- Joined
- Jan 21, 2002
- Messages
- 6,617
- Points
- 433
Oh, no... I'm not sort of ill-head murder, who wants to kill billions of people just for fun. I want peace for my children. Better world, more safe
Glad to hear that buddy
Oh, no... I'm not sort of ill-head murder, who wants to kill billions of people just for fun. I want peace for my children. Better world, more safe
Yes, it's me.Thank you very much @ Black Pawn, interesting reading. Do not you appear there under the nickname "Ярс"?
There are no such thing as "global conventional war" in Russian military doctrine. War with NATO will be nuclear.I wonder one thing - the whole assumption is still revolving around the use of nuclear weapons. And what if it will be a conventional war?
Chemical weapon was not used where and when it was ineffective. It was not effective against modern European armies. When it was effective, for example against Chines or Abbisinian Army - it was widely used.Do you like to quote historical analogies - and what if (I hope) it will be as during World War II when, due to the consequences, all countries refrained from using chemical weapons?
Actually - very long.Well, maybe with the exception of NK, How long will your country survive, for example: with an infected rail, energy and water supply system after attacks in cyberspace?
Any nuclear conflict is limited, because no one country have unlimited nukes.P.S. Russia also has something that can decide on survival - a strategic depth. You have where to dissipate your forces in case of limited nuclear conflict.
In fact, nor Russia, nor USA neigher both of them have no enough of nukes to literally transform Poland into the nuclear desert. May be, there are chances to burn out all Polish cities, but there are no need in it. There are 915 cities in Poland and only 1550 strategic warheads in Russia. Some cities need more then one warhead. In this game there was used near 100 tactical shells only in Warzsawa. It was enough to crush organised resistance and continue offence, other cities were intact.In the case of my country, with its size and location - it will be a nuclear desert.
We don't know what kind of climate change there will be - global warming or global cooling, but we have enough of reserves. We remember mistake of Boris Godunov, "three years without summer" and that "disaster for one is possibility for another". I'm sure, you remember it , too.ml I have no illusions, so the discussion of how the world will look after the first attack is an abstraction for me. There is one more thing to keep in mind - nuclear war will be associated with climate change and long-term hunger.
My bet is that Russian government will survive.It will not be that the governments will survive. And they should rather take this into account.
Ok. It was not you, it was Andrzej Duda who was an agressor (or supporter of "pro-democratic Belorussian Forces"). After understanding of situation - he'd made a suicide. Or may be, his HQ was hit by Islander with conventional warhead. And yes, Poland as member of EU and NATO was not absolutely free in it's politic. Now you are the president and have not too much choices. You play with the bad cards, that you already have.By definition, you made a mistake. If I am a president, I do not lead to a conflict with Russia. Especially when I am an aggressor.
Yes, official Paris don't want (at least right now) to make unfriendly (to Russia) actions, but officially their pilot (Boleslav Kowalski) trained to use nukes, is ethnic Polish, who had deserted from the French Air forces with his Rafael and steal two ASMP's.I'm losing all the support of other countries and I can not balance it with military power. As for France's help, I'm skeptical. There is a saying: "Poles love the French and the French love the Russians" and this is unfortunately true.
It's you. But Duda (in the game) had another opinion. You can ask Germans to "to help" you, but you don't know will they listen you.Germany ... is a very pragmatic and anticipating nation that can break down actions for many years and achieve a goal. I would not count on their military help.
And what is the goal of creating Ukro-Polish-Lithuanian battalion? To join the war if Russians will really invade Ukraine with their regular forces, isn't it?Ukraine is already involved in the war and is not strong enough to fight on the next front. And in this situation, should I count on me to take up Belarus? Anyway - what for? To get involved in the war for years?
It's the very interesting question, but there are too many secrets. I can suggest a little music video:I would like to discuss the references to cyber war as a facet of any future conflict after all its going on right now is it not?
Jeez Cyber war could be a thread in its own right
We are getting fun from it.It does confuse me sometimes why the Russians are always blamed, I don't have enough information to say its not happening but it does seem a little ridiculous at the moment.
Really? For the any conspiracy theory - "Russian hackers", "Saddam's nukes", "Assad's chemical weapons", "MH-17, shooten down by Russian Buk" and so on the best evidence is a lack of any evidences. Because if you try to demonstrate any evidences - there can be counterevidences, or you demonstrate that blamed is not monster, but equal side of the discussion, that is not acceptable for West elites.Need to get up to speed with the evidence, if there is any
I forget about US, British and France because fight between nuclear states is, without any alternatives, nuclear fight. Russia will not use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear country that is not ally of nuclear country (for example Sweden or Finland). Russia will use nuclear weapon against nuclear states. Russia may use, or may not to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear state that is ally of the nuclear state. War against NATO will be nuclear (without any alternatives). War against Poland or Germany - can be not nuclear or nuclear. War against Sweden will be unnuclear.@ Black Pawn - the only way I see in this situation is to bring about a conventional clash between NATO (because you somehow forget about US, British, Romanian, Norwegian forces, etc.) on the territory of Poland and Lithuania.
Who knows? We can roll dices the determine effectiveness of the nuclear strike.The protective umbrella of the anti-aircraft forces of Russia is such that for 1 Rafale without support (because after 1-2 days we will have eliminated our air force) there is no chance of breaking into the depth of the Russian forces. It only remains to hit a small depth - if it is to be effective.
Ok. Answer accepted. In fact, you have a chance to destroy one or two regiments, but hardly more.Simple, fast, pointless. I have no reason to use it. I prefer a conventional clash. It is a lower risk of death for Polish citizens and a greater reconstruction of the country in the future (and if not - I keep reserves to make the invaders' life more difficult in the future). With one Rafale without support we gain nothing - only the opinion of the state attacking nuclear weapons.
First of all, this discussion was about T-14 and is it necessary to make T-14 with 155-mm guns and turrets with réfrigérateurs to use nuclear shells. Poland, Lithuania, Japan, Turkey, UK - does not matter. Poland was just as example. Russia was not an agressor at the last thousands of years, and, I hope, will not be agressor in the future.And we can not afford the tactics of "scorched earth." I see that you really want to get an answer on your terms and you absolutely want to see an open war between Poland and Russia. And necessarily with Poland as an aggressor (I do not know why).
If the whole NATO will join this party - no problem. There are the next stage and a more seriouse game.Only that the assumption is still an error. If the president died as a result of an Iskander missile attack (most likely from the Kaliningrad region) and Russian forces are already in the area of Siedlce, then Russia started actions towards NATO member states in the so-called "Suwalki corridor", which NATO countries can not afford for their own security.
Sure. We helped them in the suppressing of Anti-Soviet riots. And yes, Polish invasion in Czechoslovakia in the October of 1938 was one of the reasons of Soviet invasion in Poland in the September of 1939.As for the fun song - check out exactly whose song it is. Did you hear about a country like Czechoslovakia?
1. Russia was not an agressor at the last thousands of years, and, I hope, will not be agressor in the future.
2. If the whole NATO will join this party - no problem. There are the next stage and a more seriouse game.
3. Sure. We helped them in the suppressing of Anti-Soviet riots. And yes, Polish invasion in Czechoslovakia in the October of 1938 was one of the reasons of Soviet invasion in Poland in the September of 1939.
In 1938 Soviet government, according treaties with Chzehoslovakia told to Poland government, that in case of Polish invasion in Chzehoslovakia, Soviet government will finish non-agression Treaty with Poland. So, Poland was agressor, Soviet Union was ally of victim. Absolutely same situation that with Poland and her allies - Britain and France after invasion in Poland German and Slovakia's forces.In point 1 you write that for a thousand years Russia was not an aggressor, in point 3 you admit that Russia invaded Poland in 1939. So how is it finally?
Of course, I don't forget about Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, but also I don't forget about Chamberlain-Hitler pact, Pilsudski-Hitler pact and Bonnet-Ribbentrop pact.Do you forget about the Ribbentrop-Molotov pact assuming the partition of Poland between Russia (USSR) and Germany? Both sides - Germans and Russians - planned war, Poland was on the way.
Sorry, but why? Game is game. There are many games about a nuclear war.I am a bit offended at the nuclear war as a game.
T-14 have a good possibilities for modernisation. For example, it can be equipped with 152-mm gun (increased power, decreased number of shells) and this system can use 3БВ3-tactical nukes 0,2-0,3kt. In fact, there was M9-24 "Rezeda" for the BTR-60PA, "Taran" for the T-64A and "Shipovnik" for BMP-1.I do not know where the T-14 tank appears in your speech, but from what I remember it is equipped with a 125 mm 2A82-1M gun. I know nothing about nuclear tactical missiles for this work. But this is TANK - it is supposed to destroy other tanks at a distance of up to 2 km (the range is limited by the visibility of the target) and not destroy itself by using nuclear weapons at a small distance. From using nuclear tactical weapon there is artillery - e.g. modified MSTA. Or missiles. Not tanks.
"Кто празднику рад, тот накануне пьян". "Who like a celebration - start to celebrate day before". In fact, we congratulated women in our office. We are in Moscow, and yes, I'll say them.Я не знаю, в каком часовом поясе вы находитесь, но если там День женщин, пожалуйста, присылайте им все мои наилучшие пожелания от моего имени.
Sure. It was my mistake. But also there are a Polish variant:And back to the song, if you checked it you would know (I do not put it on malice only for lack of knowledge) that it's a Czechoslovak song.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.