|
|
#71
10-17-2007, 06:27 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: WORLD WAR 3
[ QUOTE ]
I still don't understand why Russia was brought up in the first place. The country dumped their philosophy and government in order to become more "western," and saw the merits in doing so. In addition to that, Christianity is the religion of the majority (albeit a different brand). They'd be more likely to be an ally than an enemy. [/ QUOTE ] Catch up recent political events over the last week, its a valid question imo. I thought the same thing as you, up until about a week or two ago. 
|
|
#72
10-17-2007, 06:27 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: WORLD WAR 3
[ QUOTE ]
Basically I think I might of mistaken what the original question was asking. If we are talking about China+Russian taking over America, like land wise, states, all that, then yes I don't think they have a real chance, but if we are talking about an all out war where the goal is to basically Annihilate the other without nukes then like I was saying you are underrating Russia's power. [/ QUOTE ] lol, silly canadians...
|
|
#74
10-17-2007, 06:40 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: WORLD WAR 3
I think one thing we're overlooking is the attitudes of the potential troops in each nation. I have a feeling that Americans would be more reluctant to join an all-out war than the Russian, Iranian, or Chinese people. Just a thought.
I don't think a war like this would be fought on the ground. It would most likely be strategic air strikes. American Air Force >>>>> anyone else's. American Navy >>>>> anyone else's.
|
|
#75
10-17-2007, 06:47 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: WORLD WAR 3
the US would obviously enlist the help of bears.
seriously, i love this thread. this is the kind of thing i could argue about forever.. that said, and not trying to sit here for 30 minutes to type, this thread is the reason our education system is underfunded, social security is failing, and many other government programs are failing...we're planning for the things talked about here... understand, troops in the conventional sense, would NOT matter in WW3. give us another 10 years, and half our planes, both offensive and defensive, probably won't even be manned, so then it just becomes a question of how many planes we can build. our navy = #1 in the world. our air force = #1 in the world by far. our military technology = #1 in the world without question. you can have traditional armies, troop numbers and tanks. we won't be within 500 miles of them, and they're all worthless. and a big LOL goes out to anyone talking anything concerning the US being invaded. HA. i'm 90% sure that topic wouldn't even come up in russian and/or chinese circles UNLESS the US was incompacitated first... unfortunately, canada might be the key in that. assume mexico would side with the opposition, we could still have a relatively small area to defend against a full-scale invasion. san diego/phoenix/la may/may not go, but canada's border would pose FAR more problems. oceans on the east/west, only north/south to worry about... i'm rambling, but again, awesome thread..
|
|
#76
10-17-2007, 06:55 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: WORLD WAR 3
[ QUOTE ]
I personally think our society has advanced too far and is too civilized to come to it again. [/ QUOTE ] Not sure if anyone mentioned this but by body count the 1900s was one of the bloodiest centuries ever and the 90's was one of the bloodiest decades in the 20th century. Not sure how they rank when adjusted for population though.
|
|
#78
10-17-2007, 07:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: WORLD WAR 3
[ QUOTE ]
Russia's biggest asset is their hackers. there is a tremendous amount of international cybercrime (ugghh what a stupid phrase) perpetrated by people from .ru [/ QUOTE ] I dont want to get into a debate as I somewhat agree, but china's hackers are much more advanced as they are actually training for warfare. Yes, russians are notorious for "cybercrime" but its less political warfare, and more identity theft, spam, etc. basically stuff that has little to do with cyberwarfare, adaption might be easier, but as far as actual warfare over the internet the US is way ahead of russia, adn probably only slightly ahead of the asian countries.
|
|
#79
10-17-2007, 07:44 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: WORLD WAR 3
Wiper,
They'd still have to get their troops into canada and mexico, which would be close to impossible as it involves air/sea travel which would all be knocked out before they touched land. I like your outlook on the bears though, it might be our greatest asset. Lets just hope canada doesn't train their bears against us.
|
|
#80
10-17-2007, 08:03 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: WORLD WAR 3
[ QUOTE ]
Wiper, They'd still have to get their troops into canada and mexico, which would be close to impossible as it involves air/sea travel which would all be knocked out before they touched land. I like your outlook on the bears though, it might be our greatest asset. Lets just hope canada doesn't train their bears against us. [/ QUOTE ] I don't know how practical it is to ho ashore in Alaska, but the west coast of Alaska is pretty damned close to the east coast of Russia. And if you have to protect the whole coastline of south america and canada, and maybe greenland too, that's a lot of coastline to protect. I think you people overdo how impossible it would be for Russia/China to get troops to your continent. They obviously wouldn't just load up all their ships, send them away and hope for the best. Like it's already been said, the first step would be to knock out surveilance systems. Don't know how this would have to be done, but something about taking out satellites and hacking stuff and something something. They would still be hopelessly lost in a land war on US soil of course.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
