EU vs Russia war - who would win?

♂

Edited by: Foreigner4 Jan 22, 08, 16:19 #61

lesser wrote:

I remember WWII and how few wanted to fight for their country. The EU means nothing to me. Sorry :)

how old are you? (asked with surprise)

edited as the lower portion was somehow deleted i rewrote it just because i felt like it.

matthias wrote:

Foreignor you little tree hugger don't be so emotional. First of all Im polish I was born in Poland. second this is a hypothetical and in case you didn't notice wars have been around for 1000s of years. So don't be a baby. I support peace but sometimes we are not given a chance and have no choice. I would like to see you talk with Hitler and reach a compromise. Oh wait didn't Stalin to that and Hitler turned on him. Dumbass learn your history

as i had written before ww2 was a direct result of ww1- learn real history bucko and you'll see that armed conflict leads to more armed conflict. other than that your example blows as there is no russian threat on europe's doorstep, you come off like the kaczynski twins with that kind of talk. and if being against war means that i hug trees (although your logic on that is wanting) then fine. However being anti-war isn't being a "baby" though, it's this "rah rah kill kill" crap from americans that i loathe, typically it comes from those who glorify violence as a means to an end and think talking about it somehow makes them tough but at the same time would squeel like a pig in even a light altercation and be sure to press charges if someone even spilt a drink on whatever posseur wear you strut around in.
Peace.

southernThreads: 116 Posts: 10,892 Joined: May 17, 07 ♂	Edited by: southern Jan 22, 08, 16:23 #62
If the war is decided on a poker game,maybe EU has chances to win.

isthatuThreads: 4 Posts: 1,627 Joined: Jun 8, 07 ♂	Jan 22, 08, 16:35 #63
Foreigner4 wrote: lesser wrote: I remember WWII and how few wanted to fight for their country. The EU means nothing to me. Sorry :) hang on,your Polish....I thought every Pole from 8 to 80 fought for their country........

♂

Jan 22, 08, 16:44 #64

who me? i'm assuming that's a typo but yeah wierd how people superimpose themselves into history. I listen to 23 year olds talking about ww2 or even farther back in the first person, i just shake my head, but in defense of the poles, i've heard some stuff from the english that well, just makes me shake my head (in a lateral movement to be exact- imagine it in a slow melodramtic solilquy of a head shake).

lesserThreads: 7 Posts: 2,014 Joined: Oct 19, 07 ♂	Jan 22, 08, 16:46 #65
Foreigner4 wrote: how old are you? (asked with surprise) I remember from history books obviously. isthatu wrote: hang on,your Polish....I thought every Pole from 8 to 80 fought for their country........ Not every but many fought for the country. However most of other nations looks very poor in comparison.

♂

Edited by: isthatu Jan 22, 08, 16:46 #66

no typo,just nicked his line from your post hence the mix up...
yep,its normally the kiddies that seem to think "they" fought,or should I say ,"won" world war two,and those kids are interchangebly British/Polish or American.....

lesser wrote:

However most of other nations looks very poor in comparison.

oh,here we go again,you do realise that fourth largest claim is fately flawed by want of it including many thousands who never fought and many thousands who had spent the war fighting in Feld Grau only joining "polish" units at the end of hostilities.......

♂

Edited by: Foreigner4 Jan 22, 08, 16:53 #67

agreed, it's a bit of an indicator, imo, that a lot of folks these days just don't have much they can represent themselves with. i mean this in the sense that these people seem to really feel that the soldiers of yesteryear did something "special" that they themselves don't measure up to- a byproduct of the glorification of war :(

lesser wrote:

I remember from history books obviously.

obviously

lesser wrote:

Not every but many fought for the country.

i seriously wonder if fighting because there was no alternative is something to admire or just appreciate isn't our situation (unlike those unlucky folks in Iraq at present). And even then, even if it is something to admire, why should some young noncombatant be spouting this off like it reflects in anyway on him or her? where's the sense?

lesserThreads: 7 Posts: 2,014 Joined: Oct 19, 07 ♂	Jan 22, 08, 16:56 #68
isthatu wrote: oh,here we go again,you do realise that fourth largest claim is fately flawed by want of it including many thousands who never fought and many thousands who had spent the war fighting in Feld Grau only joining "polish" units at the end of hostilities....... You argue with yourself, because I never said that every Pole fought. Many did in opposition to many other countries.

isthatuThreads: 4 Posts: 1,627 Joined: Jun 8, 07 ♂	Jan 22, 08, 16:57 #69
lesser wrote: You argue with yourself, because I never said that every Pole fought. Many did in opposition to many other countries. lesser wrote: However most of other nations looks very poor in comparison. whatever......

♂

Edited by: matthias Jan 22, 08, 17:21 #70

Russia would easily win. First they have nukes. Second they have the oil that EU is so dependant on. Thirdly their is no solidarity in the EU not even a common way to deal with Russia. Fourthly most of western EU are cowards. Fifth no common EU army. Sixth Russia is much bigger and EU doesn't have the amount of nukes to cover that much area. But Russia has enough nukes to cover EU. theirs more but this will suffice for now

isthatuThreads: 4 Posts: 1,627 Joined: Jun 8, 07 ♂	Jan 22, 08, 17:23 #71
matthias wrote: Fourthly most of western EU are cowards. Qualify that remark. Those same Cowards faced down the USSR for 60 years while your country got into bed with the reds.

matthiasThreads: 4 Posts: 1,577 Joined: Jan 9, 08 ♂	Jan 22, 08, 17:26 #72
Got in bed sure, we were betrayed by the west. we were occupied. didn't stare down **** because America had your asses. Say thank you

isthatuThreads: 4 Posts: 1,627 Joined: Jun 8, 07 ♂	Jan 22, 08, 17:28 #73
to whom? like i say,qualify your remark that western europe is full of cowards.....what proof do you have of this,anything that doesnt involve inaccurate stereotypes from may 1940?

matthiasThreads: 4 Posts: 1,577 Joined: Jan 9, 08 ♂	Edited by: matthias Jan 22, 08, 17:28 #74
Yeah if we weren't betrayed by britain and others we would not be occupied. Second stared down USSR yeah with American help by yourself you were a joke.

noimmigration	Jan 22, 08, 17:31 #75
what you really mean is russia vs france, uk, german, spain and italy. what pathetic military contribution could eastern european countries like poland and slovakia offer.

isthatuThreads: 4 Posts: 1,627 Joined: Jun 8, 07 ♂	Jan 22, 08, 17:32 #76
noimmigration wrote: like poland and slovakia offer. well,they could offer a few bases to the russians...oh wait,yes I see.......

♂

Jan 22, 08, 17:36 #77

matthias wrote:

Yeah if we weren't betrayed by britain and others we would not be occupied. Second stared down USSR yeah with American help by yourself you were a joke.

noimmigration wrote:

what you really mean is russia vs france, uk, german, spain and italy. what pathetic military contribution could eastern european countries like poland and slovakia offer.

isthatu wrote:

well,they could offer a few bases to the russians...oh wait,yes I see.......

Yup. Let's all argue and belittle each other over something that won't happen. Brilliant.

PolsonThreads: 15 Posts: 2,814 Joined: May 9, 07 ♂	Jan 22, 08, 17:39 #78
noimmigration wrote: what you really mean is russia vs france, uk, german, spain and italy. what pathetic military contribution could eastern european countries like poland and slovakia offer. Once again you give a proof of your miserable ignorance.

♂

Edited by: matthias Jan 22, 08, 17:40 #79

Spain and Italy lol

Germany and UK and France are only ones competent. But not enough for Russia.

As for Poland they have some of the braviest soldiers unfortunalty after decades of communism we are behind economically and technology wise. But better contribution then Spain and Italy. If Poland had the economy of Germany we would be one of the strongest militaries in EU. We have better soldiers then UK and France not sure about Germany.

CrowThreads: 365 Posts: 7,189 Joined: Feb 14, 07 ♂	Edited by: Crow Jan 22, 08, 17:52 #80
matthias wrote: we would definitely be one of the strongest ... in EU. don`t tell that twice. People are jealous, you know Yugoslavs also were proud, in any sense and, look what happened to us

♂

Jan 22, 08, 17:52 #81

Matthias has a good point, conscription in Poland means, according to probability, that u r gonna attract quite a lot of good soldiers. Poland would be formidable with the right weaponry and financial backing. They train hard and are disciplined. I know 4 sure that Americans rate them highly. Spain and Italy, not a prayer. The best things those guys could do would be to buy nukes and work out together how 2 use them. Troops-wise, they'd be sorted out by Shetland and Orkney most probably, hehehehe.

matthiasThreads: 4 Posts: 1,577 Joined: Jan 9, 08 ♂	Edited by: matthias Jan 22, 08, 17:59 #82
thanks seanus for an honest assessment based on logic not emotion.

