NATO vs Warsaw Pact: The Air War (1989) 

And Italy changes sides and France surrenders. Aaaaannnnddd Germany takes the blame for the whole ordeal.

Gentleman Grizzly It would be great if Italy sided with WP

Nazi Vampire Eating Babies WoW what a comeBack

And poland cannot into space

As usual !

Austria is so small that author forgot to change its colour 😆

@@zepter00 It's not that they would side with one or the other, it's that Austria would likely be invaded by both sides at the same time to open up fronts and channels for troop movement, meaning like Germany, they lose.

That Bad BLU Spy Yes.

Switzerland: "Are you challenging me?"

Phaha....true lol)

david edbrooke-coffin i like your clinking

DasBubba da

Yes

Wrong

@@zektre2059 a war between India and Pakistan would starve about 1 billion people to death just due to climate effects. A hot war between the US and USSR would make that look like a minor skirmish Edit: spelling

@@michaelharris679 why didn't that many people die in ww2

@@seanmurphy7011 The USA was the one to consider dropping nukes on Vietnam during the Vietnam war and China during the Korean war and went in for a show of strength first during the Berlin crisis.The USA and Soviets probably would've both aimed nukes at each other but honestly I doubt a nuclear war would be approved unless someone shot first.Nukes dropping on NATO countries that don't have nukes may work but honestly that'd only start if an actual attack from Warsaw Pact was initiated.

@@michaelharris679 it wouldnt. look up kargil war

AntiochosSoter Just wait for a little bit under 2 months.

AntiochosSoter -YESS DO IT!!! ...the Swiss Guard, having overestimated the disarming effect if their jester costumes, had craftily planned for this dreaded day and reluctantly mobilized it's strategic reserve of snowballs from deep freeze...

Monaco would be raped like an alterboy !

allies for Vatican city and Monaco Vs italy 👈💪

The Vatican has a bathtub worth 2b :p

Fliyo MB stay cheeki breeki, blin

Fliyo MB tri poloski gang attack into nato territory

CHEEKI BREEKI IV DAMKE PIZDEC

Lol I do this type of analysis and research for fun

In 1989 Hungary and Poland would likely object to soviet forces going to war from their territory.

a random person lol👍👍

a random person lol obviously iran will win❤️🤘

Afrid Abirov but without nuclear wepons, turkey win. Turkey has more tanks, planes, ships and soldiers than iran. And iran has lots of turk population. That can help turkey in war too

Afrid Abirov and turkish economy is larger than iran too

a random person lol Turkey Drop 1 Nuklear Bomb In Tehran Half Iran Population Death So Turkey Easy Win

The channel Metatron (focused on history) actually did something like that.

That would have been pretty funny prior to the widespread introduction of precision guided munitions.

In a world where Air domination isnt important that would be a joke, ha-ha. In pur reality air dominance is the deciding factor.

@@tvanb8729 I agree

This didn't age well. Two Soviet generals might be sat on the east if the Elbe wishing there were some bridges lwdt ti cross

@@AJPMUSIC_OFFICIALit didn’t age well when it was posted Everyone has circle jerked the Russians for decades and god knows why

Till 1990 the F16 wasn't that great, as it had no Sparrow missiles. They only integrated the AMRAAM for BVR, which massivly improved its capabilities.

😂😂😂

About MiG-29 is true. MiG was perfect for dogfights, but for long-distance air battle - no. However, soviets had su-27 which was pretty good for both kinds of air battle.

F4 Near to Retrirment Nato say F4 were need you Back

I second this.

Google

Yeah, you can tell by how many Americans whine. They're so used to propaganda that paints them as invincible even though they only fight third-world countries like Iraq and can't even win in Afghanistan or Vietnam.

@@AvroBellow I see a bunch of Warsaw Pact fans complain that he has a Western bias. Watch his video on the F-35 vs the SU-35. Alot of angry Russians.

Scorpion Firesome Balkans would win. Just my opinion.

Scorpion Firesome does that include Greece?

