Just gearing up for 'another' war

[Ridge Wolf]

Here is a link in the news today. http://en.rian.ru/russia/20080618/111155009.html Although we have known about this for awhile now... it is just another step up and towards a possible confrontation. Just can't keep our hands out of it. I think we have too much testosterone. for being spread as thinly as we are presently. I am starting to get worried a little. Who's watchin' the back door? Us? At what point do we start to think that any survival skills we have accrued over the years just might be worthwhile and potentially come into actual use in the near future?

[FVR]

Who's watching our backdoor? Oh that would be Israel. Oh no, they are getting ready to take out Iran.

I don't see a problem with the above article. People forget, that Russia, China, and a host of other nations would gladly bomb us and take us over. World domination.

I think there are too many panty waist individuals in the US nowdays who have been suckling off the governments teets, enjoying the good life that so many of our past military patriots gave their lives for.

They forget, maybe they are so green that they don't ever remember back on the block. Where it is, keep your eyes open and your fists ready because you have four sides to protect.

You want to worry? Worry about a man who has a good chance to be president, who has already boasted about cutting the US defense budget to nothing, reducing the US Military, and then plans on sitting down with those that want to destroy us, and play footsies.


Neutralizing Russia's nuclear weapons, that's a no brainer.

[crashdive123]

Well said Frank.

[Ridge Wolf]

Well, I agree but I was getting at the fact that I am just tired of war. Seems like we can't exist without it. I know what happened during ww 2 when we were at war all over the place.

[Rick]

“The world is not dangerous because of those who do harm but because of those who look at it without doing anything”

“We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.”

Einstein was far smart than I so I respect his thoughts on the matter.

"No nation ever had an army large enough to guarantee it against attack in time of peace, or ensure it of victory in time of war." - Calvin Coolidge.

[crashdive123]

In the history of mankind, there has always been armed conflct. Will we ever see a time when there is none? I doubt it.

"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." (Edmund Burke)

[Sam Reeves]

So we place missile defense systems in Poland, Georgia, Armenia and Ukraine. Russia freaks out invades these counties and takes the missile defense systems and the technology that produced them.

[Chris]

Russia is not going to invade those countries, and the technology isn't wholly stored with the missile launchers, a lot of it is in space, etc.

If Russia did anything it would be developing anti-shield missiles, jamming, etc. It'd be another arm's race, but they wouldn't invade other countries, that would literally start ww3 and Russia doesn't want that (they'd lose, so hard).

For instance, in war trials, we've put f22s against f16s at like 6 vs 1 and the f22s clean up. No country can compete with those. Then we have the B2s, which can take off from Missouri, fly anywhere in the world, and drop conventional or nuclear bombs (bombs dropping from a bomber as opposed to ballistic missiles do not provide enough early warning for a counter attack). No other country can match that.

We've got huge buffers between our mainland and Russia. Thousands and thousands of miles of allies, bases, and oceans. Russia has none of that.

Russia can hem and haw, piss us off by helping Iran, or dick around with the UN Security Council, they can rattle the saber and threaten another arms race, but they're not so stupid as to commit suicide by staging an invasion of one of our allies.

[Sourdough]

Chris, Just who are you call, "A HUGE buffer". Just kidding Alaska is please to be your buffer, just keep sending the PORK, and buying the OIL. We love you America.

[klkak]

Chris, Just who are you calling, "A HUGE buffer". Just kidding. Alaska is pleased to be your buffer. just keep sending the PORK and buying the OIL. We love you America.

I almost fell off my chair on that one Hopeak. I haven't had "maple cured bacon in a while". Have America send some of it up with the pork.

[Sam Reeves]

Russia is not going to invade those countries, and the technology isn't wholly stored with the missile launchers, a lot of it is in space, etc.

If Russia did anything it would be developing anti-shield missiles, jamming, etc. It'd be another arm's race, but they wouldn't invade other countries, that would literally start ww3 and Russia doesn't want that (they'd lose, so hard).

For instance, in war trials, we've put f22s against f16s at like 6 vs 1 and the f22s clean up. No country can compete with those. Then we have the B2s, which can take off from Missouri, fly anywhere in the world, and drop conventional or nuclear bombs (bombs dropping from a bomber as opposed to ballistic missiles do not provide enough early warning for a counter attack). No other country can match that.

We've got huge buffers between our mainland and Russia. Thousands and thousands of miles of allies, bases, and oceans. Russia has none of that.

Russia can hem and haw, piss us off by helping Iran, or dick around with the UN Security Council, they can rattle the saber and threaten another arms race, but they're not so stupid as to commit suicide by staging an invasion of one of our allies.

Russia has a long history of invading those counties. Their first protocol would be to invade these nations. They are threatening to invade Georgia as it is.Their SU-34s match our f-16 and F-22s Granted they don't have alot of SU-34s but we have alot of F-22s either. The Serbs shot a B-2 down in Yugoslavia and Russia took it home with them. We can't afford another Arms race. We can't even afford Iraq.

We don't have any allies just nations we protect.

[RobertRogers]

I think the US is heading toward fighting half the world: Iraq, Iran, the middle eastern countries, Russia, China...

Can't do it all, too many fronts, as Germany found out the hard way.

[Chris]

Russia has a long history of invading those counties. Their first protocol would be to invade these nations. They are threatening to invade Georgia as it is.Their SU-34s match our f-16 and F-22s Granted they don't have alot of SU-34s but we have alot of F-22s either. The Serbs shot a B-2 down in Yugoslavia and Russia took it home with them. We can't afford another Arms race. We can't even afford Iraq.

We don't have any allies just nations we protect.
Nothing in the world matches an f22.

No b2 has ever been shot down, one has crashed, but not shot down.

An F-117A was shot down over yugoslavia and it was thought that it was a bit of a luck shot, spray a pray sort of thing.

The F-117A is an attack fighter, it can do some limited bombing, but not much, and in anycase it has been mostly phased out in favor of things like the f22. But the point being it flies lower to the ground and is so more susceptible to ground based fire.

The B2 is a true bomber, flying high above the range of many ground based defenses (not all though certainly). Because of our fancy-*** smart bombs too it can bomb in total darkness, in cloud cover, etc.



I think the US is heading toward fighting half the world: Iraq, Iran, the middle eastern countries, Russia, China...

Russia and China would not ally against us. Assuming there is a theoretical conflict between Russia and the US, China would either sit it out or ally with us. The Chinese are practical, they know they'd instantly lose a trillion dollars in US Treasuries, their economy would plummet because we'd stop buying all their crap, and with almost all of their wealth and power being concentrated in a few coastal cities they'd be easily neutered. Plus, for us to attack them we hop a boat from South Korea, Japan, the Phillipines, or have our buds from Australia do it. Then there is Guam, and Hawaii of course as well. China has to sail across the pacific, unless of course they used a few of their ICBMs, which would be bad, but those ICBMs may not make it (missile defense, made in china), and even if they did, by the time they did we'd have ones in the air heading to every city in China. The US would be hurt, hurt bad, but China would cease to exist.

These are the reasons why the cold war never became hot. So long as you don't have a zealot as your enemy, mutually assured destruction is pretty compelling. But that is also what makes islamic extremism so dangerous, they are zealots.

[Sam Reeves]

Nothing in the world matches an f22.
They have been begging us to prove this but we keep refusing.


No b2 has ever been shot down, one has crashed, but not shot down.

An F-117A was shot down over yugoslavia and it was thought that it was a bit of a luck shot, spray a pray sort of thing.

The F-117A is an attack fighter, it can do some limited bombing, but not much, and in anycase it has been mostly phased out in favor of things like the f22. But the point being it flies lower to the ground and is so more susceptible to ground based fire.

The B2 is a true bomber, flying high above the range of many ground based defenses (not all though certainly). Because of our fancy-*** smart bombs too it can bomb in total darkness, in cloud cover, etc.
It was shot down.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-117_Nighthawk
[/QUOTE]

[Sam Reeves]

Russia and China would not ally against us. Assuming there is a theoretical conflict between Russia and the US, China would either sit it out or ally with us. The Chinese are practical, they know they'd instantly lose a trillion dollars in US Treasuries, their economy would plummet because we'd stop buying all their crap,
http://edition.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/europe/07/16/missile.treaty/index.html

[Chris]

It was shot down.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-117_Nighthawk (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-117_Nighthawk)


As I said:



An F-117A was shot down over yugoslavia and it was thought that it was a bit of a luck shot, spray a pray sort of thing.


The thing was you got the F-117A, an older stealth fighter, confused with the B2, the newer stealth bomber. F-117s have already mostly been replaced.



http://edition.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/eu...aty/index.html (http://edition.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/europe/07/16/missile.treaty/index.html)


That changes nothing. China & Russia are not going to ally and attack the US.

If China pisses us off we'd cancel their money in US bonds, freeze all chinese assets, and enact a trade embargo shutting off China from our economy. Consumers would have less crap to buy, but China would get poor real quick.

In a conventionial war we would clean their clock. Destroy their ports and the game is over, and their ports are within flying distance of our pacific bases. Whereas ours are on the other side of the world from them.

In a Nuclear war everyone loses, but China doesn't have enough nukes to destroy the US, we have enough to destroy China a few times over. We also have the semi-effective missile defense, and of course better ways of delivering the weapons than China.

Many people erroneously think that china or russia are superpowers, they are not.

Assuming in a "world war 3" scenario Europe sides with us, and really, why wouldn't they? Any nation in Nato technically has signed a treaty to do just that... consider this military spending:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/spending.htm

It isn't even worth comparing. France, UK, Germany, & Japan could handle Russia & China. Israel could handle everyone in the Middle East (remember the 6 day war?).

Then, Nukes:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_states_with_nuclear_weapons

Still, it is the US and Russia, and don't forget the US has people on the ground in Russia right now handling their nukes because they can't afford the staff and we don't want them getting stolen.

So, to sum up.

Conventional war: not going to happen because of economic issues, and if it did happen, we'd easily win anyways.

Nuclear War: mutually assured destruction still holds. Any country that attacks a nuclear power with a nuclear weapon will always expect to see an equivalent response.

[Pict]

Nuclear War: mutually assured destruction still holds. Any country that attacks a nuclear power with a nuclear weapon will always expect to see an equivalent response.

This is what bothers me about islamic terroroists with a bomb. They just don't care. Any culture that would strap bombs to their own children won't hesitate. Mac

[Chris]

Nuclear War: mutually assured destruction still holds. Any country that attacks a nuclear power with a nuclear weapon will always expect to see an equivalent response.

This is what bothers me about islamic terroroists with a bomb. They just don't care. Any culture that would strap bombs to their own children won't hesitate. Mac
Exactly, which is why they are so dangerous.

If Russia has nukes, or if China has nukes, it doesn't matter as much, they're practical, they care if they get retaliated upon.

Religious zealots do not care, suicide bombers by definition do not care.

[Sam Reeves]

As I said:



The thing was you got the F-117A, an older stealth fighter, confused with the B2, the newer stealth bomber. F-117s have already mostly been replaced.

I stand corrected. But America will not risk it's B-2 in fear of Russians SU-34s no more than America would risk it's carrier fleet with Iran in fear of the Sunburn missile. I wish it were different.




That changes nothing. China & Russia are not going to ally and attack the US. That works both ways.


If China pisses us off we'd cancel their money in US bonds, freeze all chinese assets, and enact a trade embargo shutting off China from our economy. Consumers would have less crap to buy, but China would get poor real quick. This would also break America. We are as totally dependent on cheap goods as we are on foreign oil. Unemployment would quadruple and we would enter a new depression.


In a conventionial war we would clean their clock. Destroy their ports and the game is over, and their ports are within flying distance of our pacific bases. Whereas ours are on the other side of the world from them.In return they would destroy our Pacific bases and invade Taiwan. An even trade as far as they are concerned. We are not the only ones they peddle their cheap junk to anymore.


In a Nuclear war everyone loses, but China doesn't have enough nukes to destroy the US, we have enough to destroy China a few times over. We also have the semi-effective missile defense, and of course better ways of delivering the weapons than China.Russia has plenty to go around.


Many people erroneously think that china or Russia are superpowers, they are not.


Assuming in a "world war 3" scenario Europe sides with us, and really, why wouldn't they? Any nation in Nato technically has signed a treaty to do just that... consider this military spending:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/spending.htmIn a WWIII scenario Russia will own half of Europe just like it did during WWII.


It isn't even worth comparing. France, UK, Germany, & Japan could handle Russia & China.That's what Germany thought during WWII.
Israel could handle everyone in the Middle East (remember the 6 day war?). That was during the late 60s.


Then, Nukes:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_states_with_nuclear_weapons

Still, it is the US and Russia, and don't forget the US has people on the ground in Russia right now handling their nukes because they can't afford the staff and we don't want them getting stolen. Can't beat free labor. "To defeat an enemy use his resources against him" -The Art of War.



Conventional war: not going to happen because of economic issues, and if it did happen, we'd easily win anyways. Like in Iraq?


Nuclear War: mutually assured destruction still holds. Any country that attacks a nuclear power with a nuclear weapon will always expect to see an equivalent response.Which is why nuclear nations don't want other counties having nukes. In the end nukes aren't about war they are about peace.

[Ole WV Coot]

Who's watching our backdoor? Oh that would be Israel. Oh no, they are getting ready to take out Iran.

I don't see a problem with the above article. People forget, that Russia, China, and a host of other nations would gladly bomb us and take us over. World domination.

I think there are too many panty waist individuals in the US nowdays who have been suckling off the governments teets, enjoying the good life that so many of our past military patriots gave their lives for.

They forget, maybe they are so green that they don't ever remember back on the block. Where it is, keep your eyes open and your fists ready because you have four sides to protect.

You want to worry? Worry about a man who has a good chance to be president, who has already boasted about cutting the US defense budget to nothing, reducing the US Military, and then plans on sitting down with those that want to destroy us, and play footsies.


Neutralizing Russia's nuclear weapons, that's a no brainer.

You got it 100% correct. Different generation living on cloud 9. Nothing but good things will ever happen to them.

[BraggSurvivor]

Reportedly the Israeli government likes the Bush doctrine of preemptive war so much that they are going to attack the nuclear facilities in Iran.

I predict that if this should happen we will be quickly drawn in as Iran retaliates first against the fleet in the gulf and then against your land forces stationed in Iraq.



Otherwise I'll see you all as we tote our rifles to a place called Megiddo. :mad:

[Chris]

I stand corrected. But America will not risk it's B-2 in fear of Russians SU-34s no more than America would risk it's carrier fleet with Iran in fear of the Sunburn missile. I wish it were different.



That works both ways.

This would also break America. We are as totally dependent on cheap goods as we are on foreign oil. Unemployment would quadruple and we would enter a new depression.

In return they would destroy our Pacific bases and invade Taiwan. An even trade as far as they are concerned. We are not the only ones they peddle their cheap junk to anymore.

Russia has plenty to go around.



In a WWIII scenario Russia will own half of Europe just like it did during WWII.

That's what Germany thought during WWII.That was during the late 60s.

Can't beat free labor. "To defeat an enemy use his resources against him" -The Art of War.
Like in Iraq?

Which is why nuclear nations don't want other counties having nukes. In the end nukes aren't about war they are about peace.
I see that there is no arguing with you, you dispute facts and seem bent on an america-is-weak attitude. A russian jet designed in the 1970s, of which apparently there are 2 in operation, is going to take out our stealths, which can't even be spotted by our guys in war games. Nonexistant chinese aircraft carriers are going to blow past the world's best navy, air force, and satellite surveillance and destroy our pacific bases. Then we end up with staggering unemployment because we need cheap goods imported from China? Cheap goods from china cost us jobs. Our economy is largely NOT an export economy, we don't rely on foreigners buying our goods to drive it (though, there are exceptions). Then Russia stomps through Europe because... well... no reason... despite Europe outspending Russia on defense by like 6:1.

Some people just don't get the staggering difference in military capabilities between nations, or, just how far Russia has fallen since the end of the cold war. Most countries have 0 aircraft carriers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_carriers_by_country#People.27s_Re public_of_China) (china) or 1, (russia), and the ones they have are smaller. We have 11. Each aircraft carrier sails within an aircraft carrier group which includes cruisers, destroyers, subs etc. China has 0 cruisers as well. We have 22. We have twice as many destroyers as china, and 72 nuclear subs to their 10. You can also safely assume our stuff is more advanced, because it always is. US defense policy is to maintain technological superiority of at least 10 years against any other country.

[Chris]

Like in Iraq?

And oh, we destroyed Iraq's army in 3 weeks, the war part of Iraq we won in 3 weeks, and it would have been quicker had we not tried to avoid civilian damage.

Since then there has been a civilian insurrection and civil war between rival types of muslims which we have been policing. Peacekeeping is not war. In any hypothetical fight against Russia or China we would not be going in as peacekeepers.

Do not for one instant be so ignorant as to think that the fact that Sunnis and Shiites don't like each other that the US Military is weak. It is so unrelated you should be ashamed of even trying to make the comparison.

