US + it's rotten Tail ( I mean Nato countries 🤣 ) Vs China + Russia + India + Brazil = Who will win the Tarrif WAR ?
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
Elessar · 31-35, M
Nobody
And those four you mention will start bickering with one another the moment you remove the one common enemy lol (minus maybe Brazil, as they seem to be the only who successfully managed to keep their authoritarian primadonna out of the government and restore actual democracy). BRICS has no credibility as an alliance, that's why it's 5 countries vs NATO's whooping 32.
And those four you mention will start bickering with one another the moment you remove the one common enemy lol (minus maybe Brazil, as they seem to be the only who successfully managed to keep their authoritarian primadonna out of the government and restore actual democracy). BRICS has no credibility as an alliance, that's why it's 5 countries vs NATO's whooping 32.
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
Elessar · 31-35, M
@Sayana lmao, US isn't going anywhere, their doctrine is that if they go down they'll make sure the rest of the world follows them to the grave.
Even if hypothetically the US decided to "retire" and let the rest of the world sort itself out, you've got ~500 French and British nukes working as deterrence for what remains of NATO while more nuclear and non-nuclear capacity is built. Europe's economy is big enough to build and sustain a significant arsenal.
Even if hypothetically the US decided to "retire" and let the rest of the world sort itself out, you've got ~500 French and British nukes working as deterrence for what remains of NATO while more nuclear and non-nuclear capacity is built. Europe's economy is big enough to build and sustain a significant arsenal.
Sayana · 22-25, F
@Elessar USSR had over 27000 nukes in 1990 still it collapsed, Ukraine had over 5000 nukes in 1990
So, USA will collapsed in the same way, or in the way how 9/11 had happened, This time 10-15 millions people will go to the GOD !
BRICS ? Russia have over 5K nukes and did you forget Russian " Dead hand " system ? 🥹🥺
Also, China can wipe out USA any given time, + India also have nukes and ICBMS
China will have 1000 nukes in next 5 year and India can make over 500 nukes.
Those 32 Puppies ( NATO ) can't SAVE USA from it's " Nemesis " 🤷♀
So, USA will collapsed in the same way, or in the way how 9/11 had happened, This time 10-15 millions people will go to the GOD !
BRICS ? Russia have over 5K nukes and did you forget Russian " Dead hand " system ? 🥹🥺
Also, China can wipe out USA any given time, + India also have nukes and ICBMS
China will have 1000 nukes in next 5 year and India can make over 500 nukes.
Those 32 Puppies ( NATO ) can't SAVE USA from it's " Nemesis " 🤷♀
Elessar · 31-35, M
@Sayana USSR didn't really go anywhere, Russia still retain a lot of those nukes. If it wasn't for the sh*tshow in Ukraine, Russia would still be perceived as the world's second military power. If the US "collapses" in a similar fashion, you'll likely see something similar, those nukes won't magically disappear, they'll just transfer to a new entity. For all practical purposes it makes no difference.
Ukraine (unfortunately?) never controlled their nukes, or they wouldn't have surrendered them, nor be in their current situation.
Which is the reason why nobody sane of mind goes to war with Russia (without them attacking first, I mean) and why the excuse that they need to conquer Ukraine for "security" reasons is total BS. What I'm saying is that if BRICS move war against NATO minus the USA, the remaining 31 members still have enough capacity to make sure nobody wins.
Neither China not India's logistical capacity to sustain a war in a remote part of the world was ever tested, the US machine on the other hand has been thoroughly tested. Testing that capacity by going against a powerful entity like NATO or even the US alone would be so monumentally stupid that of those countries you mentioned the only one capable of actually doing it would be only Russia lol.
China and India also have their own disputes, they aren't the "big friends" that you think they are.
Ukraine (unfortunately?) never controlled their nukes, or they wouldn't have surrendered them, nor be in their current situation.
Which is the reason why nobody sane of mind goes to war with Russia (without them attacking first, I mean) and why the excuse that they need to conquer Ukraine for "security" reasons is total BS. What I'm saying is that if BRICS move war against NATO minus the USA, the remaining 31 members still have enough capacity to make sure nobody wins.
Neither China not India's logistical capacity to sustain a war in a remote part of the world was ever tested, the US machine on the other hand has been thoroughly tested. Testing that capacity by going against a powerful entity like NATO or even the US alone would be so monumentally stupid that of those countries you mentioned the only one capable of actually doing it would be only Russia lol.
China and India also have their own disputes, they aren't the "big friends" that you think they are.
Sayana · 22-25, F
@Elessar See, USA has never fought against any powerful country, US has fought with " Vietnam" Iraq, Afghanistan, Syeria etc....Also, If China and India can not deploy their all assets near to USA then similarly USA can't move it's all assets to south China sea ...( In case China Invades Taiwan )
If USA fights against India in Indian ocean then USA will suffer badly, Similarly if USA fights against China in south China sea ( Near Taiwan ) then USA will have a heavy loss.
And what you talking about USA's strength ? USA has a smaller Navy than to Chinse Navy and in case of WAR, most of the US's Aircraft carrier will be hit and sunk by Chinese Missiles, as they will fire those missiles from the Mailand of China.
