no as uk is not eu and uk+/usa>everyone.
I think you'll find that the UK is in the EU...OakLeaves wrote:
no as uk is not eu and uk+/usa>everyone.
we just take a bag of money and pay to russian soldiers to fight their own government. money talks
You can find a plot summary of Red Storm Rising here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Storm_Rising
It's widely considered one of the most realistic representations of such a war.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Storm_Rising
It's widely considered one of the most realistic representations of such a war.
Last edited by Cerpin_Taxt (2007-06-04 16:14:32)
Don't know about the others, but judging from what Greece did in WWII I think we'd do ok.
ƒ³
I don't think they could deal with all Europe.
Bollocks you read Tom Clancy? I will burn all my Clancy's books.
Bollocks you read Tom Clancy? I will burn all my Clancy's books.
chechnya
hes from newcastle mr poeCameronPoe wrote:
I think you'll find that the UK is in the EU...OakLeaves wrote:
no as uk is not eu and uk+/usa>everyone.
All I have to say is that the U.K. could hold its own, but I'm not so sure about the rest of the area....Cerpin_Taxt wrote:
Hypothetical situation:
Similar to the events in Red Storm Rising, Russia launches an invasion of Europe starting with Germany. At first glance, there are not enough NATO forces in Europe to stop thousands of invading Russian tanks. In an all out conventional war, could NATO forces in Europe successfully repel an invasion without the aid of the US?
Keeping in mind all facets of a military (army, navy, air force, etc.), how do you think it would all go down?
I would swing around and attack the UK first and hope to establish a stronghold.Turquoise wrote:
All I have to say is that the U.K. could hold its own, but I'm not so sure about the rest of the area....
That would be a surefire way to conquer the whole of Europe, but that's also a lot easier said than done....usmarine2005 wrote:
I would swing around and attack the UK first and hope to establish a stronghold.Turquoise wrote:
All I have to say is that the U.K. could hold its own, but I'm not so sure about the rest of the area....
I agree...but it would be the only way. I would use Ireland for example. They would remain neutral if we promised not to attack them. I would tell them we would give them final control of Northern Ireland and enlist them as spies. There has to be some Irishmen out there with ill will towards England right?Turquoise wrote:
That would be a surefire way to conquer the whole of Europe, but that's also a lot easier said than done....usmarine2005 wrote:
I would swing around and attack the UK first and hope to establish a stronghold.Turquoise wrote:
All I have to say is that the U.K. could hold its own, but I'm not so sure about the rest of the area....
Last edited by usmarine2005 (2007-06-04 16:37:10)
LOL... You like to understate things, eh?... That actually sounds feasible.... except for the fact that the U.K. is one of the main EU countries pouring money into Ireland at the moment. It's almost like a form of reparations, if you think about it....usmarine2005 wrote:
I agree...but it would be the only way. I would use Ireland for example. They would remain neutral if we promised not to attack them. I would tell them we would give them final control of Northern Ireland and enlist them as spies. There has to be some Irishmen out there with ill will towards England right?Turquoise wrote:
That would be a surefire way to conquer the whole of Europe, but that's also a lot easier said than done....usmarine2005 wrote:
I would swing around and attack the UK first and hope to establish a stronghold.
And how would you defeat UK? They are not close to Russia and you can't use nukes.usmarine2005 wrote:
I would swing around and attack the UK first and hope to establish a stronghold.Turquoise wrote:
All I have to say is that the U.K. could hold its own, but I'm not so sure about the rest of the area....
Amphib attack to try and secure a stronghold, and then air drops.sergeriver wrote:
And how would you defeat UK? They are not close to Russia and you can't use nukes.usmarine2005 wrote:
I would swing around and attack the UK first and hope to establish a stronghold.Turquoise wrote:
All I have to say is that the U.K. could hold its own, but I'm not so sure about the rest of the area....
Stole that from Normandy.
why not?sergeriver wrote:
And how would you defeat UK? They are not close to Russia and you can't use nukes.usmarine2005 wrote:
I would swing around and attack the UK first and hope to establish a stronghold.Turquoise wrote:
All I have to say is that the U.K. could hold its own, but I'm not so sure about the rest of the area....
Coz it says so in the OP.sdlettonieCZLV wrote:
why not?sergeriver wrote:
And how would you defeat UK? They are not close to Russia and you can't use nukes.usmarine2005 wrote:
I would swing around and attack the UK first and hope to establish a stronghold.
Well, Europe has Hammerfest, and Hammerfest has the Firestorm defense generator... tough call.
Ultimately Europe would probably win; the Chronosphere and Weather Control Device could be borrowed from the US.
Ultimately Europe would probably win; the Chronosphere and Weather Control Device could be borrowed from the US.
The Russia of today isn't the USSR, it just doesn't have the sheer numbers to call on that it used to. And collectively, Europe has a pretty kick arse navy. 7 Aircraft carriers and 2 on the way vs Russia's...1 and 1 on the way?
The chances of anything coming from mars, are a million to one they say.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
Could Earth defeat Mars if we were invaded?
And how are you gonna get your ships through the American- armed European navies? I think even the air attack is dubious considering the radar systems we've also given the British. I think that an attack on Britain by sea would be suicide, for while the Brits have a smaller navy, the Brits have a better equipped navy. Better missiles, better sensors. That's what a naval battle is all about these days. Then you add in the spanish navy, who could reinforce the Brits in about 3 days. I really don't see an attack on Britain as possible without having the mainland. I do see an attack on the Scandinavian peninsula as viable way to establish your "stronghold".usmarine2005 wrote:
Amphib attack to try and secure a stronghold, and then air drops.sergeriver wrote:
And how would you defeat UK? They are not close to Russia and you can't use nukes.usmarine2005 wrote:
I would swing around and attack the UK first and hope to establish a stronghold.
Stole that from Normandy.
How do you know who would aid England? What if Russia just declared war on England? Then went from there.iamangry wrote:
And how are you gonna get your ships through the American- armed European navies? I think even the air attack is dubious considering the radar systems we've also given the British. I think that an attack on Britain by sea would be suicide, for while the Brits have a smaller navy, the Brits have a better equipped navy. Better missiles, better sensors. That's what a naval battle is all about these days. Then you add in the spanish navy, who could reinforce the Brits in about 3 days. I really don't see an attack on Britain as possible without having the mainland. I do see an attack on the Scandinavian peninsula as viable way to establish your "stronghold".usmarine2005 wrote:
Amphib attack to try and secure a stronghold, and then air drops.sergeriver wrote:
And how would you defeat UK? They are not close to Russia and you can't use nukes.
Stole that from Normandy.
I see your point. But if you do not take England, you will not take Europe.
Last edited by usmarine2005 (2007-06-04 17:37:38)
Russia is one country while Europe is above 30. Just because Russia has huge lands doesn't mean they have lots of people, more than half of Russia is uninhabited and pretty darn cold. I don't believe Russia would have a chance, but might give a fight thou.
That would be a little more dubious to be sure. However, I find it somewhat difficult to believe that Europe, no matter how spineless it seems to us now, would turn its back on Britain. I would submit that If Russia attacked Britain tomorrow, the rest of Europe would help out in the water and in the air at least.
Then you can't take Europe.usmarine2005 wrote:
How do you know who would aid England? What if Russia just declared war on England? Then went from there.iamangry wrote:
And how are you gonna get your ships through the American- armed European navies? I think even the air attack is dubious considering the radar systems we've also given the British. I think that an attack on Britain by sea would be suicide, for while the Brits have a smaller navy, the Brits have a better equipped navy. Better missiles, better sensors. That's what a naval battle is all about these days. Then you add in the spanish navy, who could reinforce the Brits in about 3 days. I really don't see an attack on Britain as possible without having the mainland. I do see an attack on the Scandinavian peninsula as viable way to establish your "stronghold".usmarine2005 wrote:
Amphib attack to try and secure a stronghold, and then air drops.
Stole that from Normandy.
I see your point. But if you do not take England, you will not take Europe.
No. Since poland is the closest eastern european country to the western side. My guess is us polish people (Not me most of the old ones) hate so much russia and if given the chance to get back at them they would, So the european powers would re-enforce poland on the western border, While the polish and slavic troops wanting revenge would hold them off on the eastern front, Then when the russian troops are tired european forces would march to moscow and throw putin from power. Also the slavic nations would burn the tomb of lenin.