🫸🫷
You’ve already got my region of England highlighted, so there I suppose! I could work from home xD
If your a civilian you want to be on the US front, if your a soldier you want to be on the Russian front.
It seems most people get it, but I don’t - Care to explain?
Americans are better at following the laws of war, but are also more efficient at waging war.
Removed by mod
Idk man, the beheadings, crucifictions and other genocide in Ukraine seems quite distasteful too
I agree, but we haven’t seen the depravity that will be encouraged by the new fascist leaders. I am desperately hoping that getting rid of Medicare will piss enough military people off that they won’t defend him.
VA benefits are distinct from Medicare (which is distinct from Medicaid). Cutting Medicare (the one for old people) isn’t going to do much to active service members. Nor, I think, will cutting Medicaid (the one for poor people).
I agree not directly, and while these people may be severely stunted in empathy, they do have it for those in their immediate circle. If their parents lose their money and health, they may care.
Not certain. These ghouls are able to contort anything into anything it seems.
Correct. It’s the cuts to the VA that’ll piss them off. The Medicaid cuts will piss them off because it’ll impact their families.
Well, glad you spit that out,feel better? Want a glass of water?
Americans are better at following the laws of war
You think the Trump admin won’t actively seek to degenerate the US military to the level of the orcs?
Romanians be like: at the beginning or at the end of the war?
This map forgets that the US have direct access to bases in NATO countries.
Trump could just send troops in the open to the bases, and then turn around on the local forces.
US taking over NATO countries will not be a Normandie style sea landing, they would break out of our own bases having disabled them first.
And they have a kill switch for a lot of NATO tech
People coming up with scenarios like that forget that the US would have huge supply lines to keep those bases going while the other country is literally right there. And it is not as if you would need to besiege a modern military base for months to starve them out.
While it’s inaccurate to pretend the US would just steamroll the EU in a land war in the EU, we also shouldn’t pretend like the bases wouldn’t be problematic. Everywhere the US operates requires huge supply lines, so it’s not the absolute deal breaker it would be for most nations.
Starting with places to land and manage supplies would be a big advantage.
The biggest issue would be that usually they use the bases to house troops during the lengthy process of getting them into place for deployment, so there would be a lot of questions about how to actually move the people over fast enough, but getting the supplies there would be relatively routine.There’s no way the US could take or hold Europe without an aggreable civilian population. Given the differences in expenditures, military size, experience, and developed tools and logistics there’s also no real way any European nation is going to be able to effectively stop them. Basically a significantly worse Vietnam type situation, from the perspective of both sides.
The EU has 500+ million population. Do you you think that the few thousands of american troops in Europe can fight against that? Even if the EU had no military, it would be an impossible fight. And the EU has a lot of military, vastly outnumbering american military stationed in Europe.
What?
Population means very little when we have to fight tanks, boats, planes and missiles.
We have few military weapons outside of military bases, the US only needs to take control of a few bases to cripple us
Population means very little when we have to fight tanks, boats, planes and missiles.
Those things cant automatically teleport to european soil. Aircraft carriers can only do so much and they also cant teleport. Numbers are still relevant, especially when backed by existing european military. Morale is also relevant.
Europe is a giant place, with shitload of people, that have a strong desire to defend against invaders. Look what happened to Vietnam or Ukraine. As long as you have a large enough group of people, with decent equipment and morale, you can do great things.
You do know that the US maintains a supply of tanks and equippent in many countries on their bases the world over?
If you have one tank, it is easier to get another one.
Do you think european nations dont have any tanks?
We absolutely do have tanks, really good tanks, but we don’t have recent combat experience with using them, sure we have run exercises with them, but the US have active combat experience using their tanks.
You’re years out of date
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-eurostat-news/w/ddn-20240711-1
Are you from the future?
Close enough. Especially if you add Norway, Switzerland and the UK.
Well, since my whole country is already coloured Red, i’m guessing there’s not a lot of choice.
Had to check if Dutch or Russian
Well, technically, there’s a small part of Limburg that remains free, but since we don’t really consider that area part of the country, it still counts.
Britain needs to ramp up their navy again! BRITANIA RULE THE WAVES ONCE MORE!
Wake up the Dutch and Spanish too
It’s time Portugal to rise once more
Oh no, we were too loud and woke up Belgium too. Quick Congo, run and hide!
Made me laugh
Leopold is back?!
Reborn as the Rwandan president, Paul “I don’t know if my army is currently seizing Goma or not” Kagame.
The dutch have different problems rn and the spaniards i belief given up on their dreams of a spanish ruled sea.
(Fun fact that i just HAVE TO tell. I got to see the original battle plan maps from the spanish armadas battle against the english near Portsmouth, in the Portsmouth Naval Museum in 2023. They take them out to display under special light only every 50 or 80 or so decades the historian there told me. It was soo cool!!! And i had a real big autism hyperfocus with adhd hyperactive moment!!! To think i almost didnt go there if my boyfriend didnt take me!)
How close could you get? Was there a smell?
Ah sorry i didnt take a picture of them. But they were in the building where its all about Admiral Nelson. In the last room. I’ll ask my boyfrirnd if they took any pictures
Update: no they reminded me that it was forbiden to take any pictures at all of them Buuut i have found this nice vehicle that we saw in Portsmouth
Litterly up close. Only a glass panel seperated us. I’ll look threw the pics i took if i maybe took one. It was forbiden to take with light. And it wasnt very bright in the room
The closest I ever got to something that old was a contemporary copy of the US Declaration of Independence; that’s brand new compared to what you saw.
I own a bullet from the 17th-18th century and well being in a roman city, you cant build anything or dig anywhere without first giving archeologists the front run at digging.
Are they fighting each other or just hitting all of Europe in a pincer movement?
Why not both?
Full Molotov Von Ribbentrop.
I’m a manufacturing engineer specialized in machining exotic alloys and complex parts, even though I have changed career a few years ago I have experience in manufacturing complex military parts.
So I would probably be in a factory trying to produce as much military equipment as possible.
Kind of same, I would get send back to H&K most likely
This comment has been edited for privacy. The message was visible for the duration of activity on the post.
It really bugs me that I’m “in the same boat”, actually.
Like, if they needed a guy to just man a watchtower or something I’d volunteer the shit out of that. I’m pretty powerless when it comes to other things though.
I read it as “fellow embryos” at first
Tough question, defend my homeland from the historic genociders trying to finish the job and end up drone bombing senile old men glued onto mules to form human wave cavalry charges is my ancestral duty. Then again the option to sit around in the beautiful france countryside and wait in a bush near the fake mcdonalds for americans.
Since its the north of France, I gotta say eastern fronts work from home is more attractive.
What would Russia want with Vosges I wonder. To answer your question, probably Belgium. At least I can contemplate death with a good beer sliding down my oesophagus.
I guess US. More likely to get blown up, but at least the weather is nicer.
Russia can’t defeat the US in conventional warfare, but is much-more-comparable from a nuclear aspect. So Russia has a significant incentive to use nuclear weapons.
I’d guess that the US probably has a shot at actually getting a first strike off versus Russia. So the US has a significant incentive to use nuclear weapons.
Anyone intending to make serious use of nuclear weapons has very little reason to hold back if they expect a high likelihood of the other side responding massively. So they’ve got a significant incentive to go all-in.
I think that there’s a pretty good probability that a major war between Russia and the US of the “only one of us is walking away from this” sort goes very nuclear very quickly.
If Russia or the US launch nuclear weapons, over 90% of the world population will die over the following 10 years. However, global warming would be solved.
Nuclear winter solves global warming
https://www.navalgazing.net/Nuclear-Winter
Even using the most conservative numbers here, an all-out exchange between the US and Russia would produce a nuclear winter that would at most resemble the one that Robock and Toon predict for a regional nuclear conflict, although it would likely end much sooner given empirical data about stratospheric soot lifetimes. Some of the errors are long-running, most notably assumptions about the amount of soot that will persist in the atmosphere, while others seem to have crept in more recently, contributing to a strange stability of their soot estimates in the face of cuts to the nuclear arsenal. All of this suggests that their work is driven more by an anti-nuclear agenda than the highest standards of science. While a large nuclear war would undoubtedly have some climatic impact, all available data suggests it would be dwarfed by the direct (and very bad) impacts of the nuclear war itself.
90% of people being dead and the other 10% being pre-industrial is what’ll fix global warming, we don’t need nuclear winter for that.
The direct effects on the world of a nuclear war between the US and Russia isn’t going to include killing 90% of the world’s population.
It will if we decide to be dicks about it
You’re right. It won’t be 90% of the world population, but it would definitely be more than 90% of the countries involved (e.g. NATO, Russia, and China). As far as the world population, people in countries of the southern hemisphere might have more chances at surviving, but with geopolitics changed that drastically with an impossible to resolved food shortage, things could become chaotic pretty quickly. Don’t argue with me. Here are the sources I based my opinion on.
-
Kurzgesagt video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LrIRuqr_Ozg
-
Their background sources: https://sites.google.com/view/sources-nuclear-winter
-
Russia’s entire military budget is somewhere in the same order of magnitude of what the US spends just on maintaining its nuclear arsenal, so no, they are not comparable there either.
Removed by mod
inb4 you get dropped by a drone, or dysentery
