One thing about Russia.....yes it's a monster, but here's the thing.....every invasion of Russia has come from where?   From the West.....and failed b/c Russia would fall back to the east and use the terrain that way.

 

What if you could establish a forward base in their east, and work westward, there would be no churn and burn and run from Russia, the only runnin they'd do is out of room...unlike the past.

 

Never say never to anything.....and I wasn't aware that the US ground forces only = 800k.   Thought we were at 1.5 million at a minimum....

 

At any rate, the same could be said of Russia establishing a base in Canada to attack the US, but we're talkin the US vs Russia with the US invading.  

 

A few other things need to go into this too.   The People of Russia, would they welcome the US as liberators or aggressors?   The Putin Gov't has rubbed a lot the wrong way imo....

 

But as I've said b4,  militarily the Russians have my respect as a top notch military with advanced weaponry.   They're on par with anyone in the world imo....lacking behind probably only the US in certain areas.   I don't doubt their tenacity or their heart to fight.   But don't compare the US in Iraq to how we'd fight the Russians if it were to happen.   The US has two war modes.  for regional weaker foes we tend to go easy on them with political limitations.   For a country that has every ability to wipe us out in battle (IE Russia) I know that we'd go back to WWII tactics to win (Minus a-bombs if possible but always an option if in our favor)

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.

 

Did you ever notice that when these stupid (yes, stupid) one-line scenarios (if a simple question of "X v. Y:  who wins?" can even be considered worthy of the label "scenario") involve America on one side, then most of the answer is already implicitly conceded.  By that I mean that the discussion pretty much invariably and immediately converges on the idea (typically a silly idea at that) of America invading and trying to occupy Country Y.  Of course, for many countries the idea we would try to occupy them is just absurd, yet this seems to be taken by some as being some sort of militarily-significant fact that indicates some sort of parity or at least a weakness in the American military.  Meanwhile, at least one "half" of the scenario could be assessing how well Country Y could take the war to America, even to the point of invading and occupying us.  Heh heh, no point in wasting time on that half of the scenario.  My theory is this convergence occurs because it's about the only room for any sort of discussion, as discussing an "America v. Country Y" scenario with the battlefield pretty much anywhere outside of pretty much any Country Y is a foregone conclusion (maybe with a couple exceptions, some of which are just utterly absurd ideas to begin with, such as "USA v. France" or "USA v. UK" for example), so certain people find solace in rushing to the extreme edge of the scenario and then declaring that America can not win at that extreme.  Um, okay, you're right, so I guess you win the argument.  Wow, America must be weak or at least not so strong after all.

 

Why the heck do some people get agitated over the fact that for the last couple decades and for at least the next few decades (unless something very unusual occurs), America has had and will have the most powerful military on the planet?  So what?  That's a fact, drive on. 

 

Many of those Russian commonwealth allies had working democracies that were not under direct Russian influence.  If a country  simply have natural affinity for another larger country due to economic/historical/cultural ties,  breaking that affinity is not "liberation".  Now, if America had stood back and allowed the natural democratic process to take it's course, I doubt any Russian would feel betrayed if a pro-American candidate won the elections(disgruntled perhaps).  But the U.S didn't do that, instead the U.S committed a series of illegal actions to force those vassals into  pro-American regimes.  Now these illegal actions consisted of things like:

1.  Giving the pro-American candidate many times the campaign funds as his nearest unsupported competitor, when it was clearly prohibited under national laws.

2.  Giving the pro-American candidate unlimited media advertising access through American satillite TV and radio networks into the country in question, that is also illegal.

3.  Sending massive amounts of money and weapons to support "democratic" uprisings in already democratic states that simply didn't elect an U.S-backed leader.

4.  Sending massive amounts of money to ex-soviet military generals to overthrow democratically elected leaders who were not pro-American.

The russian army is actually more powerful then the u.s army. Russia has the second largest armend forces in the world. 1,5 million well trained soldiers. They have the largest air force in the world , 2,400 aircrafts (The U.S has 250). They also have about 9,300 ACV's ( the U.S has 1,400). And dont forget that russia also has 5,000
artillery (the U.S has about 350). And lets not take about their navy. Largest and most developed submarine force. I know these number sound crazy. I could'nt belive it myself. Now you might say, "well the U.S army is alot more advanced and newer". Well not really. The U.S.S.R broke down in 1991. I know for sure that 90% of the army are from the 80's. The MIG plains are very advanced. I have seen them. Im dont think that russia could actually invade the U.S but The U.S would'nt stand a chance. Russia is still a Superpower, if not a Megapower.

It's more then that now, it's around $32 Billion thanks to Putin. Why they may not be what they were back in the Soviet era, even if I was incharge of the worlds most advanced and largest military, ie the US, I still wouldn't want to face them, any way lets not get this "we're better then you" argument started again.

Why you didnt talk about STELT,f-117 or B2,russians have a big fear from that technology?

For a Nuclear War - USA have NORAD,so what have RUSSIA,and I'm not sure for taht,russia will survive after war?

 

Why you didnt talk about STELT,f-117 or B2,russians have a big fear from that technology?

For a Nuclear War - USA have NORAD,so what have RUSSIA,and I'm not sure for taht,russia will survive after war?

 

Really, I didn't know the Russians feared the US STELTH technology that much or at all....You cant really say they fear them beacause we hadn't had a war with Russia and we do not fully know what their SAM capabilites are however (the F-117correct me if Im wrong I really dont remember what plane it was) was shot down by a Russian SAM system in Yugoslavia? Now about NORAD yes we have NORAD but the Russians have a similar system and the base is located somewhere in the Urals region. However there has never been a nuclear exhange between the two countries so whats the real significance of these systems? who will come out on top after the nuclear exchange. the real answer would have to be after a first hand witnessing of the war. If that ever happens lets get back on this post and find out the winner. Thats if we survive that is.....haha.