- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: What would a U.S.-Russia war look like?
Posted on 3/6/14 at 2:36 pm to son of arlo
Posted on 3/6/14 at 2:36 pm to son of arlo
1
Posted on 3/6/14 at 2:47 pm to boxcarbarney
Under this administration with today's entitlement youth I'm just glad I already speak Russian.
Posted on 3/6/14 at 2:49 pm to stat19
New-USA or RUSA
Land grab. Take it all
Land grab. Take it all
Posted on 3/6/14 at 2:51 pm to boxcarbarney
I've never agreed with those that have said that US weapons and tactics need to be changed to be better suited to handle smaller scale, regional conflicts involving asymmetrical warfare such as we faced in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The United States should ALWAYS focus on being equipped to face another world power in a large scale, conventional war because those are the wars that have the highest stakes.
That is why we need M1s, A-10s, Apaches, Raptors, field artillery and other weapon systems that have either been phased out, cancelled outright or produced in smaller numbers than first planned. They are weapon systems designed to beat Russia in Europe and for 20 years we have heard we don't need them any longer. They say we need a "smaller, more nimble" military.
Guess what?
The United States should ALWAYS focus on being equipped to face another world power in a large scale, conventional war because those are the wars that have the highest stakes.
That is why we need M1s, A-10s, Apaches, Raptors, field artillery and other weapon systems that have either been phased out, cancelled outright or produced in smaller numbers than first planned. They are weapon systems designed to beat Russia in Europe and for 20 years we have heard we don't need them any longer. They say we need a "smaller, more nimble" military.
Guess what?
This post was edited on 3/6/14 at 2:54 pm
Posted on 3/6/14 at 3:07 pm to Scoop
Cancelled
Cancelled
Cancelled
Original order: 750
Final production: 183
Cancelled
Cancelled
Original order: 750
Final production: 183
Posted on 3/6/14 at 9:39 pm to SpqrTiger
quote:
If it's kept conventional, which it probably wouldn't be... the US wins every time.
Doesn't Russia even to this day have very large armored divisions?
Posted on 3/6/14 at 9:40 pm to Zach
Posted on 3/6/14 at 9:46 pm to boxcarbarney
Not that I am implying they couldn't hold their own but while they were collapsing we were putting contingencies in place.
Posted on 3/6/14 at 9:53 pm to Scoop
People who say another major World War won't happen are ignorant.
It will happen, the right ingredients for it will eventually fall into place.
And when it does, it will make WW2 look like childs play...I predict major cities, maybe even small countries, will be obliterated entirely.
It will happen, the right ingredients for it will eventually fall into place.
And when it does, it will make WW2 look like childs play...I predict major cities, maybe even small countries, will be obliterated entirely.
Posted on 3/6/14 at 11:45 pm to deltaland
The one encouraging thing about nuclear weapons is that they are beyond capability of a terrorist groups, since the require infrastructure that only a nation-state can provide. Therefore, the only way a terrorist group can ever get nuclear weapons is if a nation-state gives them to that group.
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News