It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

United States military compared to Russian military. Let's do the math and compare numbers.

page: 3
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in


posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 07:11 AM
a reply to: darkbake I hear people say that the USA has not won a war since ww2 but did they really ? There were a lot of countries that were fighting in that war .All of the British commonwealth was there ,but we are told by some that one of the last countries to get involved finally defeated Germany .I have heard it said that Germany would have won the war had they not taken on Russia . Now we have a scenario where China maybe India and all of the other countries that would not be considered a friend to US may actually be on the opposite side .

If it ever came to a head to head against the two it would probably be Russia being invaded seeing they are the ones being surrounded . I think that would be like trying to invade the US ... So the scenario is ,that the US have bases all over the world and would be targets for their enemy or enemy's ..Like the US with secret weapons I am sure others would have some secrets of their own . Oh and yes China would be a big player in this . I don't think there would be many countries that would have the appetite to get involved .Europe for one ....peace

posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 08:00 AM
These things are hard to undertand by just looking at charts and numbers. All the United States military and the all the Russian military are not going to get in one place and fight. Since Russia has no ability to project power beyond its border areas that is where a conflict would take place.

A war with the US would be a war with NATO. And along with that would come a collection of Russian enemies looking for a chance to act. Georgia, Ukraine and Moldova would all move to remove Russian forces from their borders. Azerbaijan backed by Turkey would no doubt move on Russian backed Armenia. And then you have the Caucasus where places like Chechenya would once again try and rise up and break free from Russian rule and in this case the US would likely give the Arab states the green light to arm and suppy them. In the East the Russian would have to maintian large forces to not only deal with possible US/Canadian/Japanese/Aussia landings but, even more of threat China who might decide to assist SIberia with its dreams of becoming a seperate nation. And with Russia under blockade China would then completely take over Russias arms markets and never give them back.

Then you have to look at the state and abilities of Russias forces. Beyond their elite units they are a mess. Desertion and or draft dodging is common place. Units numbers on paper do not reflect reality and unit commanders instead of correcting them simply pocket the money that would be used to feed and arm them. In the brief Georgian conflcit not only did Russia have problems with communication and navigation but, equipment problems were common. People had sold off radios, weapons, and even the charges in the reactive armour of the tanks was found to be missing and thought to have been sold on the black market. Russias lack of modern warfare doctrines and abilites lead to miltary anylists calling it the last WW2 style battle. After the mess in Georgia Russia sacked a ton of officers and tried to reform the military but, corruption again raised its ugly head and lots of that money never got anywhere near the soldiers it was suppose to. So twice refoms to make Russia into a modern military have failed.

If Russia were invaded no doubt its forces would at least have some morale if not much else in their favor. If however Russia attacked a NATO member and started war with the US, Russia might very well collapse into chaos before any real fighting started.

Russias only real card to play are its nukes. It can not win a conventional war against the West and it knows it. It also does not want a nuclear confict that nobody can win.. So war is unlikely between the US and Russia because Russia has everything to lose.

edit on 19-4-2014 by MrSpad because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 09:57 AM
One of the things that would affect the battle would be the fact that the American populace doesn't like to see its troops shipped back in body bags by the thousand so if a war did happen where nukes were not used and it became an invasion of Russia i'd imagine it not being such a popular war back in the US when the greiving families start to question it

posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 10:09 AM
a reply to: MrSpad
Star for you, always.

I love your post and read them thoroughly. Really puts things into perspective without a rebuttle.

Thanks man

posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 10:29 AM
a reply to: liejunkie01

It would all depend on which continent the war is fought on. The US has better air, Russia has FAR better land units (also, their troops outnumber us if you count the active reserves), and their naval fleets about balance out when you take into account preparation time (Russia has far better naval defense while the US is better offensively in the water).

This is without bringing China into it. If the US tried to invade Europe in opposition to Russia, we would fail. Horribly. If you brought China into it, their forces could possibly have some success in a North American invasion (not total nor long-lasting success, obviously)

Then... if you bring nukes to the table, we all lose. I dig Fallout 3 and everything but I wouldn't want to live it.

posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 10:41 AM

originally posted by: LightningStrikesHere
It's not about how big your Army is ,it's about how you fight the war .

Look at Afghanistan for example , Russia could not defeat them ,and the U.S is still trying to...

Need i say more ?

that is the KEY aspect. HOW.

Look at the Vietnamese. they fought for 30 years straight.

If America had saboteurs destroy our electricity and/or oil refineries. we would be absolutely screwed.

America is looking at a future of World War against BRICS and an internal war of the people against the TRAITOROUS globalist foreign controlled bankster owned federal govt.

posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 10:54 AM
Of all the factors being considered, the assets each country has is important, but what is more to be factored is where would the confrontation take place, and who's allies come to the fight.

What is not a factor anymore is M.A.D.
Mutually Assured Destruction is no longer a valid threat.
Even if a nuke was unleashed on the USA, the POTUS would not respond in kind out of his fear of escalations, I would say we could be hit several times this man will wait to consider his options, probably look for some kind of sanctions that would make it less desireable for the aggressor to continue the attacks

Anymore, MAD Is a joke, I take the comic book MAD more seriously

edit on 19-4-2014 by Xcouncil=wisdom because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 11:01 AM
I dont know where this invincible army from the United States resides that everyone speaks of. Last time I checked our Helicopters, Drones, and new state of the art Stealth Planes keep crashing. A few years ago I read an article about the Chinese selling our military bogus parts for equipment. Our missile defense systems only work in about a 50/50 ratio and thats just in testing phase not an actual war theatre. I wont use the line about how we havent won a war. No need to. We as Americans are pretty good at murdering women and children, so any war with Russia we would kill a lot of innocents. Which will get us nuked. The end result is both sides get nuked. Anyone with a brain would just nuke the United States first. Even the people in control of our gov arent stupid enough to launch a nuclear first strike on a country like Russia or China. It would turn the opinion of the WORLD against them in a heartbeat. That puts us in an awkard position as the superpower. Only a couple of nukes need to slip through the cracks. They have at least 1000. A .44 desert eagle is a better weapon than a .22 revolver, but if I beat you to the draw and have the .22 at your head...who has the better weapon now?

posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 11:04 AM

originally posted by: FraternitasSaturni

originally posted by: LightningStrikesHere
It's not about how big your Army is ,it's about how you fight the war .

Look at Afghanistan for example , Russia could not defeat them ,and the U.S is still trying to...

Need i say more ?

Need you say more? lol... What kind of war do you think is being fought in Afghanistan exactly? I think you have no clue what you're talking about... The US are "trying" to defeat them? Russian "could not" defeat them? lol... Wow... Where did you learn your history from? Rambo III?

Please do share... what do you think Afghanistan is about? You think its a war? Really? ahahah... wow..

Ok wise guy what is it? Since YOU seem to know why don't you tell me since "i have no clue what i am talking about".?

posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 11:29 AM
Phone: ring, ring, ring, click

Obama: Hi Putin buddy I am having a little trouble here at home with protests and the season has not even started so I dare not push through any more austerity cuts else they will continue to call my wife ugly and making her cry. I sure can do with some help.

Putin Well mate don't ask me because oil prices are down after fooling everyone with that Iranian straights scam ,as you say summer is coming and I cannot shift enough gas as it is plus that Ukraine has not paid its bill and is sucking money out of my economy.

Obama: Yes life's not worth living and my investors from the military sector are pushing me to get more contracts and God only knows what I will do with all them troops returning from Afghanistan, don't want them here else they might side with the protestors.

Putin: I know could you not send your returning afghan troops over to sort out the Ukraine for me, we can huff and puff and that will push oil prices up like last time and then we can both get a much needed injection for our military investors and rake it in as oil prices go to the moon.

Obama: Man you is de smarts man in the world, our friends in Iran and OPEC just don't appreciate us enough do they now, well thanks again, I will ring my war generals and bring that old Kerry geriatric out of retirement and kick McChains cage as i walk past, bye bye

edit on 19-4-2014 by VirusGuard because: Mummy toe upset daddy toe

Maths: How a $5.00 phone call cost tax payers billions

edit on 19-4-2014 by VirusGuard because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 11:39 AM

originally posted by: daaskapital
I don't care what the numbers say. The fact is, the USA has not won a proper war since their involvement in WW2...If they can't beat farmers in Afghanistan or Vietnam, what makes everyone so sure they can take on the professionally trained soldiers of Russia?

Really? That is what you think? Your views are very immature in this area.

1. We won both conflicts in a few days....
2. Occupation is a different matter when you are trying to bolster a new government.
3. We could go all Russian and just kill anything that moves...I guess if you reduce the population by 30 to 40% it kind of weeds out any form of insurrection.

Professionally trained....Really? LOL

Do you know they switched the anti freeze in military vehicles from wood base to drinkable... seems Russian soldiers would drink it either way.. hehe kind of tells you what professionals are like there.

But one thing you are missing, we have had 13 years of real war equipment testing, 13 years of real war tactics testing, 13 years of our troops engaged in real war scenarios. These last 13 years has improved all areas of our war fighting capabilities ten fold, so right now is not a good time for any country to go toe to toe with us when all these other countries have been playing war games at best and think their equipment will work...think.

Of course, Russia can be put in the same boat, but they were under a completely different system back then...they remain largely untested in their modern form.

Still, i think the USA has a problem of underestimating their opponents. If they do the same with Russia, well it is obvious what will happen. Let's hope it never comes down to push and shove.

When we look at Desert Storm, we were not all that good back then and it took hardly nothing to obliterate Iraq's war machine. That war machine was Russia's top equipment.

Move forward to 2001 and we were a little better but once again "obliterate" is the correct word...

So today Russia is basically still using that equipment we stomped while ours has continued to get better at a very steep rate do to true field testing every step of the way.

If anything, other countries down play our abilities and true might/effectiveness in comparison to their forces.

edit on 19-4-2014 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 11:40 AM
a reply to: rustyclutch

we still have nukes pointed at them also, once theirs the start flyin, ours all start flyin, it's called (MAD), Mutual Assured Destruction. nobody wins.

edit on 19-4-2014 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 11:54 AM
a reply to: hounddoghowlie

if u read any post i made that was my point. Both of us are getting nuked therefore nobody wins.

posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 12:00 PM
a reply to: rustyclutch

One thing I learned after 28 years in our Military is whatever it is we are having issues with Russia/China etc has issues 10 times of that. I'm sure you do not believe me, but their equipment is basically crap, with maybe a nugget here and there, but none of it is real world tested.

Talking about drones...I'm a drone pilot now...ya they crash some times, so do planes, so do cars...etc. The big difference here is we have 1000s and they have 0....kind of hard to crash one if you do not have any...hehe

BTW the drone is not the important part it is the camera, nav system, and other capabilities which they are decades behind us in those areas even with a conservative guess.

posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 12:04 PM
a reply to: darkbake

On the other hand, who has Russia fought since WWII? Some eastern block nations with no military to speak of? Afghanistan who had no military at all?

The U.S. went against the 4th or 5th largest military in the world and made mince meat of it.

Yes, the U.S. seems to underestimate the commitment/effort required to finish the job, but underestimating the U.S. is also vogue, IMO.

A simple answer? Russia is first class tough if it's a "homeland" scrap. Not so good outside their own turf.

The U.S. hasn't been tested at home since 1812 and the Brits did well getting a "draw" real result either way. But outside the U.S., it's projection of power is it's strength. No one come least for now....

posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 12:10 PM
a reply to: MrSpad

I agree with your post 100%...

The true threat to Russia is China if/when they decide they want all those great natural resources that Russia has. With the fact that they are border countries, China's Army would be very hard to stop if it got rolling in their direction and China's attitude of reducing its population and gaining all of Russia's resources is win win for them.

