Who will win WW3?

[mainpmf]

i think russia and china will won if world war III comes,they have strong military and so many civilian who will stand front of their nation,its hard for US and EU for take over the big area of Russia and China.

Easy for both of them. They got nuclear power.
You can have 5 millions of soldiers, if your opponent got nuclear submarines, what can you do?

[bryant.coleman]

Would you care of adding me too?
Cause it's perfectly out of the topic. He's right.

I will add you when you indulge in name calling. Have some patience.

i think russia and china will won if world war III comes,they have strong military and so many civilian who will stand front of their nation,its hard for US and EU for take over the big area of Russia and China.

Russia and China will be the perfect combination. Russia is having advanced military technology, and China is having an (almost) infinite pool of soldiers. On the other hand, NATO is weak on the manpower sector. They don't have enough cannon fodder. The Turks are there, but Turkey (pop: 75 million) can't be compared to China (pop: 1.3 billion).

[mainpmf]

Would you care of adding me too?
Cause it's perfectly out of the topic. He's right.

I will add you when you indulge in name calling. Have some patience.

Oh, it's the "dumbass" part you don't like?

Well have it sir: you're not only a dumbass, you're also a dangerous person. You keep spreading huge hoaxes because you don't care about what you say or what source you provide as long as it goes in your sense. You have no logic, no argument and no figures to prove your claims. Claims that are also totally ridiculous ans from the stone age.

Better here? You're not much better than BADecker in fact.

[mOgliE]

i think russia and china will won if world war III comes,they have strong military and so many civilian who will stand front of their nation,its hard for US and EU for take over the big area of Russia and China.

Russia and China will be the perfect combination. Russia is having advanced military technology, and China is having an (almost) infinite pool of soldiers. On the other hand, NATO is weak on the manpower sector. They don't have enough cannon fodder. The Turks are there, but Turkey (pop: 75 million) can't be compared to China (pop: 1.3 billion).

And what will they do with their 1.3 billions of soldier against a few thousands nuclear heads?

[mettalmag]

it will end up with mass destruction and in this situation there wouldn't be "winner

[arbitrage]

it will end up with mass destruction and in this situation there wouldn't be "winner

This is best answer. No one will win this war with nuclear warheads.
We all going to be losers, hope this day will never come. But some organizations in world
doing their best for this to come true.

[bryant.coleman]

And what will they do with their 1.3 billions of soldier against a few thousands nuclear heads?

Using nukes against a combined force of China and Russia? That will be suicidal. USA + France + United Kingdom + Israel + Pakistan is in the possession of close to 6,000 nuclear warheads. The most powerful nuclear weapon ever built (Tsar Bomba) was capable of incinerating everything within 100 km of its radius. That gives a maximum effective surface area of 30,000 sq.km per weapon.

Now the question is how many of these nukes the NATO will be able to use in a relatively short time (say 4 to 6 hours). Even if they manage to use all the 6,000 weapons, only around 1% or 2% are likely to land in Russia / China, as the air-defenses are very advanced. That means that around 10% of the surface area of Russia / China will be devoid of life. That might kill at the most 50% of their soldiers. But the remaining 50% will use nukes on the NATO nations, completely exterminating the life there.

[galdur]

That small peninsula to the left is called Europe...

[Zeke2345]

Think China is running a pretty effective war in buying up business and real estate around the world,forcing Countries to be more open or be forced into a sudden downward spiral as China pulls out of their area.
Slow and steady take over and they are doing a pretty good job of that in Africa.

The old idea of war I think is done,maybe some flare ups but the cost is to high for both sides of a scrimmage.

[McDonalds5]

Would you care of adding me too?
Cause it's perfectly out of the topic. He's right.

I will add you when you indulge in name calling. Have some patience.

Oh, it's the "dumbass" part you don't like?

Well have it sir: you're not only a dumbass, you're also a dangerous person. You keep spreading huge hoaxes because you don't care about what you say or what source you provide as long as it goes in your sense. You have no logic, no argument and no figures to prove your claims. Claims that are also totally ridiculous ans from the stone age.

Better here? You're not much better than BADecker in fact.

That post of yours is so emotional 

[darkangel11]

And what will they do with their 1.3 billions of soldier against a few thousands nuclear heads?

Using nukes against a combined force of China and Russia? That will be suicidal. USA + France + United Kingdom + Israel + Pakistan is in the possession of close to 6,000 nuclear warheads. The most powerful nuclear weapon ever built (Tsar Bomba) was capable of incinerating everything within 100 km of its radius. That gives a maximum effective surface area of 30,000 sq.km per weapon.

Now the question is how many of these nukes the NATO will be able to use in a relatively short time (say 4 to 6 hours). Even if they manage to use all the 6,000 weapons, only around 1% or 2% are likely to land in Russia / China, as the air-defenses are very advanced. That means that around 10% of the surface area of Russia / China will be devoid of life. That might kill at the most 50% of their soldiers. But the remaining 50% will use nukes on the NATO nations, completely exterminating the life there.

Dooming the whole planet. If 10k nukes are ever launched at the same time it won't matter on which countries they'll fall, only rats and cockroaches will survive if they're lucky.

[opmac]

Think China is running a pretty effective war in buying up business and real estate around the world,forcing Countries to be more open or be forced into a sudden downward spiral as China pulls out of their area.
Slow and steady take over and they are doing a pretty good job of that in Africa.

The old idea of war I think is done,maybe some flare ups but the cost is to high for both sides of a scrimmage.

I agree with you totally!!!

I see the same thing happening in the city I live in and the surrounding cites.
The municipalities continue to let this happen. All they see is the dollar signs but fail to see 1, 5, 10 years down the road

[galdur]

Uh oh, the Russians are shaking in their boots now...Dr. Strangelove speaks...

Breedlove: NATO Ready to ‘Fight and Win If Necessary’ Against Russia

The US European Command (EUCOM) and NATO are prepared to "fight and win" against Russia "if necessary," US Supreme Allied Commander Europe General Philip Breedlove said on Thursday.

WASHINGTON (Sputnik) — Russia has repeatedly warned that NATO’s attempts to expand on its borders, as well as more recently amass troops and equipment, constitute provocative acts that are contrary to previous agreements and can undermine regional and global stability.

"To counter Russia, EUCOM, working with allies and partners, is deterring Russia now and preparing to fight and win if necessary," Breedlove said.....more



Read more: http://sputniknews.com/military/20160225/1035347156/breedlove-nato-deterrence-russia.html#ixzz41F80SnbQ

[galdur]

Army Chief Gen. Mark Milley is pushing his recommendation that the 4-25 Airborne Brigade of the US Army remain stationed in Anchorage, Alaska for “at least an additional year,” amid calls to cut costs by eliminating the brigade.

The excuse, as usual, is Russia. Gen. Milley insists “Russian aggression” is present not just in Europe, where the Pentagon has been getting money to throw ever more money at the Russian frontier, but also in the Arctic, and that the US needs to keep troops in Alaska to counter Russia....more

http://news.antiwar.com/2016/02/24/army-chief-us-troops-must-stay-in-alaska-to-fight-russia/

[bryant.coleman]

Dooming the whole planet. If 10k nukes are ever launched at the same time it won't matter on which countries they'll fall, only rats and cockroaches will survive if they're lucky.

I don't think that it is possible to lunch 10,000 nukes at the same time. No country, including the United States and Russia has the ability to do that. Even with the nuclear triad, at the most they may be able to launch 100 or 200 of them, of which more than 99% will be shot down by the air-defense systems and fighter jets.

[giantdragon]

I don't think China will support corrupt Russian government in the war against US/NATO. Business ties between US-China are much stronger then Russia-China and Chinese govt seems to silently support US/EU sanctions against Russia now.

[galdur]

I don't think China will support corrupt Russian government in the war against US/NATO. Business ties between US-China are much stronger then Russia-China and Chinese govt seems to silently support US/EU sanctions against Russia now.

Yeah, some support...

Goodbye Petrodollar: Russia Accepts Yuan, Is Now China's Biggest Oil Partner
Russia reaps the rewards of dumping the dollar

Wed, Feb 3, 2016

Russia is now the top crude exporter to China, the largest (or second largest, depending on whom you ask) oil demand growth country in the world.

At the start of the decade, Saudi Arabia enjoyed a 20% share of Chinese crude imports, while Russia was lagging far behind with 7%. Now the Saudis find themselves neck and neck with Moscow for the lead in Chinese market share, with both performing in the 13-16% range. But Russia's share continues to rise, as The Kingdom struggles to maintain a foothold.

