Author Topic: Soyuz Sovetskikh Sotsialisticheskikh Respublik Debate (Read 28026 times)

Scarecrow63 · « **Reply #20 on:** March 18, 2008, 08:07:45 PM »

If you would take time to understnad peoples posts before you type, maybe you'd catch that I did not say that WW2 killed the USSR, I said the economy failed because an emphasis was put on military manufacturing that couldn't be maintained.

And yes, that is a very large reason, even if countries had cooperated, their economy would still have failed

Isamu · « **Reply #21 on:** March 18, 2008, 09:33:55 PM »

the soviet military was not as big as people thought. it was truly only really capable of homeland protection. not an invasion like nato was sure of.

Scarecrow63 · « **Reply #22 on:** March 18, 2008, 09:52:44 PM »

Cause those thousands of tanks had no offensive capability.....

Isamu · « **Reply #23 on:** March 18, 2008, 11:45:28 PM »

no they didn't have enough tanks to invade. they didn't have the numbers.

Enceladus · « **Reply #24 on:** March 18, 2008, 11:54:46 PM »

They had more tanks than the American's had. They would of easily of taken over Europe(if they didn't break down 1km past Moscow due to their low quality

) However the nuclear weapons that either side possessed outweighed this possible advantage.

GrndAdmrlPellaeon · « **Reply #25 on:** March 19, 2008, 07:54:48 AM »

I believe many of theirs were faulty.

Meyer · « **Reply #26 on:** March 19, 2008, 09:31:10 AM »

which were faulty? tanks or missiles? I agree. If USSR had wanted they could have propably invaded the rest of the Europe. After all USA is behind the Atlantic. and USSR had the largest in the world. in terms of tanks, airplanes, helicopters, manpower. you name it. Only thing they propably were lacking in numbers was the navy. but that doesn't really matter.

Isamu · « **Reply #27 on:** March 19, 2008, 05:49:13 PM »

the russian tanks were quite good. but the fact is they didn't have the numbers to invade. tanks don't do a whole invasion by themselves. it takes so many resources to invade. the ussr was not capable.

Dane Kiet · « **Reply #28 on:** March 19, 2008, 08:34:08 PM »

Meyer, wtf, navy doesn't matter? Let's ignore the fact you can use a navy to flank your enemies, you would still have to deal with the fighters and bombers launched from carriers out at sea. Also, with a navy you can blockade harbors and choke off supplies. You can't win a continental war without the navy.

Scarecrow63 · « **Reply #29 on:** March 19, 2008, 09:29:27 PM »

Quote from: Isamu on March 19, 2008, 05:49:13 PM

the russian tanks were quite good. but the fact is they didn't have the numbers to invade. tanks don't do a whole invasion by themselves. it takes so many resources to invade. the ussr was not capable.

Do you ever have any idea about what you're talking about? Of course they had the numbers, they were quite capable to launch an invasion, do you honestly think the former SUPERPOWER had no power?

Meyer · « **Reply #30 on:** March 20, 2008, 01:45:20 AM »

Quote from: Dane Kiet on March 19, 2008, 08:34:08 PM

Meyer, wtf, navy doesn't matter? Let's ignore the fact you can use a navy to flank your enemies, you would still have to deal with the fighters and bombers launched from carriers out at sea. Also, with a navy you can blockade harbors and choke off supplies. You can't win a continental war without the navy.

I don't think navy would play a heavy part if USA and Russia would fight. Especially if that fight would be in Europe. If in Asia maybe then. but even then it would the Air Force that matters not the navy. Air force could destroy the navy with relative ease. And I also like to point out that US navy isn't the most technologically advanced and best in the world. it's just largest. and those carriers aren't very good when subs can just shoot torpedoes to them.

Dane Kiet · « **Reply #31 on:** March 20, 2008, 03:04:04 PM »

Then you still need to engage them, you can't ignore them. Also, if you are talking about modern times (1960s on), navies have missiles they can launch from sea and use to destroy targets. Ignore the navy and you are screwed.

Meyer · « **Reply #32 on:** March 20, 2008, 04:41:20 PM »

missiles can also be launched from land and air.

Isamu · « **Reply #33 on:** March 20, 2008, 06:00:58 PM »

but you can't get quick response fighters from anywhere but a carrier if you are fighting on another continent.

vadereclipse · « **Reply #34 on:** March 20, 2008, 07:12:04 PM »

WRONG
countries like the us have air bases all over the world.

Scarecrow63 · « **Reply #35 on:** March 20, 2008, 07:13:46 PM »

Quote from: Meyer on March 20, 2008, 01:45:20 AM

And I also like to point out that US navy isn't the most technologically advanced and best in the world. it's just largest. and those carriers aren't very good when subs can just shoot torpedoes to them.

Then what navy is more advanced?

strike23 · « **Reply #36 on:** March 20, 2008, 07:46:02 PM »

the U.S. definatly has had the most advanced navy throughout the past half century or more. we were the first with Aircraft carriers, the first with nuclear powered subs, etc.

Isamu · « **Reply #37 on:** March 20, 2008, 09:00:28 PM »

umm the ussr had the first nuke powered subs. but right now the usa has the most powerful and tech advanced navy

Scarecrow63 · « **Reply #38 on:** March 20, 2008, 09:20:20 PM »

No, the USS Nautilus was the first nuclear-powered submarine, check your facts before you post em

Isamu · « **Reply #39 on:** March 20, 2008, 09:28:50 PM »

really? thats interesting. ussr propaganda still exists then

Author Topic: Soyuz Sovetskikh Sotsialisticheskikh Respublik Debate (Read 28026 times)

strike23