Survivalist Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 214 Posts
A direct war between the US and Russia would eventually go nuclear.

For a long time neither side was insane enough to risk a nuclear exchange, and thus the USA and USSR never went to war directly, although they did use proxies.

Putin is smart enough never to engage in open warfare with the USA.

I don't know how smart our leaders are, but I hope they're not insane.

WWIII will almost certainly be started by the USA. They may do this as 1) the death rows of a collapsed superpower or 2) a desperate attempt to get the economy working.

Incidentally, the big banks loved WWI and WWII because they got to finance both sides of it and make a killing. I'm not sure if they'd feel the same way about WWIII. If they don't think they can make money off of a war between the US and Russia, then no war will happen.

Simple.
 
They are just going to mothball a few tanks and a few tens of IFVs in Eastern Europe. Hardly a deal breaker really.

What the Eastern Europeans want is a FOB as it would boost their economy and provide extra inward investment. That isn't on the table.
 
I'm in the army and I can honestly say first hand. We are not equipped to handle a war of that caliber. Our training is mediocre, gear is either out dated or fails to operate properly. I'm sure things would get more strict if something like that was to arise but as of right now I wouldn't feel comfortable with only the training I've recieved. And I'm 11B Infantry.
 
I'm in the army and I can honestly say first hand. We are not equipped to handle a war of that caliber. Our training is mediocre, gear is either out dated or fails to operate properly. I'm sure things would get more strict if something like that was to arise but as of right now I wouldn't feel comfortable with only the training I've recieved. And I'm 11B Infantry.
But just imagine how badly equipped and trained most Russian units are!
 
Difference being it takes on average 5 rounds for our rifle to make their body armor unusable (according to army standards). Their rifles only take 3 for our armor. The 5.56 was designed and used as a round to maim not kill. The idea behind it being if you maim a enemy it takes 2-3 soldiers off the field instead of just 1. The 7.62 was designed to kill. Plain and simple. People highly under estimate the Russian forces to be honest.
 
Difference being it takes on average 5 rounds for our rifle to make their body armor unusable (according to army standards). Their rifles only take 3 for our armor. The 5.56 was designed and used as a round to maim not kill. The idea behind it being if you maim a enemy it takes 2-3 soldiers off the field instead of just 1. The 7.62 was designed to kill. Plain and simple. People highly under estimate the Russian forces to be honest.
I don't think that is going to make much difference in the grand scheme. A bigger issue is the wide range of different NATO units that would be simultaneously engaging Russian forces. It looks like it will be around ~4000 NATO troops taking rotations.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/05/nato-4000-rapid-reaction-force-baltics-russia
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/03/w.../europe/nato-to-create-interim-rapid-response-force-to-counter-russia.html?_r=0

Russian troops were very poorly equipped in the 1940's, and defeated an invading army 3 million men strong.
The Russians would be on the offensive in this case.
 
We will never go to war with Russia during Obama's tenure. He promised to end wars and never get involved again and we all know he is a man of his word when it comes to campaign promises. We would just do the liberal thing --- surrender and call it a day. That way, we'd have the "correct form of government here" without the need for the potus's pen and phone to fundamentally transform America.
 
I don't think that is going to make much difference in the grand scheme. A bigger issue is the wide range of different NATO units that would be simultaneously engaging Russian forces. It looks like it will be around ~4000 NATO troops taking rotations.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/05/nato-4000-rapid-reaction-force-baltics-russia
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/03/w.../europe/nato-to-create-interim-rapid-response-force-to-counter-russia.html?_r=0



The Russians would be on the offensive in this case.
Read my post up the thread. Russia will never be the aggressor in a war between the USA and Russia.
 
Discussion starter · #13 ·
Russian troops were very poorly equipped in the 1940's, and defeated an invading army 3 million men strong.
Didn't we send them a lot of materials and weapons? For the most part they were fighting Germany with us attacking from the other side. I believe if we followed patrons advice and attacked russia after ww2 when they were extremly weak. We wouldn't have had most every war we've had since.
 
Didn't we send them a lot of materials and weapons? For the most part they were fighting Germany with us attacking from the other side. I believe if we followed patrons advice and attacked russia after ww2 when they were extremly weak. We wouldn't have had most every war we've had since.
Yes, the US sent the USSR some weapons, but that wasn't the whole story. For example, the USSR had no real air force, and had to produce most of its tanks and heavy weapons domestically.

The Soviets pounded out a few million rifles out of scrap metal, put them in the hands of poorly trained peasants, and set them against one of the most formidable militaries ever fielded. And they won.

Most Americans think that the USA won WWII. In reality, the soviets did, and would have crushed the Nazis even without American help.

As to a military solution against the USSR, the spring of 1946 would have been the perfect time. Alas, it was not to be.

One could make the argument that we would have been better served allying with the Nazis to defeat the USSR, who was the greater long term threat.
 
FWIW, here is one Ukrainian citizen's current opinion of potential conflict between Russia and the West.

http://www.angelfire.com/extreme4/kiddofspeed/maydan/updatedecember3.html
"December 3, News on situation in Ukraine.

I want my readers to know that if I will not update my pages for a while then it because I have no electricity. Neighborhood has no electric power half of the time, the reason no coal on Power Plants. Something telling me this is beginning of really huge mess.

If situation in Ukraine only dangerous for own people Russia present danger for all the planet. They consider Western sanctions as act of aggression and really ready to leap. I wonder if NATO is ready as well? No doubt, NATO is well equipped, courageous army officers and soldiers but remember Napoleon words that an Army of lions commanded by a deer will never be an army of lions. Obama not even a deer, he look more like cross of [deleted] with [deleted]. The whole bunch of corporate puppet leaders- slow and irresolute will be disaster in open war with Russia."
 
For example, the USSR had no real air force
O RLY?
Zero AF at all ?

What about 36 183 armoured ground-attack Il-2 ?
16 769 - single-engine fighter Yak-9 ?
11 427 - dive bomber Pe-2 ?
etc

Up to May 1945 there were 47 300 aircrafts in Soviet AF (9700 - bombers, 10100 - ground attack, 27500 - fighters).

Lend-lease
Fighters:

Р-40 (B and C)- 247
P-40D - 1887
P-39 - 4952
P-63 - 2400
P-47 - 195
------------
9681

Bombers:

А-20 - 2771
B-25 - 861
-------------
3632

Other - 813
Total from US - 14126

From Great Britain
Hurricane - 4171

Total from US and GB (1941-1945) - 18297

Know smth about Kuban air battles (April-June 1943) ?
1100 German airplanes destroyed.
Just like in the Battle of Britain with 1800 German aircraft destroyed.
 
Read my post up the thread. Russia will never be the aggressor in a war between the USA and Russia.
It's hard to tell just how crazy someone is until they finally do something to convince you of it. Never say never.
 
I've avoided saying this because any comparison with Nazi Germany tends to come across as hyperbole, but I see many comparisons between Russia today and Germany in the 1930s, and between Putin today and Hitler. I am not talking about gassing Jews. The comparisons that I see are: formerly powerful country that lost a major conflict and lost much of its power, influence and pride; a leader who greatly resents this loss and plays on his people's sense of humiliation and pride to become a dictator; this dictator seeks, with some justification, to reunite the former empire and rebuilt its strength and sense of national pride. In the 1930s, these trends ran headfirst into an ironclad British and French treaty with Poland. When Hitler tried to take the German city of Danzig back, Britain and France declared war (foolishly, in my opinion), and WWII started, due to the actions of Germany but not due to Germany actually choosing to start WWII.

OK, that said, my answer to the OP's question ...

1 - I don't think anything Russia is doing is any of the U.S.'s business, though we may be painted into a corner at some point by NATO obligations (our equivalent of the British-French treaty with Poland?). We should leave NATO as soon as we legally and morally can do so, in my opinion, for precisely this reason, to avoid getting dragged into a European war.

2 - If war did come, the Russian military is currently no match for the American military. But things can change ... ask the Wehrmacht.
 
Read my post up the thread. Russia will never be the aggressor in a war between the USA and Russia.
Nor would the US. Russia, however, is surely the agitator by hitting and bullying former Soviet states that are friendly to the US.

Granted, I understand why Russia would not want US interest right next to their boarder... However, they also need to understand that the disdain and hatred for Russia from these former states are of their own creation.. The US had nothing to do with the putrid hatred held by these nations for Russia as many were victims of decades of a brutal dictatorship. One only needs to ask an East German how they feel about Russia to see what being part of the former Soviet Union means.
 
I think the USA and Russia are already at war and have been essentially since WWII. Just both sides have an agreement not to **** where they eat and are using other countries territories and human chess pieces to play out there game.

The situation now sucks that way, but the alternative of fighting each other directly would probably suck a whole whole lot more.

WWIII is now, but the casualties are mostly foreigners, dollars, and the wealth, prosperity and freedoms of Russians and Americans (and allies).
 
1 - 20 of 214 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.