Why? Analysts attribute Russia's huge market share growth to its willingness to accept yuan, while Saudi Arabia is still clinging to blood-soaked dollars. As Business Insider notes:


Interestingly, part of Russia's success in China has been attributed to its willingness to accept Chinese yuan denominated currency for its oil.
This is consistent with earlier forecasts about Russia's market share in China. Bloomberg reported back in July:

“Following Russia’s recent acceptance of the renminbi as payments for oil, we expect more record high oil imports ahead to China,” Gordon Kwan, the Hong Kong-based head of regional oil and gas research at Nomura Holdings Inc., said in an e-mail, referring to the Chinese currency. “If Saudi Arabia wants to recapture its number one ranking, it needs to accept the renminbi for oil payments instead of just the dollar.”
As both the head of the Eurasian Economic Union (and founding member of BRICS), as well as a major energy exporter, Russia is leading the charge against the dollar. And now other nations are following suit: Iran and India announced last month that they intend to settle all outstanding crude oil payments in rupees, as part of a joint strategy to dump the dollar and trade instead in national currencies.

The dollar is slowly losing its privileged place in international transactions. What this means for the United States is anyone's guess.

http://russia-insider.com/en/politics/saudi-arabia-has-lost-asia-russia-now-chinas-biggest-oil-partner/ri12611

[bryant.coleman]

I don't think China will support corrupt Russian government in the war against US/NATO. Business ties between US-China are much stronger then Russia-China and Chinese govt seems to silently support US/EU sanctions against Russia now.

The Chinese simply does not care about corruption in other countries. Ties between China and Russia are much stronger than that between China and the NATO. And right now, NATO and the pro-NATO nations such as Japan are moving towards an open confrontation with China, over the issue of the South China Sea islands.

[galdur]

Abe snubs Obama over Russia visit


KYODO

FEB 24, 2016

Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has snubbed an appeal by U.S. President Barack Obama, who asked that he not visit Russia in May, sources close to Japan-Russia relations said Tuesday.

Obama made the appeal by phone on Feb. 9, but Abe rejected it and will press ahead as planned with a visit to the Russian city of Sochi for talks with President Vladimir Putin, likely in early May, the sources said.

Obama delivered the appeal in a conversation primarily about cooperation between Tokyo and Washington over North Korea’s launch of a rocket two days earlier. The Foreign Ministry has not publicly revealed what the two leaders discussed regarding Abe’s trip to Russia.

The sources quoted Obama as urging Abe to postpone the trip, citing Russia’s differences with the United States over its actions in Ukraine and Syria.

Abe is keen to settle a long-standing dispute over islands off Hokkaido seized by the Soviet Union after Japan’s surrender in World War II. The matter has prevented Moscow and Tokyo from signing a peace treaty.

The islands are Etorofu, Kunashiri, Shikotan and the Habomai group of islets, although Russia knows them by other names and refers to them as the southern Kurils.

“Prime Minister Abe is planning an unofficial visit to Russia at an appropriate time before (Russian President Vladimir Putin) visits Japan,” Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshihide Suga said at a news conference Wednesday.

Political observers say Japan has been careful to maintain a delicate balancing act between Russia and its ally the United States while pushing to end the isles dispute.

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2016/02/24/national/politics-diplomacy/obama-jittery-over-abes-possible-visit-to-russia/#.Vs_wyfmLTUJ

[mainpmf]

And what will they do with their 1.3 billions of soldier against a few thousands nuclear heads?

Using nukes against a combined force of China and Russia? That will be suicidal. USA + France + United Kingdom + Israel + Pakistan is in the possession of close to 6,000 nuclear warheads. The most powerful nuclear weapon ever built (Tsar Bomba) was capable of incinerating everything within 100 km of its radius. That gives a maximum effective surface area of 30,000 sq.km per weapon.

Now the question is how many of these nukes the NATO will be able to use in a relatively short time (say 4 to 6 hours). Even if they manage to use all the 6,000 weapons, only around 1% or 2% are likely to land in Russia / China, as the air-defenses are very advanced. That means that around 10% of the surface area of Russia / China will be devoid of life. That might kill at the most 50% of their soldiers. But the remaining 50% will use nukes on the NATO nations, completely exterminating the life there.

WTF are you talking about? What air defenses? Why air defenses would matter in any way? Oo