Discussion about WWIII

[Bombardier]

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

 

[Black Pawn]

Thank you very much @ Black Pawn, interesting reading. Do not you appear there under the nickname "Ярс"?

Yes, it's me.

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?

There are no such thing as "global conventional war" in Russian military doctrine. War with NATO will be nuclear.
Russia is not USSR - now we don't want to make love and happyness for the everyone.

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?

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.
Nukes are very effective, so they will be used. In fact, this discussion was about "how to model using of nukes" not "to use or not to use".

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?

Actually - very long.

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.

Any nuclear conflict is limited, because no one country have unlimited nukes.

In the case of my country, with its size and location - it will be a nuclear desert.

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.

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.

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.

It will not be that the governments will survive. And they should rather take this into account.

My bet is that Russian government will survive.

 

[Black Pawn]

@Conhoon , let's play the game.
Imagine, that you are president of Poland. 2019. Sanctions and stop of transit of Russian gas through Ukraine and Poland decrease incomes of Russian budget.
There are some unrests in Belorussia, particularly inspired by Polish agenda and pro-Polish activists. Lukashenko is killed, "Free Belorussian Army" ask Poland, Ukraine and Lithuania for help, and they agreed. Legal government ask Russia for help, and Russia agreed. After short conventional battle joined Polish, Ukrainian and Lithuanian forces are defeated, flew away in Warszawa.
Russian forces continue offence at the territory of Ukraine and Poland. If you will not stop them - they will conquere all Poland. Germans (there are many of pro-Russians) ready to "send help", but not ready to fight with Russians - in fact they suggest another division of Poland. French government secretly suggest you few tactical nukes with jet and pilot, you can use it against Russians or not to use.
If you don't use nukes - Poland will be occupied (may be only by Russians, may be - by both Russia and Germany). If you use nukes - Poland may be nuked too, or Russians can be scaried and stop their offence (and Poland will be free).
What will you choose?

 

[Conhoon]

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. 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. 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. 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?

 

[Bombardier]

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

Cyber warfare
The use of computer technology to disrupt the activities of a state or organization, especially the deliberate attacking of information systems for strategic or military purposes.

 

[Black Pawn]

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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?
Duda is dead, his European friends don't tell you much. You have no much time for conversations or searching for compromise. Russian forces are already in Siedlce and looks like they don't want to stop. German forces are coming to the West Polish border.
Main variants of the closest future:
1. Poland capitulated and captured by Russia as a whole country. May be later it will be free. May be not.
2. Poland is capitulated and divided by Germany and Russia. May be later it will be free. May be not.
3. Poland became a battlefield of the conventional war between Germany and Russia. In the case of any significant help from nuclear state, there are high risk of escalation and transformation of this war into the nuclear war.
4. Poland became a nuclear battlefield between Russia and French "volonteers", or between Russia and a whole NATO.

You can try to deescalate by full capitulation, or escalate with using nukes. You can try to use nukes against Russian forces in the Polish territory, against Russian forces in Ukrainian or Belorussian territory, or against Russian targets at the Russian territory.
There are no good choice in this situation.
Did you read book of Andrzej Sapkowski "Ostatnie życzenie" (The last wish) story "Mniejsze zło" (Lesser evil)?
https://royallib.com/read/sapkovskiy_andgey/lesser_evil.html#0
-----------
"— Bo nie wierzę w mniejsze zło. Renfri uśmiechnęła się lekko, po czym usta skrzywił jej grymas, bardzo nieładny w żółtym świetle świecy.
— Nie wierzysz, powiadasz. Widzisz, masz rację, ale tylko częściowo. Istnieje tylko Zło i Większe Zło, a za nimi oboma, w cieniu, stoi Bardzo Wielkie Zło. Bardzo Wielkie Zło, Geralt, to takie, którego nawet wyobrazić sobie nie możesz, choćbyś myślał, że nic już nie może cię zaskoczyć. I widzisz, Geralt, niekiedy bywa tak, że Bardzo Wielkie Zło chwyci cię za gardło i powie: "Wybieraj, bratku, albo ja, albo tamto, trochę mniejsze"."

"Because I don't believe in lesser evil."
After Renfri smiled delicately, her lips was contorted by a grimace looking nastily in the yellowish glow of the candle.
"You don't believe, you say. You see, you are right, but only to a certain extent. There is Evil and the Greater Evil, and behind both of them, in the shade, there is the Very Great Evil. Very Great Evil, Geralt, is one which you cannot even imagine, even though you thought that nothing can surprise you. And you see, Geralt, sometimes it goes so that this Very Great Evil clutches you by the throat and says: "Choose, fella, either me or that one, slightly lesser".
----------

Sometimes we have to choose less evil, or search for another solution in difficult situation.
What will be your choice - capitulation, escalation, conventional conflict, or, may be, something else?

 

[Black Pawn]

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

It's the very interesting question, but there are too many secrets. I can suggest a little music video:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Based on the funny Polish song about brave Polish aviator who use chemical/biological weapon against monster from the bog (Who said "Russophobia"?).

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Bombardier]

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. Need to get up to speed with the evidence, if there is any

 

[Black Pawn]

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.

We are getting fun from it.

Need to get up to speed with the evidence, if there is any

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.

 

[Bombardier]

Here is an interesting article regarding the alleged Russian Governments involvement in the hacking of the US Democratic party. It all seems to be assumption and speculation because of an apparent Russian connection but it is not clear if the Russian connection goes as far as the Russian Government.


