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

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drewski)
    *cough*Georgia*cough*

    We can only speculate as to why they didn't want action in Libya and Syria - one thing's for certain though: the reason they gave the public was not the actual reason.
    You really have no idea what happened in Georgia do you? Georgia attacked South Osetia (belongs to russia) first most citizens there are Russians, so Russia intervened to protect their own citizens!
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    And just how will China and Russia transport their supposed 23,000,000 troops, who more than likely share a rifle between 20.

    **** off.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AreYouDizzeeBlud_x)
    All those saying that European countries would side with the UK and America are delusional.

    Russia could cut off oil supplies to them months before launching their initial attack and then when they do what are those countries going to do when they've got bugger all to fuel their artillery? The only countries that could do anything would be the UK and US who can get oil from elsewhere such as the middle east and the US.

    The rest would fall victim of supply shortage. This would mean they'd side with Russia in order to keep their own countries in order which in turn would make Russia a more credible force than it already is.

    Also, for those saying that Russia's equipment is outdated, are you being serious? Stop listening to the manipulated drivel you here in the media over here every day to make you feel safer. The fact is, if you watch proper news channels like those from abroad where they dont lie and try and deceive the public like they do here and in the US on news channels such as Fox, they instead tell it as it is. Russia's government would have no second thoughts about launching an attack on us, they may have against the US because of its size but they'd easily attack us first as we're a much smaller force and an easy target to deal with at first.

    Also, if this country is so good, why the hell are they basing their new artillery on models previously used in Germany? and also, if Russia is no longer the force it once was, why have American intelligence regarded them as a real threat and has rebounded to become the 2nd most powerful force in the world in terms of technology. Also, why are Russia constantly making threats to countries like Poland and basically making Poland do as they say or they'll attack them? Because Russia in reality has most of Europe in its pocket. Bulgaria, Serbia, Ukraine, Germany, Poland, Belarus, Czech Republic, etc. would all do as they are told because their countries rely on Russia massively.
    And you think for a second that Russia could sustain an oil embargo upon the entirety of Europe?

    Deluded, you certainly are.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stalin)
    And you think for a second that Russia could sustain an oil embargo upon the entirety of Europe?

    Deluded, you certainly are.
    Russia has cut off oil for mainland Europe before and threatened to cut it off for 9 months, so yes, they could sustain an embargo for a long enough period to build and put together an attack whilst other countries crippled away due to lack of resources.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Organ)
    Kosovo doesn't produce much oil...

    Libyan oil reserves are fairly small, they don't even export to the USA ffs.

    None of the countries you mentioned are in Europe's backyard, or frankly have as larger global reach as these Arab protests.
    Balkan oil pipeline
    http://centurean2.wordpress.com/2011...-independence/

    Please read

    Not to mention Kosovo is now home to the US's biggest military base in europe and its strategic location factor.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AreYouDizzeeBlud_x)
    Russia has cut off oil for mainland Europe before and threatened to cut it off for 9 months, so yes, they could sustain an embargo for a long enough period to build and put together an attack whilst other countries crippled away due to lack of resources.
    Following up on a threat is far more difficult. Europe is Russia's biggest oil importer, if we stop, the Russian economy grinds to a swift halt. Moreover, numerous other countries export oil, ergo - and contrary to your claim - we're not dependent upon Russian oil; haven't you heard of Iraq and Saudi Arabia?

    A Russian attack? Jesus Christ! What planet are you living on? I suggest you close your wikipedia page before you make yourself look like an even bigger fool.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    But the fact is that Russia has the worlds largest number of nucleur warheads.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Scarface-Don)
    But the fact is that Russia has the worlds largest number of nucleur warheads.
    Britain's 200~ nuclear weapons could easily destroy the world, thus why are Russia's 3000-5000 estimated nuclear weapons even relevant in this discussion?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by infernalcradle)
    tbh...UK/US vs. the world....

    we would probably win given that the US probably will have all sorts of crazy ass **** that they don't tell anyone about, but are itching to use....

    and I reckon those countries that use US planes/tech systems etc. will find them "accidentally" not working as chances are, they will all have remote kill switches for a "just in case" eventuality
    I laughed when you said "US/UK vs the world and US/UK would win". You are so wrong but nice try.

    China/Russia would quite easily demolish both states within months. You simply can't comprehend the amount of debt america is in, every week they spend in afghanistan they are having to fork out $2 billion dollars. If you have a look a Libya the US didnt have the financial assets to send troops to Libya and all they did was let the Europe handle it.