Turkish army cant even properly fight against ISIS.

Germanium true

+Germanium they are not fighting ISIS at all. They're only fighting Assad and so helping ISIS

Sir Edward Heath without control of the air the Soviets commanders would probably be prisoners.

Air power is overrated. The Soviets would have controlled the air by stationing a shitload of T-72 and T-80 tanks at the conquered NATO bases. That's the point of this anecdote. The Red Army conquered the ground first then the air during WW2.

Because Germanys air power was forced to fight against the bomber attacks in the west.

Sir Edward Heath didnt get it

@@benyamaha4426 most likely the shorter the airwar , more the advantage is with WP.Longer the airwar NATO has edge as 1-NATO aircraft are more reliable and made for long hours 2-More available reserves from USA/canada 3-The initial WP strike will achieve their purpose likely but significantly deplete the strike planes and escorts available to them 4-Would be interestng to see if USSR does not use any su-27 in the initial assault and use the PVO + VVS flankers ( approx 400 + in mid-1989) as a "fleet in being " for a counter strike

Yeah his videos are merely interesting theory I think, nothing more than just a proposed war game vision

@@anrw886 kind of yes. He his videos make me think of a middle schooler trying to give a military lecture. Both amusing and strangely fascinating. Even when he gets certain points right he has no real understanding of what those points mean or how impactful they are. He stretches the likelihood of certain outcomes and lowers others in order to influence the results and make them believable.

Jezza NATO would have won in the long, long, long run. However in the short run its a tie. Now as for ground military, I think it's safe to say that the Soviets had that in the bag.

If you look at the lists he provides more closely, you realize that NATO led in the numbers of good and modern aircrafts. Most of WP's planes were mediocre or poor. NATO air forces marginally win in this scenario, because it is able to deliver more damage to the WP ground troops than they themselves take.

jurisprudens Quantity over Quality is only viable with large differences in quantity.

@@nickcalderon2637 WOULDNT SAY IN THE BAG

@@andrewfranciscohughes2481 I would. The WP had the most potent land forces in military history.

@Mists & Shadows Someone's done their research.

Mists & Shadows holy shit someone who isn’t just talking out their ass in this comment section. You have no idea how much respect I have for you right. Good job brother.

@Mists & Shadows Where tf did you even got all that information?

Mists & Shadows fuck asks man that’s like a fucking easey

Exactly

I doesn't help to have aircraft able start from improvised airfields in central europe. Plenty of concrete and asphaltet areas there. Heck, you could event start B-52s from a lot of the Autobahns. Much better infrastructure than the WP in central europe. High tech industry in every small city could out-manufacture WP countries by a factor of 100.

That’s just not true

@@markusweissenbock6337 that is really not true. you cant land a fighter jet on a motorway. you can maybe take off from one if its long and straight enough but that is really unlikely in most cases. it is extremely useful for aircraft to land on impoverished airfeilds. it is stupid to say there is more concrete than feilds and natural terrain in west europe. you heavily underestimate powerful warsaw pact industry, and overestimate NATOs industry as well. there were no "high tech industries in every small city" that is comedical thing to say. it is known soviet factories could produce much more and much faster than western european ones (mainly because there werent a lot of big factories in west europe) eastern infrastucture was similar to western one. but that doesn't even matter because planes cant take off from motorways except in very specific cases

Yes

Good idea

And the winner will be Bhutan.

Good one, although I think China would win.

Pablo de la Torre Gálvez maybe marginal.

*Nothing happens because they're a continent away and neither has overwhelming naval supremacy*

How do you invade the other side of world without suffering many casualties.

Both sides don't have the necessary replenishment fleet size to sustain a large fleet that far. Even the UK and Frence over seas bases have the capability to support a few ships at max.

I think it is based on the equipment and flight performance of the plane. The kill ratios of the two planes are not that useful, as they happend under different circumstances. E.g. the Mig 23 was often flown by poor trained pilots against more modern enemies, whereas the F15 was flown by well trained pilots against older planes. Furthermore, the US F15 enjoyed force multipliers like AWACS. Also the effectivness of planes changes with the number of planes. The 200 km range of the F15 radar loses part of its advantage, if you lose situational awareness, because the airspace is too crowded.

DJ Frank Poland vs Russia's slave Belarus

вампир кобато that's not even a fight, it's just Poland bitchslapping a minion

DJ Frank ukraine is already destroyed

Afrid Abirov Are you Belarusian? So you are Russian's slave hahaha 🙄

Lukashenko should go to hell. Why he doesn't side with Ukraine why?? Why he side with Russia?? Fuck Belarus!! Russia's slave

вампир кобато california is in the usa...

DaTurdburglar that's the joke.

Abage im autismo pls no bully

Trapped behind enemy lines

Green Acorn why not the Zulu against some north American tribe?

*Nothing happens because they're a continent apart and neither has overwhelming naval supremacy*

Panda Boss He smushed the US and Russia together for the arena war.

In a real-geography war, complete stalemate. In an arena war, I have no idea

Shivansh 2018 Nautiyal those guys are lovers, not fighters

Shivansh 2018 Nautiyal PUTIN WOULD BITCH SLAP TRUMP AND TRUMP WOULD CRY LIKE THE BITCH HE IS.

unclejoeoakland 😂😂😂😘😘😘😘😘

Trump has said on the record that he "doesn't believe in exercising" while Putin has a black belt in Judo and is nearly ten years younger ...

I think Putin could bitch slap trump. Be he will need a chair to get high enough to deliver it.

It isnt, its Rugby for wimps... When did you ever see a rugby player wearing body armour and a helmet?

But it's not football it's rugby for cowards.

Burger yeah, you're right, let's call a sport where you touch a ball first and foremost with feets soccer, and let's call instead a sport where you seldom kick an object with not even a roundish shape football.

He should start a historic channel. Habsburgs vs Ottoman Empire etc.

Shut up yank! Tea is love, tea is life and Football(what you wrongly call "Soccer") is thousand times better than Handegg (what again you wrongly call "Football")

Fliyo MB Ура! => Hurraah.

Хм => hmmm.

Fliyo MB in 1989 most likley I hope we get paid this year

Most likely, "where do we get meat today?". The "I hope to get paid" thing came later, in the 1990s. ;)

jurisprudens Soviet pilots were better fed and payed than ground troops. So probably they would have meat and payment no matter which year :)

chkoti366 if pakistan captured jammu and kashmir then india will be dead..

and obviously china will win

no need we all know who would win

Afrid Abirov but Pakistan won't capture Jammu and kashmir

1962

GOOD

Yeah but some of them are still arguing each other.

Japan has the superior naval power in this matchup, but Japan wouldn't be able to make massive landings. At most, maybe a few islands

i think US has problems with all the countries in BRICS, they would probablly declare war in the US side too, and Cuba/Venezuela would for sure ally anyone that wants to destroy the US note...on this comment i was trying to be impartial, if i dont say this a lot of people would throw to me like mad dogs :P

but, again, trying to be impartial...he...seems to have a problem with russia, he has been trying hard to put russia down in every video he makes, and what i mean is that he dosnt put some good russian weapons, and some good tanks, have been classified by him as "ex-soviet tanks in storage" or something like that, he also puts a much smaller number on them and the excellent are classified as good, the good as mediocre and the mediocre as bad, so honestly, if he dosnt make a video where he puts what each side really has, and classify them correctly, i think it dosnt make sense to watch that video, because he will put a much smaller arsenal on russia side and probablly on the whole russia-china block, so that makes a lost war for them, anyway, i liked the world war 3 scenario idea :) edit: some people Said something about the logistics, and thats why he dosnt put the whole number, but i dont think so, but anyway, if he uses logistics, then use the same for both sides, its not like you are going to watch by example football and tell a team that its players cant use one of their legs lol

Asumming no nukes involved, this will be an interesting fight. US side would have the technological edge while the Russians/Chinese would have the numerical advantage

Continuing from what You Remember and Eduardo said, I imagine the other CSTO nations, Iran, Iraq, Serbia and Pakistan would join the sino-russian side

actually cool idea)

Махамбет Мамыров thanks!

Tristissimvs Hominvm Trump and Putin jump out of plane and fistfight while falling.

Tristissimvs Hominvm Neither Carry weapons. He’d essentially be doing a few US planes vs a few Russian planes.

butike goloko I hate to say it, but The Philippines would lose

MasterOfNoodles i just want to know how fast they will lose.

Meester Writer Your comment itself is cringey

fuck you got me there

Meester Writer normie

Basically this. It's only understnadable since US is the biggest NATO player (while Soviet is the biggest WP player) that NATO will most likely be on the disadvantage on the ground war. It's a lot harder to transport tanks and other equipment over an ocean than on land. If geography somehow changed and North America is literally next to Europe without a large mass of water, it would drasitcally give NATO a huge advantage

NATO forces were more diversified. This might have given them an advantage in overall tactics. The WP just simply had to adjust for a variety of different attacks while themself they were bound to strict ruling. Of course, that all under the assumption of non-nuclear attacks.

vodka beer is over rated

reincarnation of Kurt Cobain Texas would win cause there are more gun lovers and a lot of ex military

deathphantomdaredevil 9000 lol i know

deathphantomdaredevil 9000 California has larger military presence though, just look at how many military installations California has. Major military contractors, like Lockheed Martin has factories in California.

Mickey G so then it's not just Texans vs Californians? Lol

Carl Bergquist definitely finland 🇫🇮 they have massive marine ship and air craft

Surely you mean Sweden victorious, then? Swedish air forces _and_ navy fleet are both far superior to us Finns, and have been for the wole duration of Finnish independence. Land forces not so much (though Swedes are a tad better equipped), especially considering that we have more guts to fight. I'm assuming the scenario would not be for this shameful period of 2010-17 when Sweden had its conscription abolished?

Stål Handske While abolishing the conscription may have been a really bad decision in hindsight knowing how the world looks now (and arguably without hindsight as there are benefits of the program for society in general, but anyway), it made sense due to the doctrine change. Going from a force made to defend from the invasion of a neighboring superpower to one of international peace-keeping was made because the superpower was no longer as big of a threat and keeping the rest of the world at peace made sure that consequences didn't spread to us (like hundreds of thousands of refugees fleeing the middle east creating the... politically interesting... situation we are in now). Would these missions worked and kept the world more peaceful than the price of the positive effects of the conscription program might have been worth it. But now with that price paid *and* our home region once again feeling pressure from the superpower in the east we got stuck with all the negatives and none of the positive aspects. Sorry if I'm rambling a bit. But analyzing decisions, especially bad ones, and seeing if they made sense at the time is something I find really interesting.

Sería casi imposible que sucediera eso porque ambos son neutrales, se concentran principalmente para la defensiva que la ofensiva.

No, he meant exactly ballistic missiles. "Aeroballistic" missiles, to be precise. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kh-15

I think it’s because us Argentines had lesser skilled pilots.

They shot down export-version Mirages that were fighting at the outer edges of their range and constantly had to fly back to get refuelled. Most of those kills were on planes flying away from them. Again, context is everything.

하성태 Islamic countries of course.

Pavel Krit Well...It will be a bloody battle...

In terms of nuclear firepower, EU has France (300 medium-yield) while Islam has Pakistan (130-ish, low-yield)

Gloves off the Islamic countries don't stand a chance. That ia how they got colonised.

@@Ag3nt0fCha0s That was over 100 years ago now are strong

Of all this branches of war, when it comes to air space if not before, Swedish and Finnish neutrality would be breached, one way or another. Either shooting down Soviet aircraft doing shortcuts, or not shooting down Nato aircraft doing the same, they would have been given free passage and access to at least emergency landings.

He didn't forget, he mentioned Sweden and Finland in another video saying that while they would likely side with NATO, it was not guaranteed.