If USA fights against India in Indian ocean then USA will suffer badly, Similarly if USA fights against China in south China sea ( Near Taiwan ) then USA will have a heavy loss.
And what you talking about USA's strength ? USA has a smaller Navy than to Chinse Navy and in case of WAR, most of the US's Aircraft carrier will be hit and sunk by Chinese Missiles, as they will fire those missiles from the Mailand of China.
Elessar · 31-35, M
@Sayana Regardless its hardware and logistics were tested, China's so far was not. If anything Vietnam should teach everyone that military might alone isn't enough to win a war, as well as Afghanistan (both for the US and Russia/USSR) and Ukraine (for Russia). I'd like to think that Europe, India, China, etc. are smart enough to have learned from other countries' mistakes without having to repeat them..
The same works in reverse too, hopefully India and China are run by more rationale people than the average pubescent teenager that treat military might as a d*ck measuring contest.
US navy is only smaller in terms of number of ships, but raw numbers alone don't mean anything, now more than ever it's tech and not numbers that win battles. A fleet of 35,000 fishing vessels gets absolutely obliterated by a fleet of only 300 dreadnoughts, for saying. Just an example of course, not saying that the Chinese or Indian navy employ fishing vessels, just that the US Navy so far, fortunately or unfortunately depending on one's PoV, remains at the top.
The same works in reverse too, hopefully India and China are run by more rationale people than the average pubescent teenager that treat military might as a d*ck measuring contest.
US navy is only smaller in terms of number of ships, but raw numbers alone don't mean anything, now more than ever it's tech and not numbers that win battles. A fleet of 35,000 fishing vessels gets absolutely obliterated by a fleet of only 300 dreadnoughts, for saying. Just an example of course, not saying that the Chinese or Indian navy employ fishing vessels, just that the US Navy so far, fortunately or unfortunately depending on one's PoV, remains at the top.
Sayana · 22-25, F
@Elessar No matter what, I tell you one thing here. BRICS is basically a group for trading and business amongst it's member, Its not a military origination like NATO
But Why USA is much worried about BRICS ? Because, BRICS nations have 40 % world population and almost 32 % of World's GDP, So in case BRICS introduce it's own currency then it will weaken the $$ US dollar and Once it happen it will weaken the USA.
I was having an argument with a British Guy here and he thinks that UK is a still a superpower and UK can defeat China in a WAR
I told him, let alone China, even India can beat UK in a WAR if NATO or USA don't help the UK.
But Why USA is much worried about BRICS ? Because, BRICS nations have 40 % world population and almost 32 % of World's GDP, So in case BRICS introduce it's own currency then it will weaken the $$ US dollar and Once it happen it will weaken the USA.
I was having an argument with a British Guy here and he thinks that UK is a still a superpower and UK can defeat China in a WAR
I told him, let alone China, even India can beat UK in a WAR if NATO or USA don't help the UK.
Elessar · 31-35, M
@Sayana The US couldn't care less about BRICS, it cares only about China. If they cared about losing the primacy of the dollar they wouldn't have elected the orange guy to do all what is in his power to devalue it, without even needing other countries to do anything.
No country can realistically predict who wins a war. Russia and everyone else assumed that Ukraine wouldn't have lasted 3 days, and yet they're practically in a 3+ years stalemate as we speak. Vietnam as you mentioned didn't result in a victory of the USA. The war in Afghanistan wasn't won by the Soviets. The war in Ukraine didn't result in the predicted 3 to 15 days collapse of Ukraine - all the opposite, what's collapsed is Russia's reputation as a military power.
China likewise could completely fail if it hypothetically attacked the UK, especially because an attack on the UK would almost certainly get the rest of Europe involved (even in a scenario in which the USA leaves NATO), not even Russia paradoxically would want China to acquire territory at its west lol. So it really depends. A war started by the UK against China and fought in China? Absolutely not. A war started by China, against the UK, and fought in the UK? China's ability to win it is far from guaranteed. Besides, the UK has its own autonomous nuclear arsenal so even in the worst case scenario for them, they'll make sure to drag its attacker(s) with them to the grave, and nobody wins. China, likewise, would do the same if the roles were reversed.
No country can realistically predict who wins a war. Russia and everyone else assumed that Ukraine wouldn't have lasted 3 days, and yet they're practically in a 3+ years stalemate as we speak. Vietnam as you mentioned didn't result in a victory of the USA. The war in Afghanistan wasn't won by the Soviets. The war in Ukraine didn't result in the predicted 3 to 15 days collapse of Ukraine - all the opposite, what's collapsed is Russia's reputation as a military power.
China likewise could completely fail if it hypothetically attacked the UK, especially because an attack on the UK would almost certainly get the rest of Europe involved (even in a scenario in which the USA leaves NATO), not even Russia paradoxically would want China to acquire territory at its west lol. So it really depends. A war started by the UK against China and fought in China? Absolutely not. A war started by China, against the UK, and fought in the UK? China's ability to win it is far from guaranteed. Besides, the UK has its own autonomous nuclear arsenal so even in the worst case scenario for them, they'll make sure to drag its attacker(s) with them to the grave, and nobody wins. China, likewise, would do the same if the roles were reversed.
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment