monkeyfudger - Member
chewkw - JC(not Jesus Christ)
Please stop doing that. It's not funny. No, not even a little bit.
😆 Oh c'mon ... you are being too serious.
cloudnine - Memberhttp://waterfordwhispersnews.com/2015/11/24/north-korea-wondering-if-they-can-bomb-syria-too/
All hail Dear Leader for trying to have fun. 😛
Tom_W1987 - Member
It will only kick off if the Turkish have the balls to try and stop Russia from cementing a Kurd-Assad alliance.
Ya, that will learn them for trying to play with the "dancing bear".
On a earlier comment- Turkey wouldn't win a ground war or any conventional war against Russia. Sorry.
Same with the US. Again, sorry. All the talk about Russias financial situation, gave we forgotten the US fiscal cliff? Only recently there was deadlock and a last minute vote that saved the nation from dire straits.
All the smart politicians know that Putin can't or wont back down.
Surely we all expect "our troops"* to behave better than ISIS?
we do, but an act is an act. People are people. It's either understandable or it's not, regardless of who did it.
Hora, the americans would pulverise the russians in short order. Wouldn't even break a sweat and Putin knows it full well.
wrecker - Member
Hora, the americans would pulverise the russians in short order. Wouldn't even break a sweat and Putin knows it full well.
Both will be badly wounded IMO.
Wrecker you really think that? I don't. Proganda flows both ways. Lay off the blockbusters.
Really?
The yanks ****ing pulverized the Iraqis in 91 and the vast majority of Russian equipment is of that era. The Americans utterly dominate the globe in terms of situational awareness in a fight. It's not propaganda, they literally are by far and away the most powerful single expeditionary force the world has ever seen and will likely ever see. China, India...all have land border issues that will mean they will never obtain the kind of expeditionary capability of the Americans - the money will have to be spent elsewhere.
Turkey and Russia would bloody each others noses heavily, both sides know that and both have framed this little game of "WW3 chicken" in that context.
Russia v US,
Big IF but if it really kicked off I suspect their Navies would last a week a best. Hopefully they'd back off after a carrier group or two was nuked BUT if it carried on watch Threads from 1984 for where we'd end up. Vladimir maybe a thug but he's not stupid. I hope.
It's a complete myth that current ICBM's can target carrier groups. Even then, you have to know where the group is and even with satellites that's hard. See crashed airliners for example.
The oceans a farking big place, carriers move and the destroyers that protect them can shoot your nice spy satellite down.
True but nuclear tipped torpedoes only have to get a few km away. Google base surge. Also the Russians have some bloody good anti ship missiles.
I don't think they'd back down. Do you?
Yup, and the Americans have about 10 times the number of attack submarines in a sea worthy ready to deploy state.
One russian submarine might get through the maritime patrol ring, it might then just get through the attack sub net, one might get through the ring of helicopters and then the outer ring of destroyers....and then it might get a shot at a carrier group.
Emphasis on might - if it wasn't for nuclear weapons the yanks would have smacked the Russians around for the "lolz" years ago.
The Russians would also have to have the bollocks to actually do that, as the one thing that is going to piss off Americans enough to actually press the big red killy button is another Pearl Harbor. No, American carrier groups can pretty much do and go wherever they feel like.
You know all the numbers? For sure?
The Russians have about 20 attack subs, which are known for poor reliability and serviceability. Very few are ever at sea, when they do go to sea, they tend to sink with all hands on deck.
Last time I checked the yanks had well over 60 that are all well looked after and maintained.
Then you have all the European attack subs that are constantly out there tracking Russian submarines.....the west still rules the waves at the minute.
Lay off the blockbusters.
You need to open your eyes up mate. Russia is crippled by sanctions. Their reach is nowhere near what it was, they haven't fully recovered from the fall of their empire. The US have a very, very capable military with recent experience of numerous operations. COIN ops are difficult, but a conventional war? It's not even a fair fight.
The divide and conquer strategy does work especially with tool like Turkey playing into the hands of their crafty under current.
US will win but bloodied probably with half their population gone coz they are pulverised by one nuke getting through. Russia will be the same without their capital but with such vast land they will managed albeit back to past century.
Then you all speak Mandarin ... 😆
You learn!
The Russians didn't loose to a technically superior enemy 70 years ago. For all their much vaunted technical ability how well did the Yanks do in Vietnam?
The Russians could fight the Yanks to a standstill, a very hot, glassy standstill, we'd see the spine of NATO truly tested and I hate to say I think it would be found wanting.
A war I'd only want to see in simulation, hopefully calmer minds than the STW collective will prevail in the real world.
Be honest, you lot are all sitting in front of your computer violently fapping like silly wee boys over this aren't you?
I wouldn't compare German technical superiority with American technical superiority. American technical superiority isn't measured in years but decades and they also have numerical superiority at sea and in the air.
Again, like I said, unless the Russians are willing to go nuclear - Russia can't do anything in regards to resisting American military projection.
Be honest, you lot are all sitting in front of your computer violently fapping like silly wee boys over this aren't you?
It's interesting because it's acutely intertwined with realpolitik.
Tom_W1987 - MemberIt's a complete myth that current ICBM's can target carrier groups. Even then, you have to know where the group is and even with satellites that's hard. See crashed airliners for example.
Not a very useful comparison, that. "Look for a small thing that you weren't especially watching, that might not actually be visible, oh and there's loads of them basically the same" vs "Keep an eye on a damn big thing and its mates, that you can sometimes locate via google, then watch where it goes"
Incidentally, isn't it weird how quickly these threads descent into excitable war porn?
See above Northwind.
Not a very useful comparison, that. "Look for a small thing that you weren't especially watching, that might not actually be visible, oh and there's loads of them basically the same" vs "Keep an eye on a damn big thing and its mates, that you can sometimes locate via google, then watch where it goes"
Except those photos are years old, satellites pass over a small area very quickly. Then you have to guess where that carriers gone and reposition accordingly. Which is why there are rumblings that we are going back to SR-71 style spyplanes. No one, not even the yanks have managed to yet build a space based radar network that could track a carrier group. And if a shooty match occurred, that would be the first thing to go.
The carrier will remain the single most potent non-nuclear aspect of a nations ability to project power for decades to come.
Isn't it weird how even sensible, and well presented topics/posts about conflict always results in someone shouting "war porn" even if nobody is particularly excited?
Tom1987, I really think your technical knowledge should be used against terrorism. Even ChuckNorris wouldn't match your frothing and anger of proper action. Imagine, even news on telly would be more exciting with your tactical war reports.
Syria is Russians backyard, short supply line, and scarily the Russian press is talking up use of nukes (before all this Syrian stuff).
Anyway I'm off to bed, I think it's best we agree to disagree as neither of us has so far convinced the other of our arguments.
Tom1987, I really think your technical knowledge should be used against terrorism. Even ChuckNorris wouldn't match your frothing and anger of proper action. Imagine, even news on telly would be more exciting with your tactical war reports.
I think you've misread me, I've been trying to tell people why WW3 isn't about to happen and trying to highlight the actual game that Erdogan and Putin are playing. I'm the freaking sensible one in this thread.
It's all about game theory, not war-porn.
are all sitting in front of your computer violently fapping like silly wee boys over this aren't you?
Definitely the minute there's an excuse to get the top trumps out...
[img] 
[/img]
Stwers get all
[img] 
[/img]
Ming the MercilessAnyway I'm off to bed, I think it's best we agree to disagree as neither of us has so far convinced the other of our arguments.
And so it was, in that seemingly innocuous sentence, at approximately 10pm on Tuesday 24/11/2015 that Singletrackworld came as close as it ever has done, or ever would have, to reaching an agreement in a thread about politics.
Well, if you don't want to try to understand how the world works that's fine by me.
Unfortunately the rest of the world outside of the EU, still only truly respects hard power - hence most of the worlds politics and conflict is defined by that power. Europeans live in a world of fluffy clouds, food security and cuddly bunnies.
So enjoy your ignorance.
Kimbers +1.
Tom1987, your words should reach God ears. No ww3 then.
Stwers get all
Wondered where Russell Brand had got to...
Tom_W1987 - MemberExcept those photos are years old
What photos 😕
...hard power...
[img] 
[/img]
😆
deadlydarcy - Member
😯 ... that is a black man!
See! Stereotyping people again ...
there was some UK military consultant type chappy on LBC earlier discussing the situation and how the Turks really are on the side of IS, and when discussing the different groups in Syria he described one lot as 'moderate, Guardian-reading, types'.
Well, I'll leave on one last point. If we had more War Studies graduates from KCL and less art historians - we'd be living in a safer world.
The field of study in relation to conflict, it's causes and the geopolitical strategies that various powers use to gain an upper hand - is a poorly understood field at best and at worst, one that is marginalized by the attitudes such as those displayed here.
So yes, have fun on your smug liberal high horses whilst the rest of the world continues to blow itself to hell - as normal.
Tom_W1987 - MoronIt's a complete myth that current ICBM's can target carrier groups. Even then, you have to know where the group is and even with satellites that's hard. See crashed airliners for example.
The oceans a farking big place, carriers move and the destroyers that protect them can shoot your nice spy satellite down.
Took me less than 60s to currently locate five us carrier groups using google, i would suspect Russia has something better to do that!
Its my view Turkey has done more to support IS than any other state. As I posted I think Russia will make use of this at home and diplomatically.
There isnt going to be a US / Russian war stemming from this, neither country remotely cares enough. The Russians will do nothing to allow Turkey to invoke NATO. I do think Turkey needs to take care with any missions over Syria where they are violating Syrian airspace and the Russians are more than capable of shooting them down
The iodiocy of Turkey's actions where starkly shown tonight, Russian planes over a tiny piece of Turkey for 17 seconds and shot down over Syria. Trigger happy madness
Took me less than 60s to currently locate five us carrier groups using google, i would suspect Russia has something better to do that!
Do you honestly think they actually give the exact position? But of course, during peacetime, routine patrol routes are going to be known because civilians and the crews families are updated with their rough whereabouts and planned route.
So congratulations, you've managed to locate a US aircraft carriers rough location, during peacetime for a surprise attack using nukes. Well done, you've now started WW3 even if those nukes miss or one get's through the battle groups defensive screen. Good luck getting past the myriad of subs, helicopters, destroyers, anti-aircraft missiles, BMD missiles that can hit satellites and finally CIWS with anything else other than massive ballistic missile spam.
But yes, let's all go on dreaming that Russia is totally going to stick it up to the imperial pig dog America.
Shouldn't you lot be down the shops buying all the baked beans and bottled water, that you can fit in your 4X4s
buying all the baked beans
Haricot beans stewed in tomato jam? I think not.
[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-34917485 ]Russian marine shot in rescue mission[/url]
Hmmm,seems to be getting a bit tetchy over there now.
I'd trust the judgement of these guys, there are 'on the ground' :
[img] 
[/img]
The Russians didn't loose to a technically superior enemy 70 years ago
the technical superiority of the enemy didn't extend to cold weather gear, the lack of which had a very significant effect on the outcome.
I can find my car using google earth but it isn't there now and in fact hasn't been there for years.
From recollection I disagree a lot with Tom's opinions and politics but his factual analysis seems well informed.
The Russian's beat the Germans because they had better kit and bigger numbers . German technical superiority was very much theoretical the vast majority of their supply and main units were horse drawn their tanks though well designed were unreliable and few in number they were also slow to build . like Napoleon Germany also failed to appreciate the scale on the undertaking or the severity of winter.
The American army is vast and equipped with quality functioning kit. Unlike 1930s Germany the USA is a very big country with significant resources.
Any way despite my strong dislike of Putin he plays geopolitics with skill (but no ethics) I doubt he will slide into war with a NATO power over this but he will use the incident to wrestle a lot of room to manoeuvre in Syria.
Any way despite my strong dislike of Putin he plays geopolitics with skill (but no ethics)
The no ethics thing is really his trump card. Russia is in a position where its acceptable to carpet and cluster bomb.
Russia reminds me Israel in certain ways where state aggression is used to off balance strategic opponents.
The skill is less statesmanship, more violent unpredictability.
