Poll: What do you think a real war between the East and the West would be like?

[crazyarms33]

If it happened a lot would depend on where the fighting was. If China was invaded by the US then China has a HUGE advantage. The same goes for Russia if the US invades from the Pacific Ocean side. If however the main axis of attack is in Europe as was feared during the Cold War, Russia/China would be stonewalled. Anti-tank weapons have never been more lethal and that is generally the Russian attack doctrine(Or at least it was for the soviets). Also air power is key. The West generally speaking, has more and better new generation fighters, bombers and fighter-bombers. The question then becomes one of logistics. Could the Western powers actually maintain supply lines across the ocean and then have enough of an infrastructure after Eastern air attacks to get it to the front lines quickly and effectively. The war would be won on the sea it seems to me, not on land or in the air. And if that is the case...well the West would be in some DEEP shit, because numbers can be negated on land to a certain degree by terrain and supporting air strikes/artillery. Not so much in the ocean.

Side Note: If you haven't read Red Storm Rising by Tom Clancy, give it a look. It's an entirely fictional tale about WW3 and what would have happened if the Cold War had gone "hot". Fairly entertaining as a book, but not sure how credible it is.

 

[Helmholtz Watson]

hmmm...If the US gets into a fight, just let Germany do it's thing because with American and West European support, German might would be unstoppable!!! ;P

 

[aashell13]

It's a silly notion.

you can't just sit here and ask "who would win in a fight, country x or country y?". particularly if both countries are nuclear powers. the question is so vague it's meaningless.

 

[Jacco]

hmmm...If the US gets into a fight, just let Germany do it's thing because with American and West European support, German might would be unstoppable!!! ;P

After all the shit they caused in WWI and WWII, I wouldn't put it past the Germans to tell everyone to fuck off and deal with everything themselves. lol. And knowing the Germans I do, I wouldn't put it past them to win.

"We'll be on the right side of the war, this time, damn it!"

 

[Jacco]

It's a silly notion.

you can't just sit here and ask "who would win in a fight, country x or country y?". particularly if both countries are nuclear powers. the question is so vague it's meaningless.

As I told another poster, this is a question of what it would be like, not whether it would or could happen.

 

[AdeptaSororitas]

Well Russia & China Vs JUST the US? Well it'd be close. But Russia/China vs the US AND it's Western Allies? A lot less close.

 

[plugav]

I don't recall who their allies are, but Russia itself coulnd't afford to take on Europe, let alone the whole of NATO.

China... I don't know much about their military capabilities, but they seem to make a lot of money off international trade and that makes it improbable for them to start a war with the West.

 

[Axyun]

The West would win. While Russia and China have a lot more dudes, the West has a significant technological advantage. The West would win the air war, thus winning the ground war.

-snip-

An attack on the US mainland would be total suicide for any nation. As a Japanese general said during WWII, "There would be a gun behind every blade of grass."

I'm not saying the U.S. would lose, but we would have very heavy casualties. We are not prepared to defend the millions of people that live by the coasts. And I'm not sure our tech gives us as much of an advantage as we think. Look how long and difficult the wars on Iraq and Afghanistan have been despite fighting a much more ill-equipped opponent.

 

[Colour Scientist]

Russia? hell no, they already lost the cold war and the whole fight for communism thing, leaving them pretty weak.

Russia didn't lose the Cold War, I think you'd better read up on that.

 

[Kahunaburger]

It would be quick and catastrophic. The next war would be fought with rocks.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Nukes end all life either way.

The nukes don't even need to hit America; China and Russia could fire their reserved into the sky, oceans, or themselves and end the world in a Nuclear Winter.

But no, the West would turn to their largest, least human-friendly weapons (possibly from space) before facing defeat. The East probably would, too, come to think of it.

Those alliances would also likely fall apart well before the end, anyways.

Not true, nuclear winter is a myth, created by people wanting to make nuclear warfare sound even worse than it is, and/or sell more books.

Likewise, the effects of nuclear devices in general. [footnote]Off-topic, but this one really annoys me. People trying to drum up anti-nuclear support managed to convinced people that there'd be no hope in the event of a war, so people don't bother with precautions. Sticky tape on the windows or duck and cover would save alot of lives in the event of nuclear war...not everyone is going to be close enough to nuclear initiations to be vapourised, alot of people are going to be in the "face full of broken glass" area. Alot of Japanese policemen survived Nagasaki because they'd been told a few things about Hiroshima that the general public didn't know, fewer died relative to everyone else around at the time.[/footnote]

Even in the event of full scale nuclear war, the majority of people would survive.

However, "merely" killing one or two billion people is enough to fuck things right up. The nations involved would be fucked up beyond recognition. This is why such a war hasn't happened of course, and the whole point of having nuclear weapons (or at least second strike capabilities). Seriously, MAD was a very real thing that people were, and are, very aware of, and built policies around.

...

You might make a case that neutral nations would "win", I guess. If nobody was to target South America, say, suddenly Brazil becomes a mighty superpower compared to everyone that's left.

 

[tthor]

Russia? hell no, they already lost the cold war and the whole fight for communism thing, leaving them pretty weak.

Russia didn't lose the Cold War, I think you'd better read up on that.

you do realize Soviet Russia is dissolved, and communism in the country collapsed? I consider a governmental collaspes pretty damn close to losing

 

[Estocavio]

I love how everyone jumps to NUCLEAR WARFARE!

When that would be somewhat impractical, when ICBMs can not only be shot down, but they leave no Land to Annex.
Imagine what Russian Industry could do with America, for instance.
And America wouldnt try and Nuke folks for the same reason.

 

[TheFarLeft]

The West would win. While Russia and China have a lot more dudes, the West has a significant technological advantage. The West would win the air war, thus winning the ground war.

-snip-

An attack on the US mainland would be total suicide for any nation. As a Japanese general said during WWII, "There would be a gun behind every blade of grass."

I'm not saying the U.S. would lose, but we would have very heavy casualties. We are not prepared to defend the millions of people that live by the coasts. And I'm not sure our tech gives us as much of an advantage as we think. Look how long and difficult the wars on Iraq and Afghanistan have been despite fighting a much more ill-equipped opponent.

That's the drawback of our military technology. It's highly advanced, but it's designed to go up against a force similar to our own. When the military took down Saddam, our tanks mowed theirs down like it wasn't a thing. But now we're fighting an enemy that doesn't use very much technology. A computer or satellite phone is about as advanced as they use. And they know the country better than we do, can blend in with the population, have the people on their side because they protect them from rival tribes, and can't be intimidated because they don't care if they die. Our whole military tech and doctrine is a product of the Cold War, and is designed to go up against a country like Russia (when they were the USSR); that's why it's been so shitty for our military over in the Middle East.

 

[Colour Scientist]

Russia? hell no, they already lost the cold war and the whole fight for communism thing, leaving them pretty weak.

Russia didn't lose the Cold War, I think you'd better read up on that.

you do realize Soviet Russia is dissolved, and communism in the country collapsed? I consider a governmental collaspes pretty damn close to losing

The Cold War was actually technically over before the collapse. Gorbachev did more to end the Cold War than anyone else.

 

[Kenjitsuka]

America: Predator/Reaper UAV drones, M1 Abrams tanks, F22's, F35's, long-range bombardments, optics that can see through walls or pitch black nights.

China/Russia: Some outdated MiGs and armour. Larger numbers, but that won't stop a hellfire missile.

In 2010, the US Department of Defense's annual report to Congress on China's military strength estimated the actual 2009 Chinese military spending at US$150 billion. The Chinese government's published 2011 military budget is about US$91.5 billion, the second largest in the world. This figure would mean that for 2011, China's military expenditure as a percentage of GDP would be 1.4%.

The PLA is the world's largest military force, with approximately 3 million members (see List of countries by number of total troops), and has the world's largest (active) standing army, with approximately 2.25 million members.

There is good reason to believe the PLA have already begun engaging countries using cyber-warfare. There has been a significant increase in the number of Chinese related cyber events from 1999 to the present day.

And their toys are far better than you think: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_99 for one.

According to the Pentagon, China is currently developing kinetic-energy weapons, high-powered lasers, high-powered microwave weapons, particle-beam weapons, and electromagnetic pulse weapons with its increase of military fundings.

 

[Zetatrain]

While I wouldn't say the was US losing the war, they weren't really winning it either. The problem with the Vietnam war was that the US adopted a war of attrition with the NVA and the Vietcong. Basically it believed that all it had to do was beat back the communists until they eventually gave up. The problem was that the NVA and Vietcong were never going to give up no matter how many times the US beat them. Every time the US cleared out an area of NVA and Vietcong, no attempt was made to hold onto the position so when the US left the area the Vietcong would move right back in.

 

[spartan231490]

Easily. Especially now that they have such a strong economic alliance, as one almost has to support the other. China's massive military might not be quite as well equipped as the west, but their numbers are enough to more than compensate for that. Also, while they aren't as well equipped as us, they are no slouch in military technology. Russia is actually relatively well advanced militarily. Their fighter jets are some of the most maneuverable out there, they are one of the 2 or 3 aircraft that can do a full raptor maneuver. Could they win? Probably not individually, especially if we started it, but they are more than capable of putting up one hell of a fight. Together, I'd call the result a coinflip.

 

[BlackStar42]

Russia's army isn't what it used to be, but history has taught us that if the West tried to invade it, we would lose very badly. Russia also has unbelievable natural resources that it could use for itself or to give to China. China's tech isn't quite up to US standards, but their army's a lot bigger and could probably repel any non-nuclear attack the US tried. Neither Russia or China have navies capable of threatening America. China could most probably take South Korea and Japan, and Russia could probably take Eastern Europe, but I don't see them progressing any further beyond that. So, with neither side capable of doing any more damage to the other (barring nukes) it'd just descend into another Cold War.

 

[SilentCom]

It's war and its not like they are lacking a military so yes, they could put up a fight.