What if Russia and U.S. had a war............

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 8 2004 @ 09:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by CyberGhost
now US would destroy Russia, Russian scientists are more clever than the US ones but, in US, US is for people, and in Russian, people are for Russian, in American it's a human that comes first! so most of the scientists moved to work with the US! i mean some clever person in Russia invents something good and they give him a medal! what a hell! and he should be thinking about how to make money and what's he's gonna eat tomorrow instead of thinking about what to invent, in America they are provided with everything! they get paid good and appriciated. America gives money to Russia just to keep them quite! and on the place!

if there would be a war, US would destroy Russia easily!

thats all true about the scientists, but i still think Russia would destroy the U.S.




posted on Feb, 8 2004 @ 09:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by browha
You people are so ignorant! The we're invincible because we're America has never been true.
In a nuclear war, no one wins, any country even remotely invovled would be destroyed.
The only victory you would have would be the total destruction of Russia, and that would be counter-balanced by the total destruction of America.
If you consider destroying an enemy victory, you would win. But at the same time you would lose.
For me victory is not about how many people you kill or how many cities you raze to the ground, but how many lives you save.
If you're prepared to kill 3-4 billion people to keep one man and his close friends (the president) alive, then have your war, because dying for the president (one man, elected to power) is perhaps the most stupid thing I've ever heard of. The only thing that makes him any different to you is his position.

stop being so ignorant, and go learn about M.A.D. (Mutually Assured Destruction).

Edit:: This is directed at CyberGhost and anyone else who thinks there would be a 'winner'.


[Edited on 7-2-2004 by browha]

This is also true i agree



posted on Feb, 11 2004 @ 12:22 PM
link   
Im thinking everyon forgot about the nuclear subs that are down there holdings up to 26 poseidon missles(multiple nuke warheads)
with just one sub we can end all life as we know it.
How many subs do we and the russians have?? a somewhat 20?Less? but they alll too much.



posted on Feb, 11 2004 @ 12:40 PM
link   
IMO Nuke war no win= Global Death

on the flip side you can be assured that there will be a 75% weapon system failure rate. Hence the idea of having 100 times over the needed destructive power because they know that a large portion of the weapons systems will fail to trigger. Fail in sub orbit, be destroyed on re-entry, fail their target accuasition, mis fire on launch etc.

You have a 30 minute window from first launch to destruction, so I am thinking there will be LOTS of people abandoning their posts. On both sides. Adding to the weapon system failure rate and the chance of all 5,000 or 10,000 warheads raining down is quite slim.

Plus the responding country bares the weight of destroying the rest of the world. When push comes to shove if there is a nuclear war I bet the "responding" country will just sit and wait to be destroyed instead of launching all weapon systems because the leader who will issue that order will know that he just killed off all of humanity.

That is a big burden for someone to face in the time of their death. Its bad enough that they know "they" will die, but to have the burden of the death of all humans, all animals, all life forms. Thats a huge burden on ones soul. And IMO I doubt that anyone alive today is capable of issuing those orders.



posted on Feb, 11 2004 @ 01:07 PM
link   
How can you say there will be a 75% weapons failure rate??? These things are designed to destroy the enemy, not f***-up
If your most hated enemy was nuking your country you'd have to be mad not to nuke back.
I know I certainly would.
If you were the president/PM/etc of whichever country you were from can you honestly say that if your MOST HATED enemy was destroying your very people, your family, your friends, with nuclear weapons, you wouldn't retailate?



posted on Feb, 11 2004 @ 01:33 PM
link   
US and Russia having a war?
It would be a very bad thing...
The entire population of the northern hemispere would lose.



posted on Feb, 11 2004 @ 01:35 PM
link   

Thats why it will not ever happen.......unless of course a total madman takes power in either country.


Oops....too late....



posted on Feb, 12 2004 @ 06:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by SectorGaza

Originally posted by blobby
incoming nukes to usa from n.lorea zap zap zap star wars defence system activated missiles destroyed....

you think usa doesnt have secret space weps.....
....

you dont, face it, it was canceled, and even if they didnt cancel it its still isnt 100% defends you against the rain of icbms from russia

and.. against icbms fitted with MIRVs they are pretty much useless

[Edited on 7-2-2004 by SectorGaza]

Even if the US had secret space-based anti-ballistic weapons in place - chances are such technology would be overwhelmed with the number of MIRV's and decoys the Russians could throw at the US.
(i hate agreeing with Sector)


The response of the US would probably be instantaneous and of a similar volume - the winners of the conflict would be Australia, Brazil, and any other country in the southern hemisphere...

Russia and the US would be smouldering craters with survivors and the rest of the northern hemisphere wondering how they are going to rebuild under the bleak radioactive sky of a nuclear winter...



posted on Feb, 14 2004 @ 12:18 AM
link   
I think if Russia and US would have a war it would go nuclear and nobody would win.

Nukes would US and Russia like Siberia!


Out,
Russian



posted on Feb, 14 2004 @ 12:25 AM
link   
I see no reason for a war but if there was there would have to be a winner. Frankly I am tired of the military ambitions of Russia and other socialistic countries and I cannot understand what it is that they want?



posted on Feb, 14 2004 @ 12:30 AM
link   
.....this totally belongs in a debate forum.



posted on Feb, 14 2004 @ 02:15 AM
link   
Star Wars would be essentially useless. I believe at the height there was something like 30,000 nukes combined between USA and USSR. That has supposedly been scaled down but lets say for the sake of arguement that they still have 10,000 nukes in Russia. If star wars is an optimistic 90% effective at shooting down nukes, that would still be 1,000 nukes raining down on the US. More than enough to turn the US into a smoldering wasteland.

10,000 nukes or 1,000 nukes, either way everyone is dead.



posted on Feb, 14 2004 @ 03:45 PM
link   
just thought id say this but wouldnt the UN or NATO sorta say "what the **** are you doing" and like stop it i know they couldnt totaly stop it but they could at least stall them any way if the US and russia went to war it wouldnt be a 2 coutry war every country would be involved also if the russians would win in most battles because their troops were better equiped and had more ammo.but i think it would reach a stalemate both countries had enough power to reach a stalemate but not total victory



posted on Feb, 14 2004 @ 04:44 PM
link   
by the way blobby, your starwars laser thingies would be ineffective against russian icbms as they have multiple Independently - Targetable Reentry Vehicles, SS-18 missile for example bears 16 platforms, one of them contains false targets system. After reaching high orbit, all missile heads become hidden in the cloud of false targets and therefore invulnerable for radars.


the missile heads are armored with the use of extremely dense and heavy metal Uranium-239. Such an armory cannot be burnt by laser in foreseeable future.



posted on Feb, 14 2004 @ 05:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by SectorGaza
by the way blobby, your starwars laser thingies would be ineffective against russian icbms as they have multiple Independently - Targetable Reentry Vehicles, SS-18 missile for example bears 16 platforms, one of them contains false targets system. After reaching high orbit, all missile heads become hidden in the cloud of false targets and therefore invulnerable for radars.


the missile heads are armored with the use of extremely dense and heavy metal Uranium-239. Such an armory cannot be burnt by laser in foreseeable future.



It's not a laser buddy, it's something called a rail gun.



posted on Feb, 14 2004 @ 05:27 PM
link   
I believe a rail gun uses electromagnetism to send a projectile down range.

home.insightbb.com...



posted on Feb, 14 2004 @ 06:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jeffrey

Originally posted by SectorGaza
by the way blobby, your starwars laser thingies would be ineffective against russian icbms as they have multiple Independently - Targetable Reentry Vehicles, SS-18 missile for example bears 16 platforms, one of them contains false targets system. After reaching high orbit, all missile heads become hidden in the cloud of false targets and therefore invulnerable for radars.


the missile heads are armored with the use of extremely dense and heavy metal Uranium-239. Such an armory cannot be burnt by laser in foreseeable future.



It's not a laser buddy, it's something called a rail gun.







suuure
,



posted on Feb, 14 2004 @ 06:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by AD5673
What if the U.S. amd Russia had a war who do u think would win?
I think Russia would win because they got much stronger weapons and better weapons and could woop our asses


BWAHAHAAAHHAHAHAHAAAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA



posted on Feb, 14 2004 @ 06:51 PM
link   
Canada ey


Interesting subject on Russian warheads I heard from a computer Egineer freind of mine.

Russia seems to have a nuclear missile, with 6 warheads intact, now each of these warheads contains 50 dummy warheads which are actualy aluminum baloons, than when released are impossible to tell apart from the real ones with current american radar tech. Lets say If Russia were to deploy this missile over newyork, 300 warheads would deploy over the city of which only 5 were real! Good luck sniping those off.

Now this is simple beer talk, could be wrong. Im sure someone else could fill me in.

Deep



posted on Feb, 14 2004 @ 07:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by THENEO
I see no reason for a war but if there was there would have to be a winner. Frankly I am tired of the military ambitions of Russia and other socialistic countries and I cannot understand what it is that they want?


Please stop your Russia bashing.

I am pretty damn tired of it.

Just ask yourself is Russia trying to take over the world?

Or is it USA?

Out,
Russian





new topics
top topics
 
0
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join