Quote (ofthevoid @ 10 Oct 2019 15:49)
They do but if a war broke out between Europe & Russia i think both sides would really try to not use nukes. I think Russia would deploy nukes if China tried taking over Siberia.
And as far as nukes, yes they both do but Russia's nuke game is on par with the US, while the Euros have fallen behind. For every one nuke Europe can muster Russia can send 10. Just as an example i think it was 2012? ish Russia announced state of the art nuclear powered submarines that are extremely difficult to detect. Each one of these subs can hold 12 nukes and there's 12 of these subs. That alone is enough to hold China at bay for many years to come.
you're just digging your hole deeper and deeper. by that 'logic' it wouldn't matter if iran got a couple of nukes, america and israel have so many more...
and again, the whole scenario is ridiculous to begin with, but hey, i guess whatever it takes to make excuses for the emperor's latest decision, huh?
Quote (ofthevoid @ 10 Oct 2019 16:00)
I doubt it. Look at the pseudo alliances that are forming. Essentially all of the countries that are our enemy are in a way banding, at least in UN votes it seems that way.
China & Russia are friends because common enemy, Russia & Iran are somewhat friends because common enemy, and now we are pushing on Turkey so they are moving towards that alliance. I mean obviously it's really hard to predict things but hypothetical alliances as of now could be China+Russia+Iran+Turkey+NK plus whatever other nations we decide to go after versus the NATO alliance, Japan, SK etc. You don't want to push too hard on countries like Turkey so they end up joining the other side.
China would be fine with ceding Europe to Russia, while China takes ownership of south Asia, Oceania, Australia. I know this is pie in the sky but fun to think about some of these scenarios.
more baseless uninformed fantasising. maybe google the belt and road initiative and tell me again how THE economic powerhouse of the next couple of decades would just cede control over one of the largest economies to a significantly smaller and already overstretched partner?
notice how irrational and outright stupid all the parties involved would have to behave to make your transparent attempt to rationalise trump's blunder seem even remotely 'reasonable'?