Is Russia Now the World's Leading Military Power?

[Donald H]

America's ambition is a critical element in that equation and the one that enabled all this happen.....because America wants Ukraine's resources and America wants it as yet another "business platform" in that part of the world. It's not just America, it's western globalists in general who want to add it to their empire. One of the main hurdles of that was to wrestle Ukraine away from Russia's influence, control, protection....all that. Granted, Russia has kept Ukraine as kind of an inept younger brother who gets slapped around once in awhile. America has attempted to make Ukraine into a little whore who caters to white collar criminals and mobsters (the West). While neither role is a "happy state", Ukraine's rightful relationship is to Russia, just like America's neighbors of Canada and Mexico are in that same way to us. If another country halfway around the World managed to plant imposters in one of these neighboring governments, allowing in their military and corporations....essentially turning them against us, we would do the same thing. We would fight the imposters and any military they intimidated us with.

There were American weapons being put in Ukraine long before this began. It was not just to protect Ukraine it was to advance America's interests there and to intimidate and weaken Russia. It was passive aggressive, ON PURPOSE, to make it look like Russia was the instigator when it was not. We were covert and sneaky when we messed with Ukraine and tried to turn it into an American asset. Russia is being overt and to the point in fighting back. Much more honest if you ask me.

Ukraine would still emerge as Ukraine if America had not attempted to quietly groom it into a whore-mercenary in someone else's backyard, to be eventually used to steal the house.

Nope, it's definitely America's ambitions that enabled this entire thing to happen. Never would have happened if we didn't try to stick ourselves in there.

It's also clear, with the Biden administration being so obviously a direct spin-off of the Obama administration and it's agenda, that Ukraine is pretty much all the Biden administration cares about. Our president dismisses problems and difficulties all over the world including in his own country....while always prepared to send another $25 billion to Ukraine. America WANTS Ukraine, BAD obviously...and it's not for any reason related to civil rights and liberties (although it makes a great sales pitch). It's for profit and expansion. And that's why Russia is doing what it's doing.

Thanks for you version of an analysis!
I hear it as saying the same as how I've simplified the story.

America can't reign as global lone superpower if Russia and China stay intact and form an alliance against US aggression.

The elimination of Russia from the equation is the only way forward for America. This is all a thousand times bigger than America's feigned concern for the Ukraine's people.

America's feigned concerns of saving the victim country's people has to sound very familiar by now!

 

[Deadstick]

This is one of the funnier Russian Propaganda Tools efforts to make us quake in fear of the Russians. Oh their military is the best in the world. Nonsense.

First. Let’s go down the list type by type shall we? Let’s begin with the Navy. The Russian Navy is a joke. The American Navy would put them on the bottom in a few days. The ability of the American ships to strike is well known. And I’m not even including the Carriers right now. American Submarines are not world class. They set the class for the world. They are exceptionally quiet, and have far superior sensors than their Russian Counterparts. The Russian Surface Force is a throw away.

Their ships are massive missile carriers. Now, the fly in the buttermilk is once they fire those missiles they can only run for cover. While the Americans can strike with far better accuracy. The Ukrainians have sunk how many Russian Warships? Forget it. The Russian Navy would be wiped out in a few days, and I’m giving them a few days instead of hours to allow for something unexpected. Once the ships and subs at sea were sunk, the Carriers and Cruise Missiles would wipe anything tied up at the dock out.

The Air Force. The American Air Force has more planes, and a lot better planes. Even if you give the Russians a lot more credit than they deserve, the worst case scenario for the American Army is fighting under a neutral sky, nobody owns it, but in reality, it would be friendly.

Strategic Bombing is something we have the lock on. The B-2 and B-21 bombers are without a doubt the best in the world. Able to penetrate Russian Air Defenses without any real problems. The B-21 is still in testing, but you can bet your ass they would be moved from testing to combat in short order. The B-2 can carry a lot of precision guided bombs or cruise missiles and launch them at targets the Russians imagine are safe.

So the Air Force would win that battle.

That leaves the ground war. The Army and Marines. There is nothing in the Russian Inventory that compares to the M-1 Abrams tanks. As was demonstrated in Ukraine, the most advanced Russian Tanks were death traps for the troops.

But hey, maybe that was all part of Putin’s plan.

I mean, the Chinese had a one child policy as a method of population control. Maybe Putin’s plan on population control is sacrificing young men to the meat grinder of battle.

Russian Troops are ill trained, poorly equipped, and badly led.

So how exactly do you expect to compete with American troops who are well trained, well equipped, and well led?

This is one of the funnier Russian Propaganda Tools efforts to make us quake in fear of the Russians. Oh their military is the best in the world. Nonsense.

First. Let’s go down the list type by type shall we? Let’s begin with the Navy. The Russian Navy is a joke. The American Navy would put them on the bottom in a few days. The ability of the American ships to strike is well known. And I’m not even including the Carriers right now. American Submarines are not world class. They set the class for the world. They are exceptionally quiet, and have far superior sensors than their Russian Counterparts. The Russian Surface Force is a throw away.

Their ships are massive missile carriers. Now, the fly in the buttermilk is once they fire those missiles they can only run for cover. While the Americans can strike with far better accuracy. The Ukrainians have sunk how many Russian Warships? Forget it. The Russian Navy would be wiped out in a few days, and I’m giving them a few days instead of hours to allow for something unexpected. Once the ships and subs at sea were sunk, the Carriers and Cruise Missiles would wipe anything tied up at the dock out.

The Air Force. The American Air Force has more planes, and a lot better planes. Even if you give the Russians a lot more credit than they deserve, the worst case scenario for the American Army is fighting under a neutral sky, nobody owns it, but in reality, it would be friendly.

Strategic Bombing is something we have the lock on. The B-2 and B-21 bombers are without a doubt the best in the world. Able to penetrate Russian Air Defenses without any real problems. The B-21 is still in testing, but you can bet your ass they would be moved from testing to combat in short order. The B-2 can carry a lot of precision guided bombs or cruise missiles and launch them at targets the Russians imagine are safe.

So the Air Force would win that battle.

That leaves the ground war. The Army and Marines. There is nothing in the Russian Inventory that compares to the M-1 Abrams tanks. As was demonstrated in Ukraine, the most advanced Russian Tanks were death traps for the troops.

But hey, maybe that was all part of Putin’s plan.

I mean, the Chinese had a one child policy as a method of population control. Maybe Putin’s plan on population control is sacrificing young men to the meat grinder of battle.

Russian Troops are ill trained, poorly equipped, and badly led.

So how exactly do you expect to compete with American troops who are well trained, well equipped, and well led?

Lets hope you never have to find out because it won't be pretty, as for aircraft carriers they are really obsolete, they are ok for putting the frighteners on small Countries that can't fight back but it would be a different ball game with a big power, those massive carriers the US have would be sunk in a major conflict, they have about fife thousand ships company in a floating coffin, China as well as Russia have missiles that can take them out, even Iran does.

 

[AZrailwhale]

Lets hope you never have to find out because it won't be pretty, as for aircraft carriers they are really obsolete, they are ok for putting the frighteners on small Countries that can't fight back but it would be a different ball game with a big power, those massive carriers the US have would be sunk in a major conflict, they have about fife thousand ships company in a floating coffin, China as well as Russia have missiles that can take them out, even Iran does.

The USN spent decades developing ways to protect carriers. They are nearly invulnerable when in their task forces. If our enemies considered them obsolete, they wouldn't be spending billions of dollars trying to develop their own carriers and carrier aircraft.

 

[Markle]

It must have really sucked for the peace-loving Russians when we forced them to invade Ukraine.

No force. President Joe Biden INVITED them to invade Ukraine.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Lets hope you never have to find out because it won't be pretty, as for aircraft carriers they are really obsolete, they are ok for putting the frighteners on small Countries that can't fight back but it would be a different ball game with a big power, those massive carriers the US have would be sunk in a major conflict, they have about fife thousand ships company in a floating coffin, China as well as Russia have missiles that can take them out, even Iran does.

Apparently, you don't know much about how carriers operate, or the defenses that they have. Not only is there an airwing, but they also have several ships traveling with them, whose primary purpose is to defend the carrier.

And also, you need to differentiate between ship's company (people actually stationed with the carrier itself) and the airwing (composed of the various squadrons onboard). While it's easy for civilians who have zero idea about carriers to confuse the two, I can assure you, ship's company and airwing personnel will happily let you know that they are separate from each other.

 

[Deadstick]

Apparently, you don't know much about how carriers operate, or the defenses that they have. Not only is there an airwing, but they also have several ships traveling with them, whose primary purpose is to defend the carrier.

And also, you need to differentiate between ship's company (people actually stationed with the carrier itself) and the airwing (composed of the various squadrons onboard). While it's easy for civilians who have zero idea about carriers to confuse the two, I can assure you, ship's company and airwing personnel will happily let you know that they are separate from each other.

Thats all very well in theory but once the missiles start flying it goes out of the window, carriers have probably been obsolete sine my Uncle was a Oerlikon gunner on HMS Victorious in WW2, it took three strikes form Kamikazi off Okinawa.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Thats all very well in theory but once the missiles start flying it goes out of the window, carriers have probably been obsolete sine my Uncle was a Oerlikon gunner on HMS Victorious in WW2, it took three strikes form Kamikazi off Okinawa.

When the missiles start flying towards the carrier, there are ships posted around the carrier in a barricade that are there specifically to stop the missiles from reaching the carrier.

Carriers don't travel by themselves, they ALWAYS have an escort of several ships.

 

[Deadstick]

When the missiles start flying towards the carrier, there are ships posted around the carrier in a barricade that are there specifically to stop the missiles from reaching the carrier.

Carriers don't travel by themselves, they ALWAYS have an escort of several ships.

I know all that but there would be a swarm of missiles it only needs one to get through and a carrier would be gone, no ship is immune from being hit, i remember in the Falklands war we lost quite a few ships when they were hit by French Exocet missiles others were hit just by low flying jet fighters.

 

[SavannahMann]

Lets hope you never have to find out because it won't be pretty, as for aircraft carriers they are really obsolete, they are ok for putting the frighteners on small Countries that can't fight back but it would be a different ball game with a big power, those massive carriers the US have would be sunk in a major conflict, they have about fife thousand ships company in a floating coffin, China as well as Russia have missiles that can take them out, even Iran does.

Yeah. Ok. Let’s start at the beginning.

To damage or destroy the carrier, the ship has to get close enough to fire. So they will need data on where the Carrier is. The Carrier will be moving around. To find the Carrier and fix its location well enough to launch means those ancient Bear Aircraft banging away with Radar. Let’s pretend that American Fighters don’t shoot it down and it transmits the location and the Russian ship fires it’s missiles.

Then as the Vampires come racing in they are engaged by all the ships around the carrier. Those ships share information and the computer assigns incoming targets for the ships to engage. Missiles and then guns are used. Decoys are popped to give the incoming missile something to decide. Which big target is it looking for. Electronic jamming is used to further confuse the inbound missiles.

Of the hundred or so that are launched less than ten will reach the task force. Maybe one or two will hit the carrier. Worst case.

That may render the Carrier Hors de Combat. In other words too damaged to conduct operations. But it won’t sink off of one or two hits.

Unless Russia is dumb enough to use tactical nukes. That might do the job. But the response from any American President would be exactly the same. They would launch weapons in response.

The best chance Russia has is submarine launched weapons. The best weapon for that would be the Shkval torpedo with a nuclear warhead. Again that would result in Nukes being used in reply.

On a straight conventional basis the Russian Fleet would lose a lot of ships for little gain.

Because as the Russian ships started moving towards the points where they could launch they would have air and sea launched missiles coming in at them. So other than a surprise attack at the very start of hostilities there is little chance of getting those ships close enough to do something. Not without an F/A-18 putting ordinance into them.

Once hostilities had been joined the Air Force would happily launch a dozen B-52’s with a couple hundred cruise missiles at the Russian Ships.

Now the Russians would stop some of them. Hell I’ll give you most. But it wouldn’t be long before the Russian Navy was out of the fight for all intents and purposes.

 

[ABikerSailor]

I know all that but there would be a swarm of missiles it only needs one to get through and a carrier would be gone, no ship is immune from being hit, i remember in the Falklands war we lost quite a few ships when they were hit by French Exocet missiles others were hit just by low flying jet fighters.

"We" lost quite a few ships during the Falklands war? Are you British? Because those were the ships lost. To my knowledge, NONE of the US ships were lost, or even damaged for that matter.

 

[Deadstick]

"We" lost quite a few ships during the Falklands war? Are you British? Because those were the ships lost. To my knowledge, NONE of the US ships were lost, or even damaged for that matter.

Yes i am British, i was making the point even all those years ago missiles can and WILL take ships out.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Yes i am British, i was making the point even all those years ago missiles can and WILL take ships out.

as I recall only a couple small ships were lost. and that was because the British did not have adequate air cover because they didn't have real carriers to use.

 

[Deadstick]

as I recall only a couple small ships were lost. and that was because the British did not have adequate air cover because they didn't have real carriers to use.

Here is a list of ships lost, some of them Warships, we also had ground based air defence systems like Rapier and Blowpipe, and Harrier jets operating from two aircraft carriers.

List of 6 British Ships Sunk During the Falklands War - History Lists

A list of 6 British ships that were sunk during the Falklands War and a brief overview of their service during the 10-week war between Britain and Argentina.

historylists.org

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Here is a list of ships lost, some of them Warships, we also had ground based air defence systems like Rapier and Blowpipe, and Harrier jets operating from two aircraft carriers.

List of 6 British Ships Sunk During the Falklands War - History Lists

A list of 6 British ships that were sunk during the Falklands War and a brief overview of their service during the 10-week war between Britain and Argentina.

historylists.org

Like I said a couple of ships and they were lost because you couldn't project airpower.

 

[Concerned American]

Like I said a couple of ships and they were lost because you couldn't project airpower.

Not with Randy Andy flying.

 

[SavannahMann]

Yes i am British, i was making the point even all those years ago missiles can and WILL take ships out.

Yes they can. The world learned extremely valuable lessons from that war. First. Do not make your ships out of aluminum. Aluminum burns in those situations.

Second. Have air power to kill enemy airplanes before they can launch at you. The British Harriers did a good job defending the fleet.

Third. Have the crew done fire protection to help prevent flash burns in an explosion. The old days had Sailors put on helmets. Maybe. Now they wear gloves and hoods to protect themselves from flash burns.

The reality was that the Brits should have lost a lot more ships. But they had better tactics and strategy for the battle. They knew where the enemy was. The enemy did not know where they were.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Yes i am British, i was making the point even all those years ago missiles can and WILL take ships out.

You're right, missiles can take out a ship IF they are able to get to them.

Going against the stuff that the U.S. Navy has makes it very unlikely though. Still don't see why you think carriers are outdated, especially since you're British and don't know that much about the U.S. Navy.

Me? Served 20 years USN, and have been on 2 different carriers. They're not as much of a target as you seem to think. Especially with the ships around them guarding them.

 

[AZrailwhale]

I know all that but there would be a swarm of missiles it only needs one to get through and a carrier would be gone, no ship is immune from being hit, i remember in the Falklands war we lost quite a few ships when they were hit by French Exocet missiles others were hit just by low flying jet fighters.

You lost two ships from Exocet missile hits. The destroyer HMS Sheffield, which damaged from fire from the unused missile fuel, and the civilian container ship Atlantic Conveyor which also was lost to fire. Neither ship had any anti-missile defenses, Sheffield had a single twin-arm Sea Dart long range SAM, 2 single Oerlikon 20mm manually operated 20mm guns and a single 4.5-inch gun. No anti-missile systems at all. The RO/RO container ship Atlantic Conveyor was completely unarmed and had no defenses at all. The RN lost a total of six ships in the Falklands none of which had modern anti-missile systems or close-in defenses. The two Type 42 destroyers and the two Type 21 frigates had a pair of WWII era 20mm guns and a single 4.5-inch gun each. The Type 42s had a single twin arm Sea Dart launcher, and the Type 21s had a single quad Sea Cat short range launcher dating from the early sixties that was always inadequate.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Hey Deadstick......................hate to tell you, but carriers aren't as fragile as you seem to think. It would take a hell of a lot more than just a single missile hit to bring them down.

Several reasons that just one missile hit wouldn't do much. First, there is what is called "watertight integrity". That means that each and every space onboard can be sealed from each and every other space. When General Quarters is called, all those hatches are closed and dogged down, with the only access through them being the scuttle hatch which can be closed and dogged down in a matter of seconds. A missile might be able to breach the hull, but that hole is going to be surrounded by numerous spaces that are sealed to limit the damage and stop flooding. They are also heavily armored and have pretty thick hulls.

Then, there is the manning of General Quarters itself. That means that each and every person onboard has 5 min. or less to get to their assigned battle stations, outfitted and ready to go, with all the damage control gear laid out and ready.

And, even on small ships, there are several repair lockers (places where serious damage control equipment is located).

Combine that with all the teams having communications with Damage Control Central (the hub for information concerning the ship and crew's welfare), there are numerous systems onboard the ship to make sure it survives.

Carriers aren't nearly as fragile as some seem to think. Not only were they designed with survivability in mind, the crews that are on those ships are highly trained and run drills constantly. Whenever we transited the pond (crossed the Atlantic), we could look forward to at least 1 General Quarters drill every other day, with many time being one each day (ya gotta do something to overcome the boredom).

 

[AZrailwhale]

Here is a list of ships lost, some of them Warships, we also had ground based air defence systems like Rapier and Blowpipe, and Harrier jets operating from two aircraft carriers.

List of 6 British Ships Sunk During the Falklands War - History Lists

A list of 6 British ships that were sunk during the Falklands War and a brief overview of their service during the 10-week war between Britain and Argentina.

historylists.org

Neither Rapier nor Blowpipe could defend the ships in San Marcos Sound. As for fighters, HMS Invincible had a dozen Sea Harriers armed with Sidewinders and Hermes had sixteen Sea Harriers with radar and eight Harrier GR3s that were optimized for land attack and had no radar at all. They were quickly modified to carry a pair of Sidewinders on the way to the Falklands but had no fire control other than the seeker heads on the missiles. They had a combat endurance of 90 minutes meaning that with only 28 Sea Harriers the RN would be hard pressed to maintain a six aircraft CAP. AND the RN had no AEW coverage. After the Falklands they cobbled together a half-assed AWACs using a Sea King Helicopter.