|
The Real World Discuss real world issues from love to life to politics. |
View Poll Results: Who will Win if these country's go to war? | |||
The United States | 46 | 74.19% | |
Russia | 5 | 8.06% | |
China | 11 | 17.74% | |
Voters: 62. You may not vote on this poll |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
09-19-2010, 09:56 AM | #231 | |
"Who Dares Wins"
Nation: rebellion Current Wars | Foreign Aid Discord name: TheRebel Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 248
|
Re: Who has the most powerful military?
Yeah that is true Killer04.
Going back on topic, this quote sums it all up: I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones. - Albert Einstein.
|
|
09-19-2010, 10:28 AM | #232 | |
Brutal Despot
|
Re: Who has the most powerful military?
If the Germans had completed an atomic bomb project with more than one warhead, they would have won the war. They had the ballistic missile technology to launch them into London and other key allied cities in Eurasia, so that would have been the end of that. And it wouldn't have been long before America got hit as well.
|
|
09-19-2010, 11:46 AM | #233 | |
Legion's Resident AppleJack
|
Re: Who has the most powerful military?
I don't think that if the Germans had 1 warhead by 1945, it would of made a damn difference. If they nuked London, America is still charging from the West and Mother Russia is bitch slapping from the East. If they Nuked Moscow, that's only going to bolster the Soviet's resolve and make their charge go faster. If they nuked Bastogne, it's gonna be shit no one cares about. Hell, nuke Washington and that's only going to anger more Americans. You're gonna have to need more nukes than that.
|
|
09-19-2010, 12:08 PM | #234 | ||
Brutal Despot
|
Re: Who has the most powerful military?
Quote:
They would have needed at least a half dozen, to really be effective, but with most weapons, more is better. And keep in mind, if the Germans can convince the US/UK to pull out or face a blasting like the world had never seen, they could have then focused on the russians, which might have made a difference, given that they have nukes at this point. And I'm not arguing this would/could have gone down, I'm just following up on the premiss of what would have happened if the Nazis got nukes pre 1945.
|
||
09-19-2010, 12:52 PM | #235 | |||
Dinky Doo
|
Re: Who has the most powerful military?
i dont think they had the technology to launch one at london. yes they had superior rocket technology but look at the US first atomic weapons. they were big ass weapons that weighed a lot because uranium and plutonium are so dense. also V1s and V2s were that accurate or reliable. there were many explosiond on the launchs pads and you basically pointed them in a general direction and hoped you hit something important.
__________________
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
09-19-2010, 01:11 PM | #236 | ||
Brutal Despot
|
Re: Who has the most powerful military?
Quote:
German rocket tech wasn't "great" by today's standards, although the V2 is the basis of American designs for many decades to follow, but with a nuke, like, how accurate does it need to be?
|
||
09-19-2010, 01:17 PM | #237 | ||
Legion's Resident Chinaman
|
Re: Who has the most powerful military?
Germans reverse engineered crashed UFOs.
tis true.
__________________
Quote:
“If a single member of a family eats, the whole family will not feel hungry." - Ave Legio!!!!
|
||
09-19-2010, 02:32 PM | #238 | |
Brutal Despot
|
Re: Who has the most powerful military?
Die Glocke, german anti-gravity "thing"
If it came out that it was a UFO, I'd believe it. If they said it was a hoax, I'd believe that too.
|
|
09-19-2010, 03:13 PM | #239 | |
Legion's Resident AppleJack
|
Re: Who has the most powerful military?
So, who'd win? U.S.S. Missouri v.s. R.F.S. Pyotr Velikiy, one on one, somewhere in the North Atlantic, no additional support from both sides, ship to ship per se. Starting range is outside the maximum ranges of both ship's weapons. The Armament of the U.S.S. Missouri are: Nine 16-inch guns, 32 Tomahawk missiles, 16 Harpoon Missiles. For defense, she has a thick armor, ranging from a couple mm's to over 20 inches in some places. She also has 4 Phalanxes for defense. The Armament of the R.F.S. Pyotr Velikiy are 20 SS-N-19 Shipwreck AShMs, Ten 533 mm torpedo tubes and 1 duel 130 mm cannon. For defense, she has light armor around vital parts, 96 S-400 SAM w/ ABM and ACM capabilities, 192 9K311 SAM w/ ABM and ACM capabilities, 44 OSA-MA SAMs, and 6 Kashtan CIWS(each with two 30 mm 6-barreled gatling guns and 32 9M311 missiles). The Missouri is conventionally powered and has a maximum speed of about 31 knots and a range of 23,960 km at 15 knots. The Pytor Velikiy is Nuclear Powered, has a maximum speed of about 32 knots and an essentially unlimited range at 20 knots.
|
|
09-19-2010, 08:48 PM | #240 | ||
Nation: Brandenburg Current Wars | Foreign Aid Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: CCSU, New Britain, CT
Posts: 84
|
Re: Who has the most powerful military?
Quote:
The Germans had rockets instead of planes, but rockets were very much less accurate. Killer is right on the deficiencies of the V1 and V2s. The V1s were often shot down, first of all. They were nothing more than fast pilot-less planes with larger payloads. V2s were extremely inaccurate, often landing in the countryside. Also as Killer notes, early nuclear weapons were huge, far larger than bomb payloads on missiles. The B-29s that dropped the bombs each carried one, and nothing else. Put one on a missile and that thing would nose-dive into the Channel. And this is assuming that that V2 worked properly (some glitched and malfunctioned). A plane, at least, can guarantee you a hit on the city, in clear weather. The V2 couldn't give that by a long shot. To add to all these difficulties (as if they were not enough), Germany most certainly wouldn't have had enough nuclear bombs to waste them on misfires and mistakes and just plain misses. If you've only got a handful of bombs, and one or two miss entirely... well crud, you're in some hot water now. Also, nuking Moscow? How? The Germans were hundreds of miles away from Moscow by 1944, it was out of range of their missiles. Same only moreso for Washington. No, plane was the only feasible method of delivery for primitive bombs, and Germany was pretty much a ground-only power by that stage. Addit: Jacky, you know the Iowa BB's have been retired for almost a decade now, I believe, right? That said, probably the Soviet ship. The Missouri, I think, was designed more to assist landing operations/give fire support for land operations than naval warfare. It's why it kept the big guns - mobile and deadly artillery floating offshore providing more of a punch than missiles can.
|
||
|
Tags |
military, powerful |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc. |