World War III
- Thread starter syndicated44
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I have say that this is all very silly. There is one key fact that has been missed in this little tale. In 2015, in all likelihood, Chuck Norris will still be alive. Have you never seen Invasion USA, Chuck basically stops the Russians from invading the US in a matter of days and I'm certain he could stop the Chinese as well. Chuck Norris will never be too old to kick ass in the name of America.
End of discussion.
End of discussion.
An event like this would probably Federalize Europe (finally) and in itself using both the political wing of the EU and military wing of NATO, would be a formidable defence force.
Defence force.
Throughout the whole of the Cold War, it was pretty much agreed that when the brown stuff hit the fan and the Soviets rolled through the Berlin Wall, Europe was lost. This was mainly due to the fact that Quality does not beat Quantity (many people have pointed this out) and both sides agreed that it would probably be NATO that used Chemical, Biological and, only as THE LAST RESORT when mainland Europe would be lost, Nuclear.
Although many people are very sceptical about the ability of politicians to do any good, they forget that what I have described above did not happen. At all. Not even a little bit. It came close, DAMN close at points, but never did Europe have to fly the flag of the USSR...or become a smouldering crater.
End of History Lesson
Defence force.
Throughout the whole of the Cold War, it was pretty much agreed that when the brown stuff hit the fan and the Soviets rolled through the Berlin Wall, Europe was lost. This was mainly due to the fact that Quality does not beat Quantity (many people have pointed this out) and both sides agreed that it would probably be NATO that used Chemical, Biological and, only as THE LAST RESORT when mainland Europe would be lost, Nuclear.
Although many people are very sceptical about the ability of politicians to do any good, they forget that what I have described above did not happen. At all. Not even a little bit. It came close, DAMN close at points, but never did Europe have to fly the flag of the USSR...or become a smouldering crater.
End of History Lesson
It all seemed fairly believable up until this point.syndicated44 said:
Why would UK/Fr/Es form one alliance and De/It another alliance? With Ru at their coat-tails I'd have thought they'd all group together in a single alliance. In fact, such an alliance already exists; it's called the European Union.
I also don't get why Ru and PRC would then turn on each other. Seems like the costs would outweigh the benefits for either side.
And the UK starves? How'd you figure that one out? What you got against us Brits?
Which is why a missile defence system is the shittest idea in history.JoshGod said:
2012-tards are not conspiracy theorists, because 2012-tardation is not a conspiracy theory.SnootyEnglishman said:
Spoken like a true statesmanEldritch Warlord said:
I doubt that in the circumstances we are discussing, S. America would be interested in invading N. America. More likely they'd have enough to think about just securing their shores from the approaching Ru/PRC hordes.Crypticonic said:
It's like Yahtzee (kinda) said, who the hell would want to invade the US?
Don't be! [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/jump/18.196051.6303571]Ghost1800 said:
China is realising that with the recession, they can no longer rely on the US for this, so they are actually trying to create a domestic middle class to consume Chinese goods, so they are no longer so reliant on exports.Steelfists said:
Exactly, because the Soviets knew it would mean nuclear war.Chrono212 said:
Mutually assured destruction is underrated.
I will answer your questions thusly!!OpiateChicken said:
1. I was thinking Russia and China for old soviet relations. Plus I could imagine Russia siding with China to further itself.
2. I honestly didn't think about where the US navy was located. To be honest I more or less assumed that the navy was more heavily placed in the Atlantic to cover trading lanes. However the pacific seems like a more logical answer.
3. Again I was more thinking soviet power with Cuba. Not really invading Cuba but getting military access there.
4. Sadly I know little of relatively current relations in Western Europe. I was assuming I would be horribly wrong with how alliances worked out. I was looking more at a geographical standpoint.
5. Yes I know US would use nukes but if that was the case. My little bit would start and end in a few sentences. In fact.. War starts US launches nukes other countries launch nukes. ARMAGEDDON!!
6. If I did base this around CoD there would have been many more nukes and a lot more stupidity. I was really basing this mostly off of old Cold War politics.
7. I never actually considered Canada fallen. I considered them neutral. Fighting what they could but mostly cutting their losses. More to the point of the question: Its a plot hole?
8. Russia has joined a side to better itself. I just cant see them joining with the US on a war like this. Plus our foreign policy is pretty much shit right now.
9. I was imagining that the fighting would have weakened the Russian and Chinese forces significantly. Plus their home nation has been destroyed and the men are essentially abandoned fighting a fruitless battle with little to no information. I can imagine in a situation like this a smaller military would have a shot at taking on a stronger fighting force.
10. Nitpicking are we? I jest but I am pretty shitty at grammar.
11. More on the subject of nukes I might actually believe they wouldn't. There is such a fearful stigma involving nuclear arms. I actually had them nuking Beijing and Moscow but it seemed like a fruitless waste of time (plus the story thread just went no where). In my little world I prefer wars being wars, not a magic make my enemies disappear button (I am fully aware this isn't how the world works).
12. I was imagining that China had made a stream line through Canada meeting relatively light resistance. From there they would have taken Michigan to and moved across the great lakes. I was thinking espionage over full on fighting in this situation. I also didn't expect that first push to last very long. More to test the water and draw attention away from fighting on their own land. I would also imagine that New York would be more of a morale blow over a strategic strike. Lady Liberty holding a big red flag instead of her torch.
13. I didn't expect them to take on the entirety of US's navy instead just punch a hole and get their men where they need to be. Fighting off ships as they come. I kind of skipped over that bit so another plot hole!
Anyway like I said in a previous post I was locked in my room while some guys put in some windows so writing this certainly passed the time. I am glad it took off like it did.
I'd have to support the opinion that while this story is nice and kinda interesting - it is also probably a large load of crap. Too many loopholes and logical mistakes. Russia will not attack the US even as a part of a large coalition (with the Chineese? The fucking Chineese? No offence to neither China nor anyone, but that won't really be a sensible thing to do strategically. It is a doublecross waiting to happen).
I think that there is way too much post cold-war paranoia on one side, and "cold war enthusiasts" on the other to finally let go of the Russians vs. Americans stereotype. But we kinda need to work on this, don't you think?
I think that there is way too much post cold-war paranoia on one side, and "cold war enthusiasts" on the other to finally let go of the Russians vs. Americans stereotype. But we kinda need to work on this, don't you think?
7. It is in Canada's best interest to help the United States, as we share a continent together, and anyone big enough to beat the US will roll over Canada (No offense to you guys, but sniping wont save you here).syndicated44 said:
8. Actually, it would be in Russia's best interest to join Team USA. I'm sure they would understand that anyone who's ballsy enough to attack the USA will probably not honor alliance treaties.
13. You can't punch a hole in a Navy that is basically built around Aircraft carriers. They will find you if their in the same ocean, and they will kill you.
Just picking out the three that bugged me most. No time for more (Though I will say this: Most impossible war ever.).
Assorted notes: A war between the Korea's would be surprisingly short. Both countries have already pre-zeroed their artillery: within, say, 3 hours, both countries would be void of population centers and military post. Super carrier launched fighters from US forces in Japan would end what is left of North Korea.
Also, Chinese front line equipment is not that far behind the US's when it comes to raw power. Its the gadgets that make the difference: the best tactical communications network ever devised, dozens of types of vision for long range fighting, speed of logistics, artillery accuracy, unit compositions, and hundreds of other minor differences not listed on Wikipedia. This is what the United States Military is good at: not just making the fanciest toys, but integrating that toy with the people who need it.
Their "efforts" so far amount to forcing peasents to buy fridges at discount prices. You can't create a middle class, as their economy grows so will the middle class. I'll bet it will never be able to meet the needs of even half of China's current manufacturing power, not least because middle class people don't work in factories, and the most lucrative middle class occupations are still dominated by the West. And that isn't even mentioning the West's domination of University education.oktalist said:
If a significant Chinese middle class does grow, it will happen over at least half a century. I guess.
EDIT: I propose we turn this already cool thread into an even better one by posting our WWIII scenarios!
Hmm. I was going to write one now but I have to think about it a bit more. Will post it later.
Okay I wrote this three times now. I clicked on your name the first and the second my browser died..AccursedTheory said:
7. I am not sure it would be. Consider this, if your older, bigger, and stronger brother just got the snot beat out of him would you immediately rush into fight his assailant or would you wait and help him after the enemy was gone?
8. Honestly I have no idea what side Russia would take. However I do not think they would stand by US. Or for that matter enter the war. I could see Russia playing both sides, selling arms etc. After both armies are hurt and beaten I can perhaps see them swooping in. In the terms of this scenario I think Russia would want more land and power and I can seriously see China being a threat to the US in the next few years. Our government currently is fragile and I would not be surprised if there was a civil war or a revolution sometime soon.
13. Yes... I give up, I really honestly know little to nothing about naval warfare. I always think of a large battleship bombarding coastal targets and launching little boats full of men.
On your comment about Chinese front line and the argument over quantity over quality. I have heard a few stories from a few vets (so no promises this is actually true) but in Vietnam they said that they would send waves on top of waves of unarmed men to attack fortifications to set off traps, fill in trenches, and waste ammunition. Then they would send in the actual soldiers and wipe out the camp. So I do truly believe that China would have a chance if they got onto US soil. Its a matter of getting there first. Another reason I would think that China would do their best to ally with Russia. They would have easy access from there to go through Canada and force air and land combat (I don't know China's air capabilities though. I cant imagine them being better then the US's). However I believe if China got momentum and then kept it they could theoretically trounce the US's defenses before anything adequate could be setup.
Your thing on Korea is interesting. I do remember hearing something like that at one point long ago but that just makes me think of two fists hitting each other until both are bloodied and broken. Actually I have to say I liked my little bit on Korea (not to toot my own horn) but I can actually see that happening there. I can see a guerrilla force sacrificing itself to take down its oppressors (ahh drama).
That's why we put them on the front lines: Let the Russians and Chinese think our Pokemanz are lame, then we come out and flamethrower their sorry behinds with our Charizards. >=-Dsyndicated44 said:
This would never happen. The US would not leave iraq or afgahanistan until the job was done. And canada would attack and defend the US and same with France, Germany, and britan...the power of allies.
China would never be able to fight a sustained war, let alone invasion on United States soil. Its population is soaring and it can barely feed the populace. It relies too heavily on commerce with the United States to even debate a move like this. On another note, the United State's debt, from an economical viewpoint, helps the world economy function. All countries have ridiculous amounts of debt to other countries and it is these factors that keep the economy balanced and relatively stable. In other words, China would be fucking itself if it engaged in any kind of conflict with the United Sates.
EDIT: The most realistic World War 3 scenario is a conflict based entirely on control and domination of the quickly depleting natural resources of the earth. (namely fuel)
EDIT: The most realistic World War 3 scenario is a conflict based entirely on control and domination of the quickly depleting natural resources of the earth. (namely fuel)