^Excerpted.

I don't agree. Traditional warfare with Russia has always been treacherous. Given their ridiculous geography and climate, they've always been one of the most difficult countries to attack and defeat, if not the most difficult. Their technology and spending, while both taking a hit in the 90's when the USSR dissolved, has since taken a huge rebound. Their government is swimming in money, and they've pumped a TON of it into their military (in true Russian fashion).

Not only do I think that we can't beat them easily, I doubt that we could actually beat them at all...particularly if we continue to stretch ourselves thin in Afghanistan and Iraq.

It would be a hard fight, for sure. It would not be an Iraq,
But we could defeat their numbers!!

That is your opinion. Have you done ant time in the military? I don't think so. We are not even close to being thin like you say.True that we are in Iraq and Afganistian, but we still complete other missions around the wourld at the same time. The only thing that Russia has over us is their new fighter jet. Still that doesn't mean it can't be shot down.

"Dale Herspring from Kansas State University said in 2008 that, "The Russian military will be back about 2020. In 2015, it will be in sort of a decent shape"

Most advanced in military technology are done in the US. Guns, artillery, aircraft etc. Also territory would only be an issue if we were assaulting and not defending and I doubt we would ever just go and attack them.

That stuff is too expensive to be used against Russia for long!
Plus they have Jamming technology which would make much of it useless.
We would have to dumb down our weapons systems to fight Russia.

Its not going to happen though. Tim is right the only thing that keeps our government in check is Nukes. Why do you think everyone wants them?
Russia has about 10 thousand and we aren't going to do shet!
They can do what they want in Georgia, and other than maybe send weapons to them we wont do anything!

The Georgian leader should never have listened to Bush's rhetoric about becoming a NATO member.
They knew Russia would never allow NATO's encirclement of their country tighten that much!
Poland and the Czech Republic will be lucky if they arent next!

U.S., Russia revert to cold-war rhetoric over missile-defense plan
Russia says that the proposed US defense shield in Poland and the Czech Republic, an initial agreement for which was inked this week, is targeting Russia, not rogue states.
By Jonathan Adams
posted July 09, 2008 at 10:29 am EDT

A war of words erupted this week between the United States and Russia over a controversial US plan to deploy a missile-defense shield in the Czech Republic and Poland. The plan has already strained US-Russia relations and encountered resistance from some in Europe.

The verbal spat between the US and Russia came after US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on Tuesday inked an initial agreement on missile-defense deployment with the Czech government in Prague, as reported by the Associated Press.

According to Reuters, Russia's Foreign Ministry responded to the news in a statement: "If the real deployment of an American strategic missile defense shield begins close to our borders, then we will be forced to react not with diplomatic methods, but with military-technical methods."

In reaction to that statement, the US criticized Russia for its "bellicose rhetoric," which it said was meant to intimidate the European partners of the US into backing out of the defense plan, according to the BBC. The report goes on to clarify Russia's statement.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0709/p99s01-duts.html


Ive been saying he is about to restart the Cold War with his foreign Policies!

Russia defense budget 2007 - $31 billion
US 2007 439.3 billion

Last time I checked Iraq didn't have atomic weapons.
I mean come on If you had a neighbor who lived in a cardboard box (behind your house)and you let him use your address to get his welfare check and he stopped selling you crack you would do something about it right?? But if that crack dealer had a 357 magnum and 1000 rounds of ammo and a bunch of powerful crack head clients who relied on him for crack you would think twice before wooooopen that azzzz! Same thing...right.

??

Chazter - Good points. I've unfortunately gotta run for now, but I think you're right that we have an edge on Russia for now if we were in a defensive position. I was working under the assumption that we would be attacking them (since I think that's what this thread started as...attacking them in defense of Georgia).

I still disagree that they are not a decent military force as we speak, but there's really no way to prove that and your defense budget numbers indicate that I'm wrong on that. Hopefully we won't find out first hand anytime soon.


120557 - Yes I know that is my opinion...that's why I started everything with "I think". To answer your question, I haven't ever served in the military, although I fail to see how that's really relevant in terms of knowledge of international military strength.

Iraq has no gun/atomic bomb...Russia is a weak crack dealer with a 357mag and a 1000 rounds of amo....nukes.

Dont worry man, good to know we both allow each other to have our opinions and state our thoughts and info without be aggressive towards each other. I also pull a little more for the US as I just got a job with a military contractor lol.

Nukes wouldn't help much in an invasion. Also because of the other reasons I mentioned earlier.

Chaz,
That's with a very small military engaged on two fronts against an enemy that could be equated to a bully beating up Geeky kids on a school house playground.
Our military today is but a shell to what it was during the Cold War, and then it wasn't near to what we would need to fight a conventional war against Russia!

Look at the Budget you posted and then look at this!

Feb 25, 2008 U.S. Spending on Iraq and Afghanistan by Month, Week, Day, Hour, Minute, & Second
This chart shows how the United States spends $12.3 billion per month in Iraq and Afghanistan.

http://www.armscontrolcenter.org/policy/securityspending/articles/supplemental_war_funding/

You can do the math, but imagine if we didn't have that expense. Russia doesn't, and their weapons are a lot cheaper. More, but cheaper, and they haven't been involved in a two front war like we have.

Already our economy is faltering and our military equipment is suffering from not enough maint.
Go to war with Russia?
When I was in Europe during the Cold War the US had 365,000 US Army personnel in USAREUR.
That's not counting all the Hawk missile bases and AF personnel in Europe, or the NATO country troops that were there too.

We had a plan called REFORGER (return of forces to Germany) where every unit in the States, another 365,000 would be flown in to help!
Still, We were outnumbered 12-1 in Tanks and pretty close to that in every other dept. by the USSR.

Our battle plans were to delay and hopefully hold on to the last man, backing up towards the Atlantic Coast, until the Draft could crank up and begin sending 190,000 troops a week to help!

NBC warfare was an option we reserved and probably would have used. It would not have been pretty and the world, esp Europe, was glad when the Cold War ended.

first off who every said Russia was broke dream on. guess you forgot about the oil money Russia has. Russia did go through a hard time. but there back. as for USA defeating Russia. hell USA can even beat a bunch of sand people in Iraq or Afghanistan. in the end. if USA and Russia get in to a war. we all lose. lets hope things can calm down. if not. a lot of us or going to die. so in the end we all lose. now i no why people have been blowing there horn all day. no one like my Russian flag in front of my house.because when it comes down to it, i still consider myself Russian. long live the Russian people. i salute you. comrade.

We cant hardly manage to muster 175,00 troops today to fight in Iraq and Afghanistan, and look at the cost!
Seems to me you are missing a lot of tactical information in your assessment of doing battle with Russia.

First you would need to multiply the current defense budget by about 25. You have to figure that we would fire about 100 times the amount of high tech expensive(with a capital$$) missiles, rockets, etc as are being used in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Plus you'd have to replace the losses in Tanks, Planes, APC's, etc. That's a guarantee if we fight Russia and an expense you aren't seeing beating up little ole Iraq.
M-1's, M-2's, F-16's, F-15's, etc aren't cheap!

You might want to increase that defense budget another 100%!

Oh I forgot the sunk aircraft carriers, submarines, and battleships, Russia has a Navy, Iraq doesnt!! You better up that budget again!

i,m not saying a war between USA and Russia would every happen. but what i am saying is. bush better leave Putin alone. if not god help us all. i just pray things will cool down.

Why? We have ways to find subs. In fact, I will be working on that at work. We still have a lot of money going into military contracts.

Should the U.S. defend our allies?