    & also it is was once said that Russia had enough nuclear weapons to change the face of the earth.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stalin)
    Britain's 200~ nuclear weapons could easily destroy the world, thus why are Russia's 3000-5000 estimated nuclear weapons even relevant in this discussion?
    But a nucleur war is never going to happen anyway. Because if it did, obviously nothing would survive. Politicians are not that dumb to get into a nucleur war because after a nucleur war the political ideas that the war was being fought for cannot be put into practise for obvious reasons. So countries having nucleur weapons is simply to show off their influence and power, so by having 3000-5000 warheads, Russia is able to demonstrate its world influence and power. And lets not forget the other military advances of the Russians, for example, they possess the most powerful and largest submarines.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Scarface-Don)
    But the fact is that Russia has the worlds largest number of nucleur warheads.
    That is true but Russia has dispossed more than half of their nukes due to peace treaties and so on.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stalin)
    Following up on a threat is far more difficult. Europe is Russia's biggest oil importer, if we stop, the Russian economy grinds to a swift halt. Moreover, numerous other countries export oil, ergo - and contrary to your claim - we're not dependent upon Russian oil; haven't you heard of Iraq and Saudi Arabia?

    A Russian attack? Jesus Christ! What planet are you living on? I suggest you close your wikipedia page before you make yourself look like an even bigger fool.
    when you're going to have an adult like debate without constantly resorting to insults and making assumptions, PM me. Until then I'm putting you on ignore.

    Yes I have obviously heard of those countries and to get oil from other countries we need to invade them just as we've done in the middle east. So whilst we're putting our efforts into getting oil from other countries and losing soldiers and artillery, Russia could build and catch us off guard with an attack. No country just gives up oil, they fight for it. If Saudi became our sole oil provider they'd extort us knowing they could, leaving our economy well and truly crippled. Either that or we wouldn't have oil.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hamzazulfiqar)
    That is true but Russia has dispossed more than half of their nukes due to peace treaties and so on.
    But the amount of warheads they have is far more than any other nation and disposing some will not make their amount less than other countries.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Scarface-Don)
    But a nucleur war is never going to happen anyway. Because if it did, obviously nothing would survive. Politicians are not that dumb to get into a nucleur war because after a nucleur war the political ideas that the war was being fought for cannot be put into practise for obvious reasons. So countries having nucleur weapons is simply to show off their influence and power, so by having 3000-5000 warheads, Russia is able to demonstrate its world influence and power. And lets not forget the other military advances of the Russians, for example, they possess the most powerful and largest submarines.
    The Russian show of force is nothing more than a mirage. Sure, the Typhoon's look impressive, but I'd rather be in an Ohio class or a Virginia class sub.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    China are the ones to watch in the future.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AreYouDizzeeBlud_x)
    when you're going to have an adult like debate without constantly resorting to insults and making assumptions, PM me. Until then I'm putting you on ignore.

    Yes I have obviously heard of those countries and to get oil from other countries we need to invade them just as we've done in the middle east. So whilst we're putting our efforts into getting oil from other countries and losing soldiers and artillery, Russia could build and catch us off guard with an attack. No country just gives up oil, they fight for it. If Saudi became our sole oil provider they'd extort us knowing they could, leaving our economy well and truly crippled. Either that or we wouldn't have oil.
    Diddums!

    As for making assumptions, isn't this another classic case of the pot calling the kettle black?

    :rofl2:

    Keep believing in your amateuresque military talk. Call of Duty has no doubt helped further your thorough grounding in military affairs, you clown.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stalin)
    The Russian show of force is nothing more than a mirage. Sure, the Typhoon's look impressive, but I'd rather be in an Ohio class or a Virginia class sub.
    Aye, but for a nation that can not build a decent civilian car, the Typhoon is pretty f***ing impressive!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stalin)
    The Russian show of force is nothing more than a mirage. Sure, the Typhoon's look impressive, but I'd rather be in an Ohio class or a Virginia class sub.
    Fair enough that's your opinion. But I just think that the Russians are soo underestimated in terms of power and military.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Scarface-Don)
    Fair enough that's your opinion. But I just think that the Russians are soo underestimated in terms of power and military.
    Military, they are nothing special, The rest of the world would **** on them. No, their real power is in resources.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Swimmer)
    Can I just put my point across please, I think US doesnt give one crap about killing innocent people for oil, if they could they would invade the whole of middle east for it, they dont because they are scared of other supoerpowers such as China and Russia, as those two countries are strictly against killing innocent people in foreign countries. If China or Russia wasnt there I reckon middle east would have allready been invaded. My opinion.
    That i very true but the actual fact is that America is **** scared of Russia and China. As America tried to threaten Pakistan, China stood up for Pakistan by telling the US any attack on Pakistan would be construed as an attack on China.

    Pakistan has great ties with China and the US fears that. Russia i reckon is a lone wolf just wanting to be the ONLY superpower.

    Here is the source of the information :

    http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=102_1306435700
 
 
 
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.