Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

[andrea]

I think it is a very safe bet that whever invades will not be able to take control of all the launching sites within the hours(or days, even) it would take to order the launch.
And this for a single reason above everything else: Russia is huge. Even knowing where all of them are ( and it is never good to assume being all-knowing) a coordinated strike on all of them would be highly unlikely to be carried out quickly enough to avoid the launch of at least an handful of missiles.
And most definitely you aren't going to destroy second strike capability, which might be a factor if somebody (insane sub commander?)decides to take nuclear revenge after a conventional defeat.

edit: As sheb said, nuclear war seems unlikely to happen unless conventional war goes all out first.

[Sergarr]

Oh, but you see, the Phmcw seems to advocate for strike against the nuclear launching sites, which explicitly is a thing that provokes and immediate and guaranteed nuclear response.

Like, if he advocated for a normal conventional salami-style war, I'd understand, but he seems to want some kind of magical blitzkrieg.

Here's a picture of why this is a terrible idea:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

These vehicles can be absolutely everywhere and there's no way you can guarantee to kill every single one of them before somebody gives out a final order.

[Sheb]

Don't worry, we Belgian will be too busy fighting each others to invade Russia right now.

[cerapa]

Like, if he advocated for a normal conventional salami-style war, I'd understand, but he seems to want some kind of magical blitzkrieg.

For some reason the phrase "magical blitzkrieg" gives me the mental image of a soldier riding an unicorn and charging towards a missile silo with a rainbow in the background.


I think it's pretty much a certainty that if anyone were to try to have a decent war these days we would all be bathed in nuclear fire and the only survivor will be Australia.

[Guardian G.I.]

Oh, but you see, the Phmcw seems to advocate for strike against the nuclear launching sites, which explicitly is a thing that provokes and immediate and guaranteed nuclear response.

Like, if he advocated for a normal conventional salami-style war, I'd understand, but he seems to want some kind of magical blitzkrieg.

Here's a picture of why this is a terrible idea:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

These vehicles can be absolutely everywhere and there's no way you can guarantee to kill every single one of them before somebody gives out a final order.

There's also the Perimeter system, created to ensure that the missiles will take off even if the entire Soviet/Russian high command gets destroyed by a NATO decapitation strike.

[Phmcw]

I don't encourage it, I think that a war with Russia may become a welcomed distraction for our "beloved" elites five years from now if Germany do enter recession. And you're having way too much faith in the Russian Army. America is busy inflitrating every country at every level, have done just that since the end of WW2 and Russia cannot do the same as it did during the USSR. The 20 years of power void those last years have probaly been put to good use, and there is no way that they didn't try to find a way to neutralise Russia's nuke, if only in case Russia had fallen into a civil war during Eltsine presidency.

[MarcAFK]

So we're back to armchair generalling :All your base are radioactivated by us edition.
I don't particularly have a problem with this.
Australia wouldn't survive though, it wouldn't take more than a single MIRV to wipe out our cities.

[Phmcw]

You're right, my only point is, our politicians will need a diversion soon, and Putin is offrering one. They may become more interested in escalading things that he had anticipated.

[smjjames]

Why do you want a nuclear war so much phmcw?

Also, Kamatchka? Come on, we don't need that, besides, if you don't know already, we didn't conquer Alaska, we BOUGHT the Alaska territory from Russia. And that was before the gold rush happened there.

[MarcAFK]

Why do you want a nuclear war so much phmcw?

Also, Kamatchka? Come on, we don't need that, besides, if you don't know already, we didn't conquer Alaska, we BOUGHT the Alaska territory from Russia.

You conquered it with unfair capitalist economic warfare!

[smjjames]

Why do you want a nuclear war so much phmcw?

Also, Kamatchka? Come on, we don't need that, besides, if you don't know already, we didn't conquer Alaska, we BOUGHT the Alaska territory from Russia.

You conquered it with unfair capitalist economic warfare!

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

[Helgoland]

I believe he was kidding, smj.

[Sergarr]

I don't encourage it, I think that a war with Russia may become a welcomed distraction for our "beloved" elites five years from now if Germany do enter recession. And you're having way too much faith in the Russian Army. America is busy inflitrating every country at every level, have done just that since the end of WW2 and Russia cannot do the same as it did during the USSR. The 20 years of power void those last years have probaly been put to good use, and there is no way that they didn't try to find a way to neutralise Russia's nuke, if only in case Russia had fallen into a civil war during Eltsine presidency.

And a war with NATO will be a good distraction for Putin and will guarantee nearly 100% support for him until the end of it.

Just look at how much the relatively small victory (the retaking of Crimea) has bolstered up the Putin's popularity.

[Ukrainian Ranger]

Should recession in Europe happen, Russia will get a huge hit just because it happened

Recession = low prices for raw materials. Guess who will suffer because of that? 2008 crisis consumed almost half of Russian central bank reserves. Russian stock-market index went from 2450 to 530 and it never recovered to pre-2008 crisis level. The highest was 2050, pre-Crimea  was 1350, current is 1065.

Back then huge reserves and oil prices getting back to $100+ allowed Russia to survive.  Now Russia is in worse situation to survive 2008-like crysis. Reserves are smaller (still rather huge, but). Putin needs to feed Crimea and spend money on war with Ukraine. Sanctions are there to make oil drilling more expensive. Ukrainian market is going away.  Shale oil and alternative energy sources become are more viable

[mainiac]

So I haven't been finding good sources in english but I hear that Merkel has been proposing deficit financed spending to respond to the weak economic outlook in Germany.  Can any of the German speakers tell me if this is correct?

If so good news for the EU as a whole but, wow, that is some chutzpah.