What happens if we end up at war with Russia?

page: 6
4
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 01:20 AM
link   
reply to post by penninja
 

China just declared unofficially which cities of Western coast will be nuked first, and why - t o die maximum people. China should be expelled from UNSC but there is no one to expel it because UNSC and the world is bitterly divided. Everything indicated we are going to an event X with unknown magnitude of destruction, and the parties struggle whose nations will survive it. Therefore my reasoning above for the importance of population to be saved. America has no chance to win a war with Russia but it can lose it for certain. Another matter is if America wants to destroy maximum of Russia anc China while sacrificing its population. But it has never declared as a goal of US policy, the way it is made known as a goa of the Chinese although unofficial one. Russia has always shown concern of population, although the West does not think so good for her. Therefore a Russian and American alliance IS POSSIBLE with the goal to save maximum people on the planet. If the event X is indeed inevitable. China may help it happen by starting it a bit earlier. So is Saudi Arabia and the rest. Why should they want their nations to die, if they don't know their nations are going to die anyway? Isn't it craziness of biggest magnitude? Let again think of what is the really important. Is it your smart phone, is it your money, or is it your life and that of your loved ones. Is it the life of whole nations, or their wealth in today's estimates. The saved people is all that matters at the end. And that end may be quite near.




posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 02:24 AM
link   
reply to post by 2012newstart
 


This is incredible nonsense and runs on like your thoughts are scrambled.

We tell each other plans for our nukes daily, the Pentagon recently declared nuclear options too... big deal, we do this all the time, We've always been at war with Eastasia dontcha know?

The Chinese don't even actually have a real doctrine of overseas war, nothing there beyond hyperbole and bs... peoples war is the true doctrine, victory by immigration, land purchase etc... no reality to what your saying.



posted on Nov, 10 2013 @ 01:57 AM
link   

penninja
reply to post by 2012newstart
 


This is incredible nonsense and runs on like your thoughts are scrambled.

We tell each other plans for our nukes daily, the Pentagon recently declared nuclear options too... big deal, we do this all the time, We've always been at war with Eastasia dontcha know?


Who are "WE"? I am not American and logically don't know the Pentagon plans of wars in East Asia. Neither do I know the Russian plans. All I do is logic.

Would you please use correct English grammar because there might be other people who do not understand slang as "dontcha ".

This is not incredible nonsense and my thoughts are farther than my nose can reach. If you understand anything of it.

"The saved people is all that matters at the end. And that end may be quite near" that is my conclusion and I will repeat it. This is all about. The people who will be saved. Not the Americans who will be saved. The people from this planet.
edit on 10-11-2013 by 2012newstart because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2013 @ 02:15 AM
link   
Completely lost on the 1984 reference in "always at war with East Asia"?

China, with the bulk of it's population that is educated along the coast in a very small region, incredible cities like Shanghai, a barn storming economy, vital targets like the newly built Three Gorges damn.... is going to launch an attack with some theory that of 3,500 nukes the 3-4 that it would take to get through, knock out all the power, end the economy, lay flat all those new buildings and basically end China also... is somehow a good idea?

You really don't understand the game being played at all do you? Population in fear = easy to control, cold war tactics that allow weapons sales all over the world and fuel the economy while less stable nations get all the killing on their soil?

I'll say it again... 5 Nations sit atop the UN security council, they already together control the world... they are NEVER going to directly fight each other.



posted on Nov, 10 2013 @ 02:38 AM
link   
reply to post by penninja
 


America has been sold to china and russia - they want to kill all of the "useless eaters" and america has a lot - thanks to the destruction of our economy, most recently by obama and his communist regime.

What about the firing of all of the military top brass? Were they patriots to america, or cheaters on their wives? Gambling addicts? and spies giving military secrets to foriegn countries?

What about the mercenaries that have been hired by DHS for obozo's personal army in america?

The idiotic FSA (free # army) that elected obozo will be the first sacrificed to the invading illegal drug cartels, and russian/chinese troops that are all over america right now - the patriots will be second because they can defend themselves a little longer.

But, in the end - Babylon (america) will be completely destroyed.

And they are all laughing at us.



posted on Nov, 12 2013 @ 05:06 AM
link   
I've been wondering for a while now, what the hell is happening to Putin, maybe he's been in power too long, but he's acting weird.
I don't see any sort of shooting war happening on either Russian land or the continental US, what would worry me is any sort of conflict where both would feel compelled to enter into. Say for instance a strike in Iran by the US and Russia going in at the same time to secure some say sensitive objectives, I dunno just my thoughts.



posted on Nov, 13 2013 @ 09:45 AM
link   
Russia sent its biggest ship Peter the great to Mediterranean. Moskva cruiser went back to Sevastopol base, Varyag, Slava class as Moskva, joined Peter the great. Varyag visited Alexandria, Egypt. This is a massive presence in the region if we are looking for potential nuclear capabilities.



posted on Nov, 13 2013 @ 09:49 AM
link   
reply to post by jmsbkr
 


If Putin is not in power in Russia, others will take it. KPRF.ru is the biggest party in opposition. Let alone generals and FSB-KGB. In fact Putin may be the best partner of USA that possibly could arise in Russia at the moment.
For example, no single vote for Putin came from the Northern fleet. Perhaps they all voted for KPRF or other leftist parties. Imagine what the consequences would be, if let say a powerful hardline general is elected president.



posted on Nov, 13 2013 @ 09:59 AM
link   
In the past I had the rare chance to visit onboard another Kirov class cruiser, similar to Peter the Great. It is quite big! And those missiles called carrier killers they are just enormous. They are not kept open but we all know their characteristics.
If Russia is to start WW3 it may start it with such kind of ships. Notice that all "anti-air" missiles as S300, S400 are nuclear capable and can strike ground targets as well. We are talking of hundreds of various kinds of missiles, all possibly nuclear. You know if a bomber Tu could carry 12-24 smaller cruise nuclear missiles what to say about such big ships. i doubt all armament is reported in those public sites. Let alone the fact all reported armament is dating back 20-30 years ago. Perhaps what is really inside all those tubes is a completely different new systems that the public doesn't know about.

I don't want to frighten anyone, but if WW3 indeed starts, those ships may make the Middle East vast land if needed. Or to strike US carrier groups. It all depends who will strike first. Of course the US planes are quite powerful and the US cruise missiles could be nuclear armed too. If they strike first, the chances are at the opposite side.

May God save us!
edit on 13-11-2013 by 2012newstart because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 13 2013 @ 10:08 AM
link   
I visited the first of series "Kirov" battlecruiser en.wikipedia.org...
I am quite proud of it. Pls do not ask me what circumstances made it possible because I won't tell you
At that time the carrier killers missiles as well as others were installed right on the upper deck and they were looking as terrible as those on Moskva, only more in numbers. Now they are all put inside on lower deck and are not visible on Peter the Great, nevertheless they are the same (or better) missiles. Nobody knows what the hell is installed inside there. Let pray we don't have to enter into any WW3 to test who is the stronger one.
edit on 13-11-2013 by 2012newstart because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 13 2013 @ 10:28 AM
link   

2012newstart
I visited the first of series "Kirov" battlecruiser en.wikipedia.org...
I am quite proud of it. Pls do not ask me what circumstances made it possible because I won't tell you
At that time the carrier killers missiles as well as others were installed right on the upper deck and they were looking as terrible as those on Moskva, only more in numbers. Now they are all put inside on lower deck and are not visible on Peter the Great, nevertheless they are the same (or better) missiles. Nobody knows what the hell is installed inside there. Let pray we don't have to enter into any WW3 to test who is the stronger one.
edit on 13-11-2013 by 2012newstart because: (no reason given)


That missle is worthless because that ship would never get close enough to a carrier to use. Back when the Russians had a fleet, it would have been a part of a battle group with Soviet Carrier that would have provided it cover from US Carrier Battle group. With all those ships working together in theory this ship would survive long enough to get in range and hit a carrier. Now these things are used as PR stunts but in war with the US they are just sitting ducks. The Russian surface fleet would either head into port and hide or be destroyed. The Russian would have to depend on their Sub fleet to do try and disrupt US forces heading to Europe.



posted on Nov, 13 2013 @ 10:52 AM
link   
reply to post by MrSpad
 

yes that is the classical theory. There was a good movie called WW3? a German documentary after the fall of Berlin wall that represents how the events would develop should Gorbachev have been ousted. Exactly what you say, first blockade of Atlantic that the Russians lost. Then ground offensive in Germany. The film ended inconclusively, with mutual nuclear exchange. It admitted however that at one point Europe is defenseless and has to use nuclear weapons first.

In real case scenario one of the superpowers will use nukes first in surprise attack. (if it starts as regional war let say in Syria, the surprise will be the nukes used against the other superpower). In such case a strike group exactly as the one in Mediterranean would have a goal to destroy with nuclear loaded missiles of whatever kind maximum of the US fleets and bases in range. And the range may be different of what the official data shows. Because we have the Reagan-Gorbachev treaty of medium range missiles ban. But I doubt it they keep it. It is already admitted the KH missiles on bombers could travel 3000 km. Accept it as probable that both Iskander and Yakhont travel much farther than 500 km....

In other words, the war will be won at first shot and it depends whether or not with minimal damage for the attacked country. It might be USA in the position of attacking country and then all is vice versus. I admit that the US bombers and fighters are unparalleled by what is publicly shown by Russia today. Still there are the scramjet reentry vehicles that Russia only recently admitted it has developed. So everything is one big IF. Still we have right now hundreds of Russian nukes floating next to Syria and Israel. What to care of one-two Iranian bombs? Well they might be crazy enough to start first. And Israel sees that clearly. Russia doesn't want at this point to start WW3 nevertheless Putin warned on several occasions such scenario is possible. Generals warned too. US top general said about Syria what could be the Russian response, that Russia has the capability of all spectrum to strategic, but that he doesn't want to comment such option now. Ok let me stop here.



posted on Feb, 9 2014 @ 05:28 AM
link   

wrabbit2000
Here, I think miscalculation is the greatest factor. Putin is pushing because Obama is wimpy and can be pushed. Putin will keep pushing until Obama says no. Although if Obama pushes back too hard, Putin has a dozen ways he can hurt us BADLY without any military.


I don't think Putin is pushing and it's something the west made up and then some people can pretend it's pushing. I bet Putin only needs one way to bring the west down to it's knees or force to change rapidly, just by refuting one document from the HQ of psychiatry via youtube or the news and say it isn't so. They are a very patient people I assume and I hope the west comes to realize this in the near future and make up something new.



posted on Feb, 9 2014 @ 06:08 AM
link   
I would keep an eye on the Bering straights, once railroad marshaling yards start being built on the Russian side, time to think about somewhere else to live. Plus docking facilities for anti submarine ships, that's all the Russians would need as regards protecting landing craft, shore based anti aircraft units should do the job as regards air protection.



posted on Feb, 9 2014 @ 06:25 AM
link   
Just remembered that old saying, "If you want peace, prepare for war" although looking at 20th century history, that did not work out so well.



posted on Feb, 9 2014 @ 09:26 AM
link   

Thorneblood
If you really wanna know how it will all play out then here....this video pretty much covers it all.



No, because Nato might disband or choose Russia and against the US eventually if it became clearer how things are. Otherwise things would become more like this for all sides on the planet.

www.youtube.com...
edit on 9-2-2014 by spiritspeak because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 9 2014 @ 09:34 AM
link   
reply to post by devildogUSMC
 


* A fresh Perspective after recent views of Putin and Russia....

I haven't read the whole thread but replying straight to the OP point here...

If we went to real, honest to God war against Russia or visa versa, as opposed to a proxy war? Well... The answer today is very different from what it would have been 6 years ago. Today?...

I hate to say this...but if we end up in a war with Russia? Learn Russian in a passable way, very very quickly...stay low and stay quiet until things stabilize (and they will...it'll be a marathon event, NOT a sprint) and settle in for a long, hard fight to get back what we lose in the opening days and weeks.

Right now we don't even have a President I'm confident would hold himself together, mentally, if faced with a TRUE challenge he can't pin blame back for, can't use somehow for his benefit and is an actual "Do or DIE moment" for decision making. He may just have a breakdown...and it won't surprise me. It really won't. We have weakness and pathetic self interest vs. Putin, who represents the best and worst of what Russia can present to the world for deed and word.

This is the worst time in history to have a weak worm as a President...but that's the hand we've been dealt. Now lets hope to God no one calls our bluff in a serious and meaningful way over the next 3 years. We may just lose the opening rounds.
edit on 9-2-2014 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 9 2014 @ 09:39 AM
link   
Hahaha another world war will not happen. It's not profitable to have a world war just ask those involved in the last two. Nuclear war is off the table just because no one has the balls. The world super powers are in a stalemate against the people and the banks. So we are stuck here bearing our teeth at each other and that's where it's profitable.



posted on Feb, 9 2014 @ 09:43 AM
link   
reply to post by spiritspeak
 


I've got something of a new perspective since my September post on this thread...

Put and Russia are patient..within limits. It depends on what they want here. If they want the US to simply be sidelined while they re-take their place as a respected world power, fine... It's not that big a deal by comparison and given what fall our President has already lead us down, here? It's not that much more to add salt into the wound at this stage.

However....the US is weak and indecisive right now. That won't last. Not by a long shot. People in the world thought the US was kaput and falling for power in the 1970's too. Vietnam just ended...morale in the military was in the crapper and we had a succession of crooks, seat warmers and incompetent fools in the White House. It made the US a paper tiger and a laughable one by the time 1980 rolled around.

Then Reagan came and people laughing at our weakness, choked in mid bite and didn't have a good meal again for at least 25 years. Putin knows this too.....

So, if doing more than sidelining the US is the goal, there are 3 years left to do it in before it's back to a crap shoot and dice roll for how our nation turns next. More inward and weaker? ...or another strong leader to over-swing the other direction?

Patience in Russia is real...but real limited with that 3 year timeline. Lets hope just sidelining is all they seek.
edit on 9-2-2014 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 9 2014 @ 09:47 AM
link   

marbles87
Hahaha another world war will not happen. It's not profitable to have a world war just ask those involved in the last two. Nuclear war is off the table just because no one has the balls. The world super powers are in a stalemate against the people and the banks. So we are stuck here bearing our teeth at each other, and that's where it's profitable.


Those same words preceded World War I, World War II and Korea.....and were 100% totally, absolutely wrong, all three times. They were repeated and I heard them myself in 1989 for Panama and 1991 for Kuwait. Again, 100% totally and absolutely wrong to everyone who said and believed it.

War absolutely can happen...and the surest way for it to proceed is for a majority to believe it's not possible. History shows that to be the most dangerous position for a population under threat to take.

War is also the single largest profit producing industry known to man in the modern times ...so profit motive as a reason NOT to go to war is badly misreading everything about international geopolitics right now, IMO.





top topics
 
4
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join