Pages:
Author

Topic: USA vs RUSSIA (Read 3212 times)

hero member
Activity: 2702
Merit: 704
Bitcoin is GOD
August 24, 2015, 12:50:54 AM
#55
That is why the US and Russia developed MIRV's/MARV's which makes a defense not possible/extremely difficult.

The Russians claim that their S-400 Triumf air-defense system is effective against all types of MIRV. Also, the American MIRV technology is not as much advanced as that of the Russians. With the development of the S-500, the capability of the Americans to launch a nuclear strike against the Russians will be greatly reduced.

I'll be honest and say that I do not know that much about particular weapons or systems of defense (maybe you are a military). However, there are a few more roads to MAD than just dropping bombs over cities.

As far as I know is forbidden to explode atomics bombs on space (or was the high atmosphere) and the reason is that if you do that an EMP is created. With enough bombs it could be possible (in theory) to destroy every satellite and almost all electronics on earth. Taking us to a pre Industrial Revolution era (or maybe even a dark age)

Another way will be with the use of biological weapons, if Russia was losing a hypothetical WWIII and they faced total destruction, they might as well destroy the whole human race, after all Russia will have nothing to lose at that point.
hero member
Activity: 728
Merit: 500
Never ending parties are what Im into.
August 23, 2015, 11:35:48 PM
#54
This war is a cold one, but nature is warming it up.
Posturing is always necessary or some one takes a look at the cookies and decides to have a nibble.
Watch any American President and his body language with potentially hostile Countries, its exaggerated on purpose. Bigger board, bigger exaggerations.
legendary
Activity: 1120
Merit: 1000
August 23, 2015, 07:01:58 PM
#53
how long this war will continue?  Cry
legendary
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1027
August 23, 2015, 06:56:54 PM
#52
If we fight a nuclear war , we lose. Does it matter if there are a few Russian or Americans left who can decide that they won?

You are wrong. Russia will win the coming nuclear war.  Smiley
your wrong too no one will win we will all be dead..but this will never happen..its all done for money and to lower the population  and to control the little people
i believe the super rich call us the little people..
hero member
Activity: 602
Merit: 500
hyperboria - next internet
August 23, 2015, 03:07:49 PM
#51
If we fight a nuclear war , we lose. Does it matter if there are a few Russian or Americans left who can decide that they won?

You are wrong. Russia will win the coming nuclear war.  Smiley

nope
hero member
Activity: 616
Merit: 500
August 23, 2015, 03:06:21 PM
#50
If we fight a nuclear war , we lose. Does it matter if there are a few Russian or Americans left who can decide that they won?

You are wrong. Russia will win the coming nuclear war.  Smiley
hero member
Activity: 602
Merit: 500
hyperboria - next internet
August 23, 2015, 02:27:56 PM
#49
This conversation is pointless. It's obvious that american military forces are way stronger than russian. American tehnology is just better. American economy several times bigger. And there is just more people living in america. But this war is impossible because russia has nuclear weapons.
legendary
Activity: 3752
Merit: 1217
August 23, 2015, 01:38:50 PM
#48
That is why the US and Russia developed MIRV's/MARV's which makes a defense not possible/extremely difficult.

The Russians claim that their S-400 Triumf air-defense system is effective against all types of MIRV. Also, the American MIRV technology is not as much advanced as that of the Russians. With the development of the S-500, the capability of the Americans to launch a nuclear strike against the Russians will be greatly reduced.
member
Activity: 70
Merit: 10
August 23, 2015, 12:52:18 PM
#47
US military is stronger but nowadays I don't think anyone would be interested in this kind of conflict - USA isn't involved enough in Eastern Europe and Russia is too weak to pose a real threat to them
newbie
Activity: 30
Merit: 0
August 23, 2015, 12:29:52 PM
#46
absolutely USA.
we know if the reference currency is Dollars America.
and the country  superpower have recognized in this world is USA.
although the two country still having hostility each other.
and want to maintain or fight to be number one country.
legendary
Activity: 2464
Merit: 1145
August 23, 2015, 10:09:18 AM
#45
The stronger army belongs to US but it's irrelevant. Army's were made irrelevant by the development of nuclear weapons. If an hypothetical WWIII were to happen MAD will be assured, especially if we take into account the most fearsome of all the weapons... Biological Weapons.

It is partially correct. Having a  larger army does not guarantee anyone a sure shot victory in warfare. Still, it can offer an initial advantage to the warring sides. And having nuclear weapons alone is not enough. Without quality ICBMs, the nukes will be useless. Also, if the opposing side is having good air-defense systems, the nuclear attack will be difficult. 

That is why the US and Russia developed MIRV's/MARV's which makes a defense not possible/extremely difficult.

M.A.D. is still working today.
legendary
Activity: 3752
Merit: 1217
August 23, 2015, 09:30:47 AM
#44
The stronger army belongs to US but it's irrelevant. Army's were made irrelevant by the development of nuclear weapons. If an hypothetical WWIII were to happen MAD will be assured, especially if we take into account the most fearsome of all the weapons... Biological Weapons.

