Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Is it inevitable that Britain or the US will get attacked in the near future? watch

    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    All these hypotheticals about who's got more troops, tech, carriers blah blah blah. Since when did we all become national security and international relations experts to be able to make such bold claims on the outcome of any conflict between two countries?

    Even though I disagree with a lot of Organ's comments, he has it spot on with the fact that major global markets are so closely linked and dependant on each other, war isn't ever going to be such a simplistic concept as guns vs guns.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hamzazulfiqar)
    well that is obviously possible.
    The USA arent capable of defeating a handfull of afghan guerillas...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AreYouDizzeeBlud_x)
    The thing is, Russia is run by a very corrupt government. Who is saying they have to use their nukes? The thing is, Russia could launch an air raid on the UK and kill millions and millions because of how densely populated the UK is. Now whilst it would be hard to attack the UK undetected, it wouldn't be impossible.

    If Russia or China are to attack it would likely be just about as we are to pull out from involvement elsewhere. Taking advantage of us when a lot of our soldiers have been killed and a lot of our equipment is useless. This would mean once Russia or China launched an attack we would have to mass produce equipment which would affect our economy.
    Then unless our country was completely decimated in the first attack we would still be able to retaliate with nuclear force and even if we "Lost" over-all no one would win per-se because any more than 5-6 nukes on a country , even russia/USA would pretty much destroy them as we know it and they would probably lose a good chunk (As in probably the majority) of there population paticularly if in the biggest cities.

    People have this strange idea that only Russia and the US are capable of destroying the entire world and because we're not an empire we are of no significance anymore yet the reality is far from it.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by indiemusicftw)
    Then unless our country was completely decimated in the first attack we would still be able to retaliate with nuclear force and even if we "Lost" over-all no one would win per-se because any more than 5-6 nukes on a country , even russia/USA would pretty much destroy them as we know it and they would probably lose a good chunk (As in probably the majority) of there population paticularly if in the biggest cities.

    People have this strange idea that only Russia and the US are capable of destroying the entire world and because we're not an empire we are of no significance anymore yet the reality is far from it.
    Whilst I agree, the fact is countries do not need to use nukes to start an attack. If the country responds with a nuke then they are likely to get nukes back. The likelihood is that nukes will only be used as a last resort if a country is fearful of defeat or being dominated.

    Another thing to remember is sometimes the first attack is enough to render the enemy useless. There is no way of knowing just what Russia and China are capable of as things would have been kept under wraps just as a lot of things in the UK and the US are. Obviously, as in any attack or war, it depends on strategy and how those launching the attack go about doing it.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AreYouDizzeeBlud_x)
    Whilst I agree, the fact is countries do not need to use nukes to start an attack. If the country responds with a nuke then they are likely to get nukes back. The likelihood is that nukes will only be used as a last resort if a country is fearful of defeat or being dominated.
    This is almost definately the way it would happen imo. I can see a "Red Dawn" scenario being the most likely if the US were invaded but just carpet bombings if the UK was attacked.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SatanIsAwesome)
    I know all about that, but the thought that they'd side with Russia over the rest of Europe is friggin retarded.
    How do you know their motives? You dont. Since 2009 Russia and Germany have had an extremely close relationship and business between the two countries is thriving. If Russia launches an attack on us and we were being defeated Germany would obviously side with Russia. Thats just the way things work. Don't forget, we, along with the USA stopped Germany from taking over most of mainland Europe as well as the British Isles. If we were being attacked it would be almost guaranteed that they would see that as an opportunity to side with Russia to push for control over Europe. The Russians and Germans work very closely together now. Anyone who thinks they still hate each other because of history is in fact retarded. They've swept everything aside. They understand there is more to be made from working together and being allies than being enemies. Countries like Bulgaria, etc. ex slavic countries will side with Russia as well. Ukraine is another likely to side with Russia. They're not dumb. Russia supply them with resources that they need.

    Russia and China have already warned the US about meddling into affairs with Libya. Thats why the US won't send ground troops in yet.

    http://jafrianews.com/2011/04/28/lib...-russia-china/

    They've also warned the US multiple times to leave the Ukraine alone. Russia has more control over a lot of Europe than people think. Bulgaria was nearly crippled because Russia threatened to stop oil.



    http://www.acus.org/new_atlanticist/...urope-out-cold


    'To say that Europeans depend on Russia for their oil and natural gas is so understated that it would be more surprising to say you need eggs to make an omelet. According to the US Department of Energy, in 2005 Europe was a net importer of ten million barrels of crude per day. Although some of it came from the North Sea, Libya and Saudi Arabia the vast majority originated in Russia. The map below of European pipeline infrastructure best shows the depth of the European addiction.'
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    No country would dare attack America.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by AreYouDizzeeBlud_x)
    How do you know their motives? You dont. Since 2009 Russia and Germany have had an extremely close relationship and business between the two countries is thriving. If Russia launches an attack on us and we were being defeated Germany would obviously side with Russia. Thats just the way things work. Don't forget, we, along with the USA stopped Germany from taking over most of mainland Europe as well as the British Isles. If we were being attacked it would be almost guaranteed that they would see that as an opportunity to side with Russia to push for control over Europe. The Russians and Germans work very closely together now. Anyone who thinks they still hate each other because of history is in fact retarded. They've swept everything aside. They understand there is more to be made from working together and being allies than being enemies. Countries like Bulgaria, etc. ex slavic countries will side with Russia as well. Ukraine is another likely to side with Russia. They're not dumb. Russia supply them with resources that they need.

    Russia and China have already warned the US about meddling into affairs with Libya. Thats why the US won't send ground troops in yet.

    http://jafrianews.com/2011/04/28/lib...-russia-china/

    They've also warned the US multiple times to leave the Ukraine alone. Russia has more control over a lot of Europe than people think. Bulgaria was nearly crippled because Russia threatened to stop oil.



    http://www.acus.org/new_atlanticist/...urope-out-cold


    'To say that Europeans depend on Russia for their oil and natural gas is so understated that it would be more surprising to say you need eggs to make an omelet. According to the US Department of Energy, in 2005 Europe was a net importer of ten million barrels of crude per day. Although some of it came from the North Sea, Libya and Saudi Arabia the vast majority originated in Russia. The map below of European pipeline infrastructure best shows the depth of the European addiction.'
    Russia's entire economy is based around exportation of energy. They can't just turn off the taps to Europe. It would cause the collapse of their economy. Germany is to interlinked with Europe to risk a war against the EU. The whole point of the EU was to tie up Germany so there would not be another war.

    The UK and much of Europe is also doing many deals with China it does not mean we share foreign policy aims though
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    TLDR
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AreYouDizzeeBlud_x)
    How do you know their motives? You dont. Since 2009 Russia and Germany have had an extremely close relationship and business between the two countries is thriving.
    France & the Uk have an extremely close relationship, it doesn't mean we'd side with each other in a war against Europe. Plenty of countries have nice relationships, it doesn't matter, Germany & the UK have a nice relationship going anyway.

    (Original post by AreYouDizzeeBlud_x)
    If Russia launches an attack on us and we were being defeated Germany would obviously side with Russia. Thats just the way things work. Don't forget, we, along with the USA stopped Germany from taking over most of mainland Europe as well as the British Isles.
    You're a moron if you think that Germany wants to take over Europe, WW2 was basically the result of propaganda, not the will of the people and WW1 was the result of alliances, not Germany's desire to rule Europe. Germany is also a major part of NATO, their troops would be fighting for Europe....

    (Original post by AreYouDizzeeBlud_x)
    If we were being attacked it would be almost guaranteed that they would see that as an opportunity to side with Russia to push for control over Europe.
    zzzz you paranoid idiot.

