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.

 

NATO got cold feet now.

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 30 2013 @ 01:36 PM
link   
Well I have had lots on here tell me America & NATO are the best, and Russia would never win a war, sorry guys I won that bet, because now Russia & China & Iran have stood up to NATO over Syria NATO members have all run for the bathroom fast.
It has been a fact for many years that Russia under Putin has got an armed forces that NATO have not got money to build.
NATO are bust, skint, bankrupt, finished, every one of our NATO states could be taken by Russia within 24 hours, no shots need be fired.
America, the UN, NATO are all great at talking, but they all lack action.

www.worldwar3news.com...




posted on Aug, 30 2013 @ 06:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Alternative4u
 


Can I make a very friendly suggestion and stop reading such ridiculous websites as the one you just posted? Your going to rot your brain out with all this rubbish. WW3 is not about to happen, and it will likely never happen.

Let me tell you how this will play out.

Obama will continue on with his "strong rhetoric" and "no final decision on syria" line. The stock markets will get played a little longer and commodities will get played with a little longer. Certain people will make some money.

Finally Obama will back down and say some big long speech about how the world can't sit idly by while Syria uses chemical weapons. Then he'll throw out the "must never happen again.... or else" line towards syria and it will be over and done with.



posted on Aug, 31 2013 @ 08:03 AM
link   
reply to post by Nomad451
 


Hi there, well I am not able to say your wrong on all you say about that, it is the way most times how this type of thing ends just as you say.



posted on Aug, 31 2013 @ 08:15 AM
link   
reply to post by Nomad451
 


I disagree.. I think world war 3 is inevitable.. but I don't think we are witnessing the beginning. I mean maybe in a sense that the actions in Syria will have a ripple affect that plays a role in a world war 20 to 50 years from now, but not NOW now.
Also the US would destroy Russia, and technology wise, China too, but China has so many people it makes it an impossible win without a nuclear exchange. And no one really wins there.
edit on 31-8-2013 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 31 2013 @ 09:11 AM
link   
An anti assad soldier said If they really want to strike Bashar, they could have launched a strike earlier, not giving Bashar all this time to evacuate his positions and hide his tanks inside the schools and sending students home. Some of the schools have refugees, he kicked them out and hid his equipment inside."

Does that not sound like he is trying to get the us to bomb schools? They hid tanks in schos but they ran the people out basically what he's saying. He also expressed concerns that the us would try to hit fsa and assad to protect israel .



posted on Aug, 31 2013 @ 09:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Alternative4u
 


God you have to be kidding me. Aside from reading a crap website have you ever really compared US/NATO forces with Russian forces? Russia is still rebuilding/retraining. And their production has MAJOR issues right now.

If Russia wants to knock NATO out it's going to require nukes. They only have enough trained and effective military to take NATO on one at a time if they want to completely knock them out, may two at a time, but certainly not all at once. And what do you think NATO is going to be doing all the while, sitting there wringing their hands going "Oh my god! We're broke, we can't fight back!"?



posted on Aug, 31 2013 @ 10:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


Quite, but I think some people are so "turned on" by the thought of WW3 or the West being weak they are blinded by it.

Fact of the matter is, Russia would have a hard time against a single NATO state, much less all of them and if you attack one, you get the whole lot coming at you. NATO nations aren't broke either, budget concerns yes, but broke no. In fact, most NATO countries economies are on the bounce back while China's and Russia's have stagnated.



posted on Aug, 31 2013 @ 05:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


I am 100% certain that Obama & UK only decided to back off from attacking Syria because they like myself know NATO being fragmented and broke would be wiped out if we took on Russia, it is fact American equipment is dated, Russian war machine is smack up to date, they did not cut defence as USA have, so sorry no, the USA are no match that is reason they had to back off the war talk.



posted on Aug, 31 2013 @ 05:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Alternative4u
America, the UN, NATO are all great at talking, but they all lack action.

:shk: Sounds like you are mocking instead of being grateful that we aren't
engaged in World War III. NATO and the USA are capable of leveling Syria.
Don't kid yourself that they aren't.



posted on Aug, 31 2013 @ 05:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Alternative4u
 


Oh my god you're being such a fanboy that it's not even remotely funny. This is almost as insane as when you said that NATO subs can't leave port without running aground and Russian subs have hyperaccurate charts.

www.flightglobal.com...
www.strategypage.com...


Kramnik notes some remaining problems, including the need to improve infrastructure at air bases and the modernization of critical capabilities for supporting combat aircraft, including refueling, reconnaissance, AWACS, and electronic warfare aircraft. Without such aircraft, even the most modern combat aircraft cannot function effectively. In conclusion, Kramnik advocates the conversion of existing commercial aircraft (such as Il-62 and Il-86 jets currently in storage) into tankers, a process that could be done more quickly than building a sufficient number of new refueling aircraft and could give the air force 30-40 additional tankers by the end of the current decade. He argues that without this type of conversion program, this quantity of tankers could only be reached by the late 2020s, and even then only at the expense of a number of transport and AWACS aircraft. Such a program would allow each air base to have its own detachment of tankers.

russiamil.wordpress.com...


“The unscheduled inspection … of the Russian army has led the General Staff to mixed conclusions. On the one hand, the military has been found highly fit for combat. On the other, a number of units have demonstrated systemic drawbacks. In particular, last year’s military school graduates performed poorly, and the state of the equipment leaves a lot to be desired,” said Gerasimov.

Battlefield management — the “nervous system” of an army — has also fallen short of expectations, according to the general. “In almost all of the inspected ‘hubs,’ the duty officers showed limited skills in getting communications across via automated combat control systems,” he said.
The unsatisfactory state of military equipment has become a matter of particular concern. In Gerasimov’s view, the checkup “has once again confirmed the validity of the Ministry of Defense’s decision to reinstate maintenance units in the army.”
The problem is that, currently, conventional maintenance shops and industrial enterprises offer services that are below quality standards. “Often, a piece of equipment that underwent an overhaul or interim maintenance and is still under warranty fails within the first few months of its operation in the forces,” said Gerasimov.

rbth.ru...

Meanwhile, on the other side of things we have:

www.ausairpower.net...
www.lockheedmartin.com...
destroyerhistory.org...

Just to name a few. But oh yes, please tell us all about how Russia is a thousand times more advanced than the West, when they can't even keep their planes and ships operating, and are only just now starting to see more training.




top topics



 
3

log in

join