>The UK couldn't singlehandedly-destroy Russia in a week
TOP KEK SLAVSHIT!!!
Oh believe you me, us British are ITCHING for a war with Russia. We will fucking ANNIHILATE your dirty country. There wouldn't be a square meter of Russian soil that has running water, electricity, or petrol that isn't on fire, once our airforce and navy is done bombarding your defenseless country. Then, our army boys (we'd send the muslims and other mongrel races first) would swoop in, raping your women, and killing EVERY slavshit shit they see. When the Britain is done with you, we will have committed acts of genocide. Of course no one is gonna do shit about it.
>>28078642
Took your tea with a bit too much sugar today did we?
Last pack of royal commandos I spoke with told me your nation was cutting back its ground forces numbers to "home soil defense only" levels and is planned to augment its capabilities by relying more heavily on NATO, UN, and US relations.
Dont worry grandpa England, your super successful son America will take care of you in your old age.
>>28078642
Eh, I guess it'll work as bait. 5/10, average at best. And if you're gonna use pasta, make it more humorous.
>>28078642
>meter
Ya blew it son.
>>28078642
>muslims and other mongrel races
>killing every slavshit
Pick a side OP.
>>28078948
its an /int/ meme I think
>>28078642
Oh wow, pretty strong power fantasies there brit.
>>28078642
>>28078948
Some politicians are actually contemplating scrapping Trident.
>L M A O
Smhtbqhf
"the Britain"
Dunno why I laughed at this.
Either way, stop talking shit.
Leave this Brit alone guys. I like him !
I'd toast. A pint with ya !
Best shit thread of the month?
Op, UK currently is less relevant than France and about as relevant as Italy when it comes to military strenght.
So no, a war *alone* against Russia would be hilarious. They don't even have planes for ASW, Russian subs could have free game from week 2, after the entire small UK sub fleet was wiped out.
Russia is a shadow of the former union, but its still in another league, up with China, and the US is way over them.
>>28081105
Justify the existence of the British Trident system.
>America might not be there for us all the time!
Then Britain shouldn't have US missiles, it should develop it's own. Otherwise it shouldn't be buying US missiles when the USA will jump to their aid.
Now that the RAF is operating in syria, WW3 seems a lot more likely
>>28078642
same copypasta as earlier today.
I'll give the same reply i gave then.
>>28078642
>here wouldn't be a square meter of Russian soil that has running water, electricity, or petrol that isn't on fire
In russia that's called tuesday.
>>28082149
Because being a nuclear power gets you a seat at the big kids table.
>>28078642
BIDF on full shilling mode after the limeys wanted in on the frogs' little flexing show
>>28078642
>>28081223
>Op, UK currently is less relevant than France and about as relevant as Italy when it comes to military strenght.
Not true. The Royal Navy is the 2nd or 3rd most powerful navy in the world.
>>28082636
Then fuck trident, switch to B61 nuclear bombs. Still technically a nuclear power.
>>28078642
American here. Don't expect us to be involved.
>>28078642
>"ALL except England, and they won't last very long"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Qc8jJ0TjSY
Well this site has Russia second and UK fifth http://alltoptens.com/top-ten-naval-forces-in-the-world/
And this one has Russia third and UK fourth http://nationalinterest.org/feature/the-five-most-powerful-navies-the-planet-10610
>>28078642
>chinooks on a boat
my dick
If there was an arms race, the UK would surely win. If it were a confrontation as is now, nothing much would happen other than a few ships from either side getting sunk.
>>28082693
>Navy is least funded branch of US military
huge power gap
>Royal Navy is 2nd or 3rd best in the world
kek
>>28078948
That's incorrect. Numbers are dropping, but the fact that they're investing heavily in aircraft carriers, navalized helicopters, and the F-35 shows their intent to massively improve force projection capabilities. They don't need an enormous standing army, they just need enough to get in to the fight no matter where it may be.
Think about it. The only things they're going to have to worry about militarily for the forseeable future are the Falkland Islands, Cyprus, Gibraltar, and Ascension Island. With those four points they can extend force projection to anywhere on the globe.
You're just memeing right?
UK would be annihilated by Russia.
>>28079342
Why not go with both, and start invading Chechnya?
>>28078948
Don't worry sharia law will take over soon. Nothing like Mohammed being the most common name for babies there.
>>28084237
The ONS released the figures for 2015 in August. Muhammad was in fourteenth, Mohammed 27th, Mohammad 56th. The only other notable name is Ibrahim, in 91st place.
Compare that to Jacob, Noah, and Joshua all above Muhammad; Joseph, Samuel, Daniel, and Isaac above Mohammed; Benjamin, Zachary, Luke, Matthew, David, and Elijah above Mohammad. Then you've got Nathan, Jude, and Gabriel above Ibrahim. And those are only Biblical names.
Yeah, there's a Muslim diaspora as a result of a colonial empire, but suggesting that every single baby is now called Mohammed is dumb. Stop shitposting. Even though they're turning in to a pretty hardcore atheist nation like the Nordics, they still hold on to their Christian traditions.
>>28078948
Don't they have to pay the french to maintain their nukes? How keked Britain is at this point?
>>28078642
Er, that Brit is high.
This Brit is on tea and he says Phiffle.
Now, move on, nothing to see here.
>>28082149
Because independence is valuable, I thought as an American you would be all over that concept. We use American missiles because it was cheaper than building our own, not because we couldn't.
>>28083879
Once the pair of QE class boats are put in to service and deliveries of the F-35 pick up the UK will easily have the second strongest navy. As of right now, they're in fifth or sixth.
>us
>china
>russia
>france/japan/india
>>28078642
I'm mean, the challenger is better then any current Slavshit tank, and our navy and air force are pretty good. But we could defiently not win a war against Russia by ourselves
t.Scottish person
I guess the United British Wasteland would totally out-nuke the Russians.
All the Russians have is to attack the UK at 4:59PM sharp, and they would take over the country without firing once.
>>28085687
but there are more slavshit tanks than ammunition for the chalgeger
>>28084876
>Because independence is valuable
Then we should have the short-mid term capacity to design and produce more of our own missiles, as France does, instead of relying on the United States.
Trident is either an expensive waste of time, or not independent enough. Britain is being shown up by the French - who actually have an independent deterrent.
>>28085841
I know, that's my point
>>28085987
could scotland win a separatist war against england?
>>28078642
>There wouldn't be a square meter of Russian soil that has running water, electricity
So, you gonna sabotage the utilities in Moscow and a few other major cities?
>>28085876
How is Trident not independent? Are you one of the idiots that thinks the UK has to ask the US to launch?
All this talk of war makes me glad I live in a shithole in Lincolnshire.
>>28078642
People in the UK don't even have the guts to protect their own people getting beheaded in broad daylight, I'm they are totally itching for total war with Russia. kek
>ITT, Bongs still not realising they have no empire anymore
>>28086020
we done it in the Jacobite rebellion, but our kek 'leader' decided to return to Scotland.
basically in short:
>Scottish Jacobite defeat all of Englands army's on the way to london
>10 miles outside of london a English spy tells 'bonny' prince charlie (a kek) that there is an massive English army occupying London, and attacking London will see a Scottish loss
>All the scottish generals tell prince charlie that the spy is lying and there is no English army as we've already defeated them all left
>Prince charlie doesn't listen to his generals, and instead listens to the english spy
>prince charlie tells his army to return to scotland
>the jacobite army encounters 3 English rear guards and are wiped out
>prince charlie runs from the battlefield and returns to italy
basically we it would be a Scottish monarchy if we didn't have some kek Italian leading our armies.
Also, most of the British army is made of Scots. So to answer your question, yes, we would beat england
>>28086043
>Are you one of the idiots that thinks the UK has to ask the US to launch?
No, although I recognize that launching with US antipathy to the idea would not be prudent. Could they stop us? dubious. Could they stop providing us with any support or further missiles? Of course.
A nuclear deterrent should deter all foes, potential and actual. As unlikely as it is that the UK and USA will become enemies, it's better to be on the safe side and ensure the full production process for weapons as strategically valuable as nuclear ones remains domestic.
France has, historically, had the right idea.
>>28086138
how was prince charlie different from robert the kuk?
>>28086138
>most of the British army is Scottish
Aren't Scottish regiments having to bring in Fijians and other commonwealth soldiers to fill the gaps because there aren't enough Scots joining?
>>28078642
>Oh believe you me, us British are ITCHING for a war with Russia.
You're one of those blokes who thinks he's a hardass 'cause he once cliked like on a "Britain first" fb post, aren't you? I bet you've got a framed picture of Nigel Farrage getting sucked off by Paul Golding on your bedside table haven't you? Yeah, you have. I bet you stick your mum's electric toothbrush up your bum at night and pretend you're getting pegged by Jayda Fransen.
>>28078642
>a ramp
It's almost like /k/ doesn't realise an obvious bait thread when they see it.
This same thread happened with Norway only just yesterday.
Chances are it'll happen to Sweden or something tomorrow.
>>28086138
SNP voter detected.
>>28086194
>A nuclear deterrent should deter all foes, potential and actual.
This is not realistic.
>Could they stop providing us with any support or further missiles?
This doesn't really affect the UK strategic arsenal except on an extremely long time line. They are perfectly capable of maintaining both the missiles and the warheads, as long as the political will exists.
>>28084991
>QE Class
>Runs on diesel
Are britbongs still in WWII?
>>28086564
It's electric, it's not like it has a honking V12 or something under there. Nuclear would have been much more expensive and not really necessary considering they'll need to refuel everything else in the battlegroup anyway
>>28086561
>This is not realistic.
In the case of a small country like the UK that simply has to be 'too costly', how so?
>>28086607
It is expensive to develop the huge range of capabilities designed to stop all potential threats. It would be beyond the capability of the US at this point.
>>28086643
Out of interest, who has the better nuclear policy in your view - France, or the UK?
>>28086594
Electric powered by diesel. I guess I just have an irrational hate for diesel combined with a nuke fetish. Hopefully the brits can make it work.
>>28086076
>People in the UK don't even have the guts to protect their own people getting beheaded in broad daylight, I'm they are totally itching for total war with Russia. kek
Good luck with the daily shootings btw
