Nuclear Russian planes fly over Europe, without any warning. WW3 could be near.

[Lightbringer]

As long as it doesn't effect me, a good fireworks always helps kill the boredom....i'd say go for it, just give us a good war coverage plz. i don't wanna miss the action.

Spoken like a true coward

 

[Conspirator.]

If world war 3 (a nuclear war) really happens, I doubt my country will be at the centre of attention. Still, such a conflict directly or indirectly affects everyone. I doubt it would go nuclear though.

 

[Benjamin King]

We haven't even finished our problem with the Islamic State terror in Syria and Iraq, and Russia is already starting their sneaky moves. Worse case scenario is that they will recruit people for war (if it happens, which likely will), and I'll end up being one of them. Just hopefully it doesn't reach to nuclear weapons.

 

[Jaeger]

War with the technology we have presently, will result at worst, human extinction.

 

[BlacLord™]

Russia's military tech is decades behind our own.

The standard war aircraft don't even have radars systems that feature automatic target/locking, some of them don't even have radar in the first place and rely on old-fashioned methods. Just look at their nuclear bombers, they're from the 1950s and based on platforms even older.

Even their best fighter jets are slower than the ones in the West. Russia is many things, stupid isn't one of them. They want to bolster their image as a strong force, that's all. They're not going to wage war on the U.S. knowing that Western Europe is behind them.

 

[Olorin]

Russia has a long border with China (a great power) as well as the Middle East (a very problematic region), they need to flex their muscles and show the world they are still a big player on the world stage

In a couple of decades they went from a superpower to the western punching bag, it's time people take Russia seriously (and I don't mean in a internet conspiracy cr?? way), because as long as we don't, Russia will keep trying To appear too serious

Russia can't go to war, it can't afford to go to war, free trade stops wars

 

[Wabbit]

Russia's military tech is decades behind our own.

The standard war aircraft don't even have radars systems that feature automatic target/locking, some of them don't even have radar in the first place and rely on old-fashioned methods. Just look at their nuclear bombers, they're from the 1950s and based on platforms even older.

Even their best fighter jets are slower than the ones in the West. Russia is many things, stupid isn't one of them. They want to bolster their image as a strong force, that's all. They're not going to wage war on the U.S. knowing that Western Europe is behind them.

That's some North Korean level statement. XD

You must be registered for see links

You must be registered for see links

You must be registered for see links

You must be registered for see links

Even fodder countries probably have aircraft with radars and automatic target locking most probably some 1980s Russian aircraft of mig or sukhoi.

Spoiler

You must be registered for see images

You must be registered for see images

Russian aircrafts are 4++ gen in service in Russian and many other air forces.They have had economic set backs but they are still competing with western aerospace industries.

Spoiler

You must be registered for see images

May because that 1950s bomber is effective long range strategic bomber that they have not yet outpaced it from service.

 

[Ryu Kishi]

We are all going to die :nuts:

 

[BlacLord™]

That's some North Korean level statement. XD

You must be registered for see links

You must be registered for see links

You must be registered for see links

You must be registered for see links

Even fodder countries probably have aircraft with radars and automatic target locking most probably some 1980s Russian aircraft of mig or sukhoi.

Spoiler

You must be registered for see images

You must be registered for see images

Russian aircrafts are 4++ gen in service in Russian and many other air forces.They have had economic set backs but they are still competing with western aerospace industries.

Spoiler

You must be registered for see images

May because that 1950s bomber is effective long range strategic bomber that they have not yet outpaced it from service.

I said the standard war aircraft and all you've done is pick out their best (which still don't compete) and planes that aren't due to be released for another two years. I already know about those planes and their capabilities.

Posting stupid info pictures that don't even accurately compare isn't doing you any favours either. Their standard (and best) jet fighter is the MiG-29, of which many don't have a modern radar system at all. At the end of the day, Russia's operable aircraft consists of 4th Gen and prior machines whereas the USA has 5th Gen already and is onto conceptualizing 6th Gen planes.

Even then, the T-50 isn't particularly special. A few extra km/h isn't going to make for the fact that they're still playing catch up. And it's quite clear that an old machine like the 1950s Tu-95 is not effective because it was intercepted so easily.

 

[Aim64C]

We haven't even finished our problem with the Islamic State terror in Syria and Iraq, and Russia is already starting their sneaky moves. Worse case scenario is that they will recruit people for war (if it happens, which likely will), and I'll end up being one of them. Just hopefully it doesn't reach to nuclear weapons.

I don't think Russia is particularly interested in occupying Ukraine. Their leadership realizes that it would make this pain in the ass a permanent one - since Ukraine would always have its separatist movements to worry about. Much of the KGB wasn't actually dedicated to operations against America - but operations against the districts of the USSR who wished to separate from Russia. It was a massive policy burden and continual headache that was just not worth it in the end.

If Russia goes to war with anyone - it will be Chechnya and the Islamic State.

At least for right now.

War with the technology we have presently, will result at worst, human extinction.

Humans are far too arrogant for their own good.

A full strategic exchange of nuclear warheads between Russia and the U.S. would be quite painful - but the rural and suburban districts would pick right back up and keep on chugging. The estimates of global annihilation were grossly overstated.

There would be problems, yes, but far from species-ending.

 

[sirius49]

He is the kind of president you can respect because he truly cares about his people, culture and religion in his country. Putin rejects the antihuman agenda of the new world order. He doesn't want the Usa to impose their economic, political, cultural and educational policies in others nations. Putin did right by banning homo propaganda in Russia.I agree with what he said about USA “Those folks are either desperate or totally unprofessional”.

Muslims, unlike most Christians have no illusions about the zionists, with the exception of Eastern European Slavs.

 

[Jaeger]

I don't think Russia is particularly interested in occupying Ukraine. Their leadership realizes that it would make this pain in the ass a permanent one - since Ukraine would always have its separatist movements to worry about. Much of the KGB wasn't actually dedicated to operations against America - but operations against the districts of the USSR who wished to separate from Russia. It was a massive policy burden and continual headache that was just not worth it in the end.

If Russia goes to war with anyone - it will be Chechnya and the Islamic State.

At least for right now.



Humans are far too arrogant for their own good.

A full strategic exchange of nuclear warheads between Russia and the U.S. would be quite painful - but the rural and suburban districts would pick right back up and keep on chugging. The estimates of global annihilation were grossly overstated.

There would be problems, yes, but far from species-ending.

Nuclear war would annihilate Earth and leave permanent marks.

 

[Jɑégar]

I don't think Russia is particularly interested in occupying Ukraine. Their leadership realizes that it would make this pain in the ass a permanent one - since Ukraine would always have its separatist movements to worry about. Much of the KGB wasn't actually dedicated to operations against America - but operations against the districts of the USSR who wished to separate from Russia. It was a massive policy burden and continual headache that was just not worth it in the end.

If Russia goes to war with anyone - it will be Chechnya and the Islamic State.

At least for right now.

In other words, Russia is just having fun...

 

[Aim64C]

Nuclear war would annihilate Earth and leave permanent marks.

You worship the idol of man.

We do not hold the power to exterminate our own species.

I will posit one simple question:

How do you know this?

What figures are you using to arrive at this conclusion?

What research have you reviewed?

For example, if all of the world's nuclear powers were to nuke each other - how would that destroy Brazil?

How would that destroy the people living in the mountains of Colorado?

The reality is that even the worst case of a nuclear exchange would not destroy the homes of people who live 5 miles outside of major population centers.

Strategic nuclear warfare would do precisely what it was designed to do - halt a country's ability to sustain a military campaign by causing massive damage to city infrastructure and population.

It is not designed to completely eradicate a nation.

 

[Lightbringer]

You worship the idol of man.

We do not hold the power to exterminate our own species.

I will posit one simple question:

How do you know this?

What figures are you using to arrive at this conclusion?

What research have you reviewed?

For example, if all of the world's nuclear powers were to nuke each other - how would that destroy Brazil?

How would that destroy the people living in the mountains of Colorado?

The reality is that even the worst case of a nuclear exchange would not destroy the homes of people who live 5 miles outside of major population centers.

Strategic nuclear warfare would do precisely what it was designed to do - halt a country's ability to sustain a military campaign by causing massive damage to city infrastructure and population.

It is not designed to completely eradicate a nation.

The fallout left behind from the nuclear blasts can travel different regions by just a gust of wind. That's what happened in Chernobyl and affected other regions aside from Ukraine, going as far as Italy.

And that was only due to one nuclear plant malfunction. Imagine the consequences from the explosion of multiple nuclear warheads.

 

[Benjamin King]

The fallout left behind from the nuclear blasts can travel different regions by just a gust of wind. That's what happened in Chernobyl and affected other regions aside from Ukraine, going as far as Italy.

And that was only due to one nuclear plant malfunction. Imagine the consequences from the explosion of multiple nuclear warheads.

It can destroy human life but not the earth, like Jaeger thinks.

 

[elitenoob94]

Even though Russia is extremely huge. They are panzies. It's highly unlikely. Knowing the fact that two or three countries in Europe are on par with some of US's prime warriors.

 

[BlacLord™]

The fallout left behind from the nuclear blasts can travel different regions by just a gust of wind. That's what happened in Chernobyl and affected other regions aside from Ukraine, going as far as Italy.

And that was only due to one nuclear plant malfunction. Imagine the consequences from the explosion of multiple nuclear warheads.

Chernobyl is a pretty exceptional "malfunction". But yes, nuclear bombs can be devastating primarily concerning the after-effects rather than the actual explosion itself. And yes, in a worst case scenario, the human population could be radically reduced in both current and potential.

But it wouldn't be a total wipe-out. Humans are both densely and widely strewed over the earth, many are bound to be out of all bomb's reach.

 

[TrollingSage]

Chernobyl is a pretty exceptional "malfunction". But yes, nuclear bombs can be devastating primarily concerning the after-effects rather than the actual explosion itself. And yes, in a worst case scenario, the human population could be radically reduced in both current and potential.

But it wouldn't be a total wipe-out. Humans are both densely and widely strewed over the earth, many are bound to be out of all bomb's reach.

I think you're underestimating the effects of radiation and nuclear poisoning here. Humans like all creatures rely on the earth's ecosystems to live. A nuclear war is going to massively pollute the air, water and land and probably have a permanent effect on the climate.

 

[BlacLord™]

I think you're underestimating the effects of radiation and nuclear poisoning here. Humans like all creatures rely on the earth's ecosystems to live. A nuclear war is going to massively pollute the air, water and land and probably have a permanent effect on the climate.

You're overestimating them. Whilst the effects of radiation are tenacious and even in Hiroshima and Nagasaki now, there are still recordable levels of radiation, the after-effects weren't very prominent. They too, were surprised to see how quickly the effects let up enough for the place to be fertile. I believe it was within a year or two that plants started to grow again despite the bomb's high concentration (i.e. the bombs and how they were delivered were designed to concentrate the blast and all it's might as much as possible onto the respective cities.)

The radius of effects for even a much larger bomb are exaggerated in popular culture. The main brunt of the fallout expanding from ground zero on it's power alone wouldn't be enough to fully destroy an area the size of my home city (I won't say my home city because it's a large hill and the blast wouldn't be dispersed evenly) and overall, it's dependant on the weather and other fuel sources within the area. If it's windy, then yes, it'll stretch further and harm more. If there's a lot of ignitable fluids, then yes, more expandable damage from fire surrounding ground zero, leading to them coalescing, creating their own updraft and triggering a firestorm.

On the flip side, areas with high humidity are inherently better protected since the likes of mist and rain inhibit the spread of radiation. Likewise, the geological structure has a huge impact on how an explosion would disperse and how many potential casualties there are.

P.S. Your sig was distracting me. XD