BF2S Forums Major war

Mekstizzle wrote:

agent146 wrote:

Mekstizzle wrote:

Lol

In the case of a massive WW3 conflict. What would be the point of needing more infantry? Walk out into the field, KABLAMMO, nuclear fireball. Everyone dies instantly. Rinse and repeat until everyone is dead.

That's the good thing about nukes. They prevent this kind of shit from happening. I pray that all the Major countries keep nukes forever, and that there will never be a way to fully stop a nuke from hitting its target. It's the only way you'll prevent full scale WW2 style conflict.

ya but i prefer ww2 style is more then "send nukes to enemy- receive enemy nukes- winner are the last one standing."

Thing is nukes are so dangerous that nobody in their right mind would use them in fear of getting some sent back. Mutually Assured Destruction has pretty much prevented what would've otherwise been certain war between the US and the Soviet Union.

"nukes are so dangerous that nobody in their right mind would use them in fear of getting some sent back.'


Except for Islamic nations now days!

Hard to really say. Given our technology and superior firepower I would guess that it would take quite a big war for the draft to ever be reactivated, and I personally don't see that happening in my lifetime. Null vote.

It depends--if it were the democrats, sure, we'd all get shipped off, they're inept at understanding how wars work. It isn't just manpower, which the US military has in abundance, it is the industrial capabilities, and a major factor is the skill at arms of the troops. When a government drafts, it should be only at the last resort, once a draft is implemented, a government is diluting raw men with professional soldiers--not good. These raw men are also not prepared for the full psychological effects of battle--also not good, it is not good at all forcing people who might be totally against the war to fight which would be very destructive to the war effort all in all.

I cant stand reading OPORD's

trackstarr wrote:

SmkenRez wrote:

aint we at war now with no draft
btw wouldnt need a draft if we got invade i hope and belive every American would defend the US.
p.s. if you dont like America GET THE FUCK OUT or DONT COME HERE!!!!!!

We are not fighting a conventional war right now
we don't know who the enemy is, kind of like Vietnam.

=Nukes are a terror weapon, and we do not want to launch nukes for the fact that there will be a strike back.
We would still have the need of infantry to hold captured land.

I believe we not have a draft
because most of us will be pissed off on a attack on the U.S.

I know what a conventional war is but I really dont know if you would consider any war the US has been in the last 60 year to be conventional warfare. I would like to think that the US has been using conventional weapon but not conventional metheds but with some of the weapons they have now its hard to say. there are lots of smart people thinking new shit up. this is a really food for the brain becuase the American people on the whole are not told the whole story till about 30 years later in most cases by then its to late to really do anything about most of the time. i could be wrong i have have been know to be from time to time.

Last edited by SmkenRez (2007-07-30 21:51:41)

Comrade Ogilvy wrote:

Mekstizzle wrote:

agent146 wrote:

ya but i prefer ww2 style is more then "send nukes to enemy- receive enemy nukes- winner are the last one standing."

Thing is nukes are so dangerous that nobody in their right mind would use them in fear of getting some sent back. Mutually Assured Destruction has pretty much prevented what would've otherwise been certain war between the US and the Soviet Union.

"nukes are so dangerous that nobody in their right mind would use them in fear of getting some sent back.'


Except for Islamic nations now days!

Ttttttottally Dude!

i hope not cause im screwed