Search results for query: *
- Users: Zachowon
- With How capable would NATO be of countering a conventional assault on multiple fronts by its enemies against both them and other parties? thread
- Content: Threads, Posts
- Order by date
-
How capable would NATO be of countering a conventional assault on multiple fronts by its enemies against both them and other parties?
I mean yes. That's the point I aas making- Word Count: 9
- Zachowon
- Post #27
- Forum: The War College
-
How capable would NATO be of countering a conventional assault on multiple fronts by its enemies against both them and other parties?
We didn't invade. We supported South Korea and pushed them to the Chinese border- Word Count: 14
- Zachowon
- Post #25
- Forum: The War College
-
How capable would NATO be of countering a conventional assault on multiple fronts by its enemies against both them and other parties?
We didn't 8nvade the north Koreans before nukes...- Word Count: 8
- Zachowon
- Post #23
- Forum: The War College
-
How capable would NATO be of countering a conventional assault on multiple fronts by its enemies against both them and other parties?
3600 casualties a day is an estimate thrown out as a worst case scenario. Should I point out the 100k dead for Desert Storm?- Word Count: 24
- Zachowon
- Post #11
- Forum: The War College
-
How capable would NATO be of countering a conventional assault on multiple fronts by its enemies against both them and other parties?
Total War that leads to world War 3 woth the western world bringing back drafts.- Word Count: 15
- Zachowon
- Post #2
- Forum: The War College