🫸🫷
I’m disabled so I can’t fight.
But if I could, I would want to be on the Jura, holding up the Advance that seems to be nearing Basel, Switzerland.
I did after all train as an alpine soldier durning my military training. So I think I’d enjoy mountaineous terrain the most.
It really bugs me that I’m “in the same boat”, actually.
Like, if they needed a guy to just man a watchtower or something I’d volunteer the shit out of that. I’m pretty powerless when it comes to other things though.
Romanians be like: at the beginning or at the end of the war?
Are they fighting each other or just hitting all of Europe in a pincer movement?
Why not both?
Full Molotov Von Ribbentrop.
Russia can’t defeat the US in conventional warfare, but is much-more-comparable from a nuclear aspect. So Russia has a significant incentive to use nuclear weapons.
I’d guess that the US probably has a shot at actually getting a first strike off versus Russia. So the US has a significant incentive to use nuclear weapons.
Anyone intending to make serious use of nuclear weapons has very little reason to hold back if they expect a high likelihood of the other side responding massively. So they’ve got a significant incentive to go all-in.
I think that there’s a pretty good probability that a major war between Russia and the US of the “only one of us is walking away from this” sort goes very nuclear very quickly.
Russia’s entire military budget is somewhere in the same order of magnitude of what the US spends just on maintaining its nuclear arsenal, so no, they are not comparable there either.
If Russia or the US launch nuclear weapons, over 90% of the world population will die over the following 10 years. However, global warming would be solved.
Nuclear winter solves global warming
https://www.navalgazing.net/Nuclear-Winter
Even using the most conservative numbers here, an all-out exchange between the US and Russia would produce a nuclear winter that would at most resemble the one that Robock and Toon predict for a regional nuclear conflict, although it would likely end much sooner given empirical data about stratospheric soot lifetimes. Some of the errors are long-running, most notably assumptions about the amount of soot that will persist in the atmosphere, while others seem to have crept in more recently, contributing to a strange stability of their soot estimates in the face of cuts to the nuclear arsenal. All of this suggests that their work is driven more by an anti-nuclear agenda than the highest standards of science. While a large nuclear war would undoubtedly have some climatic impact, all available data suggests it would be dwarfed by the direct (and very bad) impacts of the nuclear war itself.
90% of people being dead and the other 10% being pre-industrial is what’ll fix global warming, we don’t need nuclear winter for that.
The direct effects on the world of a nuclear war between the US and Russia isn’t going to include killing 90% of the world’s population.
It will if we decide to be dicks about it
deleted by creator
This map forgets that the US have direct access to bases in NATO countries.
Trump could just send troops in the open to the bases, and then turn around on the local forces.
US taking over NATO countries will not be a Normandie style sea landing, they would break out of our own bases having disabled them first.
People coming up with scenarios like that forget that the US would have huge supply lines to keep those bases going while the other country is literally right there. And it is not as if you would need to besiege a modern military base for months to starve them out.
While it’s inaccurate to pretend the US would just steamroll the EU in a land war in the EU, we also shouldn’t pretend like the bases wouldn’t be problematic. Everywhere the US operates requires huge supply lines, so it’s not the absolute deal breaker it would be for most nations.
Starting with places to land and manage supplies would be a big advantage.
The biggest issue would be that usually they use the bases to house troops during the lengthy process of getting them into place for deployment, so there would be a lot of questions about how to actually move the people over fast enough, but getting the supplies there would be relatively routine.There’s no way the US could take or hold Europe without an aggreable civilian population. Given the differences in expenditures, military size, experience, and developed tools and logistics there’s also no real way any European nation is going to be able to effectively stop them. Basically a significantly worse Vietnam type situation, from the perspective of both sides.
The EU has 500+ million population. Do you you think that the few thousands of american troops in Europe can fight against that? Even if the EU had no military, it would be an impossible fight. And the EU has a lot of military, vastly outnumbering american military stationed in Europe.
You’re years out of date
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-eurostat-news/w/ddn-20240711-1
Are you from the future?
What?
Population means very little when we have to fight tanks, boats, planes and missiles.
We have few military weapons outside of military bases, the US only needs to take control of a few bases to cripple us
Population means very little when we have to fight tanks, boats, planes and missiles.
Those things cant automatically teleport to european soil. Aircraft carriers can only do so much and they also cant teleport. Numbers are still relevant, especially when backed by existing european military. Morale is also relevant.
Europe is a giant place, with shitload of people, that have a strong desire to defend against invaders. Look what happened to Vietnam or Ukraine. As long as you have a large enough group of people, with decent equipment and morale, you can do great things.
You do know that the US maintains a supply of tanks and equippent in many countries on their bases the world over?
If you have one tank, it is easier to get another one.
Do you think european nations dont have any tanks?
And they have a kill switch for a lot of NATO tech
I read it as “fellow embryos” at first
You’ve already got my region of England highlighted, so there I suppose! I could work from home xD
Removed by mod
inb4 you get dropped by a drone, or dysentery
Russia barely has a 1000 km frontline under control, what’s that long red thing on the right?
Don’t forget the two fronts the US would be fighting across the Atlantic.
Maybe 3 if those with interests in the Pacific get involved.keep fuckin around somebody’s gonna set off a nuke
If your a civilian you want to be on the US front, if your a soldier you want to be on the Russian front.
It seems most people get it, but I don’t - Care to explain?
Americans are better at following the laws of war, but are also more efficient at waging war.
The only thing Americans seem to be “better at” is proving how insane, loathsome and vile they are to the rest of the world, though Israel is definitely a runner-up.
Well, glad you spit that out,feel better? Want a glass of water?
Idk man, the beheadings, crucifictions and other genocide in Ukraine seems quite distasteful too
I agree, but we haven’t seen the depravity that will be encouraged by the new fascist leaders. I am desperately hoping that getting rid of Medicare will piss enough military people off that they won’t defend him.
VA benefits are distinct from Medicare (which is distinct from Medicaid). Cutting Medicare (the one for old people) isn’t going to do much to active service members. Nor, I think, will cutting Medicaid (the one for poor people).
Correct. It’s the cuts to the VA that’ll piss them off. The Medicaid cuts will piss them off because it’ll impact their families.
I agree not directly, and while these people may be severely stunted in empathy, they do have it for those in their immediate circle. If their parents lose their money and health, they may care.
Not certain. These ghouls are able to contort anything into anything it seems.
Americans are better at following the laws of war
You think the Trump admin won’t actively seek to degenerate the US military to the level of the orcs?
Heaven, hell, valhalla or wherever. but I won’t be fighting a human war
I’m a manufacturing engineer specialized in machining exotic alloys and complex parts, even though I have changed career a few years ago I have experience in manufacturing complex military parts.
So I would probably be in a factory trying to produce as much military equipment as possible.
Kind of same, I would get send back to H&K most likely
