitzkrieg). Its simply much more efficient and easier to overwhelm your enemies when you have your air and ground power working together, something the US would excell in during a ground war. If you look at the first Gulf War you will see what I mean. The world was calling it the mother of all battles, Iraq had the 4th largest military in the world and not a bad one at that. But still were overrun in 100 hours by US and Coalition forces. Hyper-War would be waged if such a situation were to arise. As long as you dont outrun your supply lines you can win, and logistically, the US and Europe have the capability to make this pace in combat.



posted on Feb, 15 2006 @ 09:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by 2smart2curious
With US being the only superpower in the world.What are the prospects of a new military alliance between India, Russia n China,n can they take on the US


Hmm.....We lost to many in the Iraq war so why would you guys want

war?...US is strong...but China's military is a lot......and where did you get

the information that US is the superpower??? who knows who would win..

against China itself......



posted on Feb, 15 2006 @ 10:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by unsolved2490

Originally posted by 2smart2curious
With US being the only superpower in the world.What are the prospects of a new military alliance between India, Russia n China,n can they take on the US


Hmm.....We lost to many in the Iraq war so why would you guys want

war?...US is strong...but China's military is a lot......and where did you get

the information that US is the superpower??? who knows who would win..

against China itself......



Unsolved, what myself and ludaChris are advocating is that technological superiority is a far more important variable in calculating a nations strength.

For the Iraq issue, we (the U.S. + some British) literally won an entire country over with less than 400 casualties. This has never been done in history and is quite astounding if you think about it even though we were outnumbered, an entire country. But if you look at the deaths post main battles the number increases dramatically, these are not combat fatalities so much as they are suicide bombs, IED's and other attacks that dont necessarily achieve any military goal. If we wanted to we could turn Iraq and the whole middle east into a giant piece of glass in probably a matter of about 15 min, (im not quite sure the delivery time of our ICBM's in the middle east) but we refrain from doing so.

China has many troops indeed, but with little air support and virtually no navy, a capable military such as ourselves can exploit this fact and as i said earlier could obliterate them.

Who says the U.S. is a superpower? I dont think anyone can intelligently argue that we are not. We have had the highest GNP since world war II, we have paved the way in technological progress for the past century.

Not to mention that we have the most modern warfare experience



posted on Feb, 16 2006 @ 09:04 AM
link   


Unsolved, what myself and ludaChris are advocating is that technological superiority is a far more important variable in calculating a nations strength.


Nazi Germany was technologically superior to the allies and look what happened to them



posted on Feb, 16 2006 @ 09:16 AM
link   
Do u know that India has developed a supersonic ascm Brahmos which can blow any ship and every ship including supercarriers.



posted on Feb, 16 2006 @ 09:16 AM
link   
If there was such an alliance, could you imagine the scale of Russian arms that would be produced with the financial backing of China and India's economy.
For every US naval vessel they'd be a hundred high tech supersonic antiship cruise missiles. They be hundreds more capable Russian aircraft coming out of the factories and advanced SAM's. Just 2 examples.



posted on Feb, 16 2006 @ 04:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by rogue1
If there was such an alliance, could you imagine the scale of Russian arms that would be produced with the financial backing of China and India's economy.
For every US naval vessel they'd be a hundred high tech supersonic antiship cruise missiles. They be hundreds more capable Russian aircraft coming out of the factories and advanced SAM's. Just 2 examples.


Factories which could be destroyed with our fleet of B2's if we control the skies what is there to stop our bombers?

We have the capability to cripple their infrastructure not the other way around



Originally posted by Killak420


Unsolved, what myself and ludaChris are advocating is that technological superiority is a far more important variable in calculating a nations strength.


Nazi Germany was technologically superior to the allies and look what happened to them


Nazi Germany had some crazy tech going on for sure but the small amount that was implemented in the war was too far to the end to do any good. IE the nazi jet fighter, if they had come into service a few months earlier we could have very well lost our air superiority. The V2 rockets and such were effective but mostly at causing terror not achieving a strategic military goals. The best technological advantage the Nazi's had was their tanks, their technology wasn't necessarily better it was that we miscalculated how a tank should be used. We made smaller lighter tanks in greater quantities, the nazi's made bigger, stronger, more powerful ones which proved more effective.

[edit on 16-2-2006 by Distortion]



posted on Feb, 16 2006 @ 05:26 PM
link   
You beat me to it distortion. At this point there really is no defense against supersonic cruise missiles that I know of, if anyone knows of one let me know. The only way to counter it is to destroy their military industry, and infrastructure destruction is a major part of US war doctrine. You cripple your enemies ability to support their military and they will soon be without the arms needed to put on an effective defense or go on a counter offensive.

Cutting off your enemies logistical support will eventually cripple them. A lesson learned from Germany during WW2. Except no one cut it off for them, they did it themselves by moving to fast, they out ran their own supply lines. This is what gives the US the advantage over any other countries military, they can take the fight to them, and logistically support the troops anywhere in the world.



posted on Feb, 16 2006 @ 08:15 PM
link   
Hi guys,

I do not believe that these three massive nations will converge on the US and her allies. Russia and China may have shared an Ideology at one point in history, but that is what it is HISTORY.

We must remember that Japan and Taiwan are deadly rivals to China; Pakistan to India and Russia has imploded into fragments of enemies who would savour Russia's demise.

When WWIII kicks off and I believe it will barring a miracle, these nations will have either been advised of the advantages of refraining or they will realise that their own countries must protect their own borders from deadlier rivals.

Wars don't happen overnight, they are concieved through months of deliberation and deception.

Best wishes

J



posted on Feb, 16 2006 @ 08:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by gingerlad

When WWIII kicks off and I believe it will barring a miracle, these nations will have either been advised of the advantages of refraining or they will realise that their own countries must protect their own borders from deadlier rivals.

J


IF (big 'if') WW3 ever kicked off it would be the end of the world straight away (or the end of SOME countrys)!!

any countrys from the 5 nuclear powers (britain, france, russia, america, china) can destory ANY country with a blink of an eye!!

the power of the atom far exceeds that of WW2,

WW3 would last a few weeks (if that).


[edit on 16-2-2006 by st3ve_o]



posted on Feb, 17 2006 @ 12:22 AM
link   
Hey ludaChris:
What the @#$% happened to the 600 ship US navy!?!?!?
I was reading the numbers you listed for the US navy, you were proud, I was mortified!!
That's all we have left!?!?!?
I'm sorry, that's a tiny navy...we can do better.



posted on Feb, 17 2006 @ 01:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by SpecAgentDW
Hey ludaChris:
What the @#$% happened to the 600 ship US navy!?!?!?
I was reading the numbers you listed for the US navy, you were proud, I was mortified!!
That's all we have left!?!?!?
I'm sorry, that's a tiny navy...we can do better.


I was refering to the backbone of the Navy, the Carriers, Cruisers, Destroyers, subs, and Frigates ect. I got it all of global security, all the ship lists for each class are there. I know the US has much more than that but it would have taken much longer to list them all, and I thought people here would get the idea from what I had listed, sorry for any confusion.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join