Missy89:


makes no sense

why should japan fight alongside Russia

tdayof:

RUSSIA→CHINA→NORTH KOREA →Belarus and Kazakhstan vs USA→NORWAY→GERMANY → UKRAINE → LATVIA...

Missy89:


But u did not answer the question. Where do you get the information that keeps you informed? what medium and what service? I am trying to learn here.

braindamage:
. Funny dude.

EmmySparky:
I can see the possible alliance..russia, germany and north korea and the arab world vs USA,south korea,england,france and spain..it would be fatal..very fatal

GBTYO:


And you are still incubating.

Missy89:


But u did not answer the question. Where do you get the information that keeps you informed? what medium and what service? I am trying to learn here.

SirShymexx:
Lol. Is America even brave enough to go to war with Russia? I seriously doubt it.

You mean the same country that had to wait for the Soviets to destroy over 90% of Nazi's army before joining the 2nd world war would get so brazen to fight a country where no invader has succeeded in modern era, especially one with more than enough capabilities to destroy the planet, in Europe conventionally?

The US military also lack a lot of capabilities - and it needs Europe for most of it. However, most European countries aren't even militarily strong at the moment - apart from the UK to an extent, and maybe France. A scathing expose came out about German military last month - don't bet ya money on the Germans cos their military is almost in comatose right now. The rest of Europe sucks.

The whole tank movement is just unnecessary posturing from the yanks to militarise Europe - they're not brave enough. They know they have a better chance taking on China right now, than Russia. Even that is never going to happen.

Putin is just playing chess - but at the same time getting ready for all eventualities - as Russia projects its power into Eurasia and Mediterranean.

SirShymexx:


I don't need to explain - you and I know why the US is always hiding behind NATO.

There are a lot of military capabilities that the US lacks, hence the need to always work with Europe.

It's not about throwing big war machines everywhere...those in Pentagon know what time it's.



Anyway, leave the Russians alone and keep the war mongering off Europe. According to Putin, they made their plans in Crimea very visible to the yanks before the GRU forces took over, by positioning all their missiles providing cover for the invasion where US satellites could pick them up. Why didn't the US attack then? This US posturing about nothing is sickening - if the yanks are bored and they want to test their might conventionally for the first time since the 2nd world war - they should take that ish to the pacific and go confront China. At least, they have a slim chance over there - and that's if the Chinese don't have tons of secret weapons.

SirShymexx:


In answered ya question: the US lacks a lot of military capabilities, hence it hides behind NATO for those capabilities.

The US gets a lot of logistics and reconnaissance from both Germany and UK. When it comes to the Navy, the German 212 submarine is one capability the US lacks, and it also needs a lot of capabilities from the UK. Then the French have the anti-ship missiles on the planet. The UK Challenger 2 tanks and German's Leopard are far superior to Abrams. Even military tactics differ - and European armies are far better trained than US marines. And how many times have the US asked for SAS' involvement despite all the noise about Navy seals. Etc..

You don't need my medium - Royal marines and British Army do military drills with the yanks all the time, and it's out there in the open.

GBTYO:


The old fashioned way, from books!

GBTYO:


The yanks only military advantage is that the yanks are stup1d when it comes to war.

The cluelessness of American Generals backed by a ready constant resupply chain makes them very hard to study.

The Germans attested to this in world war 2 when they found out that American Generals lacked any doctrine which in turn made them difficult to understand and subsequently predict.

American foolishness and resources is the true might behind America's military might!

Missy89:


Not buying that. Tell me what capabilities the US military lacks that she need Europe for!

NATO is a political tool for the US but a security tool for most Europeans. It legitimatizes American aggression and it gives an illusion of a consensus among of the "civilized world" on the other hand, It helps the Eastern/Central Europeans to feel safe from Russia's Aggression. US Only hide behind NATO for political reasons not for military purpose at all!. In fact US is NATO
It keeps the Americans in , the Germans down and the Russians out as Lord Ismay put it.

Missy89:


What books? name some

GBTYO:


NATO alliance is more diplomatic than military.

NATO alliance ensures the necessary UN Security resolution and also provides staging ground for American troops in Europe.

NATO was formed to ensure America has strategic foothold on Europe from where it can launch an attack on Russia.

The combined Military might of NATO members other than the US is not up to 10% of US capabilities.

SirShymexx:


Yanks are brawns - and they make too many boneheaded mistakes during wars. Coupled with the type of training their marines get and it all about shooting everything in sight. Their soldiers also always lose morale so easily when the going gets tough and start panicking. Their doctrine is also very watery and dependent on heavy weapons.

The UK saved their ar.ses during both the Gulf and Balkan wars. Their only adventure without Europe in Vietnam ended in a disaster, with mofos crying everywhere.

Missy89:


Not buying that. Tell me what capabilities the US military lacks that she need Europe for!

NATO is a political tool for the US but a security tool for most Europeans. It legitimatizes American aggression and it gives an illusion of a consensus among of the "civilized world" on the other hand, It helps the Eastern/Central Europeans to feel safe from Russia's Aggression. US Only hide behind NATO for political reasons not for military purpose at all!. In fact US is NATO
It keeps the Americans in , the Germans down and the Russians out as Lord Ismay put it.

tdayof:


Like this?

appini:
The way things are going on now, I don't think America can even win Nigeria in direct military warfare.

SirShymexx:


You're alluding to money - not military capabilities. US does the funding cos it's the country interested in militarising everywhere and being the Chief Police of the planet. The rest of Europe doesn't care about that.

However, you can't buy military expertise - you have to align to get it.

Missy89:


Not buying that. Tell me what capabilities the US military lacks that she need Europe for!

NATO is a political tool for the US but a security tool for most Europeans. It legitimatizes American aggression and it gives an illusion of a consensus among of the "civilized world" on the other hand, It helps the Eastern/Central Europeans to feel safe from Russia's Aggression. US Only hide behind NATO for political reasons not for military purpose at all!. In fact US is NATO
It keeps the Americans in , the Germans down and the Russians out as Lord Ismay put it.

GBTYO:


American Military tactics is to deploy more superior fire than their opponent.

It doesn't call for strategy but more fire power.

Americans will take on a fly with a hammer.

SirShymexx:


In answered ya question: the US lacks a lot of military capabilities, hence it hides behind NATO for those capabilities.

The US gets a lot of logistics and reconnaissance from both Germany and UK. When it comes to the Navy, the German 212 submarine is one capability the US lacks, and it also needs a lot of capabilities from the UK. Then the French have the anti-ship missiles on the planet. The UK Challenger 2 tanks and German's Leopard are far superior to Abrams. Even military tactics differ - and European armies are far better trained than US marines. And how many times have the US asked for SAS' involvement despite all the noise about Navy seals. Etc..

You don't need my medium - Royal marines and British Army do military drills with the yanks all the time, and it's out there in the open.

GBTYO:


The stats are there to verify.

The USAF has the largest fleet in the world.

The US Navy fleet is the most sophisticated and largest.

The US defense budget is 49% that of global spendings and this includes China, Russia and the entire NATO forces!

appini:
The way things are going on now, I don't think America can even win Nigeria in direct military warfare.

Missy89:


Lol that question wasnt meant for you. Oya! lolz

SirShymexx:


Yes, it's also a political tool but the political tool didn't fight the Gulf wars - did it?

tdayof:
faints

Wake up bro. No one faints around here . It's kill or get killed.

tdayof:
hmm Obama just turned Europe to dumping ground...



It would have been better without the world war[/b]which I doubt is not possible especially when more countries are in but I doubt they will be able to handle this team...




[b]RUSSIA→CHINA→NORTH KOREA →JAPAN vs USA→NORWAY→GERMANY → UKRAINE → LATVIA...

SirShymexx:


That was what I was alluding US marines can't actually fight that well and whenever the going gets tough, they panic easily and start acting funny. It's all about firepower - but European armies aren't like that. It's all about survival, with or without back-up. Their doctrine is very watery.

The UK is about who dares win - and you have to keep fighting without panicking.

GBTYO:


Coalition Forces by Country in Gulf War 2

Total Number of troops deployed: 380,000 troops

United States: 192,000
United Kingdom: 45,000
Australia: 2,000
Poland: 194
Iraqi Kurdistan Peshmerga: 70,000
Iraqi National Congress: 620

Other than the UK, other Euro NATO nations where negligible in Iraq.

Missy89:


The only military alliance worth mentioning is NATO. Even thou China and the other nations you listed have similar foreign policy and work together a lot, They do not have any military agreement that will instantly make them join forces if any of them faces NATO aggression We can all speculate but until the ink is on the paper, it is all speculation and the hypotheticals are not worth discussing till i see a treaty.

Curious why u added Latvia and not the great powers in NATO thou like France, UK, and maybe Italy?