| |
Main Forum Page | Start new Thread | Edit your AD | Search ForumSoviet era Fighters and Bombers V.S. Rest of the World fighters (non USA)
Monday, November 14, 2005 (10:24 PM)Posted by
Jugoslavo (5)
Edit | Soviet era Fighters and Bombers V.S. Rest of the World fighters (non USA) | | I think that if a war had began on the Soviet Era, and it had involved most of the European countries, Soviet bombers and Fighters would have destroyed most of Europe and owned the sky. Whats your opinion? |
|
Posted by
Sukhoy (488)
Edit | RE: Soviet era Fighters and Bombers V.S. Rest of the World fighters (non USA)
Posted: November 15, 2005 (6:17 AM) | | In Soviet era Europe was defended by NATO I mean USA. Europe had no good weaponry at that time. |
|
Posted by
JSF_fan (48)
Edit | RE: Soviet era Fighters and Bombers V.S. Rest of the World fighters (non USA)
Posted: December 12, 2005 (2:58 AM) | | I tend to disagree. Sweden, France and the most part the major European countries were quite good with weaponry. Although they are generally 5 years or so the latest equipment that the USSR and the US was producing their equipment was very capable. Western Europe in conventional warfare would have been no easy fight for the USSR. |
|
Posted by
Sukhoy (488)
Edit | RE: Soviet era Fighters and Bombers V.S. Rest of the World fighters (non USA)
Posted: December 12, 2005 (3:14 AM) | | I respect your opinion, but I ask you to give some examples for good weaponry - west Europe weapons from 70'-80' or even earlier. |
|
Posted by
JSF_fan (48)
Edit | RE: Soviet era Fighters and Bombers V.S. Rest of the World fighters (non USA)
Posted: December 12, 2005 (3:18 AM) | | British Lightning, Leopard 1, saab 35 and 37, tornado was quite good, challener 1, all the american stuff they bought was good too, the French stuff was crap (that is a personal opinion, I don't like the French, they are terrorists in my opinion and yes i have proof). |
|
Posted by
Sukhoy (488)
Edit | RE: Soviet era Fighters and Bombers V.S. Rest of the World fighters (non USA)
Posted: December 12, 2005 (3:22 AM) | | Proof France is a terrorist country or so that. |
|
Posted by
JSF_fan (48)
Edit | RE: Soviet era Fighters and Bombers V.S. Rest of the World fighters (non USA)
Posted: December 12, 2005 (3:24 AM) | | Rainbow warrior bombings in 1985, French agents attack a greenpeace ship in New Zealand waters only killing the one person but that is still a terrorist attack. Lets say France got nuked (come on Putin please press the button) its party at my place. |
|
Posted by
Sukhoy (488)
Edit | RE: Soviet era Fighters and Bombers V.S. Rest of the World fighters (non USA)
Posted: December 12, 2005 (3:32 AM) | | USA did more and behind called terror. Former CIA said that. They put cement in children' milk - cubans children, and more and more. For France was necessary to have nuke. |
|
Posted by
SenFreebie (13)
Edit | RE: Soviet era Fighters and Bombers V.S. Rest of the World fighters (non USA)
Posted: March 6, 2006 (00:34 AM) | | JSF fan, if you're from the USA listen to this VERY carefully. In the US war for independence 90% of the gunpowder used by the colonies was supplied by the French. 3 in 4 troops in the last battle were French. Most of the guns, training and logistics were supplied by the French. As for terrorism, define your meaning of this word. Do you mean 'using terror as a means to influence people'. If this is what you mean provide an example of French use of terrorism. The boarding of Rainbow warrior was not terrorism but closer to piracy, something that the US and its allies are also quite familiar with. Can you name an example of terrorism that is close to the firebombing of Tokyo in the 1940's. How about dropping the A-bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. These 3 acts are among the best known acts of terrorism in the history of mankind. These acts terrorised the Japanese, a very proud people and played some part in their surrender. This is the very definition of terrorism yet it is taught in US text books as a positive act. Name a country that France has bombed to the ground (killing at times 50,000+ per day) and I will believe you that they are terrorists. |
|
Posted by
fiddler (14)
Edit | RE: Soviet era Fighters and Bombers V.S. Rest of the World fighters (non USA)
Posted: April 2, 2006 (6:06 AM) | | getting back to the original question.i think europe would have been flying the red flag after 6 months.it would have come down to attrition.the soviets vastly outnumberd nato in every respect,to say nato had no decent weaponry is wrong.wat about the v bombers,buccaneers,saab drakens,lightnings,harriers,nimrods,jaguars,phantoms,cheiftan and leopard tanks,swiftsure attack subs,type 42 destroyers,ark royal etc etc etc. |
|
Main Forum Page | Start new Thread | Edit your AD | Search Forum Home | Book a Flight | Flight Prices | Special Offers! | Price Guarantee | Price a Flight | - Order Process | Calendar | Zero-G Flights | Gift Certificates | Hotels | Spb. HotelsWhy FlyMiG.Com? | Aircraft | In the Media | Contact Us | Questions | Flight Stories | About Us | MAKS 2003 | MAKS 2005 | Updates Avia X-change | Aviation Forum | Cool Stuff | Affiliates | Mail Lists | iPod | PostCards | Search | Links | Pilots
|
Honda CRX Si | Manuals | |  | Copyright © FlyMiG.Com™ 2002 - 2024 |
Home
