Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Armed Forces of the World Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Expert opinion on Russian collapse and consequences request
Necromancer    1/29/2009 12:31:16 AM
As Russia is the only country that can start a real world war, would anyone have theories on the possible scenarios that would lead upto say fall of government , military takeover or such?? Say taking Ukraine back?? I don't understand why China or Osama Bin is viewed as the primary threat to the West when Russia has 10,000 nukes available to the military.
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3
DarthAmerica    Warnerd Reply   2/3/2009 2:00:49 PM




Why exactly would Iran do this though??? And why would the Russians give a ferk about UN mandates? Moreover, who is going to step in and interfere with an angry Russian Government following a nuclear attack on their capital city by a rogue state? Also, if Russia could not subdue Afghanistan with over 100,000 troops at the hight of their military power in a 10 year long war. How are they going to muster the resources necessary to go into Iran? Doesn't make sense.



-DA




Necromancer asked for a scenario that could have Russia lobbing nukes.  The only way that would make sense would be if their conventional forces had suffered massive loses to render them ineffective, Russia's prestige is on the line, and the leadership was both very angry and in danger of being replaced.  It does not make a lot of sense, but feel free to try and make one that does.  Large scale nuclear war scenarios never make sense because everyone always loses, and there is no way to guarantee that small scale nuclear conflicts do not escalate.

 

Why Iran?  Well, the only forces I see that could actually take on the Russian army are the US/NATO, China, and Iran (if they fight defensively and use their terrain).  Neither NATO or China are would chance a war with Russia if it could be avoided, and it is unlikely that either would launch a limited nuclear first strike, they have to much to lose.  That leaves Iran, who's leadership seems to have a limited grip on reality.  But I could not come up a reasonable argument for why they would do it, so I left it up to other readers.

 Well in a situation of the most dire urgency we could fight the Russians but I do mean dire. You noticed that Georgia was invaded and no G.I. fired a single shot to stop it. We're tapped out right now. The Chinese could barely support a few divisions beyond their territory logistically so they are not going to do anything other than defense. Iran would Have no problem stopping the Russians if they invaded. It would not be pretty, but the Russians would most likely regret that even if no nukes were used.

The UN has to ask Russia to show some restraint, that is about all they are good for in the world.  And sure, Russia would be very tempted tell the UN where to go and what to do when they arrive, but it would cost them a lot in world opinion and quite possibly their seat and veto on the Security Council.  Besides, if Russia invades and takes over Iran, they would have Iran's oil wealth to add to their own and ports in the Persian Gulf and Indian Ocean, something that Russia has dreamed about since the czars.  So Russia swaps a promise not to use nukes for an approval to invade, knowing that they can used the "They nuked us" card to 'white wash' the inevitable atrocities. 

Ummm I don't buy that but thats my personal view. Its a well understood concept that any nation connected whatsoever to an unprovoked nuclear attack on another nuclear power would face retaliation in kind or beyond. Also, in the specific scenario described, Irans actions would be a threat to the entire world and not just Russia. After all if they would nuke Moscow, why not Tel Aviv, D.C., Paris or London? It's not inconceivable that a combination of these nations would retaliate against Iran. Look at the response to 9/11. Imagine a WMD attack of this magnitude.
 

Then they end up using nukes after all when they get mousetrapped.


They would never go in the first place in the current state. What you say in Georgia is about the extent of their logistical capability and thats far short of going into Iran.
 

Lastly Iran is like Iraq, not Afghanistan.  Iran has a national identity, literate population, strong central government, working transportation grid, and vast mineral wealth.  There are vital targets that can be targeted to destroy or control

 Actually Iran is very very divided internally. Its a critical vulnerability the Mullacracy is carefully watching.

 
Quote    Reply

Godofgamblers       2/6/2009 4:01:15 AM

"Sort of like Mike Tyson in his prime vs. Muhammed Ali in his."

 

First of all Mike Tyson was not a boxer and could never beat a boxer not past his prime.  I would much rather have see Ali vs Holyfield.

 

"Only the Russians had the manpower, tech and talent to pull it off."

 

The Soviets did not have a navy, air force or nuclear weapons.  I do not believe their economy, especially under attack, could have supported the Soviet machinery in a full blown war where as the US's economy could.  18 year old soldiers do not come from an infinite pool.  Solider attrition would have crippled the Red Forces.  -The Germans resorted to fielding boys. 

 

People also tend to overlook the US/UK Lend aid towards Russia and the role it played.

 

"Let me ask you then LK, at what time do you think the Russians were at their zenith and capable of pushing west if not in 45?"

 

I believe the Soviets have been a threat to peace and world stability from 1945 until present time.  Not sure if they could ever have taken the Western World.  NATO is one of the most if not thee most formidable fighting alliances of all time.  You throw in partner nations like Japan, SKorea, Australia, etc... .

 

"Do you think they had a better chance in the 80s? 70? why?"
 

70s

 

-No.  MAD

 

80s

 

-No.  MAD AND Reagen


 

"If i'm not mistaken, i believe that in another thread Herald once maintained that the USSR could have pushed the Allies back to Normandy in 3 mths in 45 using conventional forces"

 

I remember the thread but could not seem to locate it.

 


A bit off topic, LK, but i have to take issue with your coment about Tyson.... com'on, Tyson was one of the best. He was not a boxer?? You mean he was a brawler as compared to a classical dancing-around-with-faux-jabs outfighter?
 
Tyson in his prime was unbeatable. There has yet to be a boxer on the scene with the raw ballistic power that he had. (after his trainer died and he went to prison it was all over though, i agree). A lot of trainers talk about "ballistic power" or "exploding power" but few actually achieved it. tyson did. I suggest you watch Tyson on youtube because i think you've forgotten how good he really was. There are a few collages of him you can see ("Tyson's Greatest Hits" comes to mind).
His talent went to waste, granted, but he was unbeatable for a time and the youngest heavyweight ever.
 
Quote    Reply

Nichevo    Oh to answer the original question...   2/7/2009 12:52:14 AM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Necromancer    1/29/2009 12:31:16 AM As Russia is the only country that can start a real world war, would anyone have theories on the possible scenarios that would lead upto say fall of government , military takeover or such?? Say taking Ukraine back?? I don't understand why China or Osama Bin is viewed as the primary threat to the West when Russia has 10,000 nukes available to the military.
 
 
Answer:  a future starved of Russians!
 
 
 
 
Stated starkly, these trends portend the disappearance of a crucial component of national power -- a growing and healthy population. Russia's population is currently about one-half that of the United States. By 2030, according to some projections, Russia's population may have fallen to 124 million, about one-third of what the U.S. population is expected to be.
 
 By the more alarmist projections that should be about equal to the population of Iran.  In which case, Iran from the south, China from the east, and Russia is on the phone wanting to buy JDAMs.
 
Since Russia will be the world's strategic supplier of porn actresses, this request will be granted, but will fail to stem the tide unless the West comes directly to their aid.
 
Which will of course happen, because Russia is so nice to the West.
 
(Or else, Russia responds with nukes.)
 
How's that Herc?
 
 
Quote    Reply

Knjaz       2/8/2009 11:04:09 AM

Guys, u miss 1 point. Russian readiness to use tactical nuclear weapons. In case of nuclear strike on Russia, Iran would be wiped out. Yes, it IS genocide. But after Moscow is blown-up, who cares? No, there would be no conventional operation, let alone any petitions to UN.
Or maybe they will send Army? after nuking Iran. But not before that.

A little more on the subject ? according to Russian military stuff, tactical nukes come into play when they _expect_ large (unacceptable) casualties. Like in case of large conflict with USA, as example. Not only _after_ they suffered them.

 
Quote    Reply

WarNerd       2/9/2009 3:52:36 AM
 
The UN has to ask Russia to show some restraint, that is about all they are good for in the world.  And sure, Russia would be very tempted tell the UN where to go and what to do when they arrive, but it would cost them a lot in world opinion and quite possibly their seat and veto on the Security Council.  Besides, if Russia invades and takes over Iran, they would have Iran's oil wealth to add to their own and ports in the Persian Gulf and Indian Ocean, something that Russia has dreamed about since the czars.  So Russia swaps a promise not to use nukes for an approval to invade, knowing that they can used the "They nuked us" card to 'white wash' the inevitable atrocities. 

Ummm I don't buy that but thats my personal view. Its a well understood concept that any nation connected whatsoever to an unprovoked nuclear attack on another nuclear power would face retaliation in kind or beyond. Also, in the specific scenario described, Irans actions would be a threat to the entire world and not just Russia. After all if they would nuke Moscow, why not Tel Aviv, D.C., Paris or London? It's not inconceivable that a combination of these nations would retaliate against Iran. Look at the response to 9/11. Imagine a WMD attack of this magnitude.

The problem with nuclear retaliation is that the nations down wind catch the fallout, hence the international pressure for a non-nuclear response. 
 
Sure, numerous nations would be willing to form a coalition to perform a regime change in Iran, but a coalition would not be willing to take it farther than that.  Given Russia's history in eastern Europe, a coalition would want some iron clad guarantees against permanent Russian occupation and strict human rights oversight.  Russia could push to partition the operating areas, like in the Balkans, but the logical division would be to assign them the north half of the country, which has the roughest terrain, most fanatical population, and tribal politics.  The southern half, with the majority of the urban educated and non-fanatical population, oil, industry, and the ports would end up under the control of western powers.

So the Russian rulers would be very tempted to try and jump in ahead of everyone else to grab the spoils.
 
Lastly Iran is like Iraq, not Afghanistan.  Iran has a national identity, literate population, strong central government, working transportation grid, and vast mineral wealth.  There are vital targets that can be targeted to destroy or control

Actually Iran is very very divided internally. Its a critical vulnerability the Mullacracy is carefully watching.
 
 Compared to Afghanistan, Iran is a model of stability.  They are very divided politically, but the is no doubt that they will all band together against an outside invasion, particularly by Russia.  Nobody is going to find any natural allies of note in Iran like the Northern Alliance.

Then they end up using nukes after all when they get mousetrapped.

They would never go in the first place in the current state. What you say in Georgia is about the extent of their logistical capability and thats far short of going into Iran.

Given the likely patriotic response to having Moscow nuked, the Russians will probably be able to field over a half million in volunteer infantry (Class 'C' troops) in support o
 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics