Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Russia Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: America vs. Russia
sooner    1/30/2004 11:22:14 AM
Allies--supposedly. Who would strategically win a war?
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17   NEXT
Panther       4/23/2007 3:46:10 AM

If Russia is helping China against the US, who will help Russia when China comes for mineral, araeble land and water rich Siberia?

I hear the Iranian's "might" send a squad from their propaganda division, that is.... if the Russians submit to the one true religon of peace! Other than that... we would be a big hypothetical hole in the middle of the N. American continent. Australia might be under the grip of the Dragon. Europe might be in their own quagmire of unabsorbed militant islamic immigrants. South America might be looking to the two Asian giants as a market for all of their drug's. And unless Africa ever gets it's act together, that continent would have too remain a big question mark for the forseeable future!
 
Hmmm.. Russia may be even more alone at that time than we are now. There is something very tragically Shakespearean about all of this...
 
Quote    Reply

McDohl       4/23/2007 1:17:18 PM
OK, let me tell you something about the world, there are three types of contries, developing ones, the developed countries and then there are the Untouchables wich include the USA and RUSSIA.  AND no one, not even the big bad ass China will put a scratch on Russia. You can't touch these nations no way. War is not the way they can take over. I literally mean it!
 
Quote    Reply

Barca       5/14/2007 12:45:13 PM

Russia is a ally on the war on terror and soon enough maybe closer military ties.  .... ALLIES.. USA + RUSSKA ALLIES always..:)

Good, this is excellent news.  Because so far there hasn't been any indication that such is the case.
US seemed to stand in Russia's way in the Serbian-Kosovo fight.  Whereas Russia seemed to prop up the Saddam government and now seems to be blocking all the World's efforts in bringing Iran in line. 
 
Being allies will prevent much future tragedy.
 
 
Quote    Reply

MoJoe       5/25/2007 12:52:39 PM
In the Short run: America
In the Long run: Russia
 
American equipment costs a lot to produce, maintain, and fix (otherwise produce to recoup loses)
 
Quote    Reply

cosmonaut    Stalemate   5/25/2007 2:14:34 PM
America could +never+ take Russia - it is just not feasible.   America could not realistically take China, for God's sake.

America is having so much trouble with Iraq battling dusty footed civilians armed with basic equipment, can you imagine them trying to occupy Russia?  Body Bag companies would be raking in record revenues.

One needs not occupy a land in order to defeat it.  But trying to defeat Russia by attacking her would only guarantee America's fall.  Russian technology is on par with America's, if not superior in several areas.  What they may lack in $ they make up for in strategic countermeasure technology.
 
Quote    Reply

displacedjim       5/25/2007 8:29:22 PM

America could +never+ take Russia - it is just not feasible.   America could not realistically take China, for God's sake.

America is having so much trouble with Iraq battling dusty footed civilians armed with basic equipment, can you imagine them trying to occupy Russia?  Body Bag companies would be raking in record revenues.


One needs not occupy a land in order to defeat it.  But trying to defeat Russia by attacking her would only guarantee America's fall.  Russian technology is on par with America's, if not superior in several areas.  What they may lack in $ they make up for in strategic countermeasure technology.

While there is no reason why America would ever start a war with Russia, it's laughable to think that Russia is anywhere close to equal to America in military might or in any significant category of military technology.
 
Quote    Reply

cosmonaut    displaced jim   5/26/2007 4:43:26 AM
hi jim

before i answer, let me first establish my underlying position.  i've looked at your posts;  you are obviously informed, astute, and probably patriotic.  believe me, so am i.  i refer to the patriotic part.  i think america is the greatest nation on the planet.  its citizens are fine people.  i've met, talked to, and fraternized with a diverse array of people from the usa.  and while i myself am not american, i'm not far off.  i am most certainly not an 'america basher.'  if any country were to take over the planet, my preference would be america, not russia or china or venezuela.  ;)

that said, you should not dismiss russian military prowess.  i think you know that nuclear power coupled with detection and sophisticated delivery means substantial adversary.  america can build all the capital-intensive 'floating war platforms' it wants, but those only work against enemies without the capability to disrupt their function.  one radar-evading nuclear missile nullifies that advantage.  but then, only a rare handful of states possess that ability.  russia is one of them.  i presume this is the rationale behind the russian's publically stated strategy of 'smarter' countermeasures, not brute force of quantity.  remember, nukes change the ballgames.  competent delivery levels the playing field, no matter how many sluggers one side has.

i hope russia and the usa become allies, not foes.  your commonalities are now more apparent than ever.  russians admire the american way of life.  but like any other 'peoples', they are not ready to concede their dignity. 

thanks,

cosmo.

 
Quote    Reply

displacedjim       5/26/2007 9:47:52 AM
Cosmo,
 
I don't dismiss Russian military prowess.  I give my opinion of it.  I've reread what you wrote, and maybe you're referring to some sort of anti-ship missile.  However, I'm not sure of that.  The most commonly discussed Russian manuevering
nuclear missile is the MaRV-equipped SS-27 ICBM.  While it would be difficult to employ an ICBM as an anti-ship missile, in case you mean that, I do include them in my comment.  They are militarily insignificant.  The reason they are insignificant is because Russia already has a couple thousand RVs that already are militarily extremely significant, and thus an extra 40 RVs that can manuever a bit on their way down makes no difference when they could be accompanied by 1000 that don't.  Nuclear weapons do not mean that war is impossible--whether between a country that has them and one that does not, or even between two countries that both have them--and they don't make two countries equal in military capability or define who would win or lose a war.  This is primarily true because the likelihood they would be used is next to zero.  ICBMs are for when another country fires ICBMs at yours.  If no one launches first, no one launches at all.  In the meantime, the war is fought and finished without using them.
 
Quote    Reply

mithradates    DisplacedJim   5/26/2007 11:27:15 AM
The fact of the matter is the average Russian(and Chinese) probably thinks Americans are a fine people.  But, the U.S government has betrayed Russia after the Soviet collapse.  It's one thing to give lip-service about democracy and freedom, but it's quite another to treat a fallen great power with respect and dignity.  And that is something that the U.S  has failed to do with Russia, or with us for that matter.  Instead of helping Russia after they became a democracy, the U.S stripped them of all honor, and took away their vassal states.  You cajoled(is that the right term?) them to shrink their strategic weapons, while you building up a missile defense at home.  In the mid-90s, the Russians followed the advice of U.S economic delegates to that country.  When that bankrupted the Russian economy, the U.S condescendingly treated the Russians like paupers.  Is it any wonder that Russia's government system has transformed into what it is now(an authoritarian oligarchy with handpicked elections)

Now from a Chinese perspective, it's all very depressingly similar to the treatment we received from the U.S at the end of the cold war, where we were chucked out as an expendable pawn.  All of the economic/military agreements between our two nations were simply cancelled with the U.S keeping all the funds that China paid for them.  Do you realize that both Moscow and Beijing used to be the seat of vast Eurasian empires that dominated the world?    The Russians can't forget the power they had, and neither can we.  Russia is now committed into an alliance with China.
 
Quote    Reply

french stratege       5/26/2007 12:29:05 PM
Invading and occupy Russia? Good luck.Even a guerilla would be a nightmare if Russian would not have use their nukes.
And US ground forces are only 800 000.
Bombing Russia?
Even their air force is not on par, they have a SAM based air defense and they still have possibility to disrupt USAF air operation on such a territory and they can answer with their SSN or bombers on US fleets going nuclear or not.
They still have 30 potent and trained SSN/SSK.
Their strategic force allow them to use tactical nukes and no victory is possible on Russia with such means.
 
 
 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics