I give it maybe 3 years, then it will either be "hot" or just end in another "peace treaty"

 

Uncle Sam needs another foreign distraction to rally the sheeple behind the government, to help us forget all about this liberty stuff.

 

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.

 

I don't think it would necessarily go nuclear at all. Would be fought for a while and before Moscow falls there would be a treaty to help them save face as well. It would be a terrible waste of lives so I sure hope it never happens. However, Putin is showing that he's NOT smart enough to avoid an open war with the US right now. What he's doing with his troops and planes in Syria (and what the US is doing as well) is providing a very real opportunity for the sort of mistake and incident that would start a war. Not smart at all. He's counting on US leadership being soft and backing down yet again but I don't think he has a grasp on how changeable American political will is. The public might not support military action NOW, but if some incident occurs, the public might demand action and Obama would find himself compelled to respond. Thus, a war could start. I really hope that doesn't happen, but things are escalating and now some reports are saying that the CHINESE will start flying missions off their carrier and now we'll have THEM in the mix. They're so inexperienced with these sorts of operations that they are MUCH more likely than the Russians to accidentally bomb US troops or something like that which could cause a war. We will see...

 

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.

 

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.

 

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.

 

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."

 

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.

 

I agree with your analysis, however, regarding the reason for WWII had many veriables. One being what the former Weimar Republic did to deal with war reparations from WWI that drove the German economy into the ground. Hitler had utter disdain for France and Britain for how they were able to so easily manipulate the Weimar Republic into the treaty of Versailles. Granted, vague explanation of events but I feel this was a major contributor to the actions of Hitler and the start of WWII.

However, that being said, the absolute comparison between Hitlers Nazi party and the likes of Putin's gain into power is not only a brilliant observations, it makes total sense.

 

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).

 

Patton knew exactly what we were going to have to deal with and also knew eventually, the two nations would collide.

We promised the Europeans freedom. It would be worse than dishonorable not to see they have it. This might mean war with the Russians, but what of it? They have no Air Force anymore , their
gasoline and ammunition supplies are low.I've seen their miserable
supply trains;mostly wagons draw by beaten up old hoses or oxen.
I'll say this ;the Third Army alone with very little help and with
damned few casulaties,could lick what is left of the Russians in six
weeks. You mark my words.Don't ever forget them. Someday we
will have to fight them and it will take six years and cost us six
million lives.

General George S. Patton

 

And back on the topic, VDH thinks conditions now are a lot like 1914. Postwar order is crumbling, combined with American indifference


http://www.nationalreview.com/article/393896/war-clouds-horizon-victor-davis-hanson

 

Good article. Can we overcome our biggest challenge being our budget is mostly socialist entitlement programs (like Europe)and we have a population of low information maxed out zombie credit card shoppers.
The combination of drawing down our defense budget and forces along with adopting European style social programs handicaps us greatly.

 

I agree with your whole post but this right here in my opinion is gold.

 

We are going pretty far down a rabbit hole with this ... but to think out the hypothetical:

Before Russia could invade Turkey with a large force, Russia would need to mass a large force on/near the Turkish border. The U.S. has satellites that monitor Russian troop movement; the U.S. and its NATO allies also have spies who would hopefully tip us off to plans. We would most likely have some time (days at least) to prepare.

As you say, we could not move a force sufficient to defeat a 1,000,000-man Russian invasion force in days; however, we could, and would, move thousands of troops into Turkish border regions (I personally know of two brigades that could be there within 18 hours, and there are more). We could, and would, move carrier groups to the region. We could, and would, warn Russia of a severe military response through diplomatic channels and/or publicly. We could, and would, start the process of moving a force sufficient to defeat the Russian invasion force toward Turkey - it could not arrive in time, but it would arrive eventually, sure as death, and Russia would know that.

If Russia invaded Turkey, most likely, it would win the battle, lose the war. Since Russia is not very dumb, they would most likely not go through with an invasion of Turkey once U.S. forces were inserted into Turkish border regions.

I'll note again that Britain is a reliable ally, and in this hypothetical situation, I am sure that Britain would also insert troops and otherwise make it clear that the invasion would ultimately fail. I am also sure that Germany would dither, trying to be a go-between rather than acting as a NATO ally ... and I am sure that France would bloviate and do little or nothing.

 

Have you seen the Russian drivers? Riiight, I wont be losing any sleep over a war with Russia.

 

"The unknown" rates pretty high on the list of fears. And a lot of people are so worried about taking opponents lightly that they do the opposite of that.

Plus, look how big Russia is on the map. And remember what happened to Napoleon and Hitler. There is a lot of scary conventional wisdom about Russia.

But, we are not talking about invading Russia, we are talking about defending against a Russian invasion.

Russian population: 144 million
U.S. population: 320 million
This surprises a lot of people based on sheer geographic size. Russia's population is a little smaller than Bangladesh's population and a little larger than Japan's population. Also note: France, Germany and the UK combine for a population of 207 million. In our hypothetical, Turkey would add another 80 million (this is 287 total in Europe and the British Isles - double Russia's population), and that's ignoring all of the other NATO member countries such as Norway, Italy etc.

Russian GDP: $2 trillion
U.S. GDP: $16.2 trillion
Russia has a lower GDP than Germany, France and the UK. Globally, it ranks below Brazil and above Italy.

Russian military budget (estimated): $87.8 billion
U.S. military budget (estimated): $640 billion
Russia spends disproportionately on its military compared with other countries, and ranks #3 in the world in military spending after the U.S. and China. Note, however, that France, Germany and the UK combine for about $170 billion, nearly double Russia's military budget.

So - once you get past the giant red area on the map - in any major conflict with NATO, Russia would be badly outmanned, and badly outgunned.

Russia's only major advantage would be geographic proximity to the battle, combined with the fact that many European countries do not maintain strong militaries due to their dependency on the U.S. Russia could roll or march to the battle. Most of our forces would travel by sea or air. And, it would take time for a European country (for example, Germany) to decide to get serious about national defense, and build a military strong enough to defend its borders against Russia. There is no permanent reason they cannot do this, but I doubt they will as long as we're around to provide free protection.

 

I fail to see why this would lead to WWIII.

 

Unless China joins in, there's no way. And why would they fight their #1 customer?

 

Not with this president sitting in office. He wouldn't go to war if the US were invaded.

 

I think you misunderstand Obama. He's so desperate for a "legacy" you don't know what crazy thing he'll do.

He remembers, as most liberals do, how well beloved FDR is/was because of his involvement in WW2, the so-called "good war".

Of course you and I know FDR for who he really was, but most people don't.

Obama craves that legacy.

 

It's hard to say especially with the president we have in office right now.

 

Maybe the Russian M.I.C. and the US M.I.C. will collectively meet behind the same doors (they obviously meet together regarding the space station), and agree to stage a faux war. Not just another proxy war, but a non-existent war. A war of words, a war of politics, lots of bombs here and there for the medias to sensationalize, but ultimately each side may go to its respective governing bodies and justify billions and billions more in expenditures & profits.

If war wasn't so profitable, it wouldn't be fought. And it's not just the spoils of war, but the making of the tools of war.

 

That is an incredibly simplistic view. There are many possible reasons to fight a war, some more complex than others. The makers of spears did not start Alexander's campaigns, and the manufacturers of rifles did not trigger the American Civil War. It is certain the MIC has an influence on Washington, but the view that somehow all policy is subject and slave to Raytheon and Boeing is frankly absurd.

 

If we tie up with them it will be real war...They are pretty damn good...The Sukoi 24 is a badass

 

But the F-35 is bad..... Yes, just bad :xeye:

Thank god we have the F-22 as the F-35 is one of the worst engineering disasters since the Osprey.

 

To all those, that think that Russian army is some kind of joke. Just imagine that these long distance missiles are coming our direction.

https://www.rt.com/news/317864-russian-warships-missiles-launch/

 

Heard this morning on Fox Russians intercepted 3 US Drones...lets see what the ***** in the White House does with that!!!

 

"Intercepted" means "shadowed" in this case. So it is possible they won't say anything.
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2015/1...7/exclusive-russian-jets-intercept-us-predator-drones-over-syria-officials-say/

 

No. Syria is having a civil war. The US has destabilized the Middle East for the last 12 years. Russia and the US are choosing different sides in Syria and we had better be careful. This is not the time to send a loose cannon into the fray like Trump.

 

I don't think we have ever seen such a bold and provocative move by Russia directed towards discrediting the US. Yes, there were many near misses in the cold war, but Russia is embarrassing us. Putin is putting Obama to school.

 

Hostility seems to be continuing to escalate, hopefully not leading to the big one.

Russia security paper designates Nato as threat - BBC

 

Similar headline on Reuters to what I previously posted earlier.

Putin names United States among threats in new Russian security strategy