Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Would there have been no possibility of a conventional war between the two great super powers during the twentieth century? Did it HAVE to go nuclear?
Among other things I'm a fiction-writer. I have been reviewing and studying this for some time.
First, using the best-available information, both nations knew that a full-scale nuclear exchange would likely be an Extinction-Level Event, at least in the northern hemisphere. That served as a fairly effective deterrent. The two powers even talked about M. A. D. -- Mutually Assured Destruction -- and the United States went so far as to dismantle its Civil Defense operations, close the public fallout shelters & remove the supplies, etc. The Soviets, however, did not.
Second, the ELE-awareness is what caused the "Proxy Wars" in the late Twentieth Century: smaller wars within or between smaller countries where one side was funded/supported by the U.S. and the other by the Soviet Union and/or the PRC.
Third, there still existed the very real possibility that such a massive exchange could have been triggered by accident, human error, or the stealthy actions of a third nuclear-armed force. Although significantly lessened, this possibility exists today.
Yeah, no one "wins" a nuclear war because of the nuclear winter/ice age that follows.
Anyone living beyond 15* of the Equator in either direction is going to freeze/starve, so bye bye USA & Russia. Brazil would probably become the world's next superpower.
Yeah, no one "wins" a nuclear war because of the nuclear winter/ice age that follows.
Anyone living beyond 15* of the Equator in either direction is going to freeze/starve, so bye bye USA & Russia. Brazil would probably become the world's next superpower.
Nope, just north of the Equator. A quick look at any map will quickly reveal that there are no targets of significance -- at least, not any that either the USA or Russia is likely to target -- below the Equator. Global circulation patterns would basically keep the world-ending clouds of smoke, dust & ash in the northern hemisphere.
So, Australia and its "local" allies would be in contention to be the next global superpower.
Yeah, no one "wins" a nuclear war because of the nuclear winter/ice age that follows.
Anyone living beyond 15* of the Equator in either direction is going to freeze/starve, so bye bye USA & Russia. Brazil would probably become the world's next superpower.
Well....no one doubts the catastrophic impact and loss of life of a nuclear missile exchange.
But a nuclear winter is only theoretical. The Iraqi oil wells lit up be Saddam were predicted to have to same effect by "experts". While a local ecological nightmare, the effect on climate was, to put it mildly, underwhelming.
And once again, the question is weather a tactical exchange of nuclear weapons would result in all out nuclear warfare. Maybe, but I don't think one can assume it automatically.
First of all, there would be no war between the USA and Russia, it would be NATO vs Russia if anything.
Next, NATO could not in the past nor can it now counter Russia if it came out to a slug fest. Nato's contigency plans are to use nukes within a very short period of time if war were to break out because Russia would penetrate Eu defenses rather quickly.
The very coordinated military and vast technical superiority of the US military isn't what Russia would face in Nato.
NATO air defenses would be rapidly removed from the skies, it has very little armor that could withstand an all out push by Russian forces and regardless of what has been portrayed in the media, Russian armor is nothing to take lightly.
The USA would participate as part of NATO but would at all possible costs, refrain from being the direct one on one fighter with Russia.
Russia, likewise can see the futility of engaging the USA is a direct military campaign because it could engage NATO and still disengage with redrawn borders, whatever those turned out to be.
If anyone still believes that the USA would jump in and engage outside of NATO, think again, if it tried, you'd see all those hotspots boil real quick and there wouldn't be a 1.5 or 2.5 war going on, the middle east would immediately explode into all out war and you might even see the NKs decide to push.
There simply isn't enough left to go around as once was thought.
There are logic-leaps and non sequiturs in your post, but I agree with your conclusion. IF Russia and NATO/the US were to begin duking it out, the entire world would shortly follow. It could, quite easily, result in TEOTWAWKI (The End Of The World As We Know It).
First of all, there would be no war between the USA and Russia, it would be NATO vs Russia if anything.
Next, NATO could not in the past nor can it now counter Russia if it came out to a slug fest. Nato's contigency plans are to use nukes within a very short period of time if war were to break out because Russia would penetrate Eu defenses rather quickly.
The very coordinated military and vast technical superiority of the US military isn't what Russia would face in Nato.
NATO air defenses would be rapidly removed from the skies, it has very little armor that could withstand an all out push by Russian forces and regardless of what has been portrayed in the media, Russian armor is nothing to take lightly.
The USA would participate as part of NATO but would at all possible costs, refrain from being the direct one on one fighter with Russia.
Russia, likewise can see the futility of engaging the USA is a direct military campaign because it could engage NATO and still disengage with redrawn borders, whatever those turned out to be.
If anyone still believes that the USA would jump in and engage outside of NATO, think again, if it tried, you'd see all those hotspots boil real quick and there wouldn't be a 1.5 or 2.5 war going on, the middle east would immediately explode into all out war and you might even see the NKs decide to push.
There simply isn't enough left to go around as once was thought.
Your post might have been the case had it been written in 1975 as opposed to 2015, but no.
Not saying for a second that a Russia/Nato conflict would have a serious possibility of going nuclear. But if you think for a second the Russian military is the juggernaut is was forty years ago, then I'd say no. First of all, Russia only has a population of 143,000,000 today, as opposed to the USSR's population of around 250,000,000 in 1975. Further, the Russians do not have the Warsaw Pact forces in their order of battle either.
According to one study, the Russian army numbers around 285,000, with units at manpower levels of 50-60%. Further, these units are composed overwhelmingly of conscripts who serve a one-year stint and don't re-enlist. So there is a definite training and readiness issue with which the Russians must contend. Even then, only half of the country's potential conscripts are healthy enough to serve.
Finally, the long-term prospects for Russia are, in a word, horrendous. A commodity economy reliant on oil prices that have tanked, interest rates around 15%, declining population, declining birthrates, an average lifespan below Guatemala's, you name it.
So if, in the unlikely event, Russian and Nato forces ever duked it out in conventional warfare, it would be a rout. Russia's only ace in the hole would be its nukes.
You're right. Because it's a chemical plant exploding.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