THERE ARE SOME good reasons to believe Russians had something to do with the breaches into email accounts belonging to members of the Democratic party, which proved varyingly embarrassing or disruptive for Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign. But “good” doesn’t necessarily mean good enough to indict Russia’s head of state for sabotaging our democracy.

There’s a lot of evidence from the attack on the table, mostly detailing how the hack was perpetrated, and possibly the language of the perpetrators. It certainly remains plausible that Russians hacked the DNC, and remains possible that Russia itself ordered it. But the refrain of Russian attribution has been repeated so regularly and so emphatically that it’s become easy to forget that no one has ever truly proven the claim. There is strong evidence indicating that Democratic email accounts were breached via phishing messages, and that specific malware was spread across DNC computers. There’s even evidence that the attackers are the same group that’s been spotted attacking other targets in the past. But again: No one has actually proven that group is the Russian government (or works for it). This remains the enormous inductive leap that’s not been reckoned with, and Americans deserve better.

Read More https://theintercept.com/2016/12/14/heres-the-public-evidence-russia-hacked-the-dnc-its-not-enough/

 

[Conhoon]

@ 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. 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. 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. 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).
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.

As for the fun song - check out exactly whose song it is. Did you hear about a country like Czechoslovakia?

 

[Bombardier]

Another interesting article from the British Media 'The Sun'

Planet closer to catastrophic World War III than at any time for SIXTY years, experts warn… and it doesn’t look good for Britain or America if it does kick off

Several flashpoints could erupt into a global conflict involving the US, China and Russia, it is claimed

THE world is closer to a catastrophic and bloody World War III than at any other point in the past 60 years, experts have warned.

Russia and China, both of which are pumping vast amounts of money into their militaries, could soon rival the US in terms of power and prestige.

Potential WWIII triggers are located in Poland, Syria and the South China Sea

 

[Black Pawn]

@ 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.

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.

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.

Who knows? We can roll dices the determine effectiveness of the nuclear strike.

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.

Ok. Answer accepted. In fact, you have a chance to destroy one or two regiments, but hardly more.

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).

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.

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.

If the whole NATO will join this party - no problem. There are the next stage and a more seriouse game.

As for the fun song - check out exactly whose song it is. Did you hear about a country like Czechoslovakia?

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.

 

[Black Pawn]

Sorry for my English. We had start celebrating our women with the International Women's Day, and I'm already bit drunken.

 

[Bombardier]

I also have drinken a few Whiskies , Enjoy my friend and make sure you have plenty of headache tablets for the morn

Happy International Women's Day

 

[Conhoon]

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 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? 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.

I am a bit offended at the nuclear war as a game. But maybe it's just a way of saying (what you said in the part I marked as point 2)

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.

But you tell interesting things.

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.


Я не знаю, в каком часовом поясе вы находитесь, но если там День женщин, пожалуйста, присылайте им все мои наилучшие пожелания от моего имени.

 

[Bombardier]

https://www.internationalwomensday.com/
do the short questionnaire
I know its off topic but our women are important and should be recognised for the work they do.

Sorry the wife is calling...
ME - What my love?
WIFE - Get the dishes done
ME - Not a chance in the worl.........Smack to the head
ME - Im on it my sweet

 

[Black Pawn]

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?

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.
Second - at the 17 September of 1939 there was no any Polish government and Polish Army as organised force. So, there was no Polish state.
Third - most of this territories was settled with Ukrainians, Belorussians and Lithuanians.
It was accepted by international community, because even allies of Poland - France and Britain didn't declare war to Soviet Union. In fact even fake "Polish government in exile" didn't declare war to Soviet Union.

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.

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.

I am a bit offended at the nuclear war as a game.

Sorry, but why? Game is game. There are many games about a nuclear war.

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.

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.
What will more effective - usage of tactical nukes by tanks, APCs and artillery, or only by artillery - it is a discutable question, and it is possible to use board games as model and illustration in such a discussions.

Я не знаю, в каком часовом поясе вы находитесь, но если там День женщин, пожалуйста, присылайте им все мои наилучшие пожелания от моего имени.

"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.

 

[Black Pawn]

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.

Sure. It was my mistake. But also there are a Polish variant:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Conhoon]

@ Black Pawn, sticking to the facts - in 1938, Germans and Poles entered Czechoslovakia. The Soviet Union is attacking only Poland. When Poland occupies areas inhabited by Poles - it is aggression. When in 1968 The Soviet Union entered Czechoslovakia because it wanted to become independent of the Soviet Union - it is "help for the fraternal Czechoslovak nation and its authorities." For the sake of completeness - both of these aggressions were taken by Poland, you are only condemned for taking part in one of them.

On November 26, 1938, a joint communiqué of both governments (Soviet and Polish) was announced that the basis of relations remained in its entirety all existing agreements, including the Polish-Soviet Non-Aggression Pact of July 25, 1932.

Another case - September 17, 1939. the Polish army continued to fight. The Polish government withdrew to Romania after the attack of the Soviet Union and not before it - the decision prevailed just crossing the border by Soviet troops.

These are the facts.

There is one great additional benefit of talking to you - you are forcing me to learn English faster.


Thank you for knowing about the experimental Soviet tanks. My knowledge about them is quite vague. The T-80 was designed to operate on the battlefield after the attack with nuclear weapons, currently Russia is pushing for the modernization of the T-72B / T-90 family. What is this caused?