It is partially correct. Having a  larger army does not guarantee anyone a sure shot victory in warfare. Still, it can offer an initial advantage to the warring sides. And having nuclear weapons alone is not enough. Without quality ICBMs, the nukes will be useless. Also, if the opposing side is having good air-defense systems, the nuclear attack will be difficult. 
hero member
Activity: 2702
Merit: 704
Bitcoin is GOD
August 22, 2015, 11:34:18 PM
#43
The stronger army belongs to US but it's irrelevant. Army's were made irrelevant by the development of nuclear weapons. If an hypothetical WWIII were to happen MAD will be assured, especially if we take into account the most fearsome of all the weapons... Biological Weapons.
legendary
Activity: 2912
Merit: 1386
August 22, 2015, 11:11:54 PM
#42
Yeah, let's all launch our nukes and see how many "winners" there are.  Roll Eyes

Well, history says one thing about who can win a war with Vietnam.

It says...

Don't fuck with Vietnam...
legendary
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1027
August 22, 2015, 06:04:52 PM
#41
ALL HANDBAGS AT 10 PACERS
we be fools to go to war with each other

 now go check out R3D COIN WONT HURT TO LOOK good coin to own freedom of speech
legendary
Activity: 992
Merit: 1000
August 22, 2015, 06:01:25 PM
#40
Russia's military is based on a defense doctrine. This is where their strengths lie. They would never attempt to invade Europe or America as it would most certainly not be successful. Likewise, any attempted invasion of Russia would also end in miserable failure.  Russia has some of the best air defense and ballistic missile technology in the world. I guarantee you NATO and the USA would not be able to successfully invade Russia.

Here is a good article on the subject:

http://thesaker.is/the-russia-u-s-conventional-military-balance/

Why bean counting makes absolutely no sense

The typical reply to this kind of question resorts to what US force planners call “bean counting”. Typically, journalists use the yearly IISS Military Balance or a source like Global Firepower and tallies of the number of men, main battle tanks, armored personnel carries, infantry combat vehicles, combat aircraft, artillery pieces, bombers, missiles, surface ships, submarines, etc. each side has a presents them in a chart. The reality is that such bean counting means absolutely and strictly nothing. Let’s take a simple example: if a war happens between, say, China and Russia then the fact that China has, say, 1000 thanks in it’s Yunnan province, will make no difference to the war at all, simply because they are too far. When we apply this caveat to the Russian-US conventional military balance we immediately ought to ask ourselves the following two basic questions:

a) What part of the US military worldwide would be immediately available to the US commanders in case of a war with Russia?

b) On how much reinforcements could this force count and how soon could they get there?

Keep in mind that tanks, bombers, soldiers and artillery do not fight separately – they fight together in what is logically called “combined arms” battles. So even the USA could get X number of soldiers to location A, if they don’t have all the other combined arms components to support them in combat they are just an easy target.

Furthermore, any fighting force will require a major logistics/supplies effort. It is all very well to get aircraft X to location A, but if it’s missiles, maintenance equipment and specialists are not here to help, they are useless. Armored forces are notorious for expending a huge amount of petroleum, oil and lubricants. According to one estimate, in 1991 a US armored division could sustain itself for only 5 days , and after that it needed a major support effort.

Finally, any force that the US would move from point A to point B would become unavailable to execute its normally assigned role at point A. Now consider that “point A” could mean the Middle-East, or Far East Asia and you will see that this might be a difficult decision for US commanders.
sr. member
Activity: 266
Merit: 250
August 22, 2015, 03:29:47 PM
#39
If we fight a nuclear war , we lose. Does it matter if there are a few Russian or Americans left who can decide that they won?
member
Activity: 70
Merit: 10
★777Coin.com★ Fun BTC Casino!
August 22, 2015, 11:29:03 AM
#38
i should think is USA,
USA entrhone and showed if it is superpower country in  this world.
and the two country "USA and Russia" is make a war, and take a part if there are neighbor or two country have a war.
like in thailand long time ago, and now in middle east.
legendary
Activity: 1162
Merit: 1000
August 22, 2015, 10:41:14 AM
#37
USA of course, but they are a democracy, and Russia has as secret service the biggest orgnization ever seen by manking.

With some losses and some inteligence USA would not want to keep warring
legendary
Activity: 1134
Merit: 1000
August 22, 2015, 09:20:12 AM
#36
I think Russia has the best army, if you are comparing that with US army. But if its all about weapons, so I guess US is better, since it has newest technology than Russia.

The American technological advantage has been declining for the last 10-15 years, due to neglect. On the other hand, Russia has succeeded in recapturing the number one position in a few military sectors, with their new and innovative weaponry. A few examples are the S-400, T-14, Sukhoi PAK FA, Yasen-class submarine.etc.

This is absolutely true. I think in 10 to 15 years Russia will overtake USA in military tech. Then destruction of USA is finally possible to bring peace and prosperity to mankind.

In 10-15 years Russia will suffer the eating and not overtake USA in military tech, And not only in military but in any way. You think that a war will bring the peace? Strange imagination of one way to arrive the peace...
Pages:
Jump to: