|
| Thread: What do you think??? |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 4 · «PREV / NEXT» |
|
pei
Famous Hero
Fresh Air.
|
posted September 22, 2009 08:58 AM |
|
|
|
Games Theory is so fun! But in this case there is Mutual Assured Destruction plus some really powerfull hidden people. Do you guys think that the president has the decition to nuke a country?Does any of you think that G.Bush had any opinion on Irak? I dont think so...he is only a face to blame. If there had not been a G.Bush then another president would have existed taking his place in mostly the same decitions. People like to see the "leader" and also like to think they have some "power of decition" between the possible future leaders. I think they are fodder. Palpatine´s old trick but even better. What´s Bush and Obama but a linear plan to expand U.S. Two different faces with the same face under it. No president decides an attack, real life is not Jack Bauer´s 24 where the president has power, real life is the most powerful persons in the world deciding what to do and you ignoring it. And the best of this all is that i can type it down here and no one can say im not right cause again its only an hypothesis and cant be proven wrong without physical evidence. You might also think that without this evidence then i can not remain such statement but i do cause i firmly believe it. We will see in the end, if i reach to see it and sometimes i hope i do.
|
|
ihor
Supreme Hero
Accidental Hero
|
|
posted September 22, 2009 11:09 AM |
|
Edited by ihor at 11:10, 22 Sep 2009.
|
Quote:
Heh, and all this doesn't even factor in China. Who really is the super power of the day. As much as I am all for America and all that, in a 1 on 1 vs China we would lose..badly. In a non-atomic bomb war..whichever side China decides to back will win. Unless everybody else is on the other side.
China's standing army is as large as America's standing AND reserve combined. .
Do you really think that an amount of soldiers is a decisive factor in war in our time? What about an amount of fighters, tanks, warships, missiles and new war technologies? In our time the new term appeared "Button war". Push the button - launch the missile and proportion of power will change and I'm not talking about the nuclear weapon.
____________
Your advertisement could be
here only for 100$ per day. 
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted September 22, 2009 04:46 PM |
|
Edited by TheDeath at 16:48, 22 Sep 2009.
|
Quote:
On the other side, think from the side of your opponent. He knows you have nukes. He knows, if he invade, then you use them. The war will become nuclear and with destructive consequences(doesn't matter who win). Does he want it? I believe not.
But that means there's no war in the first place. I thought we assumed it was.
Quote:
Do you guys think that the president has the decition to nuke a country?
Yeah the president must approve it first -- usually the decisin itself is left to someone in military command, but for a nuke attack, the president MUST approve it.
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
Totoro
Famous Hero
in User
|
|
posted September 22, 2009 06:09 PM |
|
|
|
You're actually calculating outcomes of a war between super powers when preventing such things should be the world's number one priority.
|
|
del_diablo
Legendary Hero
Manifest
|
|
posted September 22, 2009 06:23 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Mutual Assured Destruction is a powerful force for peace for countries that are at least semi-sane. For insane dictators it is not necessarily a factor.
Well, we all agree brother Stalin was the more insane dictator when we had nukes. And all he had to do to launch one was to order it, yet he did not
Well, I agree it causes peace for the most.
____________
|
|
Darkshadow
Legendary Hero
Cerise Princess
|
|
posted September 22, 2009 06:24 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Heh, and all this doesn't even factor in China. Who really is the super power of the day. As much as I am all for America and all that, in a 1 on 1 vs China we would lose..badly. In a non-atomic bomb war..whichever side China decides to back will win. Unless everybody else is on the other side.
Let me clear a few things that probably make you think china is worth a snow...
1st.They have huge manpower, true. But their weapons are crappy as those used in former soviet bloc countries.Their airforce consists of poorly trained pilots in copied soviet planes...
2nd...and that leads us to the navy, their navy is nonexistant by merely comparing it to the us pacific strike force.
3rd. they can't really mobilise more than you since their industry is so dependant on people.
4.back to the airforce.Remember Germany post 1943?Heavy bombings destroyed their war industry, airforce, and civilian morale.Same could happen again as chinese airforce is crappy as indian air force.
5.If US played the game right, they could invite a special friend in the north (of china) to join the conflict.
6.I don't actually know (or care) what are the laws on herbicidal warfare. But with the poisons invented during cold war, you could easily poison the chinese food supplies.
7.Their weapon tech is crappy (I think I cleared this one by now ).
to make this clear:China stands no change if the US doesn't just go in and think it can hold 1/2 of china for 15 years 
A much fairer fight would be with Russia who stand nearly in the same level as your country in terms of military.
____________
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted September 22, 2009 06:30 PM |
|
|
Man chinese have changed in the last 20 years, although we also have to take in account Russia, who is probably more likely to ally with the chinese than the americans.
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
del_diablo
Legendary Hero
Manifest
|
|
posted September 22, 2009 06:40 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Man chinese have changed in the last 20 years, although we also have to take in account Russia, who is probably more likely to ally with the chinese than the americans.
Why in hecks name would they want to ally somebody?
If 3rd world war starts, then I highly doubt on US being back up by allies, except maybe UK.
____________
|
|
Darkshadow
Legendary Hero
Cerise Princess
|
|
posted September 22, 2009 06:40 PM |
|
|
Changed?How?Their military is still crappy as it can be
Russia?allying with the Chinks?HAHAHAHAHAAHAHAAHAHHAAHAHAH!
No change...
____________
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted September 22, 2009 06:41 PM |
|
|
At least they let them buy a lot of their aircraft, something the US hasn't. 
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
Darkshadow
Legendary Hero
Cerise Princess
|
|
posted September 22, 2009 06:44 PM |
|
|
The quality...OH a paper made aircraft could take down the poor craft the east has...
The US has a large fighter production capability on it's own, am not sure when this war would start but let me say something:
F35:Air superiority Ownage
F22:Superior Air Ownage
Mig's, SU's and chinese copies:Teh suck.
____________
|
|
del_diablo
Legendary Hero
Manifest
|
|
posted September 22, 2009 06:58 PM |
|
|
Quote:
F35:Air superiority Ownage
F22:Superior Air Ownage
LOLOL, the lolzorz
____________
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted September 22, 2009 07:30 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Mig's, SU's and chinese copies:Teh suck.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chengdu_J-10
No, not as good as F-22, but getting there.
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
Darkshadow
Legendary Hero
Cerise Princess
|
|
posted September 22, 2009 07:44 PM |
|
|
Been compared to F16...That is the top of the iceberg of phailness.
By the time the Chinks have something to compare with the F35, the US probably has developed a full stealth orbital fighter (to make the comparison more realistic:With a hyperdrive).
I thought the Chinese air force would have atleast a copy of the latest SU that could be pitted against an F18 superhornet.
But no...They continue to suck as usual.
____________
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted September 22, 2009 07:46 PM |
|
|
far from MiGs
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
Darkshadow
Legendary Hero
Cerise Princess
|
|
posted September 22, 2009 07:50 PM |
|
|
dude, MiG is so powerless only the third world actually "uses" it.
And the Chinks copy the SU fighter Aircraft FYI.
____________
|
|
blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
|
posted September 22, 2009 08:01 PM |
|
|
|
Err... stop using the 'c' word.
|
|
blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
|
posted September 22, 2009 08:12 PM |
|
|
A U.S. v China scenario is weak even to begin with since they're not natural enemies. China isn't the 2nd Soviet Union; they're quickly becoming the U.S.'s #1 fan since the economies compliment each other so well with tech and manpower. China actually paid for a ton of the Iraq War, and no regret to them since they feed in interest for the loan.
And if you're just talking conventional military it would be a futile repeat of the 45' stand off with the Soviets. China would field an absurdly massive ground force and the U.S. would have an unmovable navy. I dont think people realize how powerful the U.S. navy is. Nobody would be invading anybody.
|
|
Darkshadow
Legendary Hero
Cerise Princess
|
|
posted September 22, 2009 08:16 PM |
|
|
And the US airforce is the best in the world...
The Us wouldn't even need the carriers to keep china in bay.
A strike squadron with missile cruisers would be enough.
____________
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted September 22, 2009 08:17 PM |
|
|
Quote:
dude, MiG is so powerless only the third world actually "uses" it.
you said they only have MiGs and I said that, "F-16s" are far from MiGs.
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
|
|
