You do not have the slightest idea of what you are talking about. How does a million man army (PLA) invade and conqueror anyone when over 50% of its soldiers are armed with knives. The PLA is over-rated and even with the mass influx of new weaponry it still lacks the power to even invade Japan, not to mention a lack of confidence to invade Taiwan.venom6 wrote:
USA is the only country who used nuke against humanity in history. Remember Hirosima and Nagasaki...USA did it.adam1503 wrote:
The US would never use nukes in a war. The fallout (literal and political, excuse the pun) would destroy the country.
About Russia: Had the biggest army during WW2. Lost most of the soldiers but right now the biggest army has China. They just changed roles.
About China: If they would they could invade all countries around them. They could rush to north and occupie east russia easily. Then North Korea would liberate them and they would roll over South Korea. Taiwan would be no enemy. And yes Japan is also there but it could not defeat them.
About USA: He owns the newest technology in modern warfe but that wouldnt be enough to win over the massive army of China.
The EU: If all the countries unite to fight. No chance. Only in fact China would defeat Russia so they would reach us.
Poll
If China & Russia Joined Forces, Could Anyone Defeat Them?
| Yes | 58% | 58% - 62 | ||||
| No | 41% | 41% - 44 | ||||
| Total: 106 | ||||||
grrr darn dem welsh, also wanting our sheep loladam1503 wrote:
Im more worried about when the Welsh will invade England...
they had no choice, that's really about it. If they hadn't dropped it, japan would suicide bomb just about everything they could and pretty much gruesomely kill themselves.USA is the only country who used nuke against humanity in history. Remember Hirosima and Nagasaki...USA did it.
Not so sure about that, the technology coming from the USA is incredible, the training of their soldiers is way better than that of china. China may have a large army but that's about it, in these days numbers don't count as much as they did in WW1 and 2 for example, if you have superb equipment and a highly proffesional army against a big mob of ill disciplined, worse equipped, less trained soldiers, you'd win.About USA: He owns the newest technology in modern warfe but that wouldnt be enough to win over the massive army of China.
inane little opines
numbers dont mean shit in the 21st century.
The fact of the matter is the known world wouldn't be worth living in. If you want an idea of what it'll be like watch 'Mad Max: Beyond Thunderdome'.
It would probably result with the entire West uniting against them.. as well as the end of civilization.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
How come? After world war 1 and its sequel the world turned out ok.CameronPoe wrote:
The fact of the matter is the known world wouldn't be worth living in. If you want an idea of what it'll be like watch 'Mad Max: Beyond Thunderdome'.
...CameronPoe wrote:
The fact of the matter is the known world wouldn't be worth living in. If you want an idea of what it'll be like watch 'Mad Max: Beyond Thunderdome'.
And that, ladies and gentlemen, is all the reason we need to prevent WW3!
M.A.D. would hopefully prevent any nuclear weapons exchange. If China's economy and suffering of its people were to get so bad that they needed to take what they need by force I imagine they would have to launch a massive surprise attack on their neighbors. Grabbing huge chunks of land quickly and decisively would be in their favor rather than a long drawn out war. However, keeping their acquired land and controlling the people within this territory would prove close to impossible and they would be repelled quickly once the free nations of the world rally.
Intercontinental ballistic missiles with nuclear warheads didn't exist then...M.O.A.B wrote:
How come? After world war 1 and its sequel the world turned out ok.CameronPoe wrote:
The fact of the matter is the known world wouldn't be worth living in. If you want an idea of what it'll be like watch 'Mad Max: Beyond Thunderdome'.
The bombs existed in WW2, besides nuclear wars are highly unlikely these days anyway, the only ones who are gonna use them now would be terrorist groups, no major power will use them for fear of backlash.CameronPoe wrote:
Intercontinental ballistic missiles with nuclear warheads didn't exist then...M.O.A.B wrote:
How come? After world war 1 and its sequel the world turned out ok.CameronPoe wrote:
The fact of the matter is the known world wouldn't be worth living in. If you want an idea of what it'll be like watch 'Mad Max: Beyond Thunderdome'.
LOL, try Def-Con 4, http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0087130/CameronPoe wrote:
The fact of the matter is the known world wouldn't be worth living in. If you want an idea of what it'll be like watch 'Mad Max: Beyond Thunderdome'.
You are joking right?M.O.A.B wrote:
How come? After world war 1 and its sequel the world turned out ok.CameronPoe wrote:
The fact of the matter is the known world wouldn't be worth living in. If you want an idea of what it'll be like watch 'Mad Max: Beyond Thunderdome'.
yeah terrorists have nukes but where would they fire the nukes?M.O.A.B wrote:
The bombs existed in WW2, besides nuclear wars are highly unlikely these days anyway, the only ones who are gonna use them now would be terrorist groups, no major power will use them for fear of backlash.CameronPoe wrote:
Intercontinental ballistic missiles with nuclear warheads didn't exist then...M.O.A.B wrote:
How come? After world war 1 and its sequel the world turned out ok.
Chuck Norris.
They dont necessarily need to launch a nuke to create a nuclear disaster. Ever heard of a dirty bomb?suomalainen_äijä wrote:
yeah terrorists have nukes but where would they fire the nukes?
That was not his point and you know that, nice try though.venom6 wrote:
USA is the only country who used nuke against humanity in history. Remember Hirosima and Nagasaki...USA did it.adam1503 wrote:
The US would never use nukes in a war. The fallout (literal and political, excuse the pun) would destroy the country.
elaborateaLeX wrote:
Chuck Norris.
I can't believe this thread is three pages long.
I cant believe youre three pages longKEN-JENNINGS wrote:
I can't believe this thread is three pages long.
I sense this thread is not long for this world...GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
I cant believe youre three pages longKEN-JENNINGS wrote:
I can't believe this thread is three pages long.
I fail to see the world as portrayed in Mad Max, *looks out window* yep its still fineNantanCochise wrote:
You are joking right?M.O.A.B wrote:
How come? After world war 1 and its sequel the world turned out ok.CameronPoe wrote:
The fact of the matter is the known world wouldn't be worth living in. If you want an idea of what it'll be like watch 'Mad Max: Beyond Thunderdome'.
Post WWIII. POST.M.O.A.B wrote:
I fail to see the world as portrayed in Mad Max, *looks out window* yep its still fineNantanCochise wrote:
You are joking right?M.O.A.B wrote:
How come? After world war 1 and its sequel the world turned out ok.
I'm not referring to WWIII here, I'm referring to the post which states that the world didn't turn out alright after WWII, this followed the Mad Max scenario.CameronPoe wrote:
Post WWIII. POST.M.O.A.B wrote:
I fail to see the world as portrayed in Mad Max, *looks out window* yep its still fineNantanCochise wrote:
You are joking right?