US and EU guys only: Will you start WWIII attacking Russia for Ukraine or Georgia?
 

I've decided to make this pool for a fellow Nazi Adultmix.

So will YOU personally grab an M16 and go on Russia? Are you ready for a mutual global nuclear strike? Are you ready to launch all your missiles to Russia and get Russian missiles launched to the USA? Is Georgia or Ukraine a good reason to make a nuclear hell on the Earth?

Guys don't be shy, vote please!

P.S. I've made this thread because Adultmix believes that USA and NATO will be ready to protect Ukraine and start a war against Russia. I'm just curious is that true what he has already decided for Americans.

It truly truly depends.

I am a Canadian/US dual citizen, but I won't fight for America's wars.
If Canada joins in and declares war against Russia, I would seriously consider joining the US Forces - because then I know it's not just another senseless Bush war.

If Russia were to actually try and take over Ukraine - yes.

The old poll has been moved here because as I said it's for NATO countries onlt. Ukrainians, Russians etc are not allowed to vote here. Please re-vote. Thank you!

In order to restore the previous thread, I'll post it here:

seeandsee
Hell NOT !!

cyberxxx
BTW, this doesn't mean that Russia is going to invade Ukraine, as well as it had no will to invade Georgia - the army will be pulled back to Russia as soon as ALL Georgian military forces will realize the international agreements of 1992 and 1994 and will leave invaded Ossetia.

So this is just a hypothetical question only. I simple want to know your own position regarding the poll subject.

klinton
this is cheap rhetoric from both of you then , i'm not going to vote , cheers :)

cyberxxx
It's not cheap at all. It's a straight question. Perhaps you don't like to give straight answers and used to hide under "diplomatic talks". Be a man and answer the question even you are scared of it. Otherwise you can vote for "This poll scares me so it sucks!" - I've added it especially for you :)

Why this question is straight but not cheap? Simple because if the USA will start a military action (as Ukraine and Georgia hope), Russia will strike back. This absolutely obvious and you haven't to be a genius to guess what king of WND's will be used in the first hours of such a war. Russia and the USA already been within a minutes of a nuclear war in the past, so there is a lot of info to find our how exactly it will be done.

ukxtra
No, fuck em

d-null
Russian wants to fuck with Ukraine again??? :helpme

qxm
USA ain't going to get involved in the matter simply because the country has their hands full with the situation in Irak and the threat of Iran....... I can only imagine USA intervening in such kaboogle if Russia were to do something stupid like making a huge massacre to send a message to western countries.....

Right now bush's interest is in checking out olympic volleyball player's asses not war(see CNN videos)...

Bush is dumb but I don't think he so dense to pick a fight and make things even more complicated for the country.... not sayin that US is affraid of Russia cause it isn't...

Take it for what it is...ur asking for opinion... u got it...

ADL Colin
Like 1956 and 1968 there is nothing that can be done

cyberxxx
"Again"? When the last time Russia fucked Ukraine? Do you mean the case when USSR gave gave away the Crimea to Ukraine or you have some other "facts"? Tell us the truth then!

ADL Colin
Ukraine isn't a NATO member. Why would NATO do that?

cyberxxx
Thanks for your opinion. I really appreciate it :thumbsup Did you vote in poll BTW?

FYI: Ukraine like Georgia is going to be a member of NATO ASAP :2 cents:

ADL Colin
Huge "maybe" on that.

cyberxxx
I don't know about Ukraine, but Georgia is going to join NATO in order to get its military support then they will try to invade South Ossetia and Abkhazia next time, and they will. Mr. Saakashvili stated it's very clear: "we will never left Ossetia and Abkhazia - these territories will belong to Georgia soon". That's why he is soooooooo hurry to join NATO.

IMHO it's a good reason for all other NATO members to decide do they need such counties in the block, or not...

Not a long ago Mr. Bush said his clear "NO" to your "maybe". That's a FACT.

d-null
it sucks when countries put territory of their arbitrary borders of more importance than lives of the people that actually live there... it happens in places all over the world and all through history, and lots of bloodshed because of it... it's a shame

12clicks
I vote to send NATO in and then let the EU fight while we sit on the sidelines and demand a say in waht they do and keep explaining to them how they're doing it wrong.

ADL Colin
I'm not talking about Bush. There is opposition from other NATO members. Not clear at all what will happen in December but the Ukraine wasn't invited in April summit when other nations were. it might happen, it might not. Nothing more than "maybe" right now.

Hank_Heartland
All I have to say is Gen. Patton had it right :thumbsup:winkwink:

cyberxxx
One small note. It's not a war thread. No way! It's a peace one. I just wanted to let the people think about it.

This is a video for whose, who haven't got my point:



Personally I don't want to end up like that.

pornguy
Yes. I have already ordered the 8th Div, 43 Reg. Light fighters into both areas.

cyberxxx
Do you think their voices count? No really, I'm not mocking at you. I just really want to know. Do they count?

ADL Colin
NATO membership requires unanimous approval by all existing members.

No, I'm not talking about a war against Russia for some unknown reason. I've asked about a war for Ukraine and Georgia only.

I.e. you are ready to die for Ukraine? Ok, your vote has been accepted. Thank you!

for a fellow nazi? i hadn't realized your politics

People who will answer positiver are stupid, don't know what war is, or too young t understand.

Obvious answer:

No I won't. Don't see any reason to push the Earth into Armageddon because of Georgia/Ukraine.

If I wanted to fight in wars then I would have joined the military so my answer is no.

I couldn't give a rat's ass about Ukraine, and I actually like Russia.

However, if Russia were to invade Ukraine without any military provocation, it wouldn't stop there if nothing was done to stop it by the rest of the world.

The moment any of the world's major powers starts aggressively expanding its own territory through the use of military force against sovereign nations, WWIII has effectively started. The only thing to do then is to stop it as quickly as possible, because the longer you wait, the worse it will get.

Same thing with the US invading Mexico, China invading Japan, etc.

Actually the nuclear hell is the only possible result of such a war. I believe you remember the Cuban Crisis? Both countries were ready to launch all their nukes to each other just for a hypothetical probability of having Russian WND's on Cuba. I mean there will be no local operations like in "Ghost Recon" first hours of such a conflict will put an end to our planet. BTW, the first nuclear strike form Russia will be targeting the European NATO bases. The second one - the USA. This is a terrible situation, but there are no other solutions. The open war conflict Russia vs NATO will kill us all. I'm not that stupid to think otherwise.

Believe me, Russia will not participate in any war like US vs Mexico, China vs Japan because it doesn't threaten our security. Yes, Russian leaders will make accusatorial speeches like the USA does regarding Georgia but nothing more. That's a fact.

Furthermore. everyone knows that the USA is going to invade Iran. But once again, Russia will stay away of that war. Wait a bit and you'll see.

Russia actually invading Ukraine would be such a war. I don't think it will happen, but if it would, Russia would have to be stopped.

It's the main lesson of WWII: whenever a country starts expanding aggressively, it has to be stopped as quickly as possible.

Nope. All the life on this planet will be stopped. Do you know that Russia has no aircraft-carriers? This mean that to keep our fleet we will have to sink the american aircraft-carriers with nukes only? Do you know what it means?

With such amount of nuclear weapon this won't work. It's impossible to "stop" such a country like Russia or USA. The only possible solution is a nuclear strike. Accept it or not, but that's true.

Here is something interesting: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,402982,00.html

Have you already dug a deep-enough cellar? You'll need it ASAP :)

Russia has one operational aircraft carrier and has plans to build six more.

No, you are wrong. Russia has no aircraft-carriers at all. We have only this:
http://www.mudvillegazette.com/milblogs/kuznetsv.jpg

You are not a military man right? Believe me "Авионесущий крейср" is not an aircraft-carrier. Also believe me - there is the only tactic to deal with American aircraft-carriers. It's a nuclear strike.

P.S. I was learning these things well because I'm not a private. I'm an officer in reserve.

Yes, the Kuznetsov. Here's a video of a plane landing on its deck.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=XFwmvQjMsXA

"The flight deck area is 14,700m² and aircraft take-off is assisted by a bow ski-jump angled at 12°. The flight deck is equipped with arrester wires. Two starboard lifts carry the aircraft from the hangar to the flight deck.

The ship has the capacity to support 16 Yakovlev Yak-41M (NATO code name Freestyle), 12 Sukhoi Su-27K (NATO codename Flanker) fixed-wing aircraft and a range of helicopters including four Kamov Ka-27-LD (NATO codename Helix), 18 Kamov Ka-27 PLO and two Ka-27-S."

Nevawr!!!

Russia knows that the moment it starts lobbing nukes at others, others will start lobbing nukes back. Therefore, it would not start with nukes before either others started with nukes, or its own territorial integrity was threatened.

Russia would not use nukes until it was invaded. That's why it would not get invaded.

So what? I've told you already: it's "авионесущий крейсер" but not "авионосец". Do you understand the word: "cruiser"? Should I explain you the difference between cruiser (even one that can handle some planes on it) and aircraft-carrier? Can't you just accept: these are two DIFFERENT classes? You, wikipedia or anything else can call it an aircraft-carrier. But according to the Russian classification it's not. There are huge difference between these 2 types of sea units.

It was NOT developed to fight against the US aircraft-carriers. The only weapon developed especially for that is nuclear missiles.

Of course. And they will be used. Sad but true.

Have I told you about the US aircraft-carriers? There is no other weapon against them, so if the US will use their aircraft-carriers against Russia (which is more than likely), Russia will use nukes. Is that so complicated to understand? :helpme

I don't want the WWIII. But right now we are moving to it and moving very fast :2 cents:

I want a CIWS attached to my balcony.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...pon_System.jpg

Basically what cyberxxx is trying to say in this thread is that either the West allows Russia to annex Georgia and the Ukraine or Russia will launch a nuclear strike causing Armageddon. Obviously this is utter nonsense. Cyerberxxx may be that crazy but surely Putin who is as rational and calculating as they come is not planning on a nuclear holocaust. This thread is some of the most ridiculous saber rattling I have ever seen. :1orglaugh

Won't help :)

Another thread about this. We get it man. Russia rules, has powerful military, only uses it for good, makes no mistakes, everyone else who disagrees is wrong.

probably not, but it would still make a great piece of deck furniture :1orglaugh

Definitely good for a laugh

No, no. You don't understand my message. I've never told you I need a war. I just tried to show it it will be easy to start WWIII right now. I'm not that crazy to want an Armageddon on the Earth. Please read my posts carefully - I just showed which exactly should be done to start it. I'm not a president of the USA or Russia, so I'm not the one who will make a decision of it. I've just shown you my personal analysis of the current situation.

You're concept of simulated warfare events is beyond stupidity.
Believe me I am all for having a great discussion about military tactics, strategy and what if scenerio's.

However...

For the time being there will be no American Russian confrontation. Infact I predict there will never be one.

However Soviet tactics against American Military weaponry is like saying what if Rabbit's attacked Foxes? In such an event the assault is brief for the rabbit before being shredded to pieces.

T-72's are outdated by almost 40 years in technology and barely upto date from WWII. American Pershing tanks from WWII have a good chance to kill T72's.

THe American M1 would destroy T72's in droves before even having to resupply for ammo and have near zero problems. Russian Aircraft are good enough to take out French made warplanes but could never stand up to American Raptors for more than 5 minutes before being wiped out of the sky.
CHiuna's Naval fleet is more dangerous than Russia's any day of the week.

Why doesnt Russia need or pursue Aircraft Carriers? The answer is simple the Military aim and scope of Russia does not require them. I can go on and on about these kind of things and the only thing Russian Military has going for it is this. Sheer numbers. Russia has alot of shit to blow up and the only question in such a simulated war is how long would it take America to dismantle and would America run out of Ammo in the process?

THe Nuke question is moot as the nukes now can easily be shot down with American technology in the missile defense shields. Not a single Soviet Nuke would land in any American protected zone.

Georgia as well as Ukraine believe that the USA will be ready to die for them. So let's see how far it will go :)

At least you are able to see the truth. :winkwink:

Sorry dude, but inter-continental missiles can not be intercepted. Neither by the USA or by Russia. I haven't commented the rest of your message because it was written by a man who believes in Santa.

You haven't met the laser spewing 747 with onboard nuclear power yet?

pewpewpew

T90 is decent but Ru hasn't been able to build that many

LOL another "expert". I never told that Russia rules and never do mistakes. I just show here the possible way of starting WWIII. I never told that Russian will win such a war. Noone will. Use your brain or don't post your bullshit here.

If ANY of the countries will do a mistake now (Russia or the USA) there will be no GFY and we won't be able to continue our discussion.

If some one (that's not about you) considers that a ballistic missile can be intercepted with some "Patriot" or "C300" something like that, he is an idiot. Should I start a physics lesson here or what?

The most disturbing thing about this thread is the lack of attention being paid to the true casualty of any Russia / Ukraine conflict -- hot girls. Both countries are loaded to the gills with smoking hot chicks named Svetlana, and a war between the two would be an absolute Cootergeddon. Radioactive fallout be damned--I'm worried about the nookie!

T90 can not swim over the ocean, so it won't be used. By the other hand, Topol-M can. The same regarding the US weapon. Noone will attack Russia with Abrams :2 cents:

Heh... Don't even want to comment.

I would like to see a different poll question for the Russians:

"Would you be willing to die in a a global Armageddon for the purpose of annexing Georgia or the Ukraine?"

I would guess the answer would be no as well. :2 cents:

I can easily answer to it: NO. Who needs that useless Georgia or Ukraine? Is my point clear?

cykoe6, you still don't understand one simple thing. Russian is not going to annex Georgia or Ukraine. Just because Russia has toooooo much of unused territory. There is no reason to expand. Especially to expand in those areas that have no resources. I thought it's more than obvious.

Oh...

• How many laser spewing 747 the US army has?
• How many of them, will be ready to fly over the North Pole to intercept Russian missiles?
• What's a maximum speed of laser spewing 747 plane (you may know that laser can work in a sight range only (i.e. it can't bend over the horizon)?
• How long it will take for a single missile to deliver about 10 warheads from one country to another?
• How many missiles will be launched from both sides?

Answer these questions and you'll understand that some awesome video is just a video for the naive taxpayers. In case of mutual nuclear strike noone will survive.

Guys you understood this thread a way wrong. This thread was not created to compare some war technologies. It's a thread to think on how it's easy to loose our planet. Also there is a poll, are the "targets" worth the war.

Don't try to show who's penis is bigger. It's a serious thread which has turned into a real circus.

I like what 12clicks had to say...

"12clicks
I vote to send NATO in and then let the EU fight while we sit on the sidelines and demand a say in waht they do and keep explaining to them how they're doing it wrong."

Brad

NO WAY! I won't go to war with anybody. I'm a pacifist... unless they come over and plow thru the US, my opinion is that the US has no business there.
In any case, so far every time America intervenes, the shyte hits the fan even worse!