As you say, right now America is the only country that has true projection capabilities, so Russia and China can't to a thing against us, unless we go there, and China would not do it because they would lose their biggest customer/ consumer.

posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 12:17 PM
a reply to: Xtrozero

I am not saying we dont have a better military. I acknowledge that point. I dont acknowledge the fact that it would just be a walk in the park. Russia is MASSIVE. Lot of places to park equipment. Their warfares making capabilities are almost identical in scope as ours. The dont have as many toys as us but they have some similar to ours. But lets examine the "conventional warfare" statement. Technically using agent orange, napalm, depleted uranium is against any "convention" we ever signed on to. Arguing over who has the best conventional forces doesnt matter because thats not how this fight ends. People talk about the Russians like they havent produced some of the best scientists in the world from time to time. Furthermore they know we fight dirty, so they would fight dirty. Spetsnaz Terrorist attacks in american cities by agents I am sure are already here. Biological agents maybe? The whole situation is a big ole bag of anything can happen. The end result is nuclear war though. Nobody wins. Who told you Russia doesnt have drones? They sell drones in hobby shop. North Korea has drones. So does Iran. Who do you think the Russians are? They would smash any country in Europe to pieces. I'm sure if they ran their economy 18 trillion dollars into the ground they could have all the high tech gadgets we have here in the states.

posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 12:28 PM

originally posted by: rustyclutch
Who told you Russia doesnt have drones? They sell drones in hobby shop. North Korea has drones. So does Iran.

There are drones and then there are drones. When you look at our capabilities with our drones compared to theirs it would be like comparing an F-16 to a WWII fighter in capabilities....

Who do you think the Russians are? They would smash any country in Europe to pieces. I'm sure if they ran their economy 18 trillion dollars into the ground they could have all the high tech gadgets we have here in the states.

I seen Europeans "fight" first hand...they suck too... but any how, Russia could take on one country at a time, but they could not take on Europe as an unified force, they can not win a war against China, and their economy sucks, so they have nothing but oil and a few other natural resources, but no real way now to really improve their military effectively.

If they are so smart why do they not have their own version of Intel, Boeing, Honeywell, Microsoft etc.... They get what we make and hope to copy at best, but when they finally do copy we are already light years ahead once again.

posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 12:43 PM
a reply to: Xtrozero

I call B.S. People need to remember that the arms Russia exports and the arms they keep for themselves are two totally different weapons systems. They havent faced any new Russian hardware to say how they fare against the capabilities. They were crying about Iran getting ahold of the s-300. I think Russia might be all the way up to the 500 by now. 100 sunfire missiles are cheaper than an aircraft carrier. Would you like to bet the efficiency of our antimissile systems against a barrage of hypersonic missiles? Russia hasnt been working on weapons to invade countries with. They have been working on weapons to stop an invasion. Denial of area weapons. We catch rides to space from these people. These arent a bunch of tweekers in a high school woodshop. We will lose more than half of the machinery we send I would almost guarantee. Their missiles are good. Very Good, and America will be dodging them the whole way across the ocean and the whole way across europe. There will be no shock and awe in Russia. If there and believe there will be shock and awe in Los Angeles or Florida.

Oh yeah and about those missile interceptors of ours.....yeah laughable against SCUD missiles.
edit on 19-4-2014 by rustyclutch because: added link

posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 01:10 PM

originally posted by: Xtrozero
a reply to: rustyclutch

BTW the drone is not the important part it is the camera, nav system, and other capabilities which they are decades behind us in those areas even with a conservative guess.

btw, those cpu chips are made where? China!

do you really believe there is nothing special in those chips that the chinese can backdoor? if so, I have guy that sells bridges in New Mexico, sounds like a good

And, I will take an AK-47 over any m-16 variant. also a 7.62x25 handgun over a 9mm, and Russia's su-27 jet is superior.

The over confidence and arrogance that somehow America will always be champ is war is beyond laughable.

I remember how at CampPen, many troops huff Glade.

top topics

<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in