WW3 has begun: US NATO vrs PRIICKS (wargame)

Originally posted by victor7
reply to post by MRHIDDENHAND

 

That's true, the real intention of the thread is to discuss global geopolitics not the details of each battles of any war. The question is therefore, will Russia and China get involved in the Syria Iran issue that has developed and even led to the US conducting beach landing war games on its east coast.

Sorry it took me a while to respond.
IMHO - Russia will be angry but no real involvement with Syria. Iran may be very different despite some statements I've read on ATS. Iran has a border - Caspian Sea - with RF. Shall Americans move in, that would be a direct threat to RF national security. Then it will be RF President's call after consulting with heavy-weights in MOD, MFA, SVR. I would assume they are already weighing possibilities. Nuke exchange? National pride vs. existence.

Originally posted by cassandranova
I'm glad to see the discussion continuing.

It seems like the question everyone is asking is where would India go. I think the answer is caught up not in Russia, but Pakistan. It seems almost natural to me that wherever Pakistan is, India will not be, and I see an Iranian/Pakistani axis as forming. I can also see why Russia and China would support that, albeit from a distance.

The thing I think we're really missing in these wargames is the attacking methods. For instance, if I was China, I don't think I'd declare war on the U.S., but I might go cyber crazy in tems of disrupting our vulnerable domestic infrastructure. Think of it like how U.S. convoys kept the UK afloat last time, but in reverse.

I keep thinking that if China and Russia would get drawn in, it would be because they would fear being boxed out of resource markets, as each has their own problem with radical islamists. But Russia has less of a problem than China, so I wonder if the Bear might not dance a bit and stay aside.

In any case, I doubt Russia gets into a hot war over the Middle East, but the comments about Georgia folding up were interesting. If you're Russia, how far south do you go before stopping? Turkey? I imagine Armenia and Azerbaijan would be nice prizes to pick off.

Azerbaijan, Armenia, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan - they are not prizes. Eventually, after the fall of US Empire, they will probably re-join Russia (if not destroyed by that time). Historical links connect those countries closer to Russia than to far-away AmeriKa. Some Russian political extremists keep saying that the nation's lebensraum stretches as far as India Ocean to the South where - qoute - Russian soldier will soon wash off dirt from their boots.

China and Russia will not get to the point of serious armed conflict with the US. Not at this stage. Just a hint, why the Roman Empire collapsed. And that old joke about two bulls a young, hasting one and the old patient one.

Originally posted by cassandranova
reply to post by victor7

 

Since we're talking history, I've always read the Russian dream was the reconquest of Constantinople. Let's assume you're right that the Russians march through Georgia and Armenia. Do you think they'd continue on through and into Turkey? To consider that scenario, I guess we'd have to figure out in this game if Turkey orients itself west or east. I've always presumed they would orient west figuring on getting Syria as a prize at the end, but I could see the other side as well.

Could the Greeks ever be Russian allies, especially after the crap they've taken from the west, and their Orthodox legacy? If they did, the Turks could quickly find themselves in a pincer on both sides, and without any help likely to be coming from regional neighbors.

edit on 9-2-2012 by cassandranova because: (no reason given)

I'm curious where your read about that particular Russian dream? Not since the days of Knyaz Vladimir. You can also quote then A Russian dream about the Rome basing it on a very popular in 1920's concept Moscow - The Third Rome.
Again history. Bulgarians, Greeks, majority of Yugoslavs feel very friendly if not more towards Russians becuase of the Russian Empire involvement (just a few wars) in their liberation from Ottoman's rule. So one may expect some sympathies being propagated through generations.
Turkey is NATO - No armed contact is advised.

reply to post by MRHIDDENHAND


US plan is to conduct regime change in Iran and then use Iran to create Chechnya type problems in Russian south. That would be one big size Chechnya to handle. Also Iran has second largest source of natural gas only after Russia, so having a friendly Iran can give rise to making a Gas OPEC and command the prices.

However, recently like few days ago US and Israel tested their radars and anti missile technologies successfully. This is one major step and defense towards the 100s of missiles that Iran threatens to launch over Israel. Seems other major bet left for Iran is the closing of the Strait of Hormuz. That is why US is practicing landing on the beaches in order to secure the area from any 2-3 man team incursions and planting mines by rubber dingy set afloat from land.

US will attack Iran in coming months. Right now they are making a operations plan to minimize all sorts of causalities and losses and all the while saying to the world that we are giving time for sanctions etc. to work.

Military wise, what can Russia do to thwart these attack plans? If Russia does not do anything then it should be a game of 3-4 weeks before there is a regime change in Iran government.

Originally posted by victor7
reply to post by MRHIDDENHAND

 

US plan is to conduct regime change in Iran and then use Iran to create Chechnya type problems in Russian south. That would be one big size Chechnya to handle. Also Iran has second largest source of natural gas only after Russia, so having a friendly Iran can give rise to making a Gas OPEC and command the prices.

However, recently like few days ago US and Israel tested their radars and anti missile technologies successfully. This is one major step and defense towards the 100s of missiles that Iran threatens to launch over Israel. Seems other major bet left for Iran is the closing of the Strait of Hormuz. That is why US is practicing landing on the beaches in order to secure the area from any 2-3 man team incursions and planting mines by rubber dingy set afloat from land.

US will attack Iran in coming months. Right now they are making a operations plan to minimize all sorts of causalities and losses and all the while saying to the world that we are giving time for sanctions etc. to work.

Military wise, what can Russia do to thwart these attack plans? If Russia does not do anything then it should be a game of 3-4 weeks before there is a regime change in Iran government.

edit on 10-2-2012 by victor7 because: (no reason given)

From the end. Military-wise Russia will do zilch (they simply can not afford a large scale prolonged war). If it comes to the point of no-return highly unlikely, it will be the President's call to part take a bit to safe the face or perish launching all-in.
I haven't seen or missed any mentioning of Chemical and Bacteriological weapons. In my days of glory WMD was called ABC weapon. Russia hasn't destroyed due to technical and logistic problems her Chemical arsenal. About 15 years ago, I was at Kambarka C weapons storage facility that sits right on the bank of Kama river. Having a friendly discussion with the facility commander, I learnt that in the case of accidental or intentional hit, the stored goods may spill and eventually finish with Kama, Volga, Caspian Sea, Black Sea, and finally seriously affect Mediterranean. There are several of similar facilities both in Russia and West.

Now about the master plan. It all has begun some 300 years ago somewhere between Windsor and Amsterdam when Peter the Great managed to unit and fortify Russia to the point when it became a threat to the Crown. A series of wars have been devised ever since including the Great October Revolution/Revolt that was financed besides Germany by the Crown and US banks. The main goal of the plan is to destroy Russia as a state, simple like that. The plan so far has been victorious and with every decade Russia is getting closer to the end. If you are curious about the topic and speak Russian, I can provide you with links and suggest some reading.

I'm not really curious about technicalities any more. I'm not going to participate in the battle this time.

reply to post by MRHIDDENHAND


It is a long desire of AngloSaxon nations to break Russia as a mighty state as it interferes in their desire to dominate the world and pursue their sly and even evil agenda.

Look forward to the links, but hope they are not too in detail as I like the macro side of topics better than get into the micro issues.

reply to post by MRHIDDENHAND


RUSSIAN DUMA ASKS FOR DRASTIC MEASURES IN SYRIA

www.jpost.com...

Ryabkov, speaking on a visit to Colombia, said Russia would take "drastic measures" if the West kept trying to intervene in Syria's internal affairs through the Security Council.

"The UN council is not a tool for intervention in internal affairs and is not the agency to decide which government is to be next in one country or another," Ryabkov said. "If our foreign partners don't understand that, we will have to use drastic measures to return them to real grounds."

Originally posted by victor7

Originally posted by phatpackage

Originally posted by victor7
reply to post by Fitch303

 

India has defense pact with Russia, full mutual defense pact. China takes Russian side then Pakistan jumps in too as it has similar defense pact with China.

India has extremely strong ties with Australia, the UK and the USA as well. They also have extremely strong ties to Israel.

en.wikipedia.org...

India will never side with China ever. This is because of border issues with China and their strong ties with Pakistan.

www.2point6billion.com...


Fantasy talk.

Revisiting Indo-Russia Treaty: It was renewed for another 10 years in 2009 to be good till 2020.

Article IX of the treaty provided that the “contracting parties will consult each other in case of attack or threat thereof to remove such threat and to take appropriate effective measures to ensure peace and security of their countries.”

indrus.in...

CASE CLOSED on which side India would be

edit on 9-2-2012 by victor7 because: (no reason given)

There is no case closed AT ALL

The contracting parties agreed to CONSULT each other to try to avoid conflict, that's no sides taken, taht's an agreement to talk before fighting which is EXACTLY why I said India would be the LAST country to jump in, avoid all initial casualties and enter the war in the same position America did, unscathed

(and i'm not trying to piss you off it's a good debate and no where near closed)

Take into account:

In a decade, Tel Aviv has become a leading supplier of arms to India, now its largest export market. The value of the contracts signed over the last 10 years is estimated at nearly $10bn (.

The Indo-Nepal Treaty of Peace and Friendship of 1950 is a bilateral treaty between Nepal and India establishing a close strategic relationship between the two South Asian neighbors. The treaty was signed on July 31, 1950 by the then-Prime Minister of Nepal Mohan Shamsher Jang Bahadur Rana and Indian ambassador to Nepal, Chadreshwar Narayan Singh.[1] The treaty allows for the free movement of people and goods between the two nations and a close relationship and collaboration on matters of defence and foreign affairs.

Nearly as good as the treaty with Russia and a Conflict of interests as well because we aren't talking about JUST Russia we are talking about China and Russia who are both threatening action here

The Sino-Indian War (Hindi: भारत-चीन युद्ध Bhārat-Chīn Yuddh), also known as the Sino-Indian Border Conflict (simplified Chinese: 中印边境战争; traditional Chinese: 中印邊境戰爭; pinyin: Zhōng-Yìn Biānjìng Zhànzhēng), was a war between China and India that occurred in 1962. A disputed Himalayan border was the main pretext for war, but other issues played a role. There had been a series of violent border incidents after the 1959 Tibetan uprising, when India had granted asylum to the Dalai Lama. India initiated a Forward Policy in which it placed outposts along the border, including several north of the McMahon Line, the eastern portion of a Line of Actual Control proclaimed by Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai in 1959. Unable to reach political accommodation on disputed territory along the 3,225-kilometer-long Himalayan border[7], the Chinese launched simultaneous offensives in Ladakh and across the McMahon Line on 20 October 1962, coinciding with the Cuban Missile Crisis. Chinese troops advanced over Indian forces in both theatres, capturing Rezang la in Chushul in the western theatre, as well as Tawang in the eastern theatre. The war ended when the Chinese declared a ceasefire on 20 November 1962, and simultaneously announced its withdrawal from the disputed area.

Now lets flash forward to Today some quotes from the last 12 months

NEW DELHI: China has increased its military presence on the border in the past few years, government sources said. So has India They have a Militarized, they have fought in the past the situation in Tibet/Nepal has never resolved both nations are INCREASING their military presence along that border ...lets bring that back to relationships with Israel, Israel supplies the Indian Military, India counts on that support to modernize it's weaponry.

cont...

Originally posted by victor7
reply to post by lordnightstalker

 

The only country India has mutual defense pact is Russia. I think India China have annual trade of over $100B.

End of the day, Either India will fight along side the Russian alliance or India will not fight with anyone. This is my guess atleast.

edit on 9-2-2012 by victor7 because: (no reason given)

As long as China plays its hand,with Pakistan,India will side with the US.

To India,Pakistan is its biggest threat.

cont...

India's decision to boost its military capabilities near the border with China was a political move aimed at “containing” China's rise, the official newspaper of China's People's Liberation Army (PLA) has said. The PLA Daily said that India's reported plan to carry out a $13-billion military modernisation, including deployment of 1,00,00 soldiers along the disputed border with China — the biggest expansion since the 1962 war — reflected “adjustments” to India's national security strategy that suggested New Delhi had begun to regard Beijing as a “de facto competitor”. “India has begun to consider China as an opponent,” the PLA Daily said.

So here you have it, India considers China an Opponent, the border is at it's highest military tension since the last time hey fought, Israel supplies their modernization

Here's where your argument really begins to break down, some more Facts

The U.S. Congress on October 1, 2008, gave final approval to an agreement facilitating nuclear cooperation between the United States and India. The deal is seen as a watershed in U.S.-India relations and introduces a new aspect to international nonproliferation efforts. First introduced in the joint statement released by President Bush and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on July 18, 2005,

Actually, Bangladesh is just one of many - and this week, The United States and India signed a 10-year agreement paving the way for stepped up military ties, including joint weapons production and cooperation on missile defense. Titled the "New Framework for the US-India Defense Relationship" (NFDR), it was signed on June 27/05 by u.s. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and India's Defense Minister Pranab Mukherjee. This is a big deal. A very big deal.

the Communications Interoperability and Security Memorandum of Agreement or CISMOA whereby air, sea and land assets of both sides can communicate with each other through common hardware and encryption software during as forces of US allies do during NATO operations, the Basic Exchange and Cooperation Agreement for Geospatial Cooperation or BECA.

India is on the communications network with NATO

Now it get's interesting

Japan has such a security pact with only two other countries – the United States and Australia. And it comes in the same month that India and the United States closed a nuclear cooperation deal that won New Delhi a place on the world’s nuclear high table, ending three decades of isolation following its first nuclear tests in 1974. And finally if you remember that India, the United States, Japan , Australia and Singapore held naval exercises last year off the Arabian Sea, you begin to see the outlines of a new security architecture for Asia, which according to some has the containment of China written all over it. Japan is an enemy of China they have a similar agreement with OZ

But here is the clincher

India has maritime security arrangement in place with Oman and Qatar.[65] In 2008, a landmark defense pact was signed, under which India committed its military assets to protect "Qatar from external threats".

IN NO OTHER INSTANCE does INDIA have an OBLIGATION to come to the Military aid of any Nation other than the Oil Rich Nations of Oman and Quatar

The Russian pact is simply to communicate they have a policy of containment with us AGAINST China

But they are OBLIGATED to defend Oman and Quatar

So If Iran stops the flow of oil in the straights of Hormuz what does India HAVE to do, defend those nations

Russia is ONE military agreement of Many India has it has no more meaning than talking before fighting, WE help them with their defense against China a Stated Opponent, they are OBLIGATED to defend the oil rich states that are affected by any Conflict in Hormuz, Israel is modernizing their military, The USA is close to war with Pakistan at this point in time and Pakistan is an ALLY of China with an actual defense pact

Maybe, Maybe if it were Only Russia they would even have a choice, but there is simply no way in Hell India is cutting off it's Nuclear support, it's modernization support, it's vast trade with America, It's Treaty OBLIGATION to defend the oil rich gulf states, it's Treaties with Japan and Australia and Nepal

To jump in on the side of CHINA and PAKISTAN China a Nation it calls an opponet and has a tense Military border with India and Pakistan, the two South Asian countries have been involved in four wars, including one undeclared war, as well as many border skirmishes and military stand-offs. Additionally, India has accused Pakistan of engaging in proxy wars by providing military and financial assistance to violent non-state actors.

Cont....

reply to post by sonnny1


Indians in India are still pro Russia and suspicious of the US. Those abroad might have different opinion especially their kids. This according to an old retired Indian friend that I talked to few hours ago. He also told me that during cold war, US had aimed 400 nukes on India and all along Pakistani terrorism on India, the US sided and winked at Pak. that is common knowledge about how US lets its friends get away with crap.

India China trade is 75B in 2011 while only 57B with US in the same year. India can do trade of $75B with China that means your article about 1962 war holds little weight.

Heck majority of Indian weapons are Russian origin, so if they fight against Russia then they will not get spare parts and won't be able to offer any help to anyone including themselves.

Your essentially are saying India will side with 2 Nations it has a policy of containment in regards to that it has fought Five Wars with collectively with in recent history that it maintains one of the most armed borders in the world Against and is called one of the worlds "3 powder keg locations for the start of WW3" and side against it's current Nuclear benefactor, it's weapons modernization Ally break 3 other treaties of equal significance with in regards to Japan, the USA and Isreal and Australia break with an Oath and Obligations of defense for Oman and Quatar (which lets face it is ONLY THERE TO DEFEND AGAINST AN IRANIAN PLAY FOR OIL) cut itself off of those agreements which basically supply India it's OIL

Because it has a treaty which states that prior to any conflict they would "TALK" with Russia first

Really? Seriously are you Russian? You have to be kidding me

reply to post by sonnny1


OF COURSE LOL

reply to post by lordnightstalker


why don't you take all the treaties indians have and have a little bonfire. during war etc. treaties do not mean anything, only real actions do. indians are making PAKFA plane deal with Russia for $35B, they refused the F-35 from US. Wonder whose side Indians are on?

Originally posted by victor7
reply to post by sonnny1

 

Indians in India are still pro Russia and suspicious of the US. Those abroad might have different opinion especially their kids. This according to an old retired Indian friend that I talked to few hours ago. He also told me that during cold war, US had aimed 400 nukes on India and all along Pakistani terrorism on India, the US sided and winked at Pak. that is common knowledge about how US lets its friends get away with crap.

India China trade is 75B in 2011 while only 57B with US in the same year. India can do trade of $75B with China that means your article about 1962 war holds little weight.

Heck majority of Indian weapons are Russian origin, so if they fight against Russia then they will not get spare parts and won't be able to offer any help to anyone including themselves.

The entire world scenario has changed since then, Pakistan is now a place the USA sends drones into a kills members of it's populace, India is a Nation who we broke Nuclear non proliferation treaties to make an Ally of, the soviet weapons you speak of are no longer coming in any volume and the Israelis supply the parts to make them worth their weight in poop.

Your talking to an "old retired Indian" The old RETIRED Indians don't make policy the young ones educated in the University system many of them in the USA do

And as far as trade, please do the numbers for China (an enemy they have a containment policy against) and Russia VS all the Nations in Nato, the USA, Japan, Australia, Quatar, Oman, Saudi Arabia,I srael

It is DWARFED by hundreds of Billions of Dollars and 80% of it's food imports

reply to post by lordnightstalker


there is no point discussing this matter anymore.

good article on Syria

globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com...

As the violence worsens in Syria, the United States and international community are in a dilemma. Even more serious than the recent veto by Russia and China of a U.N. Security Council resolution criticizing the regime of Bashar al-Assad, there are no great options for how to respond.

reply to post by victor7


Because it's a better plane and they have good relationships with Russia maybe? What shmuck wouldn't buy the better plane? That's like me buying Pontiac sunfire vs an Accura of the same age and mileage because I like the guy selling the sunfire better, it would Moronic not to, that's not even an argument your offering it's just common sense you'd have to be an idiot to take a 4th generation fighter over a fifth generation fighter if you were offered it. That still says nothing about who's side they would take, they are taking our Nuclear technology too...

This just validates my argument that India will have the option of sitting it out until last because it has treaties with all sides and coming in Last makes it the big winner in this scenario, but it's Never going to allow it's Oil treaties to be sacrificed to Iran when it's only clear actual Defense treaties revolve around protecting it's suppliers all of who stand to be up #s creek if Iran dominates nor will anything ever change it's Enemy status with Pakistan or the fact that it's been in actual war with both China and Pakistan 5-6 times respectively, what are they going to do Just let China march through Pakistan dismantle the border and turn the other way? It's an Insane thought

I'd buy the 5th generation fighter too

Yes it is Over, I have cited a dozen treaties and articles, turned over your numbers multiple times and for 3 pages you have a treaty that is not any pact for defense that you refuse to actually quote and the sale of some fighter planes as a reason that India would ally with 2 Nations that it is continually at war or near war with against the USA and Israel who they are completely at peace with that and some laugh icons, this exists in your mind because of a singular treaty Even though India has 6 other treaties it would violate to back the singular one up and it's not even a treaty that requires defense and an Iranian domination of Hormuz is completely against India's Oil Interests, Complete against it's China containment policy and requires them to fight on the side of a sworn enemy they are at war with for decades without end in a situation that is considered top 3 for the start of WW3, they will just roll over and say okay we are on the same side now because Russia is selling them some fighter planes?... Yeah it's Over all right, night bro, no hard feelings

reply to post by MRHIDDENHAND


My background is as a history major, so that would have been in the Tsarist period where Russia had ambitions to become the Third Rome. I didn't think it continued to today, but you never know. Memories linger a long time. For instance, the US hasn't formally embraced Manifest Destiny in over a hundred years and yet...

I wonder seriously if we're not heading toward a more multipolar world with great states and areas of influence.