Russia vs. the EU

So to snowclone the Russia v. China, and Russia v. US, how about Russia vs. the European Union?

So, any thoughts? I chose EU instead of 'Europe' because there's been some debate about whether Russia is European or not.

Also, because the EU is effectively a econo-political link between most European nations.

Firstly, a European Army - feasible?

edited 17th Aug '11 3:51:41 PM by Inhopelessguy

The EU, simply because they have more money and the US would probably come to the rescue because we're stupid and/or because Britain needs our help.

You wouldn't need a European Army to win, the individual nations' armies and NATO would suffice.

This is just going to be "Cold War-gone-hot," but updated to reflect the complete lack of money and will in Russia, which makes it a much easier scenario to run...

edited 17th Aug '11 3:54:06 PM by USAF713

I am now known as Flyboy.

Assuming no US intervention, my money's on Russia.

Well it certainly helps America to assist in the war. Russia has few friends so, helping the EU doesn't lose any friends.

Regardless, I think it's a pretty good standstill war. EU needs someone else to punch at Russia with them or else it'll just be a horror ground in Eastern European states as millions die in a back and forth conflict.

It would be EU with marginal US support, I imagine, against Russia.

Unless China joins.

That would flip everything on its head.

I am now known as Flyboy.

China would join with the EU. I mean, they've made about a few billion euros into Europe (inc. the UK, you damn Tories) as investment, and I don't think they'd want to see that wasted.

That would put the US at a crossroads: we hate China, and we aren't too fond of anyone in Western Europe that isn't Britain. It would be a really dicey situation.

I am now known as Flyboy.

You seem to constantly ignore all the trade going on between EU and US.

^ Trade is not a deterrent to war. The factions of the World Wars were trading with each other very heavily and they still fought.

Yeah, pretty much.

After China, the US is the biggest trading partner for the EU. Including skilled workers.

Indeed. Eliminate the competition. The world is a dangerous place. Why should we play fair with China when they don't want to play fair with us?

I am now known as Flyboy.

@Tom: But they didn't have truly globalized economies like we do now, and they had incredibly at-odds political systems.

If you don't like a single Frank Ocean song, you have no soul.

And nothing has truly changed in this regard.

Russia doesn't have the logistics to push really far. They would be in hostile territory from their political borders (or Ukraine's, maybe), so their forces would be quite tired at the time they reach Germany.

At this moment, well, I'm going to cry for those russkies: the German forces are amongst the best-equipped on Earth, while the French Army has been specifically training during the last 60 years for tank killing in a European conflict. Brits would come quite quickly, at least because they're the only one allowed to kick French behinds and get away with it. The air superiority would be without any single shred of doubt for EU when the fight will be in Poland, and Russian forces will probably bleed and die there.

On the naval side, the fight would be more difficult, since there's only one carrier to put some heavy firepower (all the other EU carriers are with Harriers, which wouldn't stand a chance against Russian ship-mounted air defense), and our best bet would probably be the Brit and German attack subs (the Brit subs are quite effective, with their awesome Spearfish, while I wouldn't like to fight against the German SSK, which can stay underwater quite long thanks to their anaerobic engines and are really silent). All the other navies would be there to block the GIUK and prevent a new Battle of Atlantic (and I hope Brits Typhoons would be able to prevent Russian Backfires to send a Macross Missile Massacre on our CVN, it would be nice).

After the destruction of Poland (and the Russian forces inside it), you'd probably expect some daring strikes of our air forces inside Russian territories, but there wouldn't be any dream of counter-invasion. That's a lesson France and Germany learned, and learned hard.

The real deal would be, IMO, on the naval side of the conflict: prevent superiority in the North Sea to avoid bombing raids from the Russian, and keep the French and British Boomers safe. As long as they're clean, the conflict can only end in stalemate, with most Russian conventional forces destroyed at the end, and Poland/Eastern Germany ruined.

Of course, if the conflict is drawing for too long, expect the Germans to build a few dozen nukes to remind Russia WHO remains a badass. Not that they would use it in a first strike, but just to be sure.

Aftermath: expect a Fire Forged EU which would get back to high level of badassitude and probably some US-size militaries.

But no way Russia could, in their current state, steamroll Europe, unless we really, really screw up (I mean, more than in 40).

As the size of an explosion increases, the number of social situations it is incapable of solving approaches zero.

And to add to that — expect strikes from the NATO Forces in Afghanistan into Russia, especially by the Strike Aircraft that are already based there.