    (Original post by AreYouDizzeeBlud_x)
    The Russians and Germans work very closely together now. Anyone who thinks they still hate each other because of history is in fact retarded. They've swept everything aside.
    Nobody says that they still hate each other, but just because they're friends it doesn't mean that they want to start wars with everyone.

    (Original post by AreYouDizzeeBlud_x)
    They understand there is more to be made from working together and being allies than being enemies. Countries like Bulgaria, etc. ex slavic countries will side with Russia as well. Ukraine is another likely to side with Russia. They're not dumb. Russia supply them with resources that they need.
    Russia isn't going to start a war, I don't think that they want their population halved.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mad-marek)
    The USA arent capable of defeating a handfull of afghan guerillas...
    Retarded post is retarded.

    If the guerrillas were to actually wear a uniform and not hide among citizens they'd have been wiped out in the first month. When you have morals, as we do, it's very hard to destroy an army that hide among innocent people, if we didn't care then we could just carpet bomb the country, but we do care.

    Very few actual armies could stand up to the US.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SatanIsAwesome)
    Retarded post is retarded.

    If the guerrillas were to actually wear a uniform and not hide among citizens they'd have been wiped out in the first month. When you have morals, as we do, it's very hard to destroy an army that hide among innocent people, if we didn't care then we could just carpet bomb the country, but we do care.

    Very few actual armies could stand up to the US.
    I agree, but it just goes to show doesnt it, the US military, in this day and age can get bogged down and get its ass kicked.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mad-marek)
    I agree, but it just goes to show doesnt it, the US military, in this day and age can get bogged down and get its ass kicked.
    When versing a bunch of pathetic cowards, yes they do, although they aren't getting their arse kicked at all.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AreYouDizzeeBlud_x)
    It just seems to me that the politicians who are supposed to be running this country are far more concerned with meddling in foreign affairs.

    If you look at the countries that have the biggest oil reserves then you'll see that Afghanistan/Iraq are right up there. However, if you look at the other countries up there you'll see that they are far stronger and have much stronger allies so therefore in my opinion, the British Government at the time took the easy option like bullies by invading Afghanistan/Iraq for oil. Okay, we captured Saddam Hussein but that was obviously just a cover up so they could try him for his crimes and then have an excuse to invade, which then meant their real motives were disguised.

    Saudi Arabia, Russia, Venezuela, Canada, Libya and Nigeria are all in the top ten of having the largest oil reserves. Invading any of these countries for oil would have been a far harder thing to do than to attack two countries already unstable and two countries that provided both the UK and the US with the perfect excuses for invasion, Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein. Even Venezuela is massive in the drugs trade and im pretty sure the cartels over there would have fought back a lot harder than the taliban when they realised that their country was getting invaded. Plus they would have gained support from the other countries in South America such as Brazil and Cuba due to the illegal corruption that goes on between them.

    Now again. We have got ourselves involved with what is happening in Libya. A certain number of countries have abstained from the movement, some of whom are extremely strong countries, not only in terms of man power, but in terms of economy too.

    We also did it with Zimbabwe and Mugabe. Again, our government decided to stick their noses in other countries business. Why on earth are we getting involved with the business of African nations? Thats entirely up to them how they do their business.

    I think its extremely hypocritical that the politicians think its fine to just go and basically dictate to other countries what to do or threaten them with forced action when they can't even get the own country they're supposed to be running in order.

    I find it shocking that our very own government can claim that dictators in other countries are wrong when they're basically the same, but instead of just dictating how we live our lives in this country, they also want to stick their noses into the business of other countries.

    Sooner or later, in my opinion, this will lead to either the United Kingdom or America being attacked and I think its fairly obvious that it'll be us first due to the fact that we're an easy target compared to America and blitzing us in this day and age would send a message to other countries. Russia's government is extremely fed up with both of us, as stated by a few of their politicians on Russia Today and im pretty sure other countries are fed up of our bullying tactics as well. Russia have strong links with China so therefore they'd more than likely be allies with each other if anything did break out.

    Russia and China's total number of troops = 23 440 000 (including active & reserves)

    Britain's and Americas total number of troops = 2 830 807 (including active & reserves)

    Then you have to factor in the fact that Germany, due to strong economic links, would also take Russia's side which would mean not only more troops but technological advantages too. Ukraine who also have a large armed forces would join Russia and fight on their behalf.

    Seriously, who would side with us when we're outnumbered so badly and the history we have? Australia more than likely due to the history and Queen Elizabeth II being their monarch but other than that no one else would. We are hated by a lot of countries just as America is so it would be the ideal time for them to join forces and put an end to us once and for all.

    Now at the moment, Russia have a neutral attitude towards us and have openly played down incidents including spies and nuclear threats even though politicians have said things against actions both Britain and the US have taken. However, the more we continue to stick our noses into other countries business the stronger the possibility that they'll say enough is enough and launch a completely unprovoked attack and catch either us or the US by surprise. More than likely it would be us. Now do you think the US would act instantly if Russia decided to attack us? No, they wouldn't in anyway whatsoever because of the Nuclear threat Russia possess and the manpower China possess. I know in terms of technology America is very advanced but a lot of that is based on satellites and Russia has the technology to disable them and render them useless.

    I think that the politicians in this country need to wake up to the fact that we're no longer the superpower in terms of military we once were and wake up to realisation that we could get attacked and obliterated rather easily. We are a small island for heavens sake which is easily targetable and due to the population density the human death toll would be catastrophic.
    I read the first two paragraphs and noticed you're a complete retard. Afghanistan's oil reserves are next to nothing.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AreYouDizzeeBlud_x)
    It just seems to me that the politicians who are supposed to be running this country are far more concerned with meddling in foreign affairs.

    If you look at the countries that have the biggest oil reserves then you'll see that Afghanistan/Iraq are right up there. However, if you look at the other countries up there you'll see that they are far stronger and have much stronger allies so therefore in my opinion, the British Government at the time took the easy option like bullies by invading Afghanistan/Iraq for oil. Okay, we captured Saddam Hussein but that was obviously just a cover up so they could try him for his crimes and then have an excuse to invade, which then meant their real motives were disguised.

    Saudi Arabia, Russia, Venezuela, Canada, Libya and Nigeria are all in the top ten of having the largest oil reserves. Invading any of these countries for oil would have been a far harder thing to do than to attack two countries already unstable and two countries that provided both the UK and the US with the perfect excuses for invasion, Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein. Even Venezuela is massive in the drugs trade and im pretty sure the cartels over there would have fought back a lot harder than the taliban when they realised that their country was getting invaded. Plus they would have gained support from the other countries in South America such as Brazil and Cuba due to the illegal corruption that goes on between them.

    Now again. We have got ourselves involved with what is happening in Libya. A certain number of countries have abstained from the movement, some of whom are extremely strong countries, not only in terms of man power, but in terms of economy too.

    We also did it with Zimbabwe and Mugabe. Again, our government decided to stick their noses in other countries business. Why on earth are we getting involved with the business of African nations? Thats entirely up to them how they do their business.

    I think its extremely hypocritical that the politicians think its fine to just go and basically dictate to other countries what to do or threaten them with forced action when they can't even get the own country they're supposed to be running in order.

    I find it shocking that our very own government can claim that dictators in other countries are wrong when they're basically the same, but instead of just dictating how we live our lives in this country, they also want to stick their noses into the business of other countries.

    Sooner or later, in my opinion, this will lead to either the United Kingdom or America being attacked and I think its fairly obvious that it'll be us first due to the fact that we're an easy target compared to America and blitzing us in this day and age would send a message to other countries. Russia's government is extremely fed up with both of us, as stated by a few of their politicians on Russia Today and im pretty sure other countries are fed up of our bullying tactics as well. Russia have strong links with China so therefore they'd more than likely be allies with each other if anything did break out.

    Russia and China's total number of troops = 23 440 000 (including active & reserves)

    Britain's and Americas total number of troops = 2 830 807 (including active & reserves)

    Then you have to factor in the fact that Germany, due to strong economic links, would also take Russia's side which would mean not only more troops but technological advantages too. Ukraine who also have a large armed forces would join Russia and fight on their behalf.

    Seriously, who would side with us when we're outnumbered so badly and the history we have? Australia more than likely due to the history and Queen Elizabeth II being their monarch but other than that no one else would. We are hated by a lot of countries just as America is so it would be the ideal time for them to join forces and put an end to us once and for all.

    Now at the moment, Russia have a neutral attitude towards us and have openly played down incidents including spies and nuclear threats even though politicians have said things against actions both Britain and the US have taken. However, the more we continue to stick our noses into other countries business the stronger the possibility that they'll say enough is enough and launch a completely unprovoked attack and catch either us or the US by surprise. More than likely it would be us. Now do you think the US would act instantly if Russia decided to attack us? No, they wouldn't in anyway whatsoever because of the Nuclear threat Russia possess and the manpower China possess. I know in terms of technology America is very advanced but a lot of that is based on satellites and Russia has the technology to disable them and render them useless.

    I think that the politicians in this country need to wake up to the fact that we're no longer the superpower in terms of military we once were and wake up to realisation that we could get attacked and obliterated rather easily. We are a small island for heavens sake which is easily targetable and due to the population density the human death toll would be catastrophic.
    by who?
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by mad-marek)
    I agree, but it just goes to show doesnt it, the US military, in this day and age can get bogged down and get its ass kicked.
    They aren't having their ass kicked. The US just applied the wrong tactics to this sort of a fight. Al Qaeda has been decimated by special forces strikes and drone attacks. We went into Afghanistan to take on Al Qaeda. We have done this and won. The Taliban never mattered.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aj12)
    They aren't having their ass kicked. The US just applied the wrong tactics to this sort of a fight. Al Qaeda has been decimated by special forces strikes and drone attacks. We went into Afghanistan to take on Al Qaeda. We have done this and won. The Taliban never mattered.
    No... we went into Afghanistan to overthrow the Taliban regime because they refused to hand over Osama, I hardly think the Taliban would take that lightly would you? So yes they have mattered and do matter seeing as we're still there.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by I Persia I)
    No... we went into Afghanistan to overthrow the Taliban regime because they refused to hand over Osama, I hardly think the Taliban would take that lightly would you? So yes they have mattered and do matter seeing as we're still there.
    We are still there because the Us and UK have spent the last few years trying to convince people we were there not just on some revenge mission but there to help the country. The fact that we are now negotiating with the Taliban proves this. The Taliban were not the ones launching terrorist attacks on the West
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aj12)
    We are still there because the Us and UK have spent the last few years trying to convince people we were there not just on some revenge mission but there to help the country. The fact that we are now negotiating with the Taliban proves this. The Taliban were not the ones launching terrorist attacks on the West
    If you're right then why haven't we launched full scale invasions on countries such as Somalia, Yemen and Pakistan, sure their recognised governments aren't hostile towards us but they still harbour Al-Qaeda militants. The taliban were also vital to Al-Qaeda expansion and provided a safe haven for them in Afghanistan. Also the US will have deemed the taliban a threat due to their friendship with Al-Qaeda which was yet another reason for the taliban to be toppled.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by I Persia I)
    If you're right then why haven't we launched full scale invasions on countries such as Somalia, Yemen and Pakistan, sure their recognised governments aren't hostile towards us but they still harbour Al-Qaeda militants. The taliban were also vital to Al-Qaeda expansion and provided a safe haven for them in Afghanistan. Also the US will have deemed the taliban a threat due to their friendship with Al-Qaeda which was yet another reason for the taliban to be toppled.
    Because full scale invasions make the problems worse and cost to much. Instead we are launching drone strikes and special forces raids into Pakistan Yemen and using local government forces to track down any Al Qaeda operatives in Somalia.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.