It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Obama: US military ‘significantly superior’ to Russia’s

page: 4
24
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 06:45 AM
link   
I dont support military war in any way, but the US military are Giants when compared to any other country. Some posters are mixing up failures in occupying with failures in actual combat and engagement. Not only does the US have top technology when it comes to military weaponary, but they are the leader when it comes to training exercises around the world, they also engage in practice sessions with other countries due to their broad associations (like anti-terrorism training with the Israelis).

They are also allies and training partners with other nations who also are leaders in military technology, and also have a past of military invasion/imperialism (which believe it or not, counts when it comes to adding up experience to look back on).

And what are other people dont put into account - they have a large and high-tech spy network. If you think Afghanistan and Iraq was just oil and revenge, then you are wrong - the US i am sure infilitrated their gold-mine of terrorists networks that were hidden and in some cases ran those countries ( a country full of immigrants like the USA has its advantages, one being that we can hire a "die for the usa" american-born that is full-blooded muslim/arab, etc. to infiltrate and take over terrorist networks) - there is no coincidence that all these muslim countries are all of a sudden "REVOLTING" out of thin air, it started with the invasion of afghanistan and iraq, which were terrorists hot-spot centers that the USA now broke in and put under their wing.

I dont see Russia at that level at all.




posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 06:48 AM
link   
It was another red line statement made because he opened his mouth without a teleprompter. You have to wonder how long it took for someone to explain to him , we do not have significantly superior conventional forces to fight a war with Russia there and here.

The 10 million living here now



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 06:52 AM
link   
a reply to: MajorAce

Sure we do we just round em up here and throw em in a FEMA camp like we did the Japanese in WWW2.



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 06:54 AM
link   
a reply to: beezzer




Putin may have never attempted the takeover


Exactly the opposite of it, the Republicans and Democrats both support the fascists unelected officials in Office even if an Republican was in charge the war monger Republican cant pretty much do anything about Russia or its brothers in the east.

I guess you forget Iraq.



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 06:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: Agent_USA_Supporter
a reply to: beezzer




Putin may have never attempted the takeover


Exactly the opposite of it, the Republicans and Democrats both support the fascists unelected officials in Office even if an Republican was in charge the war monger Republican cant pretty much do anything about Russia or its brothers in the east.

I guess you forget Iraq.


I may never forget Iraq, but that's beside the point.

The minute Putin moved into Crimea, it was all over.

Putin knew the US was a toothless pup so it was not a worry.

We had removed our missile defense system previously, we had no footprint in Europe to make a move if required.

The "war" was over before it even got started.

Obama has failed to follow up on his promise to protect the Ukraine, he broke that pact.

Obama speaks loudly, but carries no stick, to coin a phrase.



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 07:15 AM
link   
What I thought was interesting about the statement from Obama was that he specified war with the United States, not with NATO. Maybe that was a slip of the tongue but If Obama is thinking in terms of America v. Russia then I have to wonder if the Ukraine is the only issue being discussed or is there something else partially driving this, like the Arctic?



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 07:26 AM
link   
a reply to: Vovin

The President of the United States is 100% correct on this issue. There is no question that the U.S. is the world's Only Military Super-Power. I applaud President Obama for making this point, while making it clear that Russia, (and the rest of the world for that matter) already knows this as a Fact.

It would be wise of Mr. Putin to remember that "people living in glass houses should not throw stones".
edit on 18-4-2014 by rickynews because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 07:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: rickynews
There is no question that the U.S. is the world's Only Military Super-Power.


You may be the most powerful military on paper.

Good luck trying to invade and occupy Russia or China.

You couldn't even pacify Vietnam, what chance would you have in a full out war with China or Russia?

No those two wouldn't even be able to even land troops in the USA but do you really think the USA could have a chance in hell of marching on Moscow or Beijing? Not a chance.



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 07:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: 4TheHighCyde20
Well, he's not wrong. US conventional forces are drastically superior to the Russians. This isn't even an opinion, it's fact. They're still operating 1980's Soviet tech. Putin is trying to modernize his military, but as he does so are the Americans.


Sure, and you must be living in the same 80s.

So what is the percentage of Russian hardware that is from Soviet 80s? Enlighten us.



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 07:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: rickynews
a reply to: Vovin

The President of the United States is 100% correct on this issue. There is no question that the U.S. is the world's Only Military Super-Power. I applaud President Obama for making this point, while making it clear that Russia, (and the rest of the world for that matter) already knows this as a Fact.

It would be wise of Mr. Putin to remember that "people living in glass houses should not throw stones".


Yeap, yet when American solders were sent to Iraq, their mommies had to buy them bullet proof vests, while the boys themselves had to dig through Iraqi scrap yards to chop up Soviet armor, so they can weld up soft vehicles in which they were ordered to driver around hostile territory.

It was called hillbilly armor.



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 07:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: rickynews
There is no question that the U.S. is the world's Only Military Super-Power.


You may be the most powerful military on paper.

Good luck trying to invade and occupy Russia or China.

You couldn't even pacify Vietnam, what chance would you have in a full out war with China or Russia?

No those two wouldn't even be able to even land troops in the USA but do you really think the USA could have a chance in hell of marching on Moscow or Beijing? Not a chance.


Vietnam was 46+ years ago, and much has been learned, and much more has been developed and deployed militarily since then...and Nobody is talking about marching on Moscow or Beijing. What President Obama is pointing out is that Russia already knows that U.S. Military capabilities are far superior than Russian (or any other nation's) military capabilities, and I believe Mr. Obama is signalling to Mr. Putin that "bravado diplomacy" will get him nowhere when dealing with the U.S. and its NATO allies.

Indeed, it is Lonely at the Top.
edit on 18-4-2014 by rickynews because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 07:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: ammocase
I dont support military war in any way, but the US military are Giants when compared to any other country. Some posters are mixing up failures in occupying with failures in actual combat and engagement. Not only does the US have top technology when it comes to military weaponary, but they are the leader when it comes to training exercises around the world, they also engage in practice sessions with other countries due to their broad associations (like anti-terrorism training with the Israelis).

They are also allies and training partners with other nations who also are leaders in military technology, and also have a past of military invasion/imperialism (which believe it or not, counts when it comes to adding up experience to look back on).

And what are other people dont put into account - they have a large and high-tech spy network. If you think Afghanistan and Iraq was just oil and revenge, then you are wrong - the US i am sure infilitrated their gold-mine of terrorists networks that were hidden and in some cases ran those countries ( a country full of immigrants like the USA has its advantages, one being that we can hire a "die for the usa" american-born that is full-blooded muslim/arab, etc. to infiltrate and take over terrorist networks) - there is no coincidence that all these muslim countries are all of a sudden "REVOLTING" out of thin air, it started with the invasion of afghanistan and iraq, which were terrorists hot-spot centers that the USA now broke in and put under their wing.

I dont see Russia at that level at all.


Here's the real level.

Guys with AKs are getting blasted by Cobras, easy hunting, right?

Just fly right on there, press a button and presto, guys with AKs are turned in to dog scraps.

Nope, a determined guy out there fighting a war for his land, even with a same old AK is still a warrior to be feared.

Here's one shooting back at a Cobra that's trying to strafe him, shoots the pilot dead.

www.youtube.com...

So what tech is thas? When in the 21st century, a guy with an AK can still flat out kill a Cobra pilot. Where is all that wonder super tech? Yeap, it's all dumped into the black hole of Pentagons wonderwaffe projects, all that cash simply stolen by MIC corporations, exactly what Dwight Eisenhower was warning America about during his last Presidential speech.



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 07:45 AM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok

If the military was allowed to be in charge of the war then yes I think we would have a fighting chance.

Hearts and minds are not something you win they are something you aim at


The civilians back home leashed our soldiers in Viet Nam as well as Iraq and Afghanistan. I am not saying we should violate the Laws of Land Warfare (Geneva or Hague conventions). I mean allow the actual tacticians to decide what to take and what to hold based on strategy rather than politics.

We shouldn't have to fight with Russia. If there is a war it is not America's to fight. Russia and America along with China SHOULD be working together to bring all the smaller countries "in line" and bring about stability.

What has the current administration done to promote stability either at home or abroad though?



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 07:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: renden

originally posted by: ammocase
I dont support military war in any way, but the US military are Giants when compared to any other country. Some posters are mixing up failures in occupying with failures in actual combat and engagement. Not only does the US have top technology when it comes to military weaponary, but they are the leader when it comes to training exercises around the world, they also engage in practice sessions with other countries due to their broad associations (like anti-terrorism training with the Israelis).

They are also allies and training partners with other nations who also are leaders in military technology, and also have a past of military invasion/imperialism (which believe it or not, counts when it comes to adding up experience to look back on).

And what are other people dont put into account - they have a large and high-tech spy network. If you think Afghanistan and Iraq was just oil and revenge, then you are wrong - the US i am sure infilitrated their gold-mine of terrorists networks that were hidden and in some cases ran those countries ( a country full of immigrants like the USA has its advantages, one being that we can hire a "die for the usa" american-born that is full-blooded muslim/arab, etc. to infiltrate and take over terrorist networks) - there is no coincidence that all these muslim countries are all of a sudden "REVOLTING" out of thin air, it started with the invasion of afghanistan and iraq, which were terrorists hot-spot centers that the USA now broke in and put under their wing.

I dont see Russia at that level at all.


Here's the real level.

Guys with AKs are getting blasted by Cobras, easy hunting, right?

Just fly right on there, press a button and presto, guys with AKs are turned in to dog scraps.

Nope, a determined guy out there fighting a war for his land, even with a same old AK is still a warrior to be feared.

Here's one shooting back at a Cobra that's trying to strafe him, shoots the pilot dead.

www.youtube.com...

So what tech is thas? When in the 21st century, a guy with an AK can still flat out kill a Cobra pilot. Where is all that wonder super tech? Yeap, it's all dumped into the black hole of Pentagons wonderwaffe projects, all that cash simply stolen by MIC corporations, exactly what Dwight Eisenhower was warning America about during his last Presidential speech.



Maybe so, but it in no way changes the Fact that the U.S is a Superior Military by far and away.



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 07:51 AM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok

You know, If I was the one calling the shots I would not even try to invade/occupy Russia/China. I would just put our weapons to the test. I would level weak/small countries like Syria and North Korea. To get their attention, and then go after all of Russia/China's small allies and let them know that there is nowhere to run. If you go to ground then we take that ground from you.

Sure they may be able to slip a few nukes through our defensive capabilities, so what the U.S. is big enough to handle a few nukes. Meanwhile we start laying waste to all of Moscow and Beijing and all the other big cities and then demand a surrender with the notion that the weak shall perish.

Basically the U.S. has the tech to rule the world hands down, might as well get it over with that way we can have peace under the gun of course. After all, were humans, were a warrior race, why fight it lets embrace it. If we do, sure billions will die but at least we can move forward and progress through the universe after.

Just imagine how much stronger we will be when we rise from the ashes.



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 07:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: Skorpy
a reply to: crazyewok

You know, If I was the one calling the shots I would not even try to invade/occupy Russia/China. I would just put our weapons to the test. I would level weak/small countries like Syria and North Korea. To get their attention, and then go after all of Russia/China's small allies and let them know that there is nowhere to run. If you go to ground then we take that ground from you.

Sure they may be able to slip a few nukes through our defensive capabilities, so what the U.S. is big enough to handle a few nukes. Meanwhile we start laying waste to all of Moscow and Beijing and all the other big cities and then demand a surrender with the notion that the weak shall perish.

Basically the U.S. has the tech to rule the world hands down, might as well get it over with that way we can have peace under the gun of course. After all, were humans, were a warrior race, why fight it lets embrace it. If we do, sure billions will die but at least we can move forward and progress through the universe after.

Just imagine how much stronger we will be when we rise from the ashes.


That's crazy, Skorpy.
edit on 18-4-2014 by rickynews because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 07:59 AM
link   
a reply to: rickynews

It wasn't me that suggested it.



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 08:01 AM
link   
a reply to: Skorpy

No point ruling a ruined world is here?

That is the entire premise of MAD I would think.

The first country to launch a nuke loses the war. That should be obvious to everyone.

We won't be stronger when we rise from the ashes. We will be in another dark age. How long did it take to get back to Roman standards after she fell? How long to rebuild the Mycenaean civilization? Those were primitive standards and they were not dealing with fallout. It won't be as easy as it sounds. It will be a hundred years of brutal struggle and then hundreds more of rebuilding what was lost.



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 08:08 AM
link   

edit on 18-4-2014 by rickynews because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 08:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: rickynews

It wasn't me that suggested it.


I corrected it. Thanks.



new topics

top topics



 
24
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join