This is disappointing. I live next door to a child with disabilities and that child is one of the most wonderful unique people I have had the experience of interacting with. Such a gentle and beautiful soul.Â
[QUOTE="EagleEyedOne"] They don't need to hold the entire country. Just the big oil wells and natural resources. The modern day plan to invade Russia would be one of great interest I will give you that. I have spent countless hours on strategy games planning and executing said invasions. The reality would be interesting but even before the possible nuclear consequences in the days of Napoleon and Hitler the task appeared to be untenable. I can't really see France or the UK turning against Russia anyway because under the most unlikely of circumstance that the EU doesn't hold together it would deny them an important historical ally. I also doubt Russia has an interest in a risky and likely nation threatening adventure into the depths of Europe militarily. The hypothetical question the OP asked seems very unlikely due to this and I will take leave in such arguments but I did relish the questions that have been asked by everyone who disagreed with my eventual position. Thank you for the cerebral stimulation even if such a scenario is very unlikely.
EU. If the EU got the US on their side (as they would) then it would just be a complete slaughter. So, yeah, EU.
EagleEyedOne
No question but that wasn't the hypothetical question asked by the OP. The US could probably defeat Russia, the EU and China all by itself in the initial kinetic conflict. Though occupation of the defeated territories might prove difficult. I'd still say EU as the UK has a tremendous naval force by itself. Add in France and you got a lot of boots on the ground. Not sure if it would really count for much but the shear tact of the Germans is a force to be reckoned with. Add all that together and you got a formidable force. I do agree Europe has the capability to build itself into a force that could defeat and certainly defend against Russia if they don't already have that capability. To actually conquer Russia though and hold it, I don't like anyone's chance of that. It's hard enough for a domestic government to maintain control over such a vast region much less a foreign one.
EU. If the EU got the US on their side (as they would) then it would just be a complete slaughter. So, yeah, EU.
EagleEyedOne
No question but that wasn't the hypothetical question asked by the OP. The US could probably defeat Russia, the EU and China all by itself in the initial kinetic conflict. Though occupation of the defeated territories might prove difficult.
The UK's military might is impressive by itself. If you throw in France and Germany, not to mention the other 20+ countries Russia would be outmatched. I doubt they would be able to even remotely win a war against the EU. ferrari2001
The UK isn't exactly geared for a large scale land war in Europe though. None of the European nations really are because they have no expectation of fighting a large scale land war without the US who is the best equipped for fighting that war. They are all geared for a supporting role with the US providing the meat. I posted this link before but I will post it again because I feel if you go through the numbers you will see what I'm getting at and the further I look at it all in greater detail than provided in this link the more I believe that without the US the EU might have difficulty in this hypothetical war. If there were time to gear for the war and a central leader like Hitler or Napoleon who could give the European people determination and desire to defeat the Untermensch or whatever propaganda is used to build that desire I feel Russia might lose this time, otherwise probably not. http://www.globalfirepower.com
which side would be the invading force, Russia or the EU? I think the defending force usually has a bit of an advantage, unless they are grossly outmatched or are taken by surprise.
whipassmt
Not in this case as Russia would have their best chance if they attacked first as things stand today. If the EU had the intention of invading Russia and time to gear up for that purpose their chances would increase considerably. However I can't really see a scenario where the modern generation of EU people would want to do that or be more capable of the task than previous much tougher and dedicated generations who have attempted the invasion in question. As things stand the US is currently better geared for fighting a large scale land war in Europe than any of the major European powers. The link below gives a general overview of conventional military strengths. http://www.globalfirepower.com/
Putin could defeat the entire EU single handedly if he wanted to but he simply has better things to do. In all seriousness though lets face it Europe is a shell of what it used to be. The Germans aren't allowed a real military and the only mainland European nation with a considerable one is France. I wouldn't bet on France winning a war these days and I couldn't see Spain and Italy wanting to commit forces beyond their very good natural defences or Britain much in the way of land forces. So Germany, France, Eastern European nations get invaded with Britain, Italy and Spain signing a peace treaty to cede those territories after a stalemate in fighting. It would be much like the map at the end of WW2 only Russia gains France and all of Germany instead of just the east.
The U-2 was hardly a secret anyway. The Russians shot one down as early as 1960 and it was in the media because of that incident. It also looks much like a regular plane unlike the B-2 or F-117.
Log in to comment