War with Russia
24279 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M
Offline
Posted 6/21/14 , edited 6/21/14
The Cold War has been done and over with but the truth is relationships have barely gotten better. Aside from a few space missions the United States and the Russian Federation have rarely seen eye to eye on issues they both have stakes in.

Never has that been more relevant than in recent years thanks to the Syria conflict and recently Ukraine.

Based on your knowledge of their governments, military, allies and assets who do you think would come out the other end in better shape? Would it be a conventional war? What would the world look like after the dust settles?
Posted 6/21/14 , edited 6/21/14
they are all divided within europe and america. most likely russia (will come on top) because america is losing it and living on just bluffing. you saw the call for tough treatment of russia and over in europe most were like, "pssh we are the ones who will hurt if russia gets alienated not you". there is no cohesion. territories and geopolitics are going to be the new weapons and i don't see, what with the situation over in europe.. racist parties growing strong, that people wish to mesh but be directed under no nonsense leadership. russia is a step ahead at the moment and the rest will take time to follow suit... but when they do, it will be too late as the people are less likely to see the threat and agree to babysitting china or new important countries.
24279 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M
Offline
Posted 6/21/14

severticas wrote:

they are all divided within europe and america. most likely russia (will come on top) because america is losing it and living on just bluffing. you saw the call for tough treatment of russia and over in europe most were like, "pssh we are the ones who will hurt if russia gets alienated not you". there is no cohesion. territories and geopolitics are going to be the new weapons and i don't see, what with the situation over in europe.. racist parties growing strong, that people wish to mesh but be directed under no nonsense leadership. russia is a step ahead at the moment and the rest will take time to follow suit... but when they do, it will be too late as the people are less likely to see the threat and agree to babysitting china or new important countries.


Or better yet the entire BRICS bloc. These countries are trying to cooperate economically but the relationships can grow much deep than that once money is involved. Sharing military and political gains amongst each other. Almost like the U.S. of the Cold War. Moving further away from the US and Europe and trying to develop and profit off of their own economies. American influence may be on a downward trend but militarily it has become a lot more ruthless in it's tactics. Finding a group of people within their enemy's state and getting them to do the fighting, then flying in with drones to target whomever they please. Where our fighting force gas gotten weaker and softer our covert tools have become far more lethal. Coupled with the lack of adherence to international law when using those methods it has become quite an effective tool in destabilizing a country.


If you try to put the shoe on the other foot, if would be much harder to fuel public descent in the US. Our people are far too apathetic to take to the streets over things like taxes or policies, not to the point of violence. Gun laws make it hard for any outside entity to fund a rebellion and our air defense has a lot of money behind it.

That said I think if push came to shove I think it would be played out in more than just proxy wars like Korea.
Posted 6/21/14 , edited 6/21/14

MysticGon wrote:


severticas wrote:

they are all divided within europe and america. most likely russia (will come on top) because america is losing it and living on just bluffing. you saw the call for tough treatment of russia and over in europe most were like, "pssh we are the ones who will hurt if russia gets alienated not you". there is no cohesion. territories and geopolitics are going to be the new weapons and i don't see, what with the situation over in europe.. racist parties growing strong, that people wish to mesh but be directed under no nonsense leadership. russia is a step ahead at the moment and the rest will take time to follow suit... but when they do, it will be too late as the people are less likely to see the threat and agree to babysitting china or new important countries.


Or better yet the entire BRICS bloc. These countries are trying to cooperate economically but the relationships can grow much deep than that once money is involved. Sharing military and political gains amongst each other. Almost like the U.S. of the Cold War. Moving further away from the US and Europe and trying to develop and profit off of their own economies. American influence may be on a downward trend but militarily it has become a lot more ruthless in it's tactics. Finding a group of people within their enemy's state and getting them to do the fighting, then flying in with drones to target whomever they please. Where our fighting force gas gotten weaker and softer our covert tools have become far more lethal. Coupled with the lack of adherence to international law when using those methods it has become quite an effective tool in destabilizing a country.


If you try to put the shoe on the other foot, if would be much harder to fuel public descent in the US. Our people are far too apathetic to take to the streets over things like taxes or policies, not to the point of violence. Gun laws make it hard for any outside entity to fund a rebellion and our air defense has a lot of money behind it.

That said I think if push came to shove I think it would be played out in more than just proxy wars like Korea.


i think you'll find with tools, technology and knowledge there is more of a chance that nothing will be secret and you'll most likely see leaks all happening all over and betrayal no longer to be something feared but rather expected. the country that will rule will most likely keep these things under the minimum because easily, you can become your worst enemy.
32372 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / F / Connecticut
Offline
Posted 6/21/14 , edited 6/21/14

MysticGon wrote:
Based on your knowledge of their governments, military, allies and assets who do you think would come out the other end in better shape? Would it be a conventional war? What would the world look like after the dust settles?


As said in the 1980s movie, WarGames, the only winning move is NOT TO PLAY.

Due to the distance between the two countries (Russia can't just easily launch a ground invasion into the US like it could into China or vice versa, the logistics would be extremely difficult), any direct confrontation between the US and Russia would doubtlessly result in a nuclear total war scenario with both sides trying to kill as many people as they can. When it comes that...America has an advantage of interception tech and dealing with a more concentrated enemy population around Moscow and St. Petersburg, while Russia has more landmass and probably more nukes. In the end, both sides and the world would be utterly destroyed and neither advantage would probably matter in the long run as we'd be dealing with a catastrophic nuclear winter at that point.

You're probably only going to see proxy battles occur in the future (like In Syria and Ukraine and such) unless either side is stupid enough to make that dare, which I highly doubt.
24279 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M
Offline
Posted 6/21/14 , edited 6/21/14

Jsybird2532 wrote:


MysticGon wrote:
Based on your knowledge of their governments, military, allies and assets who do you think would come out the other end in better shape? Would it be a conventional war? What would the world look like after the dust settles?


As said in the 1980s movie, WarGames, the only winning move is NOT TO PLAY.

Due to the distance between the two countries (Russia can't just easily launch a ground invasion into the US like it could into China or vice versa, the logistics would be extremely difficult), any direct confrontation between the US and Russia would doubtlessly result in a nuclear total war scenario with both sides trying to kill as many people as they can. When it comes that...America has an advantage of interception tech and dealing with a more concentrated enemy population around Moscow and St. Petersburg, while Russia has more landmass and probably more nukes. In the end, both sides and the world would be utterly destroyed and neither advantage would probably matter in the long run as we'd be dealing with a catastrophic nuclear winter at that point.

You're probably only going to see proxy battles occur in the future (like In Syria and Ukraine and such) unless either side is stupid enough to make that dare, which I highly doubt.


Actually they are closer than you think. Alaska and Russia nearly touch. There is also the polar cap, which will be a liquid ocean soon.

That is indeed the worst case scenario but I do think both countries have that mentality that if a nuke were fired in anger that'd be the end of life as we know it.
32372 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / F / Connecticut
Offline
Posted 6/21/14 , edited 6/21/14

MysticGon wrote:


Jsybird2532 wrote:


MysticGon wrote:
Based on your knowledge of their governments, military, allies and assets who do you think would come out the other end in better shape? Would it be a conventional war? What would the world look like after the dust settles?


As said in the 1980s movie, WarGames, the only winning move is NOT TO PLAY.

Due to the distance between the two countries (Russia can't just easily launch a ground invasion into the US like it could into China or vice versa, the logistics would be extremely difficult), any direct confrontation between the US and Russia would doubtlessly result in a nuclear total war scenario with both sides trying to kill as many people as they can. When it comes that...America has an advantage of interception tech and dealing with a more concentrated enemy population around Moscow and St. Petersburg, while Russia has more landmass and probably more nukes. In the end, both sides and the world would be utterly destroyed and neither advantage would probably matter in the long run as we'd be dealing with a catastrophic nuclear winter at that point.

You're probably only going to see proxy battles occur in the future (like In Syria and Ukraine and such) unless either side is stupid enough to make that dare, which I highly doubt.


Actually they are closer than you think. Alaska and Russia nearly touch. There is also the polar cap, which will be a liquid ocean soon.

That is indeed the worst case scenario but I do think both countries have that mentality that if a nuke were fired in anger that'd be the end of life as we know it.


Yes but it is a huge amount of easily defended territory and there is almost no infrastructure around there to get around...plus the only reason Russia would care to take unpopulated Alaska or America take Siberia/Kamchatka/Chukotka is for natural resources and they're both doing fine in that department. At this time I don't see that happening for those reasons, give it 50 years (once most of the world is out of oil), then make your predictions if you're still alive :P.
169 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 6/21/14
If war were to break out between Russia and America, it would probably occur in the form of conventional warfare. Since both Russia and the U.S possess nuclear firearms, they are both unlikely to nuke each other due to this mutually assured destruction. Neither side wants the complete extinction of the human race.

People have mentioned it above, but Russia consists of a vast area, making it difficult to defend. Russia has also struggled to retain intellectuals for most of them have already fled the oppressive regime. In the past, absolutist Czars like Nicholas I have maintained a conservative approach to ruling, which resulted in Russia technological backwardness. Though Russia has become more liberal, I believe Russia's conservative past will continue to hinder its military. In terms of modern warfare, I believe the U.S has the advantage.

With Russia's small population density, it will be difficult for Russia to mobilize its troops and defend Russia from American troops, whereas American soldiers can mobilize more easily and defend thickly populated cities.
12453 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / F
Offline
Posted 6/22/14
Now the way to really mess with Russia would be to revive the Caliphate. Another huge power block in Asia would completely disrupt things. ufufufu. Things haven't been nearly as fun since the Ottoman empire fell apart. A Persian empire could be interesting too.

And it's a myth that we could destroy the world with our nukes. Oh, it would be pretty horrible, no question, but the human race would survive. But in a war with Russia the US would probably win. China would probably side with the US (because of close economic ties) and that would be the game. Although it occurs to me that China has a pretty terrible track record when it comes to winning wars...
19605 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / Osaka
Offline
Posted 6/22/14
Meh, on paper at the very least Russia doesn't come close to the US in military terms. Its main advantage is its proximity to a bunch of relevant theatres (Europe, ME, Pacific). This is quite a threat because Europe's combined military capabilities have been shown to not be very impressive, even in such a (relatively) minor expedition as the Libya campaign, let alone trying to defend ourselves from a full scale Russian invasion were that to be the scenario that came to pass.
1814 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 6/23/14 , edited 6/23/14

anchore wrote:
China would probably side with the US (because of close economic ties)

i don't think so... check out how china is troublesome on japan & SEA nations regarding territorial disputes
24279 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M
Offline
Posted 6/23/14
China and Russia share the roles of being the biggest thorns in America's side politically. They seem to be deepening their ties and trying their best to be independent of America's actions since they have both seen what sanctions can do to an economy. They recently signed a $400bln oil deal using the ruble. They also plan on doubling their trade with one another in the next 6 years. Both country's also seem to really invest in Africa, which could pay dividends in the future. It seems as America's allies get weaker on the world stage, Russia and China are getting stronger.

If it came out to all out war I think China would side with Russia.
1814 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 6/23/14

MysticGon wrote:

If it came out to all out war I think China would side with Russia.


if you noticed china started building oil rigs & artificial islands on their neighbors after that crimea drama. so timely
1027 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 7/4/14
A war between the U.S and Russia? seriously??? do you really think either of those nations could actually fight? the poor condition of both of their nations and peoples discontent with having to go through cold war propaganda would make it impossible for them to fight. The only scenario i see that that would happen is if Japan and China go to war, the U.S would then declare war on China, Russia on Japan etc... but for first world nations there is no profit to waging war with other first world nations, that's why the U.S prefers to stir up shit in the middle east.
17893 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
52 / M / In
Offline
Posted 7/5/14
I see a war between Russia and China as more likely those two have never liked each other
You must be logged in to post.