Keep Rolling On

I wouldn't bet on it. Germany, the UK and France have more available manpower combined than Russia, have a faster growing population, are richer, more politically stable and I think they have also better military hardware.

edit: what rufus said

edited 18th Aug '11 5:43:53 AM by honorius

If any question why we died/ Tell them, because our fathers lied -Rudyard Kipling

I'd forget them quite quickly. Russia wouldn't allow this kind a forward base, and a few flights of Backfires firing anti-shipping missiles at our airbases would knock those down really quickly. We don't really have a lot of anti-air defenses there, IIRC. The best thing there would be to move all our AC back in Europe really, really fast (first days of the war), and hope they'll only divert ground forces there (and then, it would be one awesome battlefield: NATO, Russia and Afghans fighting a massive Free for all in the Empires' graveyard, with Osama ROSFL (rolling on the sea floor laughing)).

And don't forget that France is the only country there having an official First Strike policy, which can somehow make army commander hesitate before going too far ("Oh, what is that nice radar contact? What do you mean, it is a nuclear-tipped ramjet missile coming on my tanks?!".

edited 18th Aug '11 5:47:26 AM by RufusShinra

As the size of an explosion increases, the number of social situations it is incapable of solving approaches zero.

^^ Yet their standing forces and reserves are pathetically tiny compared to the Russians. (and in the case of the Germans, horrifically inexperienced since the days of the Second World War)

I wouldn't count on the vaunted "technology imbalance" when there's less than 3000 tanks across all 3 nations combined. (Russia can field over 30,000 of various models in short notice)

edited 18th Aug '11 5:45:22 AM by MajorTom

Actually Russia's populace is way smaller than that of the EU and it is even grower smaller. A "We Have Reserves" wouldn't work for them, at least when talking about the demographic aspect.

If any question why we died/ Tell them, because our fathers lied -Rudyard Kipling

You have to bring these tanks on the frontlines, Tom. In the Varsaw Pact era, Russia could move them easily, owning the countries. But now, they'd need to cross more than 2,000 km just to get in Germany while fighting and being bombed by Typhoons, Tornadoes, Rafales and Mirages, which isn't a nice thing. And then, they'd be facing armies which were trained especially to destroy these tank assaults. My dad was in an anti-tank infantry unit, and they knew the organisation of shock armies, right to the company organisation. They could almost name the enemy division commander just by looking at the structure of the assault (not at this point, of course, but you know what I'm meaning).

Euro armies are anti-tank, from the grunt to the air forces. We expected the zergling rush in the Fulda gap, and we trained and equipped accordingly. Without the logistic bonus of the Varsaw Pact, Poland and Eastern Germany would be the worst nightmare a russian tank division could expect. Killing grounds at their finest.

And even if they managed to break through the lines of Leopards II, Challengers, Leclercs, AT minefields, MILAN missiles, combat choppers, there are still two official nuclear powers here and at least one that can get its nukes in less than a month if needed.

EU cannot win and invade Russia. But Russia cannot, in its current state, invade successfuly EU.

edited 18th Aug '11 6:01:35 AM by RufusShinra

As the size of an explosion increases, the number of social situations it is incapable of solving approaches zero.

I once again will say that Russia is royally fucked unless China joins on its side (not going to happen) or on the EU's side (which might split the Allies...). Otherwise, US-backed EU will fuck Russia's shit up royally.

I really doubt this will ever happen, though. Russia knows it can't win this fight. I honestly think their sabre rattling is just a half-hearted attempt to keep the EU out of its business, not actual threats...

edited 18th Aug '11 7:33:51 AM by USAF713

I am now known as Flyboy.

It is exactly the sort of the thing the Leopard, Challenger II (and Challenger aand Chieftain), Leclerc (and AMX-30) and even the M1 Abrahams were explicitally designed for — war on the North German Plain.

And logistics were never the Soviets or Russians strong point, as it was.

@ Shinra: I recognise that. My dad was in a British AFV Repair Unit in Germany at probably the same time. We also knew the exact routes they'd take and had pre-prepared explosives at bridges, just in case.

edited 18th Aug '11 7:36:39 AM by Greenmantle

Keep Rolling On

@Tom: No, you don't know what you are talking about. There is no great rilvary between facism, communism, and democracy like there was in the 20th century. Now, we have a few remnants of communism that are more or less changing, and dictatorships that can be easily contained. Iran nd NK are the only enemies nowadays.

If you don't like a single Frank Ocean song, you have no soul.

I actually agree with Tom, at least so far as Russia winning. Russia has more men than Britain, France and Germany combined. We might be able to draw it to a stalemate initially, but if we couldn't counterattack into Russia... well, you cannot win a war without going on the offensive at least once.

edited 18th Aug '11 9:24:45 AM by GameChainsaw

The term "Great Man" is disturbingly interchangeable with "mass murderer" in history books.

Russia has manpower, but the EU has the backing. The US is going to join in their favor, whether it makes sense or not, and that means they get American naval firepower and maybe even troops. Russia loses at that point, and/or it goes nuclear...

I am now known as Flyboy.