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

Click here for more information.

I wouldn't be so sure about that my friend. It would come down to a nuclear exchange in the end. Ever heard of the MAD ( Mutually Assured Destruction policy) ? There are no winners in a nuclear war only losers who wished they were'nt so arrogant as to think they could actually win. You can have all the conventional weapons you want, that wont stop the carnage and destruction caused by the nukes, and people's lack of will to fight when they can't get safe food to eat and water to drink.
Russia is currently building the most sophisticated nuclear weapon systems the West has ever caught wind of. The Topol 4 missile has multiple decoys that can duck and weave incoming ordenance. The U.S's Anti Ballistic Missile System wether it be ship - bourne or land based is far from reliable. One article I read described the ABMS as like trying to shoot a bullet out of the sky with another bullet, so it's not that simple.
The Russians have stealth and laser weapon systems incorporated into both ships and air craft as well.
Arrogant thinking such as yours will be the downfall of your country.

Originally posted by Arc Angel
1.) The United States Economy surpasses Russian Economy by more than 10 fold in terms of GDP.

Does that really matter in a war?

2.) 3.7% of our GDP goes to our defense budget, yet our defense budget is SO HUGE if you put all of the world's military budgets together you'd only match it. And that's only using 3.7% of our Economy, during WW2 we were using 30% of our GDP to fund the war effort.

Yes we do spend more than anybody else and we have alot of ability to project power but we lack the ability to invade Russia or China on any meaningfull scale

4.) The US Power Projection Cababilities are unmatched. 11 Carrier battlegroups (Russia, by the way, only has 1 Aircraft carrier which is old. We have 22 Aircraft carriers, 11 of them nucleared powered and containing the most sophysicated weapon systems known to man).

Really at last count the US had a total of 11 carrier strike groups not 22. Several are in or entering overhaul status so not all 11 are avalible at every time. Im not sure where you got you number of 22 but since WWII no navy has fielded that many carrier at one time

5.) "What about if they nuke us?" We shot down, with a single destroyer, a sattelite from outer #ing space! Trust me, no missiles are getting through our defense systems. We have missiles designed to go after other missiles and blow them up,

Given the number of interceptors at Ft. Greely and at Vandenberg, given the current operational plan we can shoot down 5-6 missiles Most scenarios envision 2 missiles shot at each in bound as the missiles would not have the cross range speed needed to fire one at a time in the event of a miss. As impressive as the satelite shootdown was the plans are for 15 destroyers will have the RIM-161 Standard Missile 3 required for ballistic missile intercepts. My understanding is each of those destroyers (either Tico or Arleigh Burke) will have 20-30 oeprationa RIM-161 each. assuming that each ship is out to sea and every ABM works with 100% accuracy its still not enough to intercept every Russian ICBM. You also understand I assume that the sea based BMD works in the midcourse ascent phase so they would have to be foreward deployed to be effective.

As far as laser weaponry, You or I cannot speculate but have to deal with the hear and now

6.) "What if they built up their #'s then declared war?" Well, we have Apaches that can single handedly take out an entire tank column.

Hmmm the Apaches combat record being foreward deployed was less than stellar in Iraq, Im not sure how well they would fare against a combined arms foe at all. yes we have all sorts of fun toys but the Russians have plenty of counters avalible to them too. Yes thier navy is a shadow of its former self, and its doubtfull htey can project power its enough to defend thier coast line and front live subs have gotten quieter.

Anyone who disagrees is wrong.

You may want to put down that clancy book and do some real research before you post again. :shk:

itwould be america and russia would whipe each other off the planet leaving england victories because africa will perish with starvation and millatary conflict and pakistan will be in turmolie after war asia will over populate

And we are sure about what Russia's capabilities are because...

It is doubtful that there could be such a unanimous victory concluded with your research without knowing exactly what we (the USA) or they (Russia or whoever) are capable of. Their economy has been progressing at an astonishing rate, and there is no factor whatsoever in your fantasy of the rest of the world's involvement.

hi! imho in an all out conventional war russia would win hands down,the us have very little experience of war but they do have alot of experience at losing themhell the US can't even protect her own airspace from a few crazed hijackers!...and in an all out nuclear war = M.A.D.,that's my 2 cents anyway take it or leave it!

I cannot speak for the current destructive power of only the US and Russian nuclear arsenals, but at one time the US could destroy all life on the planet about 150 times over and Russia around 300 times over.
Russia preferring large, and the US preferring accurate.

Many of those weapons have been dismantled. So some time for reassembly would be required.

Who wins? If there were anyone left they could flip a coin.

The philosophy is called MAD.
Mutually Assured Destruction.

A little reminder

Firstly, we all need to abide by the Terms and Conditions of Use

Debate the Post and NOT the poster. Its as simple as that.

Courtesy is Mandatory

Lets keep it civil and clean please folks.

Lets just assume that there is a war - US V Russia.

I take it that Russia started it as I cant imagine that the US would be stupid enough to start one with them. If the US started the war, dont count on NATO support. The EU now relies too much on Russian Gas and Oil nowadays.

The surprise factor is with Russia then. Russia would have started its armaments factories up to war production, it would have deployed its mobile ICBM force and would be totally geared up and ready to go. The timetable would also be in Russia's favour. She could start the war just as winter was approaching, this would negate any US invasion.

Lets assume that the US wants to invade. For a start where? On the western side, its up in the arctic. The US may have the tech but are they a match for Arctic warfare? The weather is no respector of high tech. Carrier groups would be next to bloody useless as most targets would be one hell of a long way from the carriers. You cant invade through Europe as there are buffer sovereign states now. And why would you want to invade? Invasion is only for holding territory. Two of the best armies of their time tried and it was the weather that beat them initially. All the Russians have to do is keep doing a tactical withdrawl to sucker the US Forces even more deeper and let the Winter do the rest.

Remember that 'Uncle Fidel' is on your doorstep. The Russian Mafia is also rife in the US, so expect some s*** from them. China would probably wait a while and see how things pan out and almost certainly would strike at Taiwan while the US was occupied elswhere. And dont forget good old North Korea who are itching to 'have a go'.

Yeah sure, the Russian Armed Forces are not quite what they used to be but remember, they are fighting for Mother Russia on their home turf, so Psychologically the have the advantage straight away.

Originally posted by Arc Angel

Russia rely's on US money, just as the rest of the world does. (China)

Aren't the US Hundreds of trillions of Dollars in debt to China?

Originally posted by Rook1545
Your #1 fact is wrong. The USA is not the number 1 oil producer in the world. Saudi Arabia is, number 2 is Russia. Maybe you should check facts before posting. Might give you more credibility.

Numbers of oil for production, export, consumption and importers
More recent numbers, same results

And don't count on the the part of the world that depends on the USD to keep keep doing so. More and more countries are moving to the Euro. But again, I think you care less about facts and more about chest thumping flag waving.

[edit on 18-6-2008 by Rook1545]

I could't agree more. I read this post and thought that this member just got done reading a Clancy,Coonts or Dale Brown novel.
The numbers games looks great on paper, but war seldom is so foregiving. Look at history and it will tell you that no matter how many assets you have, luck can be on the other side.
Take Russia, for example. The climate that we have to fight in a not fore giving for the ground troops. Their missile technology in second to none. They have great air to air fighters and above all, they are not stupid. And if you think that the so called "missile shield" is the saving grace, I think the laser technology is far from perfected. We will, as a country, get hit. Simple probability says you can't possibly get all of the missiles.
Another thing you have to take into account is the fact that at the present time, most of the G8 doesn't like us too much anymore. If war did happen, other countries would have to pick side or stay nutural. I fear that they would all go against us. (Execept for England and Japan)
Then the oil, well, i don't know much about that execpt that war takes a lot of it and I doubt that the Stratiegic Reserve can sustain the war effort for long if the rest of the world cuts us off.
As for our industrial might, well that emight help for awhile, but with the debt that we carry as a country, don't you think that all of the creditors around the world would call in their markers? Some 10 trillion, according to some estimates. Then, when the US defaults on the loans, the whole world will want to kick our flag waving, chest thumping a##es.
Think you need to look at the bigger picture, but a good post for conversation all the same. Sorry if I have a few spelling errors.
SeeYa!!

reply to post by Arc Angel


I suggest to you to read General Sir John Hackett's book ''How to make war''.

Winning a modern war is not about how many troops, tanks and aircraft you have. It is about simple Economics, Logistics and Attrition Rates. A US invasion of Russia would be an economic and logistical nightmare that would bankrupt the US in a matter of weeks, not to mention the attrition rate on troops, tanks and other equipment - remember the cold weather. You only have to look at the current war in Iraq to see how much that is costing the US taxpayer.

Nowadays, none of the ''Big Boys'' can afford a major 1st world conflict.

Originally posted by Dermo

Originally posted by Arc Angel

Russia rely's on US money, just as the rest of the world does. (China)

Aren't the US Hundreds of trillions of Dollars in debt to China?

Yes, We can forget about Russia. We are at war and have been for quite some time with China. It's an economic war. We are losing from what I can see.

Originally posted by Arc Angel

"USA would win hands down. It wouldn't even be a war, more like a slaughter. "But how can you say that? Russia is surely equal to us in every aspect!"

Remember you wrote these word.

1.) The United States Economy surpasses Russian Economy by more than 10 fold ...

You counted unproven oil reserves within the USA, but left Russia's out. They have the larger reserves of gas and oil. For proven reserves, Saudi Arabia is number one.

2.) 3.7% of our GDP goes to our defense budget, yet our defense budget is SO HUGE .....

Doesn't matter. You are talking about a total war.

3.) Even with such a small percentage of our Economy going towards military funding ....

Still doesn't matter, we are at war.

4.) The US Power Projection Cababilities are unmatched.... Russia can't fight a 2 front war! The damn country is so big, we'd use it's size against it. So you got 250,000 Marines pushing West; 250,000 pushing East; Stealth Bombers coming in from Alaska as well as the Artic and a letter saying US is pulling out its funding to the Russian Economy......

Here is where your tactics go to hell. You're putting marines in a job they aren't trained or equipped to do. This is what the Army is for. You also left out NATO not to mention Europe. Unless we are invading through Murmansk, which would be stupid, so how do you start from the west border.

As for size, this is Russia's biggest ally. This is exactly why no Army can invade and win. The logistics are too great. History has proven this a couple of times with Armies of historical importance from France and Germany. Size and weather beat both them, it will do the same to any other invader.

5.) "What about if they nuke us?" We shot down, with a single destroyer, a sattelite from outer #ing space! Trust me, no missiles are getting through our defense systems. ...

Fantasy time. You are placing too much trust on technology that is truly unproven in battle conditions. Also, massed ships and troops are a decent target. No shield over them. Oh, you forgot the had nuclear submarines and they work also. Not to give credit to the Russians, but you gave them home court advantage. Our battle groups would be new coral reefs.

6.) "What if they built up their #'s then declared war?" Well, we have Apaches that can single handedly take out an entire tank column. We can fire tomahawk missiles from hundreds of miles away and blow up planes, tanks, rockets, people, before they even see us. Russia wouldn't even be able to attack America, THEY HAVE NO NAVY! What are they going to do, swim?

I left this one intact because you make some very basic and stupid assumptions. Russia has air power and helicopters. They use combined tactics just as the US military does. They were actually the developers of this type of attack during WW2, but we both know that because you are a retired Marine general. They will not invade the US any more than China will, you have a false premise.

Anyone who disagrees is wrong.

No, you are making a presumptuous statement with false, misleading, or jaded opinions, illustrating stupid tactics and a stunning lack of military knowledge.

WW2 tactics had factories being moved and some time to build stuff. Modern warfare is totally different. You use what you have and hope industry is in place to catch up with inventory depletion. There was a shortage of smart bombs within a month of the war on Iraq, but again, you knew this, because you are a military tactician.

Iraq has proven the USA has the logistic capability to invade a country in the mideast. It has also proven that the US military is a poor military power of occupation. This is what you are looking at with Russia.

Let me bottom line this real quick. Russia would defend itself including using nuclear weapons on her own soil. In the process, Europe, North America, China, India, Japan, Australia, and any other perceived threat would be nuked. Of course, Russia would suffer the same fate. This would be the end of human society as it was ever known.

You are trying to relive WW2 tactics using the US military instead of Japan and Germany, nice try, but it will never happen.

Originally posted by Arc Angel
Someone posted this not so long ago...so I'd figure I'd revive this dead topic because I never got the chance to put my 2 cents in. Here's were I stand:

Why revive a dead to kill him again at the first bloody heartbeat?

Anyone who disagrees is wrong.

rest in peace.

The uninvited guest: Chinese sub pops up in middle of U.S. Navy exercise, leaving military chiefs red-faced
www.dailymail.co.uk...
Here go your 11 Aircraft carriers... with out them... US is a sitting duck... and when Nukes start flying... then you will meet real Arc Angel!

Arc Angel is an example of a brain washed American...

also some sources say: Pentagon Disinformation on Kitty Hawk Incident



[edit on 18-6-2008 by (^_^)]

"So you got 250,000 Marines pushing West; 250,000 pushing East;" (Part of your #4 point)

This might be difficult to achieve considering as of 2005(the latest number i can remember) we have about 180,000 active marines and 40,000 reserve. But I really appreciate your confidence in our military. As a member of the Navy, I really feel we could utterly dominate anyone we choose.

Good Post!

thank you (^_^) !!!!
i was just about to post the same thing....China has nuclear subs up the wazoo, and i highly doubt if we know exactly what else they've got to throw at us. i personally think that we would be up sh** creek without a paddle.

Originally posted by (^_^)
The uninvited guest: Chinese sub pops up in middle of U.S. Navy exercise, leaving military chiefs red-faced
www.dailymail.co.uk...
Here go your 11 Aircraft carriers... with out them... US is a sitting duck... and when Nukes start flying... then you will meet real Arc Angel!

Arc Angel is an example of a brain washed American...

also some sources say: Pentagon Disinformation on Kitty Hawk Incident



[edit on 18-6-2008 by (^_^)]

The Chinese own soo much of America that they were just popping up to check on thier investment.