| Russia 14:21 - Mar 7 with 1888 views | BiGDonnie |
For anyone knows better than me, what are the chances of us (NATO) simply going on an all out offensive against Russia?
Just seen Russia threatening western countries due to allowing Ukraine to use their airspace.
Hit Moscow hard with a few nukes and it'll be problem solved, no? |  |
| |  |
| Russia on 14:23 - Mar 7 with 1841 views | J2BLUE |
Kill a few hundred thousand civilians and problem solved! |  |
| |
| Russia on 14:26 - Mar 7 with 1821 views | BlueNomad |
Too many hours on X-Box games? |  | | |
| Russia on 14:27 - Mar 7 with 1814 views | Darth_Koont |
You’re not serious, are you? |  |
| |
| Russia on 14:27 - Mar 7 with 1810 views | BiGDonnie |
| Russia on 14:23 - Mar 7 by J2BLUE |
Kill a few hundred thousand civilians and problem solved! |
Which would then stop thousands of Ukrainians dying?
Maybe. | |
| |
| Russia on 14:29 - Mar 7 with 1796 views | BiGDonnie |
| Russia on 14:27 - Mar 7 by Darth_Koont |
You’re not serious, are you? |
Yeah I'm being serious. I've asked what the chances are of us going on the offensive, which doesn't seem too crazy given the situation. | |
| |
| Russia on 14:31 - Mar 7 with 1767 views | BlueNomad |
| Russia on 14:29 - Mar 7 by BiGDonnie |
Yeah I'm being serious. I've asked what the chances are of us going on the offensive, which doesn't seem too crazy given the situation. |
You may be serious but also totally unrealistic. This level of incompetence could earn you a place in this Tory government! | | | |
| Russia on 14:33 - Mar 7 with 1752 views | Darth_Koont |
| Russia on 14:29 - Mar 7 by BiGDonnie |
Yeah I'm being serious. I've asked what the chances are of us going on the offensive, which doesn't seem too crazy given the situation. |
I was afraid of that.
Your response to a dangerously escalated situation is to raise the stakes and go all-in. When the Russians also have the same nuclear measures that they will then respond with.
I think you really need to think this through. | |
| |
| Russia on 14:35 - Mar 7 with 1743 views | BiGDonnie |
| Russia on 14:33 - Mar 7 by Darth_Koont |
I was afraid of that.
Your response to a dangerously escalated situation is to raise the stakes and go all-in. When the Russians also have the same nuclear measures that they will then respond with.
I think you really need to think this through. |
Attack is the best form of defence. Putin can't nuke us if we've nuked him first! | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Russia on 14:36 - Mar 7 with 1736 views | J2BLUE |
| Russia on 14:35 - Mar 7 by BiGDonnie |
Attack is the best form of defence. Putin can't nuke us if we've nuked him first! |
Yes he can. | |
| |
| Russia on 14:38 - Mar 7 with 1721 views | BlueNomad |
| Russia on 14:35 - Mar 7 by BiGDonnie |
Attack is the best form of defence. Putin can't nuke us if we've nuked him first! |
Please, give up! You are advocating what could result in the annihilation of at least two continents. | | | |
| Russia on 14:40 - Mar 7 with 1717 views | Darth_Koont |
| Russia on 14:35 - Mar 7 by BiGDonnie |
Attack is the best form of defence. Putin can't nuke us if we've nuked him first! |
Then you don’t understand nuclear attacks or how the nuclear deterrent works.
They’ll know when we launch. This isn’t going to take them by surprise.
It’s also f@cking inhumane. | |
| |
| Russia on 14:44 - Mar 7 with 1675 views | eireblue |
| Russia on 14:35 - Mar 7 by BiGDonnie |
Attack is the best form of defence. Putin can't nuke us if we've nuked him first! |
Let’s get you started on the basics and work from there.
 |  | | |
| Russia on 14:51 - Mar 7 with 1597 views | BiGDonnie |
| Russia on 14:40 - Mar 7 by Darth_Koont |
Then you don’t understand nuclear attacks or how the nuclear deterrent works.
They’ll know when we launch. This isn’t going to take them by surprise.
It’s also f@cking inhumane. |
Maybe not. I did simply ask a question about going on the offensive which I think some of you have ran a bit far with.
Just seems that we're sitting waiting around while Russia throw out all sorts of threats. | |
| |
| Russia on 14:56 - Mar 7 with 1564 views | BiGDonnie |
Believe it or not I was aware of this. | |
| |
| Russia on 15:09 - Mar 7 with 1493 views | clive_baker |
| Russia on 14:35 - Mar 7 by BiGDonnie |
Attack is the best form of defence. Putin can't nuke us if we've nuked him first! |
All the more justification for Russia to respond if NATO decided to do that. Absoultely foolish on many levels.
As frustrating as it is from a moral perspective, Putin needs to be given an out, an 'off ramp' as they say. To take his win back to his people before more damage is done. Thereafter the West needs to isolate him and Russia, hit them in the purse through sanctions over the long term and disarm him without using a bullet. |  |
| |
| Russia on 15:19 - Mar 7 with 1456 views | BlueandTruesince82 |
| Russia on 14:29 - Mar 7 by BiGDonnie |
Yeah I'm being serious. I've asked what the chances are of us going on the offensive, which doesn't seem too crazy given the situation. |
Until Russia tries to march into a nato member country none.
Hitting the nukes button will result in retaliation coming the other way so that won't be happening. |  |
| |
| Russia on 15:59 - Mar 7 with 1338 views | BasingstokeBlue |
| Russia on 14:56 - Mar 7 by BiGDonnie |
Believe it or not I was aware of this. |
Hmmm. |  |
| |
| Russia on 16:45 - Mar 7 with 1259 views | bluejacko |
| Russia on 14:29 - Mar 7 by BiGDonnie |
Yeah I'm being serious. I've asked what the chances are of us going on the offensive, which doesn't seem too crazy given the situation. |
You do realise the time it would take to ready a force to go into Russia dont you? |  | | |
| Russia on 17:28 - Mar 7 with 1193 views | Guthrum |
Realistically, nil. Especially with the use of nuclear weapons.
For a start, the latter would invite an instant reponse, starting while our missiles were still in the air, then later from submarines and dispersed mobile launchers. The Russians (as do we) have satellites and radar systems capable of spotting ICBMs being fired. Their leaders would probably have enough warning to get into bunkers. The civilian population would not.
A conventional attack would, as others have said, take weeks to organise. NATO is set up more for defensive than offensive warfare. But if we started pushing into Russian territory, there is a likelihood they would use "battlefield" nukes, which then leads to escalation. If faced by complete defeat (always tricky in the vastness and harsh weather of Russia), then Putin may press the button anyway.
Or NATO might be fought to a standstill, in which case nobody is better off, but lots more people are dead and cities destroyed. Nobody is better off except perhaps China, which can use the distraction to grab Taiwan. |  |
| |
| Russia on 17:40 - Mar 7 with 1150 views | BiGDonnie |
| Russia on 17:28 - Mar 7 by Guthrum |
Realistically, nil. Especially with the use of nuclear weapons.
For a start, the latter would invite an instant reponse, starting while our missiles were still in the air, then later from submarines and dispersed mobile launchers. The Russians (as do we) have satellites and radar systems capable of spotting ICBMs being fired. Their leaders would probably have enough warning to get into bunkers. The civilian population would not.
A conventional attack would, as others have said, take weeks to organise. NATO is set up more for defensive than offensive warfare. But if we started pushing into Russian territory, there is a likelihood they would use "battlefield" nukes, which then leads to escalation. If faced by complete defeat (always tricky in the vastness and harsh weather of Russia), then Putin may press the button anyway.
Or NATO might be fought to a standstill, in which case nobody is better off, but lots more people are dead and cities destroyed. Nobody is better off except perhaps China, which can use the distraction to grab Taiwan. |
Nice one! | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
