/strong/
You are currently reading a thread in /int/ - International
Who /strongest European country/ here?
Not so fast, all European countries which are not the UK!
me and me alone, fucking fight me cunts
>>60247062
>A FUCKING RAMP
Can't make this shit up fäm.
Still better than ours, we're getting two (2) whole new subs in like 2022 or something.
America's lap dog
>>60247072
Been at the small foamy beers again, Ruben?
At least have the decency to wait until 6pm (British Summer Time)
>>60247170
i too can make meme images
>>60247951
Most impressive
>>60247951
>BRIGHT ORANGE tanks and jets
??
>>60248610
brazil doesn't have demo teams?
france > uk
better planes better submarines better missiles
and one more carrier
>>60248610
You know those people on /g/ who put blue LEDs on their PCs to make them run faster, green to boost the GPU, etc?
The Netherlands is the country version of that
Not even memeing.
>>60248836
Tip top kek mon frere
Enjoyy your decline
>>60247126
>America's lap dog
Yes I remember when we joined the Vietnam War and attacked Assad... oh wait...
>>60248836
All those things wasted on surrender.
>>60248836
>>60252372
Never trust a French poster!
French submarines have:
Much smaller payload than the British subs (almost half the payload)
No equivalent to Tomahawk missiles
Need to be refuelled after 10 years (lel)
Are slower
= "better submarines"
What makes them better?
>>60248836
God, so much misinformation in this image.
>>60247062
>still weaker than India
You don't even have a space program, you're not strong.
Enjoy your decline, abdula.
>>60253177
Memes aside, India has a horrible reputation for military professionalism.
Don't delude yourself by looking a globalfirepower meme stats.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_space_programme
![1040px-UK_Space_Agency.svg[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/Z6tR1bY.png "1040px-UK_Space_Agency.svg[1].png")
>>60253177
>You don't even have a space program
Really? The UK is a world leader in the satellite industry and there is a spaceplane being developed by a private company with government support.
Hey India guess what we're building by 2018
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-paves-way-for-uk-spaceport
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-31711083
>>60248610
maybe he intends to cover the battlefield in cheetos and doritos before fighting?
>>60253177
>weaker than India
What are you basing that on?
>>60253839
You see, being strong involves launching other countries' advanced technology (e.g. British satellites) using yesterday's technology (disposable rockets) while others (e.g. Britain) invest in the future.
I know we are on another category but still : hello europebros ! How's it downhere ?
>>60252812
>What makes them better?
I don't know lad.
But our subs dont have english equipement. But yours.... Ehm that's why is a good product, there is french tech on it.
>>60252812
That's pretty small sub desu.
>>60254673
French sonar, US cruise missiles, German hydrographic systems.... vast majority of the systems are British of course including the Rolls Royce nuclear reactors and Spearfish torpedoes
That is the difference between our countries. The UK puts quality and effectiveness first, even if it involves foreign companies, whereas France will compromise on quality in order to keep it as French as possible. It means British companies are forced to compete with the best in the world for government contracts while the French ones have less pressure
That's how you ended up in the situation where you have brand new nuclear-powered attack submarines that need to be refuelled after 10 years, and a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier that has to be refuelled every 7 years.
>>60254802
Not for a hunter-killer submarine.
The biggest subs are the ones which carry nuclear missiles. Russia does have the biggest, but you should compare those with the British Vanguard Class which is 16,000 tonnes submerged
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanguard-class_submarine
>>60252812
Those British subs are much sexier looking. Those side fins get me going.
>>60255073
>bad quality
Not really, or you'll explain to me why straya bought our subs.
I'm wondering if you lie because of jealousy, or you're a bit misinformed ?/
>>60255154
>16000 submerged
Come on.
>>60247062
>a
>fucking
>ramp
>>60252372
portuguese are stupid
Buy our missile, lads.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UarK8hQ7Plo
>>60255240
If you actually read what he said Pierre, rather than instantly turn to deflect all criticism.
He never stated that the Frog subs are bad, rather because of your national hatred of competition, you are in a situation that's less than ideal.
Isn't that ass sexy af? 38,000t ass I mean.
>>60255462
That is one fat sub.
>>60255240
>bad quality
Never said that. The French subs are good quality, just not AS good as the British subs.
>you'll explain to me why straya bought our subs.
I will, if you want.
Britain makes nuclear-powered submarines exclusively. They are tailored to the needs of the Royal Navy. The Australians can't afford nuclear-powered submarines, especially not something like the Astute Class.
The Aussies were in the market for conventionally-powered submarines. The French subs are sufficiently small that (according to the French officials...) they can be converted to non-nuclear propulsion fairly easily.
The Australians went for the French deal primarily because France is offering to do a lot of the work in Australia, and the politics of the situation makes that very attractive for the Aussie government.
Britain COULD have took part in the competition to supply Australia's new submarine but it would have been a waste of time and money. BAE Systems would have to design and build a completely new class of submarine JUST for export to Australia and lose most of the workshare to Australia.
>>60255225
Incredibly sexy.
>>60255462
What an arse on that thing. Bravo, Ivan.
>>60255581
>>60255507
Sadly, we utilized all of them except one and are building now these 24,000 t midgets.
>>60255706
It's a lot smarter to make them smaller with better systems and/or higher quantity. I think building the really huge ones was a bit of a mistake, Cold War dick-waving. Both the USSR and USA were guilty of that.
>>60255847
Well, the problem was we built subs but we didn't have missles for them :^)
Even for this Borey-class we finished developing that bulava rocket only few years ago but still the USA literally payed for utillizing all those 38,000 t monsters.
you could just say american military is best because you buy everything from them you cUcKs
>>60255970
I think you mean "decommissioned" rather than "utilised"
Utilising means to use something
>>60256143
Nah, I literally translated russian word "utilizirovat' "
They were cut and all metal was sold.
>be brit
>subcontract its nuclear deterrent to US
> America sold British nuclear secrets to Russia
What a /strong/ nation have you here britcucks
>>60252812
kek
>>60256253
Hmm I suppose the English equivalent to that is "scrapped"
>>60256313
>be perfidious albion
>get perfiddy'd by your son for bants
>[time skip]
>develop your own warhead and use US missiles for cost sharing and NATO integration
It is a good deal.
>>60256140
>buy everything from them
Not everything but okay, What's wrong with that? most western countries but stuff from America, they make good stuff, sorry that Poland is too poor to afford them, stay useless.
Also we're the 6th largest arms exporter, and BAE systems is the third richest defence company exporter.
>>60256140
Not really, and the buying thing works both ways. Something like 25% of the F-35B variant is UK-made, averaging over all 3 variants it's around 15%. You might think those are small numbers but then consider the scale of the US military, they are purchasing literally thousands of those fighters.
That is only one example. You know the newest most advanced ship in the US Navy, the Zumwalt Class? Guess where its engines come from.
Do you know what company develops the Electronic Warfare suite for the ENTIRE USAF F-15 fleet?
>>60248836
>Rafael
>>60256783
>tfw Fokker makes shit for the carrier versions but not for the A version which we're only getting
>>60256883
STRONK TOGETHER
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netherlands_Marine_Corps#UK.2FNL_Landing_Force
>>60256874
yes?
>>60256883
BAE and Fokker is a fucking meme company.
>>60256783
>f35
>>60257032
>has no stealth
>worse maneuverability than f-35
>loses to fucking phantoms in red flag exercises
Reporting in
>>60247062
Wanna invade like those nazis and frogs m8?
>>60247062
is that a ramp?
>>60256883
Carrier version is the least numerous but you can see what I mean by the scale. They're producing more of those F-35Cs than most countries have in their entire air force.
>>60257032
Where did you get that image from? Rolls Royce doesn't make the engines, they use the Pratt & Whitney F135 engine
Seriously at least do a basic fact check
>>60257083
ok
>>60257032
>[x] Nuclear Strike
But the F35 can carry nuclear weapons.
Why do frogs always have this habit of lying on graphs relating to Rafale?
>>60257203
>literally losing to an F-4
>>60256783
The F35 II is sexy as fuck.
>>60257296
rafale beat f22 in UAE so I let u imagine with the shitty f35
that moment when 15 countries cant make a better plane 40years later
>>60257308
You need missiles for it though.
Contact Norway for purchasing some.
>>60257508
Proof?
buy more f-35 pls
>>60257508
>rafale beat f22 in UAE so I let u imagine with the shitty f35
Explain.
Also if you think WVR matters over BVR, you are retarded.
>>60247062
Israel or french.
>>60257642
Buy NSM and JSM.
Soon.
>>60257508
>>60257702
>buying missiles
silly america got this shit
>>60248836
say that to my f35 irl and see what the fck happens t b h
>>60257534
We've got plenty of missiles deveploing in the pipeline my Norwaybro.
http://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/uk-complex-weapons/
Great article series on our missile future.
>>60257702
Fucking slow missile.LOL CIWS can easily destroy them.
>>60257702
Does the NSM have its own launcher?
>>60257784
Hahah, what the fuck was the point of that shit?
>>60257534
I heard the Norwegian missile is meant to be nice. But we're developing British missiles for our F-35s
>>60257850
having a little fun
>>60257840
Nippon-san, using missiles to take out incoming threats is a more accepted practise than using the CIWS alone.
>>60257850
making sure the catapult works
>>60257784
Is this Dutch Top Gear?
>>60257996
very flattering but theres no way our mod could afford a carrier
>>60257996
The truck is orange so clearly: yes, yes it is
>>60257831
I meant buy the only fifth generation long range precision strike missile in existence as per today. Please, we need buyers.
>>60257840
Good luck, your post means you don't know what NSM is at all.
>>60257845
I don't know, but as I understand it you can launch it on a lot of different launchers.
>>60257865
Yes, it's very good actually. I know many with no knowledge will banter itt, but they don't know. JSM will be even better though (I don't think it's ready yet), and it will be great for F-35.
>>60247062
>top left
damn those fighters are sexy
Buy some RBS 23 "BAMSE"
"The naming of the system received heavy criticism by Rune Andréasson through Svenska freds- och skiljedomsföreningen for using the same name as the pacifistic cartoon-bear Bamse, which is popular in Sweden."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dqmTpwa8iTc
>>60258092
Not as sexy as f-15
>>60257928
Using SM-3 is the chance to destroy ballistic missile, isn't?
>it's an /int/ /k/ hybrid thread
These are the best.
>>60258169
Nice try but your opinion is objectively wrong
f-16's are easily the most beautiful air planes in existence
>>60253177
http://m.timesofindia.com/india/India-faces-severe-ammunition-shortage-can-fight-war-for-only-20-days-CAG/articleshow/47209011.cms
/thread
>>60258285
Fine, then how about bae from behind the iron curtain?
>>60258324
A Vulcan still exists somewhere so not really
>>60258205
Yes, it is.
>>60258205
SM-6 has an active seeker specifically to BTFO incoming sea-skimming missiles
>>60258205
It's not very accurate yet.
>>60258387
>SM-6
>used for CIWS
?
>>60258247
We are armchair generals who think we know what we're talking about, like /k/, when we actually don't.
>>60258352
The rear radar phallus has always spoiled it for me
>>60258352
The original Delta wing and sexiest coming through.
>>60258169
meh, I like your 35 tho, it's so well-rounded and thick makes me regret ill never be inside her
>>60258679
>you will never make babbies with an F35
>>60258679
Looks extremely strokable.
>>60258679
>>60258749
We can get more lewd, we have the technology
>>60257534
We should do tbf
![F-35_Helmet_Mounted_Display_System[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/vSjCVIM.jpg "F-35_Helmet_Mounted_Display_System[1].jpg")
>>60258749
I refuse not to believe this is exactly what these helmets are for
>>60258840
What a time to be alive.
>>60258679
>makes me regret ill never be inside her
No shit.
Superior Swedish örlogsfartyg, named after örlogsstaden Karlskrona
>>60259067
Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought Norway's JSM doesn't fit in the F-35B variant
buy our LCS
>>60259211
what the fuck is this thing even
>>60253177
you have to be a pooperpower before you can be considered a superpower, pajeet
>>60259211
Helsingborg in front of Helsingborg
>>60259256
'no'
Because for the price of an LCS, you can get a full cream euro-frigate.
>>60259248
Why wouldn't it? I'm no expert, but isn't it fairly easy to fix if it doesn't?
>>60259304
The most glorious ship there is
Russia obviously.
The Swedish military is preparing a coup against the government..
>>60258518
Not a CIWS in the slightest, but your best bet to take out a sea-skimming anti-ship missile that's coming towards you.
>>60259365
The B has less space due to the Lift Fan which allows it to do vertical lift. Maybe you can put it on the wings but that means you can't use it in stealth mode. Anyway I'm pretty sure the UK and Norway are competitors in this missile class so there wasn't a chance of us buying it
>>60259441
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vLG2pxhJscQ
LMAO
>>60259498
'chillin on Gotland
>>60247126
potato famine
>>60259567
When in war you have to take the metro to move quietly and fast
>>60259528
>you can't use it in stealth mode
ehhh, there's no such thing as 'stealth mode', having things on the external pylons only adds some RCS to what is already a very stealthy aircraft.
>>60255458
I don't see how it's less ideal since our weapon industry is much wealthier than yours, first, and probably with better quality in some points.
>>60255581
That's my point : your industry is limited compared to france's. We can do everything, and with enough quality to surpass the germans and the japs on this particular case.
Otherwise, our missiles already made their proofs against your navy. Does yours ?
>>60259528
I think you're right about that UK will develop its own, and I fear US will too (I mean, it's the US of A). I just hope our missile is as good as it's supposed to be, and that countries will buy it.
>>60247062
france.
>>60257268
Because we love this fucking plane, he's (SEE !? I CAN'T EVEN SAY "IT" !) our weaponfu
>>60259648
"marching towards Rosenbad to hang the bastard"
just jk ofc säpo
>>60247062
>FUCKING TURBANS ON HELICOPTERS AND SHIPS
>A FUCKING RAMP
>FUCKING WINDOWS ON A TANK
YOU CANT MAKE THIS SHIT UP
>>60257032
>no nuclear strike capability
What? F-35 can carry the B-61.
>>60259663
Yes yes I know but you know what I meant
>>60259681
IIRC Australia is interested in buying it for their 'A's
>>60259736
Saluting the newborn prince - fuck the riksdag
>>60247951
>ORANJE MILITARY
>>60259810
>BRITISH NAVY
>>60259795
>russian sub can't handle the banter
>>60259897
Harsh
>>60259678
>I don't see how it's less ideal since our weapon industry is much wealthier than yours, first, and probably with better quality in some points.
Again, work on your reading skills and answer what is being said, rather than reply with a loosely related answer.
So you see nothing wrong with having to refuel your carrier every 7 years when America's is only required to refuel every 25 years? Same goes for submarines.
>>60259942
ayy lmao
>>60259962
F-35A
>>60257189
>>60259785
A baby you got there.
>>60260034
>So you see nothing wrong with having to refuel your carrier every 7 years when America's is only required to refuel every 25 years? Same goes for submarines.
Economical strategy, since we have multiple subs and a shit ton of nuclear stock, I don't see the issue.
Concerning the CDG carrier, it's old and does the job.
Please buy gun, perfect to kill russkies
>>60260108
I see now. Would you mind informing me of the main differences between them?
>>60259810
"I heard you were talking trash like we wouldn't find out"
>>60258324
mmmm
Swedish airforce is the strongest in the world, Gripen > anything else
>>60248836
>The French navy is literally half the size of the Royal Navy by deadweight tonnage
K E K
E
K
>>60260326
Superman's brother is a Royal Marine Commando. You're done for.
>>60260400
How can the rest of the world compete?
>>60260418
À FUCKING
R
A
M
P
>>60260286
>wheeled arty
JUST
>>60260299
F-35A: conventional take-off and landing. Uses regular runways like your typical fighter jet.
F-35B: successor to the Harrier. It's a jump-jet, so it can use much shorter runways (including flat-top ships with or without ramps) and land vertically. The larger engine it needs to do this means it has less range and payload than the others
F-35C: carrier variant. It is launched by a catapult, rather than under its own power. It requires either a full-length runway or arrestor wires (on a carrier) to land.
>>60260529
Archer is superior in all ways t b h
>>60259648
>that cuck-camo
>>60260286
>perfect to kill russkies
Does it shoot heroin?
>>60260585
I see. Why did UK choose B then?
>>60256368
Oh Pierre :^D
>>60260710
Well, it's not the "army" ;-)
>>60260771
Yes
>>60260237
Explain the 'economical strategy' of having to refuel your nuclear plants more often than your counterparts? Given the longevity of nuclear power is one of the reasons people use it.
Really, I don't see how you can riff on about French 'quality' when the production of CdG was an utter mess.
Your nuclear stockpile is irrelevant to what we're talking about.
>>60260814
Because we love vertical takeoff aircraft.
good thread
>>60260964
They always get hyper-defensive about Rafale.
>>60260529
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZlxDFRQ0KQ
SUPERIOR
>>60260958
But what is the advantage other that it looks awesome?
Swedish forces could invade the UK in a week
>>60260958
It won't take off vertically on a day to day basis because it uses too much fuel.
>>60260814
When we had the harrier, it could take off from tiny, unpathed runways to intercept Russian fighters which have entered UK airspace in WW3
I guess the F-35B could take off from fields and shit like that, but it seems like it wouldn't do it too well
>>60261214
Dunno about that Sweden.
>>60261207
>>60261214
They could try
>>60260814
Our aircraft carriers aren't equipped with catapults (although they can be installed in the future), so they need a jump-jet.
But another important reason is that the Royal Navy and RAF have lots of experience with using jump-jets especially at sea - the UK developed the Sea Harrier for example.
Britain developed and continues to like this type of fighter because it is ideal for expeditionary warfare. It is the only type of fixed-wing fighter aircraft which can land on/take-off from austere runways and forward operating bases where there are no full length runways (or they get destroyed in war).
Imagine a situation where the British Army and Royal Marines are fighting in some country halfway across the world. As they push inland, a fighter like the Harrier and F-35B can go with them even through unforgiving territory.
This isn't a capability most countries would need. If you're only interested in actual defence, it is quite useless. For an aggressive nation which likes to project its power it's a great asset
That is why the Americans are getting it for their Marines despite also having the carrier variant
>>60261243
>I guess the F-35B could take off from fields and shit like that, but it seems like it wouldn't do it too well
I can do that fine. They've tested it in austere locations in the States, dusty fields and such.
Reporting in!
>>60261214
This is true
>>60261289
>>60261345
And succeed
All I see is a eurofighter, a ramp and a f35
>>60261421
>>60261345
>>60261289
Prince Carl Philip will lead us to victory
>>60261377
Thanks britbro.
>>60261377
>I can do that fine. They've tested it in austere locations in the States, dusty fields and such.
fair enough
>>60261451
What do you mean by this Jeanne?
>>60261508
Hier kommt das swedishe polizie to fick england
>>60261421
>>60261508
>>60261585
good luck lads, haha
>>60247062
>European country
>strong
Is this a bait thread or something?
>>60261214
Deployed from where?
Swedish nationalism is on the rise. Fetch the horses.
>>60261705
Ah, yes here comes the durrr yank.
>>60261675
>>60261751
Gott straffe ENGLAND
Why do Swedes always brag about their Gripen, saying F-35 sucks and so on. Is it anything to it? Can Gripen actually compete, or are they simply being overly proud of their own production?
>>60261705
Never let them forget, lads
>>60248740
We do.
>>60261934
it gets the job done
t. my dad
He works for BAE and worked with Saab in Sweden for a few months
>>60261705
lel
>>60261934
To be fair it is very impressive that a country of 9 million people not only has its own fighter jet, and exports it successfully in large numbers (Brasil), but also has a large domestic defence industry in general
I definitely wouldn't say it's better than the F-35 though except for very specific areas
>>60261934
Gripen is a good option if you want some 4.5 gen capability without complex maintenance or high entry price. However, it certainly not in the same league as the F35.
However, as it turns out, buying the F35 was cheaper for Denmark than buying Gripen, this is where you hear most of the assblasting for Gripen vs F35.
>>60260964
>his face when a brit unironically doesn't like RAFALE
the strongest European country is whichever one happens to be sucking American dick the hardest.
France currently holds that position.
>>60262260
>his face when I fucking failed
>>60262221
I don't care about how a small nation did this and that, I only care about the machine's quality. What areas are those?
>>60262321
Oh, so Britain is stronger than France...
>>60262321
Norway(the actual state) is currently giving Hillary Clinton a lot of money. We are the stronkest then after the election?
>>60262370
Nope. UK/US military relationship has declined recently. France is been our goto lapdog for the last 3 wars we tried to start I believe.
>>60262321
>meme opinion
>>60262328
Did you intend to come off as being rude?
>>60262445
Thanks osam.. I mean Obama
>>60262411
Norway/US... along with other scandi countries relationships are important to us because we want to basically use your territorial rights to claim the arctic for the west when it melts.
>>60262445
Lies.
>>60262455
No, I did not. Excuse my untinentionally being rude. I just want to know at which areas Gripen is better.
>>60262321
We're third stronkest!!!1
>>60262445
>France having your back during a war
This seems unwise.
>>60262445
>Nope. UK/US military relationship has declined recently.
You really shouldn't buy into Obummer's retardation, the UK is your closest defence partner.
>>60262584
>Fought in Libya
>Fought in Mali
>Fighting with us in Iraq
>First to agree to all out war in Syria
>>60262712
based
>>60262370
Since forever.
>>60262782
BLOW ME
>>60262866
Silence, vassal
>>60262712
You don't need to suck American dick to hate ISIS. Come on.
Funny thing about that is we started bombing in Syria at the request of the FRENCH President
>>60262867
>BLOW ME
The national pastime of all French"men". Seriously, why are French males so effeminate?
Why do the French seem surprised that UK is stronger than them? It has been that way since Napoleon.
>>60262922
william 3 isnt scottish reeee
>>60262950
Prob beacause your gov didn't want to piss off the pakis by doing it for murica.
>>60262975
I'm not, desu.
>>60262984
They're not, th
>Norwegian flag
Oh, ok, it's just the "France used to be kinda strong, but now, it's just a powerless and poor country" guy
>>60258169
Nothing is sexier than the F16
>>60262867
>>60262922
wtf i hate france now!
![Grand_Strategy,_War_of_the_Spanish_Succession[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/E5DgPCr.png "Grand_Strategy,_War_of_the_Spanish_Succession[1].png")
>>60262984
>It has been that way since Napoleon.
Since the Treaty of Utrecht 1713, surely
H, hello.
Are we European yet? It is merely a kind inquiry.
>>60263074
pleb pls
>>60263095
I hate you
(I love you)
>>60263074
This must have looked so futuristic when it came out in the 70s
France, Greece, and Italy.
>>60263124
wtf I hate (love) france now!
>>60263074
this
h
i
s
>>60263050
You know, I really don't understand why you Americans say such brain-dead things as factual.
>>60263116
Not European, but please feel welcome to post.
>>60263116
You are welcome in this thread, Mehmet. Please make yourself comfortable.
t. OP
>>60263172
EVERYBODY LOVES FRANCE.
>>60263072
Not what I said, but you are not at all as strong as UK, I just hope you can see past your French pride and realize that.
>>60262984
French army was considered the best in 1939. The UK army was way smaller, but professional.
>>60263240
>considered
Then why weren't they the best when it mattered?
>>60263240
>hides behind our wooden walls
Navy, the only real branch
>>60263317
The French are cowards that can't stomach a real fight.
>>60263317
That´s another question. France would have steamrroled Germany if they would have used better tactics.
>>60263240
>French army was considered the best in 1939
And look how that turned out...
>The UK army was way smaller, but professional.
We've never been strong because of our army anyway. Our strength is/was always based on our political stability, economy, innovation, and of course the Royal Navy
In fact I would argue that when we're having to raise a huge land army, we've seriously fucked up.
>>60262984
France is actually stronger than the UK
>pic related
>>60260863
I don't have the english skill for that, sorry.
But finally, we have more nukes, thus we are more powerful.
FIN
>>60263409
From a brit, it's kinda hilarous
>I'd better build a coalition, France is spooky, today !!!
>>60247062
poland
pic related
>>60263442
>France would have steamrolled Germany
>>60263124
>>60263172
>>60263409
My ancestries fought Europe.
You fought... What again ? The sea ?
>>60248740
DELET THIS
>>60263650
why?
>>60263482
If you use globalfirepower and take it seriously, you are literally retarded and have no place posting in this thread.
>>60263492
Nuclear weapons are irrelevant if we're discussion conventional capabilities.
