New cold war?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Aaron

Goonsquad Officer
<Bronze Donator>
8,141
18,049
We have some shit up our sleeves for those S300 and S400...

Very interesting. If it weren't for the fact that a US-Russian war would likely go nuclear and kill of the human race, I'd be up for a war to see these two systems slog it out.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

Aaron

Goonsquad Officer
<Bronze Donator>
8,141
18,049
Based on capabilities, force projection, and sheer size of our military, any conflict would degrade into MAD rapidly
For a Russia US war I agree. Neither side has the conventional capabilities to force the other to surrender (i.e. invade and capture the other's land mass). And a Cold War style mass armored war in Europe will never happen, or at most be confined to the Ukraine.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

a_skeleton_06

<Banned>
1,923
2,410
It's fucked up and someone already mentioned it but if a nuke is going to get lobbed out, we better hope it's in that India v Pakistan conflict just to demonstrate what a bad, bad idea using those weapons is.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

sadris

Karen
<Donor>
21,132
80,761
It's fucked up and someone already mentioned it but if a nuke is going to get lobbed out, we better hope it's in that India v Pakistan conflict just to demonstrate what a bad, bad idea using those weapons is.
Its only bad if they can't nuke back. Otherwise its like a layup in basketball, but in war.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

ShakyJake

<Donor>
7,651
19,296
Crazy conspiracy theory, but I've been wondering lately if TPTB want to instigate some sort of global, catastrophic war in order to "reset" the dire financial situation that is crippling the U.S. and Euro countries?
 
  • 2Solidarity
  • 2Like
Reactions: 3 users

Cad

I'm With HER ♀
<Bronze Donator>
24,496
45,437
Its only bad if they can't nuke back. Otherwise its like a layup in basketball, but in war.

Nuking armies in the field would quickly escalate to nuking cities. It'd get ugly, real fast.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

Cad

I'm With HER ♀
<Bronze Donator>
24,496
45,437
What? You go straight for population centers and infrastructure.

Well I don't think the correct response to an invading Indian army by Pakistan would be to nuke bangalore. They nuke the army, thats the threat.

India then nukes Karachi in retaliation because, how dare you..., then Pakistan nukes Bangalore in response.

Thats how I see that playing out.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions: 1 users

ZyyzYzzy

RIP USA
<Banned>
25,295
48,789
Well I don't think the correct response to an invading Indian army by Pakistan would be to nuke bangalore. They nuke the army, thats the threat.

India then nukes Karachi in retaliation because, how dare you..., then Pakistan nukes Bangalore in response.

Thats how I see that playing out.
Nope
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

Cad

I'm With HER ♀
<Bronze Donator>
24,496
45,437
Cad has already revealed his weakness, checkmate!
GOD_DAMNIT.jpg
 
  • 2Like
Reactions: 1 users

a_skeleton_06

<Banned>
1,923
2,410
Could get super gangster if you're India and either straight up break the Indus water treaty or "accidently contaminate" the supply on the Pakistani side.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

Gravel

Mr. Poopybutthole
36,574
116,549
Crazy conspiracy theory, but I've been wondering lately if TPTB want to instigate some sort of global, catastrophic war in order to "reset" the dire financial situation that is crippling the U.S. and Euro countries?
Why would they bother with that though?

All the wealth is already concentrated where they want it. The people who get screwed are the ones who don't have the means to let it ride through the downturns (and really, the wealthy can make money in downturns much more rapidly than during boom periods).
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

mkopec

<Gold Donor>
25,424
37,545
I think nukes are a last resort defensive measure when other nukes are already flying in air. And besides that they only serve as a deterrent for any attack, the ultimate end of world weapon. I think its foolish to say that even if a war broke out between us and Russia, that it would not just be another ground, air, sea and propaganda war like it was in the past. I think all world leaders know this and are not foolish to press that button which would ultimately mean end of world scenario. I mean we did a preemptive strike on japan before, but japan had none. You think we would of dropped them if we feared Japan having the same types of weapons in their back pocket? I dont think so. Its one thing to weigh the countless lives of other nations people to save your own, but another to weigh the death of theirs and yours at the same time.

Now where it gets scary is people like Kim Jong-Il or even theocracies like Iran. You just dont know if someone like this would just push that button when back to the wall, enemy is at the gate type scenario, kind of like Hitler on his last days in the bunker, you bet your ass he would of pushed a few buttons if that shit was available to him.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

TrollfaceDeux

Pronouns: zie/zhem/zer
<Bronze Donator>
19,577
3,743
i think japan did have an incomplete nuke but they didn't finish it yet.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

Malakriss

Golden Baronet of the Realm
12,372
11,777
The biggest problem is the modern era is that the unwritten rules and expectations have been thrown out the window. Now you have the US trying to manage threats from the WW3 level, to regional conflicts, to crazy dictators, all the way down to terrorism. North Korea is not the sort of thing we should be preemptively invading because China should be taking care of that shit, but the flaw in that methodology is having to rely on China actually stepping in and taking drastic action before a shooting war happens. On the other hand the way we've been handling the upper tier threats like Russia has been so laid back you could say Obama has let the world walk all over us as long as they aren't brown people.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user
Status
Not open for further replies.