Will Ward vs Kovalev be on par with Louis-schmeling in terms of historical significance?

Amongst major powers I agree. The danger is some two bit hooligan using them on his neighbours ...

 

i work with the boats

 

Oh yeah definitely, you want to prevent the likes of North Korea acquiring Nukes with their tyrants. It could very quickly go wrong with such small time, irresponsible nations. The problem is that these "Greens" wish it for major powers. Seriously idiotic, at least now it's loud and clear that ****ing with each other is a bad idea, remove that and a war now could potentially break out much easier and if it does, nukes would end up being used anyway.

 

I know North Korea has nukes, though they're not currently a threat or so I've heard to the USA, only to their neighbours. Either way, I mean nobody likes them having those and I completely understand that, their government is made up of unelected psychopaths with whom there's no predicting.

 

Look into a document called 'project for a new american century'. It was written by the neo cons who took control of america before 9/11. Also search on youtube for 'general wesley clark seven countries five years'. They have been planning to pick off several countries since before 9/11, Syria is just the latest on the list. The neo-cons are also very much in the hands of zionist jews, and the fact that the list is basically all of israels opponents in the region is no coincidence.

 

This thread is too depressing. Let's discuss Floyd's blatant doping.

 

These guys need to put the pipe down. WW3 isn't happening in our lifetime, the closest we were to WW3 was before the fall of the Soviet Union. We are closer in ties to Russia than we ever were.

 

In a nuclear war, there are always two losers ... I think the US could probably still beat Russia, but at absolutely enormous cost.

 

Somebodys tinfoil hat is on way too tight. No one wins a nuke war so thats out of the question. A conventional war against the US and its allies is unwinnable. The us has the best navy and air force in the world. Control the sea and sky and you win the war. Now i know people will bring up Nam and Afghanistan to counter those arguments but im not talking about a conventional army against guerillas. im talking a conventional war.

 

There would be nothing left to "win". Nuke war is the end of civilization. im talking The Road status

 

You haven't been keeping up with the news then. Two years ago, that may have been the case but Ukraine and now Syrian events have broken those ties quite severely.

 

I've been doing so sparingly, nothing more than dick waving contests. We're in a new day and age now, the U.S and Russia already know the consequences of a full scale war, Russia especially. After losing a significant percentage of their population to Nazi Germany, they sure as hell aren't going to risk a Nuclear war.

It's all about who has the biggest dick with these super powers.

 

A 1 on 1 war between Russia-USA wouldn't exist, it'd quickly become a war envolping the whole world between two sides similar to WW2, but perhaps even more extreme. Either way, whichever side loses, I wouldn't be surprised if by some miracle nukes haven't been used up till then, it'd be used to take the enemy down with them so to speak.

 

Perhaps but there's growing distance between the two powers, Russia was rather muted for a while but now it wants to wave its dick around again, of course USA does not like that. So again we come to a mini-cold war, even now.