[Sam Reeves]

I see that there is no arguing with you, you dispute facts and seem bent on an america-is-weak attitude. A russian jet designed in the 1970s, of which apparently there are 2 in operation, is going to take out our stealths, which can't even be spotted by our guys in war games. I'm afraid you may have yer wires crossed on this one.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Su-34


Nonexistant chinese aircraft carriers are going to blow past the world's best navy, air force, and satellite surveillance and destroy our pacific bases. Then we end up with staggering unemployment because we need cheap goods imported from China? Cheap goods from china cost us jobs. Our economy is largely NOT an export economy, we don't rely on foreigners buying our goods to drive it (though, there are exceptions). Then Russia stomps through Europe because... well... no reason... despite Europe outspending Russia on defense by like 6:1.
Nobody needs a super carrier fleet to overcome our prize navy. All they need is a few boats armed with too many Sunburns, which China and Iran both have.


Some people just don't get the staggering difference in military capabilities between nations, or, just how far Russia has fallen since the end of the cold war.Or how far we have fell since Iraq.
or 1, (russia), and the ones they have are smaller. We have 11. Each aircraft carrier sails within an aircraft carrier group which includes cruisers, destroyers, subs etc. China has 0 cruisers as well. We have 22. We have twice as many destroyers as china, and 72 nuclear subs to their 10. You can also safely assume our stuff is more advanced, because it always is. US defense policy is to maintain technological superiority of at least 10 years against any other country.Would that why we used so many German designs after WWII or because we haven't one a war since?

[Sam Reeves]

And oh, we destroyed Iraq's army in 3 weeks, the war part of Iraq we won in 3 weeks, and it would have been quicker had we not tried to avoid civilian damage.

Since then there has been a civilian insurrection and civil war between rival types of muslims which we have been policing. Peacekeeping is not war. In any hypothetical fight against Russia or China we would not be going in as peacekeepers. In a hypothetical war with China and Russia would we not be going in period. What was left of us would be headed to Canada or Mexico with out bug out bags.


Do not for one instant be so ignorant as to think that the fact that Sunnis and Shiites don't like each other that the US Military is weak. It is so unrelated you should be ashamed of even trying to make the comparison.Okay out peace keeping force is weak if you prefer.

The insurgents from Iran will be much worse and numerous.

[Chris]

I'm afraid you may have yer wires crossed on this one.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Su-34 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Su-34)

Fine, 80's not 70's, its still old. Even your wonderful wikipedia page says it is comparable to the f15 or the f35, not the f22.



Maiden flight (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maiden_flight)13 April (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/April_13) 1990 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1990)



March 2006, Russia's minister of defense Sergei Ivanov (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergei_Ivanov) announced that the government had purchased only two Su-34s for delivery in 2006, and planned to have a complete air regiment of 24 Su-34s operational by the end of 2010

You seem to have such a hardon for that russian plane. Seriously dude, you need a reality check.



Would that why we used so many German designs after WWII or because we haven't one a war since?

We haven't had a war since. The US has not declared war since WWII, all other engagements have been police actions. People don't seem to get that there is a difference. That peacekeeping success or failure is not a measure of our bombing or naval capabilities. You're using the flawed logic that because we have had 4000 troops get killed in Iraq during peacekeeping operations by insurgents in 5 years that we'd have problems bombing the militiary industrial complex of other countries. Bombs aren't delivered by infantry driving humvees. It is completely and utterly different.

If we were truly in a war we would not try to do any peace keeping. We would use cruise missiles launched from naval vessels and stealth bombers to destroy an enemy's air defenses (cruise missiles, btw, are another huge advantage we have over everyone else). Then we'd send up our f22's to maintain air superiority while conventional bombers pound them into dust.

If the enemy had invaded an ally we might kick them out, in which case we'd trounce them on land just like we did the Iraqi army. Our attack choppers and tanks kick ***. There would be no necessary peacekeeping since we'd have liberated an ally, they wouldn't hate us. The women may give our soldiers an STD, but that is about it. Like what we did in Desert Storm.

You think if China attacked us we'd launch a ground war and try to make a democracy? We'd bomb them and continue bombing them until they gave up.

This whole thread was started because people were worried about defense because of Iraq. You don't need infantry and ground troops to defend your country when you have only 2 neighbors that border you, and both are friendly, and you dominate your hemisphere anyways.

You need a navy and you need an airforce, and since it is hard to patrol Baghdad with a Frigate and since a B2 or F22 is overkill to take out a band of 3 insurgents, both our airforce and our navy are really not stretched or in disrepair or anything else.

Now sure, if China was Canada and on our north border we'd be talking about something different, but it isn't, it is on the other side of the world, if they attacked us we'd not be protected by an overwrought army, but by our navy and airforce, and they're not only fine, they're far superior by an exponential amount to anything anyone else has.

I'm closing this thread now, because I worry about the stupidity from it leaking out and affecting the rest of the forum.