Kasz216 on 17 June 2009
| bdbdbd said: I find the way the question is put absurd. What are "conventional weapons" and what kind of situation are we talking about? The capability of the armies of superpowers haven't relied on "conventional weapons" in ages anymore. Russia, for example, has 20 million men reserve, but they don't push it as high tech as USA. USA have less manpower, and rely on satellite guidance, that China showed a while ago how to strip it. China has propably a million men more in active duty, as USA. Etc. In reality, if we start to talk about the "big boys" fighting, we can't rule out nukes, which would mean that it's a tie; everybody dies. |
Conventional weapons = Not nuclear.
A war with conventional weapons would basically mean that the earth gets showered with particles that make nuclear weapons unusuable.
