NationStates Jolt Archive

Spain Vs. Poland: The Showdown!

Okay, I know what you're thinking. You're thinking this is going to an anti-Poland, Anti-Spain, or a "You All Suck!" thread. This is not the case. This is a thread that emerges when a college freshman has nothing to do at 3 AM on a Thursday morning.

Basically, I'm wondering who would win if right now (this very second) both Poland and Spain mutually declared war on each other. A war that would not cease until the other government acknowledges defeat (Cause I know of many wars where the currently winning, but not yet victorious, party said "We have won" and expected the rest of the world to accept it). No nuclear weapons are used, and allies will not enact any trade embargos or other such non-direct assistance.

Who do you think would win?

WTF?

Bad form.

WTF?

Bad form.
It is possibly bad form , but Klonor is just having a laugh and in that spirit I would have to say based purely on the Spaniards and Poles that I know personally, Poland would kick Spains Ass.
EDIT-

PS- @Klonor dude if you got nuthin to do at 3am and arent tired you could always study for your college course;) what you doing at college anyway?

Australia.

Poland lady Spain is generally incompetent England has owned Gibralter for 300+ years and the Spanish are too afraid to get it back Poland didnt exist in WW1? or at leasyt got arse kicked and managed to get the polish corridor and Danzigsplitting Germany in two!

What you should do is a Michael Utting bottle of Whiskey and a half of Tequila night before International Soccer matches drew with Germany 1-1 and Brasil lost 1-0 Cofederations cup 1999-2000 hes my hero greatest New Zealand goalie of all time, that or John Daley the golfer asked what he did with his winnings spent half on women half on beer wasted the rest.

No one wins in war.

No one wins in war.

Bandage manufacturers?

According to Jim Dunnigan's (a highly respected military analyst) Armed Forces of the World (http://strategypage.com/fyeo/howtomakewar/databases/armies/e.asp) they seem to be fairly matched:
Country Rnk Land PowerQualityPopulation(mil)GDPMenBudget$/Man
Poland 8 83 31 39 $180 200 $3400 $17
Spain 9 65 35 40 $570 140 $7400 $53
AFVsCombataircraftLeadershipEquipmentExperienceSupportMobilizationTradition
Poland 5400 200 6 5 5 5 5 5
Spain 3200 200 6 5 5 6 6 6


(Hope that comes out ok...)

Bandage manufacturers?
i think we now know who is behind every war from ww1 - present.

The Polish would win because they are badass!

i think we now know who is behind every war from ww1 - present.
I wouldn't put it past those slimy bastards!

No one wins in war.
Not true Destinys Child (not thre pop group)
Arms manufacturers they laugh all the way to the bank

I'm a big believer that economy output, or at least the maximization of an economy for war is what wins war. Spain's GDP is nearly twice that of Poland's. Spain wins.

They both haven't got any nukes. If the poles would start fighting in spain they would die of heat...if the spaniards would start fighting in poland, they would die of cold. The spaniards would want to invade poland in summer, because it is warmer then. The poles would want to invade spain in winter because it is colder then. Eventually no one would get of his lazy ass, because they lay to far apart. Anyhow...why the fuck do you come up with Spain and Poland for god's sake. It doesn't make sense. They haven't got a mutual history or anything that would provoke them to wage ware against one another. :p You are probably high or very drunk?

That armed forces of the World is full of Bullshit. I dont know how new those are but Finland is better than Sweden! Sweden doesnt even have a army. They are even thinking about shutting it down. Finland even defeated Russia in WW2! (Russia just said to everybody that we lost and everybody believed it)

That armed forces of the World is full of Bullshit. I dont know how new those are but Finland is better than Sweden! Sweden doesnt even have a army. They are even thinking about shutting it down. Finland even defeated Russia in WW2! (Russia just said to everybody that we lost and everybody believed it)

Man id love to believe you any way
if you won you bet Russia .
if you lost you were massacred in the good way like genocide as in russians treated you inhumanly.
Remember the chechens are nazis too thats why there getting the smackdown layethed on them it must be true Stalin said so.

I'm a big believer that economy output, or at least the maximization of an economy for war is what wins war. Spain's GDP is nearly twice that of Poland's. Spain wins.
Spain hasnt fought a decent war since well uumm urrgh hang on ill ohh aahh heres one its the 30 years war
Poland has honour should be austrian german and russian but hey theyve always had flashy cavalry

That armed forces of the World is full of Bullshit. I dont know how new those are but Finland is better than Sweden! Sweden doesnt even have a army. They are even thinking about shutting it down. Finland even defeated Russia in WW2! (Russia just said to everybody that we lost and everybody believed it)

The exact data may not be up to 2004, but it is more or less accurate.

I'm a big believer that economy output, or at least the maximization of an economy for war is what wins war. Spain's GDP is nearly twice that of Poland's. Spain wins.

That only goes so far. Superor quality forces, training, and equipment combined with a good military tradition and leadership can defeat superior numbers and economics. It's a rare combination though.

That only goes so far. Superor quality forces, training, and equipment combined with a good military tradition and leadership can defeat superior numbers and economics. It's a rare combination though.

True, but if a war is prolonged, economic health is the strongest indicator of eventual victory. Honestly, look into it, the correlation between economy and war superiority is amazing.

The biggest problem either would have is getting at each other. Poland and Spain don't have a common border, are over 1000 km away at their nearest points and would have to fly over neutral space to bomb each other. Poland is relatively flat, making mobile warfare much easier, but would have to be attacked by Spain via their northern coast meaning it would be fairly easy for Poland to respond to any landings. As for Spain, they have plenty of coastline but their terrain is highly prohibitive to speedy military operations and extremely easy to defend.

Spain:
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/sp.html
http://topgun.rin.ru/cgi-bin/texts.pl?category=state&mode=show&unit=71&lng=eng

Poland:
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/pl.html
http://topgun.rin.ru/cgi-bin/texts.pl?category=state&mode=show&unit=66&lng=eng

Spain has a smaller armed forces, but its by far much better equipped and maintained, and Spain spends more than double what Poland does on national defense. Poland's MiG-21s, for example, are really no match for Spain's modified EF-18s, they only have 22 MiG-29s which wouldn't be much better off, and Poland has plenty of tanks, but they are all of Warsaw Pact vintage and their T-72s would simply have no chance against Spain's core force of about 100 Leopard 2s, which are equivalent to M1A1s and carry the 120mm Rheinmetal smoothbore. And Spain maintains the second largest navy in Europe, after the UK - to include a carrier group built around the "Principe de Asturias". The Poles have nothing comparable.

If the Poles wanted to take an aggressive stance, I'd suggest a surprise attack to seize the main island of Majorca for use as an air base. Given that the Spanish have only 4 heavy transports capable of carrying armour they'd have a heck of a time getting it back, and Poland could dominate the eastern Spanish coast from that vantage - that is, until the Spanish bombed their airfield, destroyed all tehri aircraft and sank all theri supporting ships. By contrast the Spanish could land pretty much anywhere along the Polish coast in a surprise attack with about 10,000 men, but soon after they would find their beachhead under heavy aerial attack and with only a Harrier capable carrier to use in response, and no convenient islands to use as air bases, they would find their initial landing bombed into submission and crushed, and any supporting aircraft they used to attempt to defend the beachhead would be eventually sunk in turn.

All in all, I'd suspect a stalement to result.

True, but if a war is prolonged, economic health is the strongest indicator of eventual victory. Honestly, look into it, the correlation between economy and war superiority is amazing.

Not disagreaing with you at all just pointing out that there are exceptions that one must be careful of. (And I have looked into military affairs quite extensively
;) )

The biggest problem either would have is getting at each other. Poland and Spain don't have a common border, are over 1000 km away at their nearest points and would have to fly over neutral space to bomb each other. Poland is relatively flat, making mobile warfare much easier, but would have to be attacked by Spain via their northern coast meaning it would be fairly easy for Poland to respond to any landings. As for Spain, they have plenty of coastline but their terrain is highly prohibitive to speedy military operations and extremely easy to defend.

Spain:
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/sp.html
http://topgun.rin.ru/cgi-bin/texts.pl?category=state&mode=show&unit=71&lng=eng

Poland:
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/pl.html
http://topgun.rin.ru/cgi-bin/texts.pl?category=state&mode=show&unit=66&lng=eng

Spain has a smaller armed forces, but its by far much better equipped and maintained, and Spain spends more than double what Poland does on national defense. Poland's MiG-21s, for example, are really no match for Spain's modified EF-18s, they only have 22 MiG-29s which wouldn't be much better off, and Poland has plenty of tanks, but they are all of Warsaw Pact vintage and their T-72s would simply have no chance against Spain's core force of about 100 Leopard 2s, which are equivalent to M1A1s and carry the 120mm Rheinmetal smoothbore. And Spain maintains the second largest navy in Europe, after the UK - to include a carrier group built around the "Principe de Asturias". The Poles have nothing comparable.

If the Poles wanted to take an aggressive stance, I'd suggest a surprise attack to seize the main island of Majorca for use as an air base. Given that the Spanish have only 4 heavy transports capable of carrying armour they'd have a heck of a time getting it back, and Poland could dominate the eastern Spanish coast from that vantage - that is, until the Spanish bombed their airfield, destroyed all tehri aircraft and sank all theri supporting ships. By contrast the Spanish could land pretty much anywhere along the Polish coast in a surprise attack with about 10,000 men, but soon after they would find their beachhead under heavy aerial attack and with only a Harrier capable carrier to use in response, and no convenient islands to use as air bases, they would find their initial landing bombed into submission and crushed, and any supporting aircraft they used to attempt to defend the beachhead would be eventually sunk in turn.

All in all, I'd suspect a stalement to result.


Bravo. Well done! :cool:

The biggest problem either would have is getting at each other. Poland and Spain don't have a common border, are over 1000 km away at their nearest points and would have to fly over neutral space to bomb each other. Poland is relatively flat, making mobile warfare much easier, but would have to be attacked by Spain via their northern coast meaning it would be fairly easy for Poland to respond to any landings. As for Spain, they have plenty of coastline but their terrain is highly prohibitive to speedy military operations and extremely easy to defend.

Spain:
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/sp.html
http://topgun.rin.ru/cgi-bin/texts.pl?category=state&mode=show&unit=71&lng=eng

Poland:
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/pl.html
http://topgun.rin.ru/cgi-bin/texts.pl?category=state&mode=show&unit=66&lng=eng

Spain has a smaller armed forces, but its by far much better equipped and maintained, and Spain spends more than double what Poland does on national defense. Poland's MiG-21s, for example, are really no match for Spain's modified EF-18s, they only have 22 MiG-29s which wouldn't be much better off, and Poland has plenty of tanks, but they are all of Warsaw Pact vintage and their T-72s would simply have no chance against Spain's core force of about 100 Leopard 2s, which are equivalent to M1A1s and carry the 120mm Rheinmetal smoothbore. And Spain maintains the second largest navy in Europe, after the UK - to include a carrier group built around the "Principe de Asturias". The Poles have nothing comparable.

If the Poles wanted to take an aggressive stance, I'd suggest a surprise attack to seize the main island of Majorca for use as an air base. Given that the Spanish have only 4 heavy transports capable of carrying armour they'd have a heck of a time getting it back, and Poland could dominate the eastern Spanish coast from that vantage - that is, until the Spanish bombed their airfield, destroyed all tehri aircraft and sank all theri supporting ships. By contrast the Spanish could land pretty much anywhere along the Polish coast in a surprise attack with about 10,000 men, but soon after they would find their beachhead under heavy aerial attack and with only a Harrier capable carrier to use in response, and no convenient islands to use as air bases, they would find their initial landing bombed into submission and crushed, and any supporting aircraft they used to attempt to defend the beachhead would be eventually sunk in turn.

All in all, I'd suspect a stalement to result.

Too true Spanish should always have a strong navy its like in the bible

Finland even defeated Russia in WW2!

Finland did not "defeat" the Soviet Union in WW II. They managed to hold off an expeditionary force outnumbering them 5:1 - to which Stalin responded with a new influx of reinforcements, outnumbering the Finns 25:1, and forcing them to sue for peace.

Against Sweden, the Finns would have to pit their 60 some odd F-18's against almost 200 AJ-37s, and about 200 tanks against 500 Swedish tanks - that's again Finnish T-72s and T-55s against Swedish Leopard 2s. No contest.

The Swedes would have lots of trouble with Finland's inhospitable terrain, mind you. But with a 3:1 air superiority and far superior armour the Finns would be under serious pressure. Their best bet would be to fight a defensive, delaying battle, on terrain inhospitable to tanks - but with Swedish air superiority won the Finns would not last especially long.

Too true Spanish should always have a strong navy its like in the bible

No, you're thinking of their football team, Real Madrid.

Actually, Spain needs to keep a large navy afloat to give the English something to sink every couple of centuries. Come to think of it, they're about due... oopsie, forgot to include that in my calculations...

Too true Spanish should always have a strong navy its like in the bible

No, you're thinking of their football team, Real Madrid.

Actually, Spain needs to keep a large navy afloat to give the English something to sink every couple of centuries. Come to think of it, they're about due... oopsie, forgot to include that in my calculations...

sorry half missed the football thing but by strong i meant large go Angle-lond
If the fiinish weather played its part Svwens planes would be ineffectual against troops damn snow mist blizzards fog etc

It'd be interesting to see how the countries in between reacted. I'm sure someone will come up with an amusing* joke about france, but they would have to get around those nations some how to get at each other.










*shitty.

Actually, Spain needs to keep a large navy afloat to give the English something to sink every couple of centuries. Come to think of it, they're about due... oopsie, forgot to include that in my calculations...

Well seeing as it is Poland vs Spain, you're fine.
;)

[QUOTE=Harlesburg]Poland didnt exist in WW1? QUOTE]


erm , wtf dude , Spain have excisted for thousands of years , numpty , oh yeah , and spain supported america in the UN with the whole kill the ay rabs thing so poland would end up knee deep in Marines ....

Spain would win.
I'm sure poland would put up a very good fight.
Spain would just send in their legionnaire and stomp on everybody.

The spanish army has also the advantage of training in spain. This gives them the chance to train in every type of environment from polar (heavy snow fall in some areas) to desert, to sub-tropical.
Whereas as i understand it, poland is more or less flat and cold.

Spain would win.
I'm sure poland would put up a very good fight.
Spain would just send in their legionnaire and stomp on everybody.
The spanish army has also the advantage of training in spain. This gives them the chance to train in every type of environment from polar (heavy snow fall in some areas) to desert, to sub-tropical.
Whereas as i understand it, poland is more or less flat and cold.
And I´m shure that there wouldn´t be a war between those two countries. They won´t be one between democratic European countries.
But if we speak about a hypothesis than there would rather be a British-Spanish war about Gibraltar. And Spain would loose again therefore they are not going to do it again.

Poland would lose because loads of Polish people work in Germany, Holland or Belgium. They won't have time to fight. The Spanish would be asleep min the streets till some one sais the Polish are the main support of ETA.

Poland would lose because loads of Polish people work in Germany, Holland or Belgium. They won't have time to fight. The Spanish would be asleep min the streets till some one sais the Polish are the main support of ETA.
My question would be: How does Poland reach Spain and how Spain reaches Poland for an assault?
Denmark, Sweden and Norway would just shut down the belt so the two can´t meet to fight and the other countries close their air space - War impossible.

And I´m shure that there wouldn´t be a war between those two countries. They won´t be one between democratic European countries.
But if we speak about a hypothesis than there would rather be a British-Spanish war about Gibraltar. And Spain would loose again therefore they are not going to do it again.

UK and spain would not go to war over gibraltar.
they even discussed joint soveignty (ouch spelt really wrong), but those Gibraltian don't want it.

My question would be: How does Poland reach Spain and how Spain reaches Poland for an assault?
Denmark, Sweden and Norway would just shut down the belt so the two can´t meet to fight and the other countries close their air space - War impossible.
they could fly. EasyJet's really cheap

bloody mountain monkeys.......

UK and spain would not go to war over gibraltar.
they even discussed joint soveignty (ouch spelt really wrong), but those Gibraltian don't want it.
The Spanish are very nationalistic though and had actually even blocked Gibraltar for decades. Not surprisingly the people of Gibraltar don´t want to have anything to do with Spain. The negotiations were between Aznar and Blair. Now, that Spain has made a turn-around in its foreign policy the relations aren´t that good anymore. I agree with you: there won´t be a war. Neither would there be one between Britain and the Republic of Ireland.
Britain has not reason for them and the other side is too weak anyway. Even a madman wouldn´t do it.
And in EU-Europe today wars between EU members are impossible. Even Greece and Turkey are today disciplined enough not to do such things. And that is really the worst conflict in Europe, not those tittle-tattle over Gibraltar or (although much more serious) the conflict in Northern Ireland.

I heard Liectenstein and Monaco are having a mudfight on Saturday (p.m.). Anyone got tickets?

they could fly. EasyJet's really cheap
And the countries they - illegally fly over- could shoot them down.

The Spanish are very nationalistic though and had actually even blocked Gibraltar for decades. Not surprisingly the people of Gibraltar don´t want to have anything to do with Spain. The negotiations were between Aznar and Blair. Now, that Spain has made a turn-around in its foreign policy the relations aren´t that good anymore. I agree with you: there won´t be a war. Neither would there be one between Britain and the Republic of Ireland.
Britain has not reason for them and the other side is too weak anyway. Even a madman wouldn´t do it.
And in EU-Europe today wars between EU members are impossible. Even Greece and Turkey are today disciplined enough not to do such things. And that is really the worst conflict in Europe, not those tittle-tattle over Gibraltar or (although much more serious) the conflict in Northern Ireland.

but spain blocked it for decades due to the franco regime.

I heard Liectenstein and Monaco are having a mudfight on Saturday (p.m.). Anyone got tickets?
I heard there was a surprise act of both people of San Marino

And the countries they - illegally fly over- could shoot them down.
Why bother... They're just Spaniards and Polacks

[QUOTE=Harlesburg]Poland didnt exist in WW1? QUOTE]


erm , wtf dude , Spain have excisted for thousands of years , numpty , oh yeah , and spain supported america in the UN with the whole kill the ay rabs thing so poland would end up knee deep in Marines ....

yeah good luck rej whats your point
its about fighting capabilities i didnt doubt Spains existence just because youve been around 1000s of years dosent mean youve fought a good war recently do you even know when the 30 years war was
Poland existed before WW1 then they get conquered pop up disapear its there way.
also Greenhorn it says at the start only these two nations, American Marines cant get involved.
Marines arnt just an American thing Theyve been around a long time.
Spain isnt exactly flavour of the month since the train bombings.

I refuse to fight a battle of wits with someone who is quite obviously defenceless
:( : :sniper: :mp5: :mp5: :gundge: :gundge: :mp5: :sniper: :mp5:

The Spanish are very nationalistic though and had actually even blocked Gibraltar for decades. Not surprisingly the people of Gibraltar don´t want to have anything to do with Spain. The negotiations were between Aznar and Blair. Now, that Spain has made a turn-around in its foreign policy the relations aren´t that good anymore. I agree with you: there won´t be a war. Neither would there be one between Britain and the Republic of Ireland.
Britain has not reason for them and the other side is too weak anyway. Even a madman wouldn´t do it.
And in EU-Europe today wars between EU members are impossible. Even Greece and Turkey are today disciplined enough not to do such things. And that is really the worst conflict in Europe, not those tittle-tattle over Gibraltar or (although much more serious) the conflict in Northern Ireland.

i would not say they are very nationalistic, more that they are proud of they culture, which is beautiful. they are very pro-eu and do not see themselves as being superior

but spain blocked it for decades due to the franco regime.
I know that and thats was the fact I was refering to. It is not a conflict between Britain and Spain but rather between Gibraltar and Spain. Though Britain of course has to play a role.
I don´t see a need to change the status quo. If Spain would get Gibraltar Marocco would demand Ceuta and Medilla (sp?) at the North African costs who are ruled by Spain as their colonies. So, as a Spaniard I would say: lets calm down. It is actually preferable to let the British keep Gibraltar in order to keep Ceuta and Medilla. There could even be a defense agreement between Spain and Britain to defend each other in the case of an Marrocan assault on the colonies. There were some tensions between Spain and Marocco about some remote islands. So - there is nothing which can unite countries more together than a common enemy. It can make friends out of former enemies.
The Soviet threat led Germany (West) become part of the west and to be an ally of the US, the UK and France. Though now the problem is that there are now deep splits (deeper than ever before) between the US-UK and France. Also a problem for German foreign policy. A dilemma.

This was "How some BS threads can get too serious lesson 1"

Spain would win, have you ever been to Poland? Jeez they show us pictures of Warsaw, but not the whole country. That place is screwed up, and they're still recovering from WW2. Unexploded bombs, minefields everywhere. Kids are dying on the streets. I know, because there was a little boy, and his sister(a toddler) on the street. I went over to see what was wrong, and someone told me, "No. They are a whore's children, no good. They die anyway."

true enough.
on a minor point, its Melilla.

But morocco as no claim to those 2 enclaves. the country did not even exist at the time when they were taken. well that seems to be the main argument

Spain would win, have you ever been to Poland? Jeez they show us pictures of Warsaw, but not the whole country. That place is screwed up, and they're still recovering from WW2. Unexploded bombs, minefields everywhere.
I´ve been to Poland - mainly the western part. And it looks much better than 1990. The main streets are in good shape. Though more to the east it gets poorer. I think there is a substantial west-east divide.

I´ve been to Poland - mainly the western part. And it looks much better than 1990. The main streets are in good shape. Though more to the east it gets poorer. I think there is a substantial west-east divide.

not suprised. on the west = EU countries
on the east = Russian federation

not suprised. on the west = EU countries
on the east = Russian federation
On the east: the Kaliningrad area which is an Russian enclave, Lithuania, Belarus (ruled by the dictator Lukaschenka- closely linked to Russia though), the Ukraine.
And its western border is to another EU country: The Federal Repbulic of Germany, its biggest trading partner.
That explains that of course.
Actually: Many Poles are working in Germany as cheap workers in the construction industry (though there are some regulations in place), in agriculture (in the summer months) and on the black market, and many Ukrainians are working as cheap labour for the Polish agriculture in the summer months.
That is the current social ladder in "New Europe".

true enough.
on a minor point, its Melilla.
But morocco as no claim to those 2 enclaves. the country did not even exist at the time when they were taken. well that seems to be the main argument
Tell that Maroccon nationalists. There are also outside that issue problems: like this little island and issues of immigration and terrorism. Hopefully they can be solved through cooperation. But nobody knows. North Africa is very destable. More than 50% of Maroccans are still illiterate. One remembers the development in Algeria. And the problems aren´t really solved yet.
The treat of radical Islam is real - also for Europe. We should not underestimate it. One reason I support the US and the UK in principal.

Tell that Maroccon nationalists. There are also outside that issue problems: like this little island and issues of immigration and terrorism. Hopefully they can be solved through cooperation. But nobody knows. North Africa is very destable. More than 50% of Maroccans are still illiterate. One remembers the development in Algeria. And the problems aren´t really solved yet.
The treat of radical Islam is real - also for Europe. We should not underestimate it. One reason I support the US and the UK in principal.

thing is, Morocco says we want these territories back
and spain replies fuck off.
morocco has no real claim to them and they should grow up. in terms of gibraltar, i find that topic harder, because it all came down to the boubons versus hapsburgs. so it was more of a family war than anything. of course with other countries involved.

thing is, Morocco says we want these territories back
and spain replies fuck off.
morocco has no real claim to them and they should grow up. in terms of gibraltar, i find that topic harder, because it all came down to the boubons versus hapsburgs. so it was more of a family war than anything. of course with other countries involved.
I agree with you: it is more like a Falkland scenario. Though I don´t think Marocco would be that stupid as the Argentinian leadership of that time was. But one never knows the future.
And BTW it is Habsburg - the dynasty which also ruled Austria.

I agree with you: it is more like a Falkland scenario. Though I don´t think Marocco would be that stupid as the Argentinian leadership of that time was. But one never knows the future.
And BTW it is Habsburg - the dynasty which also ruled Austria.

shit, thought i'd spelt it wrong. thanks on correction.

Wow, 4 pages in 10 hours. I'm impressed.

Spain. It has the manpower and the supply ability. Poland is simply too small, and to be brutally honest, it hasn't yet recovered from WWII.

Why Spain and Poland? Seems like two choices just pulled out of your rear.

Oh, and for the record, I vote Poland.

I'd go with Poland. While Spain has military supremacy, Poland was able to resist the Nazis for a good few weeks w/o allies, and Spain, well . . . Hitler used parts of it to test his new weapons.

No one wins in war.

what utter super-liberal, new-age bs.

Victory

1. Defeat of an enemy or opponent.
2. Success in a struggle against difficulties or an obstacle.
3. The state of having triumphed.

The people who die in a war dont see victory so at a very big push they 'lose'

A country fights another, one country can't go on and is cnoquered. They lost, they failed in their goal of defeating the other nation. The conquered suceeded in their goal to defeat the nation they conquered and as such, they won. To say there are no victors in war is to make every drop of blood shed in the history of man worthless, people give their lives away for a reason.

on another note: Spain, they have better technology and can afford to use it more often.

All wars are civil wars as all men are brothers.

And they are right, nobody but bandage makers and capitalist arms manufactures benefit through war

All wars are civil wars as all men are brothers.

And they are right, nobody but bandage makers and capitalist arms manufactures benefit through war

Look at the US after the 2 world wars, look at cuba after their revolution (basicly a civil war). Look at france! they fought a bloody war to get rid of a monarchy and its thriving and changed the world. Anyway i wasnt saying wheather everyone benefitted, i was talking about victory.

I'd put my money on poland. The spainsh would be to busy sleeping, arguing with each other or taking care of their mullets to actually do any fighting. The poles had, untill not so long ago, been under occupation by the soviets for years, and no doubt some of that 'double hard bastard' mentality has rubbed off on its armed forces.

shit, thought i'd spelt it wrong. thanks on correction.
I thought it was Bourbons too,but please tell more of this feud id rather have the Stuarts in control of everything damn bonnie prince charlie damn italian boy

That armed forces of the World is full of Bullshit. I dont know how new those are but Finland is better than Sweden! Sweden doesnt even have a army. They are even thinking about shutting it down. Finland even defeated Russia in WW2! (Russia just said to everybody that we lost and everybody believed it)


Sweden (http://topgun.rin.ru/cgi-bin/texts.pl?category=state&mode=show&unit=6123&lng=eng)

Finland (http://topgun.rin.ru/cgi-bin/texts.pl?category=state&mode=show&unit=6090&lng=eng)

^^

Spain. It has the manpower and the supply ability. Poland is simply too small, and to be brutally honest, it hasn't yet recovered from WWII.

More so communism