Russian aggression in the UK

[Victor Maitland]

The grandpa speech !!
war would have been likely if Killary Clinton had won the election ,seeing as she wanted war with Russia..
NATO were lined up for it and were devastated when the warmomger didnt win the election.

 

[Canned Tuna]

200 nuclear war heads and a blue water navy.

/thread.

Russia isn't scared of the royal navy

 

[seiger]

Russia isn't scared of the royal navy

it doesnt really matter what you feel about 200 nuclear warheads. you dont have a nuclear umbrella so sit the fuck down before you get evaporated.


can you reliably stop them, or take them out? no.

you can launch a full scale assault on the uk, but you are not going to live to see it.

and thats even without american support, who will relish the chance to wipe you off the face of the map, with just cause, while you fuck around for 30 mins trying to stop a full scale launch on your major cities from unknown waters anywhere on the planet.

usa would probably just declare peace and then come along and finish off what was left of russian civilisation, with a couple of well placed ICBMs a day later.

 

[FinalFight]

More chance of a full on nuclear war breaking out.

 

[The_Renaissance]

I fail to see any reason why Russia would ever invade us.

We have nothing they want nor need. The only way we'd be fighting Russia would be as America's lapdog but that's one of the only bonuses of Trump winning the election - a war with Russia is probably never happening.

 

[Goatenstein]

LOL Putin would have to control large parts of mainland Europe to invade Britain. British think they're so tough but the liberal cowards would quit quicker than France. Donald gonna be taking care of the USA instead of playing world police. Donald is so handsome, brave, and would dominate MMA.

 

[seiger]

LOL Putin would have to control large parts of mainland Europe to invade Britain. British think they're so tough but the liberal cowards would quit quicker than France. Donald gonna be taking care of the USA instead of playing world police. Donald is so handsome, brave, and would dominate MMA.

yes. history has shown us the brits are scared of war. smfh.

if the uk were scared of nazis, we wouldnt be hearing bitching about immigration.

 

[Canned Tuna]

it doesnt really matter what you feel about 200 nuclear warheads. you dont have a nuclear umbrella so sit the fuck down before you get evaporated.


can you reliably stop them, or take them out? no.

you can launch a full scale assault on the uk, but you are not going to live to see it.

and thats even without american support, who will relish the chance to wipe you off the face of the map, with just cause, while you fuck around for 30 mins trying to stop a full scale launch on your major cities from unknown waters anywhere on the planet.

usa would probably just declare peace and then come along and finish off what was left of russian civilisation, with a couple of well placed ICBMs a day later.

Russians have more subs with more nukes that would retaliate the same way. It would be smarter for everyone of no one used them.

Side note, the range on a nuclear ballistic missile submarine is not literally "anywhere in the world"

 

[seiger]

Russians have more subs with more nukes that would retaliate the same way. It would be smarter for everyone of no one used them.

Side note, the range on a nuclear ballistic missile submarine is not literally "anywhere in the world"

here is what a ww3 scenario looks like.

from 0.25 onwards civilisation has lost and the world is over.

even without american aid, from 0.40 onwards, russia is toast.

and realistically a blue water navy can live under water for a long time undetectable, and certainly long enough to fire 200 suns into your back yard. it doesnt matter what you do to the uk, you are already dead.

A blue-water navy is a maritime force capable of operating globally; essentially across the deep waters of open oceans.[1]A term more often used in the United Kingdom to describe such a force is a navy possessing maritime expeditionarycapabilities.[2] While definitions of what actually constitutes such a force vary, there is a requirement for the ability to exercise sea control at wide ranges.



its good you have a decent navy, its is still one factor below the uks and if any of your subs survived, they would be the last remaining representatives of your whole fucking civilisation when they surfaced.

 

[Canned Tuna]

here is what a ww3 scenario looks like.

from 0.25 onwards civilisation has lost and the world is over.

even without american aid, from 0.40 onwards, russia is toast.

and realistically a blue water navy can live under water for a long time undetectable, and certainly long enough to fire 200 suns into your back yard. it doesnt matter what you do to the uk, you are already dead.

Russia also has a large number of nuclear powered submarines armed with nuclear weapons. Because of this, the uk would not immediately resort to launching nukes. That is my point.

I am not taking a stance that anyone wins a nuclear war.

 

[seiger]

Russia also has a large number of nuclear powered submarines armed with nuclear weapons. Because of this, the uk would not immediately resort to launching nukes. That is my point.

I am not taking a stance that anyone wins a nuclear war.

dude, if russia attacked the uk mainland, they would get nuked.

make no mistake. not just by the uk, but also nato.

there is no in between. uk would be nuked in all likelihood back, as you rightly assert russia has subs with nukes, although i understand they are not as good as the uks ones. i dont believe in a missle defense shield actually working that well.

doesnt matter though, russia is toast.

 

[Canned Tuna]

dude, if russia attacked the uk mainland, they would get nuked.

make no mistake. not just by the uk, but also nato.

there is no in between. uk would be nuked in all likelihood back, as you rightly assert russia has subs with nukes, although i understand they are not as good as the uks ones and i dont believe in a missle defense shield actually working that well.

doesnt matter though, russia is toast.

You are incorrect about the Russian subs being inferior to the UK ones, at least that is the general understanding in the US nuclear navy. Obviously all of the details are classified, so I can't be sure, but the generally accepted ideas by those who have been underway on subs and do have an idea is that the Russian subs are quiet, fast, and can go deeper than ours but their reactor plant designs are not nearly as safe as ours and they cannot play sneaky squirrel games nearly as long as we can because their crews are not well trained enough to operate while their officers sleep.

 

[seiger]

You are incorrect about the Russian subs being inferior to the UK ones, at least that is the general understanding in the US nuclear navy. Obviously all of the details are classified, so I can't be sure, but the generally accepted ideas by those who have been underway on subs and do have an idea is that the Russian subs are quiet, fast, and can go deeper than ours but their reactor plant designs are not nearly as safe as ours and they cannot play sneaky squirrel games nearly as long as we can because their crews are not well trained enough to operate while their officers sleep.

World Naval Hierarchy, according to the Todd & Lindberg classification system

1 USA
2 UK and France
3 India, Russia, Italy, Spain, Brazil

and the UK has an armed forces depleted by cuts, but the national capacity is there, and the navy has some very nice toys.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astute-class_submarine

either way its all academic. any viable nuclear war scenario with the uk includes the part where you get fired on by nuclear submarines from unknown locations, and turned into an international dust cloud.

= game over.

thank you for playing.

 

[Deleted member 502383]

No need to worry about Russia, they were a problem 25 years ago but are now in a much better place.

 

[KnightTemplar]

here is what a ww3 scenario looks like.

from 0.25 onwards civilisation has lost and the world is over.

even without american aid, from 0.40 onwards, russia is toast.

and realistically a blue water navy can live under water for a long time undetectable, and certainly long enough to fire 200 suns into your back yard. it doesnt matter what you do to the uk, you are already dead.

A blue-water navy is a maritime force capable of operating globally; essentially across the deep waters of open oceans.[1]A term more often used in the United Kingdom to describe such a force is a navy possessing maritime expeditionarycapabilities.[2] While definitions of what actually constitutes such a force vary, there is a requirement for the ability to exercise sea control at wide ranges.



its good you have a decent navy, its is still one factor below the uks and if any of your subs survived, they would be the last remaining representatives of your whole fucking civilisation when they surfaced.

/Thread. As I stated before, there's a damn good reason no country with nuclear weapons has ever been invaded. Yeah, the Russians have more than enough missiles to wipe the UK from the face of the earth. But that won't be much consolation as we bend their Rodina over and rape her with a nuclear dildo(no lube)

That's the point of Nuclear War: the only way to win is not to fight in the first place.

 

[IDL]

War isn't fought with weapons. War is won by controlling people's minds, creating conflict and confusion and instability. Can't risk the people working together and starting a revolution.

This is certainly the case for the vast majority of warfare, which never ends (the world is in a constant state of war, including the West)

Direct invasion isn't nearly as useful as it once was, considering that territory can be taken over economically, and targets can be undermined using subversive tactics and propoganda/psych warfare (in addition to economic warfare)

These strategies work particularly well in Western nations because they are so globalized and multiculturalized. Those conditions favor Oligarchy because they can wage constant war for acquisition of power and resources, and they can do it legally (although i'm sure rules are broken behind the scenes quite often). And if laws are unfavorable they can pay to lobby to get them changed, and get their interests included in major trade agreements, etc.

Major, direct warfare, I think would only really be useful if the desire was to redraw maps, or make large leaps in structural changes over a short amount of time.

 

[JohnnySagebrush]

/Thread. As I stated before, there's a damn good reason no country with nuclear weapons has ever been invaded.

It's happened on a small scale.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kargil_War
Which is why a lot of folks think that that is where WW3 will break out.

 

[snakedafunky]

How would the Russian economy even finance a War time economy? If we assume for a minute they would fight the UK without nukes or allies (imaginary scenario of course)
The UK would simple outspent them and win the war. There isn't really that much the Russian economy could do compared to what the UK would be able to achieve if they went to a war time economy.
On a more realistic scenario if the UK were under the impression the Russian want to attack they would dramatically increase their nuclear arsenal. Resulting into a nuclear stalemate or total destruction.

But Russia wouldn't be able to win a war with any big Western Nation because they economy wouldn't be able to handle it. Unless of course they would Blitz someone tomorrow. But if you had a few years built up to a war like you usually have Germany, France or the UK would simply outspent Russia.