Russia & allies vs US & NATO

I think Russia would win because it has china on it's side and the Chinese have a VERY good army with one of the largest military in the world not to mention some of the Arabs Iran Syria Lebanon to mention a few. Prove me wrong. ^-^

*I encourage debate so please engage me

Noone would win, there would be a scorched earth mentality.

"If you want my land and I'm about to lose it, ill nuke it so you can't use it either"

The Chinese will never fight with the Russians. Too much bad blood; and too much to loose when they are just about to become a world superpower (in fact, I would say they already are).

reply to post by rationaluser


I visited the Ukraine & Russia in 1999 on HMS Fearless. I found the Russians military to extremely kind, professional and courteous. The relationship we had with them over the 5 day visit was nothing short of fantastic.

Why people portray Russia as the bad guys towards NATO I don't know (Please don't bring up Georgia - there's two sides to every coin and all we have to go on is the media reports)

No-one is going to start a war - there's no reason to to - all sides will lose. Russia / China are not stupid - the rock steady increase of their economy as opposed to the West's gives them no reason to start arguments.
The biggest threat I can foresee is terrorist bombs (dirty / chemical). That I believe is just a matter of time until that happens.

[edit on 23/1/09 by vonspurter]

Originally posted by rationaluser
I think Russia would win because it has china on it's side and the Chinese have a VERY good army with one of the largest military in the world not to mention some of the Arabs Iran Syria Lebanon to mention a few. Prove me wrong. ^-^

*I encourage debate so please engage me

If there was a serious conflict, to the likes of a WWIII, and plain old conventional weapons were used, it would be a long, drawn out stalemate IMO.

But that wont happen if there was a full blown WWIII. Both sides would whip out the huge guns..ie the nukem's and the entire planet would be obliverated.



Cheers!!!!

reply to post by vonspurter


I'd have to say I agree with your post most of all.

There is no real reason for a major world conflict right now. None.

To the OP: China does indeed have an extremely large military. However. The thing that has to be remembered is that at this point in time, the Chinese do not possess the capability to project that power - meaning that the millions of soldiers in that army can't come to the US at a rate fast enough for a successful invasion. Now - if there were to be a large scale land war in the Asian/European theater, the Chinese would definitely pose a major threat - that was evident even back in the Korean war of the 50s.

But.

It would ultimately draw down to either 1) Stalemate between the US/Europe and the theoretical Asian/Russian alliance or 2) Nuclear War. There would be no "win" for either side unless current administrations decided to capitulate to the aggressors.

But - this is my opinion, not official US Army view.

Why is this thread in the ME section? Neither Russia and the US or China are in the ME.

reply to post by mf_luder

China does indeed have an extremely large military. However. The thing that has to be remembered is that at this point in time, the Chinese do not possess the capability to project that power - meaning that the millions of soldiers in that army can't come to the US at a rate fast enough for a successful invasion

They have just built a huge and cutting edge navy. Part of that technology was on submarine know how stolen sold to them.

news.bbc.co.uk...

Also a Russian led strike could followed through by boots on ground in depth by China.

might makes right, take a further look:

www.abovetopsecret.com... The Rise of the Shanghi Cooperation Organization was a thread I began in april, 2008. i believe this cooperation organization is gaining in strength and power and a "look" further into its real agenda was to counter balance nato and the un or I should say united states of America. Take a further look at the members of this cooperation by following the link above. www.cfr.org... and www.sectsco.org...

now we can take a look at g4s and corporate member CER stating a shift in power from West to Asia:

December 2008/January 2009 - CER BULLETIN, ISSUE 63 The EU's fleeting chance for global leadership
by Charles Grant

The economic crisis offers unprecedented opportunities for reforming global rules and institutions. Furthermore, the Obama presidency - which Europeans expect to be less unilateralist than that of George W Bush - will give the EU a chance to work with the US in tackling a host of international problems. But the EU may prove incapable of rising to either challenge. It may not be able to agree on a convincing set of proposals on global governance. And if Obama finds the EU ineffective - for example, unable to provide more troops for Afghanistan or to speak with one voice on Russia - he will not treat it as a serious partner.
Over the past ten years, the relative shift of power from the West to Asia has been obvious. But it is less clear whether the emerging multipolar world will be multilateral, with a strong role for international institutions, or one based on the balance of power where 'might is right'. The EU, which instinctively favours the former, has a real chance to work with the US to tilt the world towards multilateralism. The EU and the US still account for half of world GDP. Brazil, India and Russia remain regional rather than global powers. Even China - which has growing interests on all continents - is reluctant to appear as a superpower. And although the Bush presidency and the financial crisis have damaged American soft power, the Obama presidency should help to restore it.

www.cer.org.uk...

so, let the games begin.

reply to post by masonwatcher


Submarines can't project power though. They can deny the use of seaways, and they can interdict your sea based resupply, but they can't project power. About the only way to truly project power anymore since the battleship is dead, is by aircraft carrier. It carries enough firepower to wipe out small countries, without going nuclear. China is currently working on getting the carrier they bought from Russia operational, which will give them a limited ability to project power once it is, but it will be several more years before it's operational.

You are absolutely correct. Also, something else that falls under what I was talking about when I said "projecting power" was the fact they still had to move those "millions of soldiers" into a "successful invasion." I don't understand why someone gave me a link to an article about submarines, since you can't land a beachhead w/ a nuclear submarine. I was talking about the sheer number of people. They aren't going to be able to do a large enough airborne op, nor do they have the LST type craft used in WWII by the US - so....

NO.

They can "NOT" successfully project their power enough for a full scale invasion of the US.

By the way - thanks for the reponse about the subs.... yours was nicer.

reply to post by vonspurter


Although not Russian, I too find the anti Russian bias to be a little disturbing. I guess 60 years of conditioning dies hard eh? Anyway, your comment about the conflict in Georgia is correct. As I understood it, South Ossetia had seceded as they viewed themselves as Russians, the Georgians went in to retrieve the province, the Russians (undoubtedly using overkill however) responded with force to protect a territory that they also considered to be Russian.
Might also add that I hope that the US and China never wage war, my future wifes Chinese!!! Don't kill off my hopes and dreams guys!!!!

How about have peace? Why do we need people ( a lot of people to be exact) die for nothing? Why not work together to solve real and serious issues that effect the world today?

I agree, I really don't think however that the original thread was meant to suggest that we hope this happens. I sure as hell don't! I'm majoring Russian Military History in College, must say I love your country and its culture. Here's to hoping we never again become enemies.

Definetly a toast to that

World peace!

Submarines can't project power though.

Makes you wonder though...wouldn't a force of submarines designed for this purpose be the ultimate way to start a secret land invasion? (if that was the goal).

Of course, the success of modern strategy (i.e. air war to eliminate primary enemy defenses, then ground troups to solidify and occupy) leaves little room for such an invasion strategy...