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.


U.S.A Versus Russia in an all out War?

page: 11
<< 8  9  10    12  13 >>

log in


posted on Jul, 29 2008 @ 04:27 PM

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
reply to post by 2nd2no1ratbags

Yep, this thread struck me as ' could Batman beat Spiderman?' when I first read it, and the end piece 'anyone who disagrees is wrong' clinched that perception.


Bottom line for me concerning this thread? An all out war with Russia will decimate us. Yes, that's right. WE WILL BE DESTROYED. I don't know why it's so hard for people to understand that unless we have some incredible technolgy that no one knows about to keep Russia's nuclear assets off our soil then the end result is apparent.

Here it is very simply:

Russia has enough nukes (I don't care what anyone says and I don't care about Russia's current or past economic condition) to turn America into a glass pit several times over. You can't escape this fact.

Yes, I know there is technology out there with the ability so shoot down missiles but to assume that NOTHING is going to hit us? That is just arrogant folly. The pool of assumption is very shallow, rest assured.

Unless God himself intervenes on our behalf we are NOT.. I repeat. NOT going to win an 'all out war' with Russia.

Put that in your hat and smoke it.

[edit on 29-7-2008 by ViewFromTheStars]

posted on Jul, 29 2008 @ 04:38 PM
Man if they go to a full out nuclear war. Norway will get some free nuces from both sides
When they get shoot down over us. Hope to god that they dont blow up on impact .)

A tip to the US and Russians could you put a parra. On them so they dont get damaged on impact haha.

[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]

posted on Jul, 29 2008 @ 04:50 PM
People here at ATS need to do their homework on MAD.. or "Mutually Assured Destruction". Google it and fill up your brains.

The past economic conditions of Russia may have affected their conventional war potential but nuclear? Don't be a fool.

Russia will not tolerate a conventional war with us for very long before letting us have "it".

Like I said and like I've ALWAYS said here on ATS. Unless we have a 100% guaranteed anti missile defense shield we are going to be in for some -serious- trouble. No amount of chest beating and arrogant bleating is going to save anybody.

Something else you hubris infested 'indestructable Americano' bone heads aren't thinking about...
You can rest assured that Russia is busily adapting their own missile technology to counter our counter offensives. (And have been doing so already for sometime)

It's really simple to me, I don't understand why this is even debatable.

One more thing..

Don't loose sight of the powers that be that are 'fomenting' world war III. Yes, you heard me correctly. This ideology exist and has power in high places. Unfortunately, MAD will have no effect against this very real threat.

[edit on 29-7-2008 by ViewFromTheStars]

posted on Sep, 13 2008 @ 01:51 AM
reply to post by alienstar

Just a little note, the weapons systems, lasers etc etc are 50s tecnology. We were hitting targets on the ground with particle cannons via deflection satellites 50 yeatrs ago. Russia is smart she does not underestimate US.

posted on Sep, 13 2008 @ 02:16 AM
Well, I didn't read the whole thread because there was a lot of nonsense starting to come through, but I just wanted to point out that the links posted early on about "China's Navy" were actually for the Republic of China, better known as Taiwan. Different country (not according to mainland China
), totally different navy.

Apologies if someone has already pointed it out.

posted on Sep, 13 2008 @ 06:57 PM
Watching the memorial on sept 11th on TV showed me that two tiny little aircraft in a major city can cause huge chaos and carnage.

Should two super power nations go head to head, and one is in danger of a loss, and the prospect of even 1 nuclear warhead is delivered to a major metropolis; win, lose, or draw, we all lose.

Should that war ever start, may God help us all.


[edit on 13-9-2008 by HIFIGUY]

posted on Sep, 18 2008 @ 06:11 PM
Just some facts out there for you young-uns, we have 14 SSBN Ohio class
ballistic missile submarines each carying 24 Trident D5 missiles with up
to eight W76 warheads (100 kilotons each) or eight W88 (475 kilotons each)
or put another way up to 3.8 Megatons of Mega-Death, City-Busting
bombs on EACH missile.

So 14 Subs x 24 missiles x 8 warheads each = 2,688 bombs = 1,276,800 kt

= 1,276 Megatons or 1.28 Gigatons or more than enough to wipe out all
of humanity many times over and that's NOT adding the Russian Delta 4 subs
which contain another thousand or so megatons.

The main deterent for the USA are the B2 Nuclear bombers
with nuclear tipped Tomohawks, and Peacekeeper ICBM land based
systems and SSBN Ohio Subs while the Russians depend on their
strongest Nuclear deterent the Satans, Topols and Topol-M missiles
for blasting cities on a Launch-on-Warning basis.

As of 2008 it is STILL a dangerous game of Nuclear Chicken
(i.e. MAD - Mutually Assured Destruction) and we are basically
on a hair-trigger's notice to Nuclear Armageddon.

Regarding Missile defence, the USA has a significant lead regarding
kinetic energy based defence systems while China is LIGHT YEARS
ahead in Laser-based research as they are estimated to be spending
three times what the US is on that type of missile defence system.

But on a more basic note, theres still at least 16,000 nukes still
out there ready to be launched at world-wide targets via various means
from Land & Mobile Missiles, to Bombers to Subs, to cruise missiles
and other means including artillery-based and even
"Personal Delivery" options!

There really is no winner because with France, England, China, USA, Russia,
Israel, Pakistan and North Korea all having nukes, there's plenty of nuclear
destruction to go around to make life on Earth quite unlivable.

posted on Sep, 19 2008 @ 05:12 PM
What. China won't do anything to stop us from fighting Russia. China couldn't care less about Russia. If we went to war with Russia we would kill them. Our militay numbers up to about 600,000 or more. We are a monster. We could beat Russia. There would be casulities but not as many as Russia would have. We are dominate in every way. Better weapons, vehicles, soldiers, and even bombs. We also have the U.N. on our side. Russia would never even come close.
Even though our world Superpowerism is diminshing doesn't mean we will be weak. We can still beat any country out there without a problem. We have become one of the Greatest country's of all time. We are Americans. We are part of a small group of country's and citys that have become great. Ancient Persia, Anicient Egypt, Sparta, Rome, Mongolia, Holy Roman Empre, and the U.S. All those country's and city have been added to the Greatest of all time.

posted on Oct, 2 2008 @ 03:24 AM
"Trust me, no missiles are getting through our defense systems. We have missiles designed to go after other missiles and blow them up, and all the laser weaponary we secretly have too"

dude, the terrorists doesn't need any weapon or missile to cross the defence of US, 9/11 prove it by just using a in the next come, what if using airplane with explosions or nuclear warhead?....

no country is invincible and such we as human are so puny...we've been created to fing love and GOD but what we full our heart with?egoism and such a jerk head...

posted on Jul, 23 2010 @ 05:41 PM
#4 250,000 marines invade from the east, 250,000 from the west? We only have 203,000 active and 40,000 reserve. I guess you could of meant army infantry too.

posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 04:12 PM
I found two more articles in relation to this post

first a prediction about the upcoming war between Russia and the USA

So thus says the Lord. In a few years from now, you will be impaled on the brink of war. It will come with very little warning. I shall bring this war down upon you who think you can serve the world, and claim to serve Me, saith the Lord!!

In the year of 2005 you will have yet to see this war. But it will then be but a few moments in time, by the Spirit, till you will see it. It is close, it is coming, and no one can say, "I will hold it back, I will put a stop to it." I, the Lord, have made a decision to judge the evil hearts of the people, and I will do it!

So it will be, that I have now spoken the year in which I will hold it back to: but by [assume now: by the end of] the year 2010 it will have come upon you!!

here is the full article

Second article is about this: Alert: Russia Orders Troops To Prepare For War With US

Link those two articles with this canadian report

The Russians are (every few months) coming (near to Canadian airspace)
by Aaron Wherry on Saturday, September 4, 2010 1:02pm

David Pugliese gets the numbers on Russia’s near-invasion.

After the Canadian government raised concerns about the Aug. 24 patrol, NORAD issued a statement noting there wasn’t anything unusual about the flight.

“At no time did the Russian military aircraft enter Canadian or United States sovereign airspace,” stated NORAD spokesman Canadian Navy Lt. Desmond James. “Both Russia and NORAD routinely exercise their capability to operate in the North. These exercises are important to both NORAD and Russia and are not cause for alarm.”

Pretty alarming to me but what you think?

posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 12:50 PM
reply to post by alienstar

Getting canada involved in the war by bombing one of there cities would be strategically unsound. as canada has been upping its military power with the acquisition of 65 F-35 , which apparently are top of the line 4th generation planes.also acquired are 120 Leopard 2A6 tanks (20 on loan from germany free) coupled with an newly opened artic warfare training center. couple that with the fact that we could beat russia and the united states in nuclear weapons stockpiling , as Canada is currently the world's largest producer of uranium, accounting for 32% of world production , add that to some of the most advancec nuclear facilities with the ability to produce weapons grade plutonium we could be a nuclear superpower in weeks. "lets not forget the 1000's of nukes we hold for the states ..we got the keys" according to the "sharing agreement" much as youd like to think canada is a docile harmless nation , we'd rip some face when push comes to shove ...war of 1812 anyone?

posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 03:09 AM
I think that the person who originally posted (that would be arc angel) needs to seriously get out of his chair and look at the real picture. The US military took two months to take all of Iraq. And they've been there for years but still unable to get control of either Iraq or Afghanistan. How does he expect the US to run over RUSSIA of all places. Russia is the largest country in the world, with one of the most powerful military's in the world. I think he may have forgotten that exists such a thing as the Russian Airforce. And that the RuAF is the third largest airforce in the world. But considering that the first post was in 2008, he might not have foreseen the economic crisis the US is in, and the impact it has on the US military. The F-22 cancelled and the future of the F-35 unsure.

@ 4) It doesn't matter whether you have 20 carries, pal. All it takes is one hypersonic cruise missile to take it out or disable it.
@ 5) A single, sattelite in geo-stationary orbit does not compare to a wave of hundreds of supersonic nuclear warheads travelling in low trajectory.
@6) What good is an Apache destroyed by Mil's and Ka's? What happens when Russian cruise missiles slam into your planes, tanks, rockets, people? And I guess its Russian speaking martians that have the world's second largest submarine fleet, and second largest force of capital ships.

With love

a Russian

posted on Oct, 16 2011 @ 01:38 AM
reply to post by Arc Angel

In December 2010 the Russian strategic forces were estimated to have 611 strategic delivery platforms, which can carry up to 2679 nuclear warheads.

The Strategic Rocket Forces have 375 operational missile systems that include missiles that can carry 1259 warheads. These include 58 R-36MUTTH and R-36M2 (SS-18) missiles, 70 UR-100NUTTH (SS-19) missiles, 171 road-mobile Topol (SS-25) systems, 52 silo-based and 18 road-mobile Topol-M (SS-27) systems, and 6 RS-24 missiles.
[Strategic Rocket Forces...]
The Russian strategic fleet includes 12 strategic missile submarines, whose missiles can carry 576 nuclear warheads. Bases of the Northern Fleet host six 667BDRM (Delta IV) submarines, which carry 96 R-29RM (SS-N-23) launchers. The only remaining Pacific Fleet base hosts four 667BDR (Delta III) submarines, which carry 64 R-29R (SS-N-18) missiles.
[Strategic fleet...]
The Russian strategic aviation consists of 76 bombers that can carry up to 844 long-range cruise missiles. The bombers are 13 Tu-160 (Blackjack) and 63 Tu-95MS (Bear H). The bombers can carry various modifications of the Kh-55 (AS-15) cruise missile and gravity bombs.
[Strategic aviation...]

this is official data
but there is a real top-secret data

We learn only after beginning of war

what kinds of weapons the United States and Russia have

if we are not killed before...

posted on Oct, 16 2011 @ 01:58 AM
So people think that Russia that's been broke for years has an advantage over the USA,that spends trillions of dollars in weapon advancement ?

posted on Oct, 16 2011 @ 06:55 AM
reply to post by icybluebeing

this is top-secret data of RF ,US or China....

posted on Oct, 16 2011 @ 07:47 AM
Russia gives U.S. military response
The U.S. refused to give guarantees of Russia on missile defense. Moscow responds cheap, but angry

October 14, 11:12 |
Russian-US talks on missile defense finally placed the point: the United States recognized the existence of unresolved differences and thereby made ​​clear. The decisions in Washington, Moscow is already preparing its military-technical answer.

posted on Oct, 16 2011 @ 08:47 AM
Learn from history.... No country that has invaded Russia has ever gotten away with it without heavy casualties. When the Russian winter kicks in, any army is going to be in a heap of trouble. Even a well provisioned army, with lots of warm clothing, wouldn't be able to push hard and fast enough. Machines break down. If the advance grinds to a halt, then the opposing army would have time to bunker in and reinforce their own positions, making it a front line war like we saw in Russia in the end of operation Barbarossa.
Even if the US army would fight on 2 fronts, Russia would probably still win, or inflict heavy casualties to the US forces. A marine force wouldn't be enough for this war either. Russia has a manpower pool of 10's of millions, and if threatened, might call upon those able bodied men to defend their country. The Russians seem to have been willing to sacrifice their own people if their sovereignty has been threatened, they might do the same in a new all-out war.
Nukes might be used, sure. But not on cities or anything like that, nooooo. I think that the guys in the top are to afraid of dying themselves in a mutual destruction to let that happen. Nukes might be used on the US carrier groups, beachheads, troop transports or supply lines. One of the main priorities of the US forces would then be to neutralize the Russian missile command. Even if the US launched all of their 4.000+ planes in an all out assault on the missile silos, they would be peppered with SAM's and would be under constant attack from Russian fighters. Russia is a MASSIVE country, and it would take LOADS of time to destroy those silos.
Russia would probably also call upon her allies (China being the most powerful one) and so would USA, and it would escalate into a new world war.
This was a very ''oh sh*t, America is da best we would totally pwn all of them n00bs in the world'' kind of thread.
NEVER underestimate an enemy, no matter how superior you yourself might seem to be.
edit on 16/10/11 by VikingDude because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 16 2011 @ 09:11 AM
reply to post by stake

I think you do not understand what all this
: Sooner or later, start a nuclear war
RF n US continue to prepare for war

posted on Oct, 16 2011 @ 09:32 AM
War in the modern age, is economic.

Therefore, war is won by who has the better work camps. TRUTH.

In WW2, Hitler got his work camps up to speed pretty quick, they had camp "employees" cranking out Panzer tanks, but they didn't know or realize that Russia had far better work camps up in the gulags north of Japan. The sheer size and scope of Russias gulag which continues to today, is the single greatest hidden thing of the modern age. A good book would be "The Unquiet Ghost" by author Adam Hochschild which has a great map in it showing where Russian gulags were (and still) are.

Solzhenitsyn moved to Vermont eventually, but still Americans don't care to listen to him.

The real question is: Could the USA have work camps which are more brutal and more hidden, than Russias? Because we can see that slave labor and management (crushing) of partisans is how 20th Century War (tm) is done.

All this blabbery about drones and MIRVs and stuff is childish crap.

Boycotts, secret prison camps, and slave populations will win the next great war. Most participants won't even see it, they'll be turning a wrench under guards with a rifle at their head. That "worker" of the future will be glad to have the job, just as the German and Soviet prisoners would rather work in a factory, than shovel snow back and forth outside until they die.

Drop the BS and talk about what's real. Yuri Bezmenoff's testimony explains and shows clearly the Russia still hides huge gulags and the ghost of Stalin haunts them even now. Big shout out to Yuri B wherever he's at. Well in his videos he says he's living in a shack with a shotgun waiting for the KGB if they choose to come for him. These two russians, Bezmenoff and Solzhenitsyn, are ignored by Americans who essentially have lost the desire to know anything.

new topics

top topics

<< 8  9  10    12  13 >>

log in