English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

30 answers

Yes.

2007-03-31 04:13:50 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 4

Three problems exist in this scenario.

The level of autonomy of Russian forces was about a Major. That situation means a Major is about the lowest rank allowed to make even the smallest decision. If that situation still exists the communication required to operate would slow them to the point that they wouldn't be able to function as quickly as Yanks or Brits where the level of autonomy rests very low in the enlisted ranks.

The Indians, while historically fierce, have not been tested in battle for a long time. Additionally their religious teachings lean toward passive resistance and pacifism. In other words they are an unknown commodity.

Finally the French are essentially cowards. The joke goes; "nearly new French military surplus rifles for sale, only dropped once".

The only way that alliance would succeed is if the Yanks and Brits lacked the will to win the conflict. And that is a very real possibility.

2007-03-31 04:31:30 · answer #2 · answered by gimpalomg 7 · 1 0

What a pathetic question. The Russian military is in a shambles. The French have only won one war: THE FRENCH REVOLUTION (because both sides were French). The Indians have to buy a reject US Navy ship (ex-USS Trenton LPD-14, now the INS JALASHWA, and 6 H-3 Sea King maritime utility transport helicopters will be operated from the ship.The ship likely to be based at Visakhapatnam under the Eastern Naval Command. You expect the INDIAN military to be a force to worry about?
Go back to playing with your GI JOE and BARBI DOLLS.

2007-03-31 13:57:43 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Ignoring the rest for a moment, France is right out.

As part of the European Union, France would probably have Hell to pay economically let alone militarily if it opened up a war with another EU member state.

Which also makes Russia vs. UK iffy.

Even if the EU was unsupportive of England, it would also be unsupportive of Russia going after it's members.

If Russia loses trade with the US and the EU... and Japan who's lilely to be supportive of US interests simply because of their economic reliance.

So, any alliance involving France and Russia against England is likely to be resisted by Europe.

Now, as someone already mentioned, any combative alliance between Russia and Indians would officially put China on notice, potentially making an "odd bed fellow" for the US and UK if things got bad.

More likely, Russia has the most to lose if things got hot with China and would be very unlikely to directly oppose China.

So... We're down to India...

India versus the US and UK in India or very nearby, it'll probably be a military draw resolved in the economic and political arenas.

Expeditionarily?

No one beats the US away from their country.

2007-03-31 11:25:38 · answer #4 · answered by Deathbunny 5 · 0 1

Any baseball team can beat all and sundry. that's why there are not any undefeated baseball communities. The Indians have a large threat at beating the Yankees via fact of their offense. presently, i've got not considered something particular with the Yanks so this accepted sequence may be the biggest marvel and the Indians could pass on.

2016-11-25 02:02:00 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

No because the Russians have China to worry about and if they team up with the India, China would turn on the Russians.

If that war happens all of the nuclear weapons involved would take care of who really won.

Now if you are talking about a rowdy game of squash - Yes - I think that the Russia, India, and anyone else - would beat the US/UK.

2007-03-31 04:22:06 · answer #6 · answered by The Man 2 · 2 0

will I don't thinks because French would give up first shot and India would be on the help line so that mean Russian on there own and they are only half a country now so NO!!!

2007-03-31 04:21:32 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

No,

Here is the reason.

American civilians are spoiled, bitchy, gutless, turds until something happens. When this "something" does take place they become the deadliest weapons on the planet.

That "something" is when they actually get scared. When that happens the American civilian puts all of their effort into one thing and one thing only, and thats the destruction of those who threaten their ability to eat McDonalds, or have 31 different flavors of ice cream, or sattellite TV. Sorry but its true. They are capable of creating a war machine the likes of which the world has never seen.

Once that happens your screwed. This Iraq thing, doesnt have them scared. Russia, France, and India forming a coalition against them would scare them.

The worst thing you can do when fighting the US is get their population scared of you, then your f-cked.

America likes to sleep, my suggestion is not to wake them up. Yes this Iraq thing doesnt mean anything really, to me the US is still sleeping.

2007-03-31 04:24:08 · answer #8 · answered by h h 5 · 2 2

Last I checked, India leaned capitalist....and France just bent over. Could Russia take over the world? Not a chance.

2007-03-31 04:29:11 · answer #9 · answered by Michael E 5 · 2 0

no
that alliance alone couldn't beat the US

+ the US and UK would have germany, ireland, australia, canada, south korea, spain, and pretty much every other country except for Russia, France, and India, and of course Iran


Russia France and India r u kidding me???!

2007-03-31 04:20:33 · answer #10 · answered by Angus 2 · 2 0

Don't forget Australia and Canada in the mix. They are among the closest allies of the US and Britain.

2007-03-31 06:56:37 · answer #11 · answered by Kilroy 4 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers