WW3 part two

I have a few problems with your first argument but to be fair I shall let you keep Iraq being out. When you would attack France while Germany and Russia take out Poland you would start to push them back. I shall agree to you taking France but with Germany right next to France that is a great route for escape. I say the French Troops are still around but France the country is taken. Now I am going to give some history facts. Have you ever heard of Hannibal? If so you would know he took about 40 elephants and 40,000 troops across the Alps to attack Rome. This took him about 2-3 months. Russia is moving motorized vehicles and can move much faster. They have roads instead of dirt paths like Hannibal had to trek so they would be able to move so much faster and be able to get their. Also not all troops are stationed past the Urals so with the troops stationed near Poland would be a good fighting force and when the other troops get there it would be an easy task. I don't agree with you Iraq claim but will let you keep it. They have been at war for 8 years and are only finally wearing them down since they destroyed their leaders but more will come but I will let you have it. Just gives more support for Germany. Now if Germany and Russia are attacking Poland at the same time I will give another history lesson. This one is about WWII. Germany foolishly attacked Russia, it is safe to say if they didn't the war would have gone on longer. Since they attacked Russia they had already had help from several countries and after they got so far Russia had enough. They pushed them back all the way to Berlin. That is no easy task with more than 1 country stopping their tracks such as Poland would be which Germany basically crushed. So with only one country in their way Russia with German help would be so quick that their would basically be little to no resistance for them. The sea battle I say you would win but Russia wouldn't just leave their ships to die. They would obivously send them back to defend their land with extra troops and planes and jets to protect them. With French troops and Germany to help defend with Poland taken the U.K. and U.S. have enough ground to cover and with those 2 counties alone would be able to hold back the U.K. easily so the U.S. would need to send more troops their which would be safe to say since Japan and S. Korea would concentrate on Russia. Japan and S. Korea may have won the sea battle easily but the ground battle is different. Let's have another History lesson. Napoleon, French Dictator. He thought he could take over Russia but as we all know that never happened. He lost almost all his troops to the harsh winters and with Russia knowing they couldn't stop Japan and S. Korea forever they would go through with the same tactics and destroy their cities, even though this would be costly to them they would have to warmth of their cities when they retreat and not have to deal with the Siberian winters which are some of the coldest in the world. My source shows military spending, now America spends so much more but it took 8 years and is still going on for them to defeat Iraq and Iran but as you can see they are very low on this list if they are even on it so we must ask ourselves are they really prepared for this war since Russia, France, and Germany are within the top 10. So is the U.K. and Japan but S. Korea isn't. The U.K. barley spends more than France and a little more than Germany so without the U.S. they are going to fail in the European Campaign. http://www.rickety.us... I shall leave it to this and hope you will accept the French retreat into Germany.