[ SECRET POST #2978 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2978 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.


__________________________________________________



13.


__________________________________________________



14.


__________________________________________________



15.


__________________________________________________



16.













Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 05 pages, 107 secrets from Secret Submission Post #426.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

Re: 'May you live in interesting times' in-fucking-deed

[(Anonymous)]

I'm skeptical of this argument mostly because people made very similar arguments in the past and were proven wrong.

For instance it was asserted before 1914 that the commingling of the industrial systems of France and Germany made it impossible for them to go to war because it would be too unprofitable.

I think there are other reasons it's very unlikely, though - principally the effects of nuclear weapons.

Re: 'May you live in interesting times' in-fucking-deed

[(Anonymous)]

Nukes are definitely a big one.

I think another key point, though, is that (and I promise I'm not trying to be a jingoist asshole in saying this) no country is really on the level of the United States. (I promise I'm not trying to be all MURICA here).

When you look at France, UK, Germany during WWI -- I think you'd agree that they were nations of comparative strength.

When you look at Russia vs. the US (because the US is a huge part of NATO) it's an ENORMOUS gulf that exists.

The US has a military budget of $640 billion. Russia's is $88 billion. The US also has a MUCH, MUCH more deployable military with 10 aircraft carriers (with 2 in reserve) to Russia's 1.

The largest air force in the world is the US Air Force. Know who the second largest is?

The US NAVY.

And in modern wars, the person with aerial control wins.

I'm not saying the US is unstoppable, but the difference in military power makes the situation REMARKABLY different from 1914.

Re: 'May you live in interesting times' in-fucking-deed

[(Anonymous)]

Aircraft are the new wooden battleships (and aircraft carriers have long been known to be nothing more than very large targets that are primarily only suited for peace-time use), obsolete. The winners of the next war will be the person with the most drones and missiles. It is the HMS Dreadnought race all over again. Advances in technology have made all previous military status irrelevant and reset the field.

Re: 'May you live in interesting times' in-fucking-deed

[(Anonymous)]

Ummm...you realize the US HUGELY dominates in terms of drones too right?

http://cdn.static-economist.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/full-width/images/print-edition/20111008_FBC721.gif

Re: 'May you live in interesting times' in-fucking-deed

[(Anonymous)]

And the UK had more Dreadnoughts than Kaiser's Germany.

Re: 'May you live in interesting times' in-fucking-deed

[(Anonymous)]

Yes, but not to the point where it's a fucking joke.

Look, I'm not saying this to be an asshole, but the US spends a retarded amount on its military. Like it's almost LITERALLY retarded because you'd have to have some sort of mental deficiency to spend that GODDAMN MUCH on your military.

I think the only advantages that Russia has is its tanks. And even then, its hardware is still decades behind what the US can do.

This simply isn't a matchup between two equal contestants. And I legitimately don't think that Russia wants it to be -- Russia is just looking to maintain its sphere of influence. It doesn't want to go toe to toe with the US. And even if it did, it couldn't.

That's not to say the US wouldn't get hurt (it would, pretty badly too given how poorly Americans tolerate casualties nowadays) but that Russia isn't playing in the same league is not even a question.