Russia, US, the West vs ??? WWIII! (Part I)

[alkis3]

if America does not attack Russia,there will be no war.
Russia does not want a war,if you think that Russia is hostile

then look at the number of wars Russia and in a number of wars America over the last 20 years

and finally can see American movies where every movie 50% of the time shooting and explosions

Russia is a peaceful country,Yes it has weapons,but weapons to defend and not to attack

 

I'll tell you more in Russia in General nobody even thinks about the war,that the war between USA and Russia is a reality

most Russians either indifferent to the US or treat US with sympathy.

Edited April 5, 2014 by alkis3

[toastywombel]

Russia will not go to war with America and America will not go to war with Russia. Mutually assured destruction surely would prevent that from happening.

 

If anything it will be similar to the cold war, except it would be even more heavily in favor of the United States. Back in the early/ mid 1900's some may say Russia had the advantage, seeing as there was a communist wave spreading across the world. Today it is much different. Ever since the 1980's there has been a capitalist wave spreading across the globe. Many of the former communist regimes are hardly communist regimes anymore. China for example.

 

The United States as a nation just has the advantage over Russia in almost every way one could gauge advantage: economically, militarily, culturally, diplomatically.

[alkis3]

 

The United States as a nation just has the advantage over Russia in almost every way one could gauge advantage: economically, militarily, culturally, diplomatically.

in the military definitely not,we are at equal or Russia ahead

the rest do not know,in my opinion your culture is much inferior to the culture of Russia,But this is only my opinion,not going to argue this

[davidivad]

i think that America is also changing it's values to accommodate a changing world.

what makes America what it is is diplomacy. to say we are superior in any way undermines the goals we have as a world leader.

freedom is about choice not inferiority. why send such a message.

[hypervalent_iodine]

in the military definitely not,we are at equal or Russia ahead

the rest do not know,in my opinion your culture is much inferior to the culture of Russia,But this is only my opinion,not going to argue this

!

Moderator Note

alkis3, please go and take another look at our rules. You do not get to use this forum to insult the cultures of other people and if your behavior continues, we will suspend you from posting.

 

Edit: this mod note is subsequent to a number of similar incidents by alkis3 in a separate thread. For further explanation, please see here: http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/82576-what-is-your-attitude-toward-pussy-riot/?p=800502

[alkis3]

what have I offended?

this is not an insult- "The United States as a nation just has the advantage over Russia in almost every way one could gauge advantage: economically, militarily, culturally, diplomatically."

I said the same thing for the sake of Russia,or praise can only U.S.?

Edited April 7, 2014 by alkis3

[toastywombel]

in the military definitely not,we are at equal or Russia ahead

the rest do not know,in my opinion your culture is much inferior to the culture of Russia,But this is only my opinion,not going to argue this

 

When I say that the United States has a cultural advantage I am not diminishing the cultural value or Russian Heritage or saying it is inferior. I am more pointing to the scope of influence the United States has culturally over the globe.

 

The motion picture industry, music industry, and the media in the United States makes much more money and has many more viewers than comparable industries in Russia.

 

Furthermore on the military aspect please. . . I will just list some numbers to make my point:

 

United States Military Budget 2010: $533.8 Billion dollars (plus 130 billion extra for overseas contingency operations)

Russia's Military Budget 2013: $90.7 Billion

 

Active Military Personal USA: 1.43 million

Active Military Personal RUS: 0.76 million

 

Total Active Aircraft USA: 13,683

Total Active Aircraft RUS: 1,218

 

Aircraft Carriers USA: 10 (plus 2 under construction)

Aircraft Carriers RUS: 1

 

Not to mention the Untied States has NATO and the fact that the United States has over 500 military bases throughout the world.

 

Again, as I said earlier. this is a silly point as a conventional war would not be waged between the two countries because both have nuclear weapons. However if you were to remove the nuclear weapons from the equation the United States and their allies have the ability to successfully wage a ground war against any Russian aggression.

[alkis3]

ahh,you in terms of money..
well if we talk about culture,money is my last Association

 

However if you were to remove the nuclear weapons from the equation the United States and their allies have the ability to successfully wage a ground war against any Russian aggression.

can't argue
The only thing I know that Russia has a very modern tanks

and for antiaircraft missiles Russia ,stealth airplanes are not the problem

[alkis3]

toastywombel

you also do not consider that Russia has all types of weapons of mass destruction

it is not only nuclear weapons,but also weapons of chemical,bacteriological

here's one terrible accident can be read

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sverdlovsk_anthrax_leak

[davidivad]

i have imagined what world war 3 would result in.

i look to the beauty and thriving natural scenery of the Chernobyl area.

no real human traffic and a lot of disease resistant animals (had to include chemical warfare).

mother nature thrives here in a land not fit for human population.

[toastywombel]

toastywombel

you also do not consider that Russia has all types of weapons of mass destruction

it is not only nuclear weapons,but also weapons of chemical,bacteriological

here's one terrible accident can be read

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sverdlovsk_anthrax_leak

 

alkis,

 

I will not argue that Russia has these weapons, but the United States has the upper hand on Russia in any conventional ground war bar none. Furthermore, that war would never happen as I said earlier. It would be a cold war, one waged on the economic and geopolitical influence scale. One that the United States would also win.

 

I don't agree with the imperialistic nature of the United States at all. I will however say that the United States is probably the most powerful country that ever has been.

[alkis3]

 

I don't agree with the imperialistic nature of the United States at all. I will however say that the United States is probably the most powerful country that ever has been.

 

the fact that the USA wants to fight,she wants domination ,it builds bases around the world

but Russia does not need to fight,she has the biggest territory and it does not work in the direction to take over the world

and the US are working on it,that Russia simply has no desire to pursue ( not because of fear, but by the fact that it's not necessary ) an aggressive policy

Edited April 8, 2014 by alkis3

[Daniel Zrmanjac]

I feel that South Africa shouldn't be on BRICS. But that is a diffrent topic.

 

I feel that there is no possible WWIII beacuse of globalization, we are all dependent on each other. Russia provides gas to EU, without this gas the european economy would stand still. No factories can run without proper fuel, Russia would lose a lot of money. After that the trade between EU and US would stand still therefor US losing a lot on that, with the American and Euopean contries on decline China would lose their biggest customer US.

 

It would become one big domino effect. Just look how the collapse of Greece did a big impact on the worlds economy, imagine if the the rest of EU had the same collapse.

[Delbert]

I'm sorry, but all this reminds me of what I think Aristotle said: Prepare for war if you want peace. Although I think he said it as: Make war if you want peace.

 

And I think this recent situation in eastern Europe is a classic case. They had a period of self indulgence with an internal revolution, creating a power vacuum rendering defence undirected and ineffective. The enemy jumped in without having to fire a shot in anger. Easy peasy. And so on to what we have now.

 

And what did I read the other day? I read that a Russian Bear aircraft had to be intercepted yet again in northern UK. Quite a regular event I understand. The day we don't respond is likely be the day they encroach farther. Should we protest at a later time, the encroachment will doubtless be put down to a navigation error. They then might feel free to have navigational errors on a regular basis.

[michel123456]

I don't quite understand why the people in the U.S. should be opposed to people in Russia. Once upon a time it was a question of economopolitics, the ones were barabarian capitalists and the others were barbarian bolcheviks.

But that is not the case now. Or is that an after smell of the cold war because nobody won? Something like a lost opportunity to destroy the unknown other?

To me, Russians and Americans look alike. Only British look different (because they like that).

---------------------

Edit.

I remember my father saying that WWIII would not be East-West but North-South. I hope he was wrong and WWIII will never happen.

[Moontanman]

I don't quite understand why the people in the U.S. should be opposed to people in Russia. Once upon a time it was a question of economopolitics, the ones were barabarian capitalists and the others were barbarian bolcheviks.

But that is not the case now. Or is that an after smell of the cold war because nobody won? Something like a lost opportunity to destroy the unknown other?

To me, Russians and Americans look alike. Only British look different (because they like that).

---------------------

Edit.

I remember my father saying that WWIII would not be East-West but North-South. I hope he was wrong and WWIII will never happen.

 

 

The people of the USA and Russia are not at odds, the governments are..

[michel123456]

 

 

The people of the USA and Russia are not at odds, the governments are..

i am glad to hear that. Unfortunately, when governments decide that a conflict has arrived, people fight, not governments.

[Delbert]

i am glad to hear that. Unfortunately, when governments decide that a conflict has arrived, people fight, not governments.

But do not the people elect and thus choose the government in a democracy?

 

As I believe I've said and posed the question elsewhere on the forum: If an idiot is elected and then promptly makes a horlicks of everything, whose fault is it? Is it the idiot's fault or the people's fault for electing the idiot?

 

I say it's the peoples fault. And what's more, when on occasions the people protest, they are protesting about their own decision.

 

Here in the UK I understand we had what I believe some have called an enthusiast for armed conflict. Elected three times with heavy majorities, I might add. In fact he wrote a newspaper article in August last year advocating involvement in Syria, entitled: 'The hand-wringing has to stop. We must act.'

[Moontanman]

I'm not sure if this fits in here but it would seem China has been doing some semi serious war mongering as well, mostly against Japan but it involves the interests of several different countries in that area as well...

[DimaMazin]

 

 

The people of the USA and Russia are not at odds, the governments are..

Any government is part of people. USA's government must make military development and development of all humanity. Russia's government is carefree relative to development of all humanity therefore it has ability to create military problems to USA. The problems brake development of all humanity, but they will increase military development of USA.

[Moontanman]

Any government is part of people. USA's government must make military development and development of all humanity. Russia's government is carefree relative to development of all humanity therefore it has ability to create military problems to USA. The problems brake development of all humanity, but they will increase military development of USA.

 

 

That is very naive, do you really think Americans would vote to go to war with Russia? I hope Russians wouldn't vote for such a insane venture. Cooperation between nations is always better and fighting over who owns what is a bit silly since the world has gotten so small that two giants fighting would kill us all... and over small country for political reasons, the height of hubris...

[Delbert]

 

 

That is very naive, do you really think Americans would vote to go to war with Russia?

Of course not, nobody in their right mind wants war.

 

The problem as I see it is there was no deterrent in the form of defensive capability - and consequently the enemy took advantage and simply walked in. Aristotle again (prepare for war if you want peace). I'm sorry, but that's what happens in the real world. And now the West is faced with a difficult situation - how do you repel someone who walks in fully armed when the defence is standing about with what appears to be nothing more than pea shooters.

 

What does the West do now? That's a difficult one. Sanctions seem the tool being employed. But even assuming agreement on sanctions can be reached with other Western counties, sanctions may backfire. Not necessarily because of tit-for-tat, but because I think one reason counties have gone to war in the past, or intensified military skirmishes to the point of war, is because of economic strife.

[CaptainPanic]

There will not be a large scale war over some cities in Eastern Ukraine. With my limited knowledge of the situation, I can broadly see 2 outcomes:

1. Russia growls some more in order not to lose face, then backs off. No more changes. Ukraine slowly stabilizes. Trade continues.

2. Russia influences the East of the Ukraine even more, or even invades. Ukraine splits. The East joins Russia. West gets very angry at Russia, and suspends trade for a (short) while. Economy of Russia takes a beating, but will probably recover.

3. Scenario 3, which you're all discussing, where the West takes military action against Russia, very close to Russia's own home ground is extremely unlikely, because the West must seriously consider nuclear warfare in order to win it. The West will rather sacrifice a bit of the Ukraine (sorry to the Ukrainians wanting otherwise).

 

The West wants scenario 1.

Russia wants scenario 2, but with minimal economic consequences.

 

Trouble is that I cannot predict how much economic damage Russia is willing to take, so I do not know how strong the cards are that the West is holding. The worst the West can do is to enforce a complete North-Korea-style embargo, but what if Russia just accepts that? Or, as Delbert seems to suggest, what if modest economic sanctions anger Russia so much that it doesn't care anymore? What if internally, people accept hardship in exchange for military glory? I don't know how people are being played in Russia... I mean, in Europe the news mentions possible trade embargos as a good thing, even though it would no doubt increase gas prices, and hurt the European economy as well. On all sides (over here as well!) the propaganda machines are in full swing.

 

The funny thing is that while this is all being played like a new Cold War, Russia vs The West (see also the thread title), the outcome might lie in China. If China also restricts trade with Russia, then the consequences are probably too much for Putin. If China allows the Russians to go ahead, then they may just laugh at the Western embargos. China is traditionally a friend of Russia (although they've had their fights), but China will not support a rebelious region changing nationality or becoming independent, because China will fear that will encourage tribes on its own borders to do the same.

[DimaMazin]

 

 

That is very naive, do you really think Americans would vote to go to war with Russia? I hope Russians wouldn't vote for such a insane venture. Cooperation between nations is always better and fighting over who owns what is a bit silly since the world has gotten so small that two giants fighting would kill us all... and over small country for political reasons, the height of hubris...

Ridiculous questions. Russians did not war with Ukraine when it was strong. What about now?Only sanctions constrain Russia.

[Delbert]

1. Russia growls some more in order not to lose face, then backs off. No more changes. Ukraine slowly stabilizes. Trade continues.

2. Russia influences the East of the Ukraine even more, or even invades. Ukraine splits. The East joins Russia. West gets very angry at Russia, and suspends trade for a (short) while. Economy of Russia takes a beating, but will probably recover.

3. Scenario 3, which you're all discussing, where the West takes military action against Russia, very close to Russia's own home ground is extremely unlikely, because the West must seriously consider nuclear warfare in order to win it. The West will rather sacrifice a bit of the Ukraine (sorry to the Ukrainians wanting otherwise).

1/ ...backs off. No chance.

2/ ...or even invades. You mean invasion is not what they've done thus far?

3/ ...west takes military action... Again, no chance.

 

As I see it Russia have played a blinder. Spotted a political vacuum, walked into Crimea with troops masquerading as locals. Then claim it's the will of the people to be with Russia - signs documents to annex Crimea to Russia. And now a similar tactic in east Ukraine - with troops masquerading as before. Leaving the West protesting and running about like chickens with no heads.

 

In view of the current state of affairs I can't see Russia stopping. Salami tactic being played to perfection.

 

Ukraine wanted a change of government and enacted a non-democratic tactic to achieve such. And what have they ended up with? Think a Chinese proverb sums it up quite well: be careful what you wish for.