♂

Jan 22, 08, 18:05 #83

The next wars will not be land battles folks.

The best way to strike at your enemy is economically. the WTC in new york for instance. It killed innocent people and didnt involve 'traditional' forces.

It was, in the eyes of al-qaeda, a surgical strike. in the eyes of america terrorism.
(in my books, damned unsporting to kill those whom killing is not there occupation).

So trade wars, economic undermining, posturing, the 'threat' of war. (can someone see the cold war here please-it defeated the CCCP last time).

A conventional war between the EU & Russia would not happen. It would cost too much to the EU and Russia (in terms of lives and monetary).

No no, espionage, counter espionage, trade sanctions, embargo's. etc.

In escalation terms, cutting of diplomatic relations. but both sides would work to avoid conventional warfare. Nuclear war too is unfavorable. it is a detterent. which means, push us into a corner we can't get out of and you'll leave us no choice. It is not a weapon of first resort. Both sides fear using nuclear weapons but spend alot in publicising the opposite (naturally).

Summation: In war - no one wins.

El GatoThreads: 9 Posts: 459 Joined: Sep 21, 07 ♂	Jan 22, 08, 18:08 #84
daffy wrote: Summation: In war - no one wins. Except the survivors :] Hi Daffy, how you been?

daffyThreads: 40 Posts: 2,118 Joined: Feb 5, 07 ♂	Jan 22, 08, 18:09 #85
Even the survivors (by the very name, survived) have lost something Im good meloncat! and you (let us not stray from topic but digress in RC&A)

♂

Jan 22, 08, 18:14 #86

daffy wrote:

Even the survivors (by the very name, survived) have lost something

I was just bein a smart@ss...

daffy wrote:

and you

Just fine. Noticed a few trolls, made my comments, the usual.

Foreigner4 wrote:

EU vs Russia war

The title should be "EU vs Russia: Will it Ever Happen"

That way, instead of arguing about it for pages and pages, we could just have a 1 reply thread. The answer, "No"

matthiasThreads: 4 Posts: 1,577 Joined: Jan 9, 08 ♂	Jan 22, 08, 18:18 #87
Daffy great post. this was just a hypothetical however though unlikely I believe its still a small possibilty. Hopefully not. But I agree that that's how the next generation wars will likely be fought..

♂

Edited by: daffy Jan 22, 08, 18:19 #88

El Gato wrote:

I was just bein a smart@ss...

I figured as much ;) but for the benefit of the uninitiated...

El Gato wrote:

Just fine. Noticed a few trolls, made my comments, the usual.

the usual indeed - stop feeding the trolls damn it!

Well, never say never old bean, highly unlikely and not what Europeans or Russians want certantly. In a theoretical war between the two - neither would win. Both would loose out to the america's and china's! (just as the USA did after WW2 when Europe was devistated, america was the only true superpower, it took Russia a little while to become a superpower after the war but Britain, France, Germany, Poland, etc were left for nought!

Similar would happen here. You'd have China and India, already huge and developing fast, poised to overtake US, EU and Russia already...a war would simply hand the world to them on a golden platter like the US after WW2...IMHO

matthiasThreads: 4 Posts: 1,577 Joined: Jan 9, 08 ♂	Edited by: matthias Jan 22, 08, 18:30 #89
Another good post. But hypotheticaly who would be in a better position Russia or EU excluding everybody else after the war between the two.

TopolskiThreads: - Posts: 44 Joined: Jan 22, 08 ♀	Jan 22, 08, 18:31 #90
matthias wrote: Another good post. But hypotheticaly who would be in a better position Russia or EU excluding everybody else after the war between the two. Maybe my thoughts are ignorant but how could Russia win against all of EU. Assuming all participated.

POLAND . The Unofficial Guide.	Unanswered \| Archives
POLAND . The Unofficial Guide.	"Polska" means "Poland" in Polish!	Witamy, Guest \| PF Members \| Gold Members

Home \| Unanswered \| Archives \| Random \| Statistics	Time in Poland: 03:46 / Feb 9
About Us \| Contact Us \| Rules, Privacy \| Poland Advertising	© 2005-12 PolishForums.com