There is a war between green and orange. Who wins?

There is a war between green and orange. Who wins?

Other urls found in this thread:

encyclopedia.com/topic/lend-lease.aspx
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Of course orange wins. Green ones would barely stay and protect their countries. Provided they dont call US for help of course

The immigrants. Also, is Romania in civil war?

There are 5 green countries with a proper army.

there are 4 orange countries with a proper army but Russia should count as 2.

Hard to predict.

yes

poland is weak and powerless

British and French nuclear submarines sit in the south Atlantic and hit every capital of the orange countries with no response.

Whoever is allied with Italy loses.

When all of the ships set sail, the sea level will rise by 1mm and you'll get flooded so I didn't even count Holland in.

Anyway Russia will get more territories.

We switch sides

whites

you belong to russia

turkey russia alliance beats all t b h

>there are 4 orange countries with a proper army

There are no countries with a proper army in Europe at all.

orange has more nuclear weapons, tanks, aircraft carriers, and manpower. russia+sweden gives them a lot of steel and fuel.

green has literally no chance. maybe if they get financial help from the outside and germany manages to re-arm itself. and even then it is a maybe.

green comfortably

It's worse bait then what you'll become when your city drowns desu lad.

I think the manpower thing is equal.

The USA would enter the war with the green people, they won't allow Russia to win

Poland is poor and powerless oblast

britain and france have decent armies
rest are meme armies

The little white thingy in the middle of it.

I don't like your cheese

I don't like your ""country""

I don't pray to allah.

France vs Italy
>Italy switches sides
>France surrenders
Nobody wins.

>This is how Europeans think
I'm starting to hate Europe almost as must as I hate Russia

>meme armies

We are in the top 5 most militarized countries in the world, we have more tanks than britain and spain (top kek) and the same amount as Iran and the best army in eastern europe.

If it weren't for the Turks we would beat every Orange country in the map by ourselves

Most western Europeans would still chant "America will protect us, Russia is not a threat" when their cities would be getting under Russian occupation.

You pray to jesus that russia doesn't come reclaim its rightful clay

kek but rude

durka durka mohammad jihad weakling

>Russia is not a threat
People don't say that.
Especially slavshits are scared shitless of Russians.

Well we all consider our closes threats "the scaries" for you it's bacon and haram clothes, for us russia.

Orange. Only Poland, Finland and Greece would actually put up a fight from the Green side.

>poland
"no", they are weak and powerless

who cares we can't lose

Poles love their country and would fight. Germans, French and British are cowards and would surrender easily.

Gypsy Upraising

Bulgaria , Macedonia and Kosovo could handle the Serbs quickly and help Croatia , Bosnia and Slovenia to hold the line against central Europe.
Russia can easily wipe off it's neighbours and regroup with Turkey at Ukraine to launch an assault on Central Europe their offensive at the south is being held by the Orange Balkans.
During that time Italy and Spain ( with expeditionary forces from Russia and Turkey ) could hold off the French from doing anything.
Brits wouldn't do much in land but stopping them in seas would be diffucult , they'd probably be invaded the last

Russia wins, rest of the euros don't want to die for their countries

poles lost WW2 in a month

After being attacked from three sides by much stronger enemies. French surrendered in a month and they had the best army in the world at the time.

And Britain held out by itself for a year and a half alone and kept the Germans at bay, keeping the west open and allowing d-day landings to ever be possible.

D-Day was irrelevant. By the time the western armies landed the USSR had pushed the Nazis back to Poland.

>Pakistan and Azerbaijan at the top
>India and Armenia below them
>India and Armenia consistently embarrass Pakis and Azeris in war

Useless chart

Switzerland

On the green side only France has any real power. Germany is a fucking joke and would get invaded by Italy alone. Bongland has a decent fleet but that's it. France, Poland, and Finland are the only ones worth anything on the green side.

I'm not sure on Spain, but on the orange side it probably goes something along the lines of Russia>Italy>Spain>Turkey>Denmark. In any case more than enough to defeat green.

This is not considering that green has a tonne of kebab that would happily bring the infrastructure to a crawl when Turkey is on the opponent side.

UK and France together could beat all those countries

This guy right here.

switzerland and the rest of white coloured countries

Turkey is stronger than Italy and it's competing with Russia.

This.

Let's be honest Orange doesn't stand a chance

Lmao no

>Implying you would not surrender after the first battle

Both oranges and greens have a nuclear weapon. Cockroaches win!

You literally cant read the title

>He unironically believes the USSR was the sole reason for allied victory.

Alright, say Britain had fallen, ussr won't be getting any lend lease convoys through the north sea, say goodbye to troop mobility!
How about stopping Germany in Africa and the Middle east, both places which if controlled would boost their resources substantially and that was a main reason for their failure in the east.
How about the Italian campaign?

Don't forget France will immediately le surrender

dude memes lmao

France and Britain only have a few hundred nukes between them. Russia has 12000.

Lend lease was 5% of Soviet production. Ultimately irrelevant.

France and UK are about the same in terms of military strength.

Turkey is also stronger than France , having couple foreign mercenaries that bully african negros doesn't make you strong

>stronger than Italy
Having a tonne of cockroaches with shitty training and terrible military equipment doesn't make you strong, otherwise NK would be one of the most powerful countries in the world.

Hint: stuff like global firepower lists the amounts, your T-34s are worth as much as a Leopard 2A7.

>competing with Russia
Pfffthahahahah no.

>France and Britain only have a few hundred nukes between them. Russia has 12000.
Why does it matter ? A few hundred is more than enough anyway, building more is just a waste of resources for the sake of dickwaving

Ignore the rest of the arguement then

hahahahahahaha

>France surrenders
>Italy switches sides as soon as they start losing and gets off scot-free again
>Germany turns on Britain the moment Britain raises arms against Turks
>Switzerland laughs all the way to the bank

This. Turkey is stronger than any of the Green nations and Turks would actually fight for their country.

Because a few hundred is not capable of destroying the opposing side. 12000 is.

The rest of the argument is on fringe fronts. British did nothing in comparison to the USSR. Also when looking at it in modernity British people would not fight for their country. It is a nation of cowards.

This, also French and Brit nuclear subs would just sit there in no danger just launching nukes.

>They had the best army in the world at the time.
What are you even talking about...

T*rkroach please

Dr Manhattan comes in and declares no nuke policy or country gets perma ban

>scot-free again
wut? we lost a fuckton of territories and our colonies during the last war

Britain has 3 nuclear submarines. France has some subs and some land silos. They are easy targets because they are so few or in fixed positions.

Before WW2 France's army was the largest and best equipt in the world.

Drop a few nukes on Switzerland btw

5% my ass
>The United States gave to the Soviet Union from October 1, 1941 to May 31, 1945 the following: 427,284 trucks, 13,303 combat vehicles, 35,170 motorcycles, 2,328 ordnance service vehicles, 2,670,371 tons of petroleum products (gasoline and oil) or 57.8 percent of the High-octane aviation fuel,[45] 4,478,116 tons of foodstuffs (canned meats, sugar, flour, salt, etc.), 1,911 steam locomotives, 66 Diesel locomotives, 9,920 flat cars, 1,000 dump cars, 120 tank cars, and 35 heavy machinery cars. Provided ordnance goods (ammunition, artillery shells, mines, assorted explosives) amounted to 53 percent of total domestic production.[46] One item typical of many was a tire plant that was lifted bodily from the Ford Company's River Rouge Plant and transferred to the USSR.

We would fight for more than just our country, we'd fight for small little irrelevant islands on the otherside of the planet to protect territories of this country (that's how far we'd go for just territories.. Not even homeland)

Compared to Germany and Japan you basically got off with a slap on the wrist at worst.

5% of total production during the war was from the USA.

Fighting some Argentines is hardly an achievement.

Trident can't be found mate.

>Because a few hundred is not capable of destroying the opposing side.
It might not kill 100% of the population, but 95% is more than enough
>Before WW2 France's army was the largest and best equipt in the world.
That's bullshit. The command structure was ancient, the soldiers were badly equipped and the industry couldn't keep up

>Implying
The gypsies would never fight. We would just kill eachother while they laugh at us and Romania becomes 100% India.

>5% of total production during the war was from the USA.
Then give me some sources

We used the same weaponry but that's not the point, we went all that way just for a small island of sheep. This country would pull together to save the homeland.

>shitty training
our millitary staff is experienced from the wars and skirmishes in Middle East that has been going for about 40 years.
>terrible millitary equipment
That terrible millitary equipment that we produce is being used by the whole NATO.
>t34s
We have none of those , sorry to break it for you. We do produce our own tanks which do compete with T-90s in the joint millitary exercises we did with Russia.

You're pretty delusional senpai

Considering your operators managed to get stuck on a beach I doubt that.

>It might not kill 100% of the population, but 95% is more than enough
Due to French and British nuke sizes being small they would not kill anything close to that.

>That's bullshit. The command structure was ancient, the soldiers were badly equipped and the industry couldn't keep up
The organization was terrible and the generals were ancient. The equptment was not French tanks were far better than German tanks, which is why the Germans preferred to use them when they attacked the USSR.

Against weak Argentines maybe.

>U.S. aid constituted only about 7 percent of what the Soviet Union itself produced during the war
encyclopedia.com/topic/lend-lease.aspx

Spot the delusional part in my post then.
It's easy to say something like "bullshit " and run away

Nukes: Orange technically but it'd be a pyrrhic victory

Nukes off: Green

green, because we'd be backing them up

Green loses on both.

...

>Fighting some Argentines is hardly an achievement.
No, but traveling halfway across the world to launch an amphibious operation against an enemy whose home is a couple of hundred kilometres away is. Members of the US Navy's admiralty deemed it impossible.

Then pack marching 90kms and defeating a numerically superior enemy at the other end (3:1 ratio can get flushed down the toilet) of the yomp is nothing to laugh at either.

It is when Argentines were fighting with equiptment 50 years out of date and the people fighting were conscripts who did not want to be there.

Doubt it, the only real contender for Orange is Russia. Turkey would get btfo and Italy wouldn't fare much better.

now hang on

>Polack being butthurt
wow i never saw this coming desu