Russia vs USA in war: Who'd win?
Posted: April 30th, 2013, 2:20 pm
If it did NOT invovle nuclear weapons? Would the US win because of its military? Someone said that Russia has more fuel, so that's on its side.
Happier Abroad Forum Community
Our Message: You Can Transform Your Life and Solve Your Problems by Escaping America for a Better Life & Love Overseas! Discover Friendlier People, Social Connection, Saner Cultures, Lower Cost Living, Healthier Food, Greater Freedoms and More!
https://www.happierabroad.com/forum/
Russia vs USA in war: Who'd win?
https://www.happierabroad.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=18601
Page 1 of 2
Posted: April 30th, 2013, 2:41 pm
Us. Russia could attack Alaska easily, but then the Us could knock them out in a heartbeat.
Posted: April 30th, 2013, 3:20 pm
Very unlikely to happen. The US actually did invade Russia before. In 1918 . These are American troops in Russia:
The Russians say they were very cruel, torturing people, cutting people into pieces alive and and drowning people in barges- tying them up with barbed wire and sinking the vessels.
This is the account
http://d-pankratov.ru/archives/2553
Use google translate
But it's hypothetical, and will never happen.
The Russians say they were very cruel, torturing people, cutting people into pieces alive and and drowning people in barges- tying them up with barbed wire and sinking the vessels.
This is the account
http://d-pankratov.ru/archives/2553
Use google translate
But it's hypothetical, and will never happen.
Posted: April 30th, 2013, 6:36 pm
Neither would have any chance of occupying the other.
Posted: April 30th, 2013, 6:40 pm
Really? How come we never leanred this in school? Are you Russian, by the sound of your name?ladislav wrote:Very unlikely to happen. The US actually did invade Russia before. In 1918 . These are American troops in Russia:
The Russians say they were very cruel, torturing people, cutting people into pieces alive and and drowning people in barges- tying them up with barbed wire and sinking the vessels.
This is the account
http://d-pankratov.ru/archives/2553
Use google translate
But it's hypothetical, and will never happen.
Posted: April 30th, 2013, 9:53 pm
On the battlefield in a direct encounter, the US would win because it has better technology, firepower, and efficiency in combat. But in a long war of attrition, Russia would win, because their people have a fearless stubborn attitude that refuses to surrender no matter what. They are not afraid to die or of incurring casualties and would rather fight to the death than surrender or admit that they were wrong. Against Napoleon and Hitler, they were outmatched, yet they did not care and fought back fearlessly and never gave up no matter what.
So it depends on what kind of war it is, one of capturing territory, or of occupation. If the goal is to take out a capital city or piece of land, the US would win. But neither side can occupy the other country. No military can truly occupy an entire country.
The US can easily outspend Russia though. During the Cold War arms race (allegedly), the US outspent Russia and bankrupted its economy, which led to the collapse of the USSR. So the US doesn't have to win in battle. It knows how to economically bleed another country or turn it into a debt slave. The US is an expert in economic enslavement. That's how it conquers and dominates nowadays.
Anyway, isn't this an inane topic? Why do people post topics like this? lol. Why don't you get a battle strategy video game simulation, and pit the US military against Russia and see what happens? lol.
Btw Lovelybunny, you must be a very unusual female. This isn't the kind of question a female usually asks. Questions like this are usually asked or pondered by young boys with too much time on their hands. lol
So it depends on what kind of war it is, one of capturing territory, or of occupation. If the goal is to take out a capital city or piece of land, the US would win. But neither side can occupy the other country. No military can truly occupy an entire country.
The US can easily outspend Russia though. During the Cold War arms race (allegedly), the US outspent Russia and bankrupted its economy, which led to the collapse of the USSR. So the US doesn't have to win in battle. It knows how to economically bleed another country or turn it into a debt slave. The US is an expert in economic enslavement. That's how it conquers and dominates nowadays.
Anyway, isn't this an inane topic? Why do people post topics like this? lol. Why don't you get a battle strategy video game simulation, and pit the US military against Russia and see what happens? lol.
Btw Lovelybunny, you must be a very unusual female. This isn't the kind of question a female usually asks. Questions like this are usually asked or pondered by young boys with too much time on their hands. lol
Posted: April 30th, 2013, 10:40 pm
That is not my name, lol. No, I am not Russian.Really? How come we never leanred this in school? Are you Russian, by the sound of your name?
Well, the US was not acting alone, and the force was like 13,000 people only. It was part of an Entente between the White Guards and US, Japan, the UK, etc. The US along with Japan, of all countries, were there to support the Whites in their fight against the Reds. The Whites lost and this small coalition left. The Russians never forgot about it, though.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allied_int ... _Civil_War
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_E ... ce_Siberia
It was probably never taught because it was not a US action per se, but an allied action.
Posted: May 1st, 2013, 5:33 am
In a war with Russia, there would be at least 2 camps of nations. The US would have the majority of the developing world at its back, but Russia would have Iran, Syria, Serbia, perhaps Greece and a smattering of other Orthodox nations at its back.
The wildcard factors would be China and or India. If China backed Russia, the USA would lose unless India backed the USA. In the latter case, the USA would have a fighting chance.
Another factor would be the location of the combat. We lose if we invade the cold forbidding Russia, but we are likely to win in the Americas, Europe, Africa. Asia would be a toss-up influenced by China's involvement.
The wildcard factors would be China and or India. If China backed Russia, the USA would lose unless India backed the USA. In the latter case, the USA would have a fighting chance.
Another factor would be the location of the combat. We lose if we invade the cold forbidding Russia, but we are likely to win in the Americas, Europe, Africa. Asia would be a toss-up influenced by China's involvement.
Posted: May 1st, 2013, 6:04 am
Russia as well as China are imperialistic in the areas around them, not in overseas ventures. Most countries Russia conquered, such as Poland, Finland, Lithuania, etc were really just areas around it. Same with China what with Tibet and Turkestan, etc.Contrarian Expatriate wrote: Another factor would be the location of the combat. We lose if we invade the cold forbidding Russia...
The Russians are very unlikely to fight people in far away lands. They almost never do. So, there won't be anything much unless there is a border skirmish.
The W. Euro powers would conquer areas way out of the way- in Africa, Asia, etc.
Having said all that, by a long stretch, America is "adjacent" to Russia so you can kind of see the Russians having a skirmish in the Bering Straits and then going into Alaska and then attacking Canada, etc. A good plot for a movie.
Posted: May 1st, 2013, 2:48 pm
Bunny you ask alot of dumb ?'s.
Posted: May 1st, 2013, 6:32 pm
Winston wrote:On the battlefield in a direct encounter, the US would win because it has better technology, firepower, and efficiency in combat. But in a long war of attrition, Russia would win, because their people have a fearless stubborn attitude that refuses to surrender no matter what. They are not afraid to die or of incurring casualties and would rather fight to the death than surrender or admit that they were wrong. Against Napoleon and Hitler, they were outmatched, yet they did not care and fought back fearlessly and never gave up no matter what.
So it depends on what kind of war it is, one of capturing territory, or of occupation. If the goal is to take out a capital city or piece of land, the US would win. But neither side can occupy the other country. No military can truly occupy an entire country.
The US can easily outspend Russia though. During the Cold War arms race (allegedly), the US outspent Russia and bankrupted its economy, which led to the collapse of the USSR. So the US doesn't have to win in battle. It knows how to economically bleed another country or turn it into a debt slave. The US is an expert in economic enslavement. That's how it conquers and dominates nowadays.
Anyway, isn't this an inane topic? Why do people post topics like this? lol. Why don't you get a battle strategy video game simulation, and pit the US military against Russia and see what happens? lol.
I guess I'm one of a kind. The reason I asked this was because I was trying to learn the truth about military power and such of the US and other ocuntries. Sorry if I annoyed you.
Btw Lovelybunny, you must be a very unusual female. This isn't the kind of question a female usually asks. Questions like this are usually asked or pondered by young boys with too much time on their hands. lol
Posted: May 1st, 2013, 6:48 pm
the only thing i know of that usa is #1 at is waging war... any scenario against any country has usa coming out on top handily. even if russia and china allied themselves against usa the outcome would be the same. our military budget is greater than the next 10 or so greatest countries combined. economically we have states that by themselves have greater economic power than nearly every other country. for example.. if california was a country they would be the 6th largest economy in the world. and we have states that were entire countries before such as texas. militarily nobody stands a chance against us. and if you think one day soon the chinese will surpass us economically you should be careful you dont count on that and invest there. they are a country ready to implode.. they have unstable borders with nearly every single one of their neighbors.. and they have a population that is sick of being controlled. their economic model requires them to become more consumer oriented in the near future but they have hamstrung themselves with government involvement in their archaic and non-transparent banking system.. i digress.. lol
Posted: May 1st, 2013, 7:34 pm
I'm one of a kind. I always read about the US defense budget and all, and I was curiou about how they'd fare against Russia. Sorry if I offended you.Winston wrote:On the battlefield in a direct encounter, the US would win because it has better technology, firepower, and efficiency in combat. But in a long war of attrition, Russia would win, because their people have a fearless stubborn attitude that refuses to surrender no matter what. They are not afraid to die or of incurring casualties and would rather fight to the death than surrender or admit that they were wrong. Against Napoleon and Hitler, they were outmatched, yet they did not care and fought back fearlessly and never gave up no matter what.
So it depends on what kind of war it is, one of capturing territory, or of occupation. If the goal is to take out a capital city or piece of land, the US would win. But neither side can occupy the other country. No military can truly occupy an entire country.
The US can easily outspend Russia though. During the Cold War arms race (allegedly), the US outspent Russia and bankrupted its economy, which led to the collapse of the USSR. So the US doesn't have to win in battle. It knows how to economically bleed another country or turn it into a debt slave. The US is an expert in economic enslavement. That's how it conquers and dominates nowadays.
Anyway, isn't this an inane topic? Why do people post topics like this? lol. Why don't you get a battle strategy video game simulation, and pit the US military against Russia and see what happens? lol.
Btw Lovelybunny, you must be a very unusual female. This isn't the kind of question a female usually asks. Questions like this are usually asked or pondered by young boys with too much time on their hands. lol
Posted: May 1st, 2013, 8:48 pm
How about every country vs. USA?
Posted: May 2nd, 2013, 2:05 am
Fu ck the US, we are waiting for the people to decide they have had enough of the social engineer's and let the socialist system of fake money and Ponzi scheme's collapse the way it should have long ago.
Only the dumb herd can decide on where to go from here, will it be under the command of the counterfeiters dictates or will Da herd find it's a$$ and decide enough is enough!
Only the dumb herd can decide on where to go from here, will it be under the command of the counterfeiters dictates or will Da herd find it's a$$ and decide enough is enough!