Pure delusion. The US cannot wage war without total air dominance, that’s literally their only real strength (on land at least) and what props up the whole rest of their otherwise mediocre army, but Russia has the best air defense in the world, literally designed specifically to counter NATO. The US would lose its airforce over Ukraine and would then get bogged down trying to maintain impossibly long supply lines from their mainland while Russia is fighting right across from their own border simplifying logistics, and logistics is what ultimately wins a protracted war.
There is no question about this, NATO cannot defeat Russia on Russian soil or right on their borders, just like Russia cannot possibly hope to defeat the US on its own mainland or push deep into central/western Europe. It would ultimately end up in standoff long range missile strikes with a risk of going nuclear.
The US and Russia both know this, which is why there will be no NATO intervention in Ukraine unless somehow the last rational people in the Pentagon are pushed out by neocon lunatics.
Those systems are indeed good, but as a Russian citizen I am still mildly sceptical. Don’t forget - capitalist corruption runs deep, military is no exception. And while the data from the most recent flare-up in Karabakh is likely overblown by NATO copers, it does look like there were issues with the AA systems like Pantsir.
Anything is possible i guess. But afaik even the Pentagon acknowledges they have a healthy respect for Russian air defense. Not that familiar with the Pantsir system but the S-400 and the state of the art S-500 are generally regarded as some of the best ground-to-air systems in existence, plus Russia has extremely good radar coverage and surveillance satellites.
Of course these haven’t yet had the chance to be field tested against a full scale NATO air army so you never know how they will perform under such a stress test. I hope we don’t have to find out. The military industry is the one part of the old Soviet industries that was the least affected by capitalism, it was not privatized to the same degree as everything else, so i am hopeful.
S-400 and S-500 can literally massacre(yes that is the correct word to use) NATO jets lol. We in Yugoslavia got F-117 new and most modern ‘‘invisible’’ in 1990s with Soviet anti-aircraft system from 1960s, lmao imagine what would happen today with S-400 and S-500… On one hand, I don’t want war, especially not that catastrophic, on the other hand, I’d like to see them falling from the sky like flies while burning in pieces for all they did to my country and 100+ others in the past 70 years…
And they also have S-550 systems which are apparently for intercepting missiles if i’m not mistaken.
The Americans are really freaked out by these things, i remember reading somewhere recently that apparently because they are so effective the only plan the Americans have to try and hit Russia if it comes to a direct conflict with possibility of going nuclear is to just throw everything all at once Hamas style and hope that at least a few make it through Russia’s air defense.
Russia on the other hand has those brand new Sarmats which go around the entire globe and can strike from the unprotected south of the mainland USA.
So i can understand why the US has been in a panic and scrambling to expand NATO, including into the Arctic, to get its missiles and missile defenses as close as possible.
They can cause a lot of destruction for sure, but i’m not sure they would have a very easy time rolling ground troops into Berlin or Paris, nor would they ever want to. The Russians have absolutely no desire to fight WW2 all over again. Been there, done that.
The only thing the the US is the bigger dog is on the navy, so unless they want to do a bri’ish move and block ever single Russian port (good luck into paying the fuel for an navy divided into four different seas lol) but nato would definitvly be pushed on the war (basically the entire europe) but with the exception of the UK, France and Germany, all other european armys are made of paper. This would be an extremelly awful war that would probably end into nuclear warfare, as russia would eventually not handle the entire army of NATO. Its an war that literally everyone would lose, and thats exactly why the US and NATO will never start it.
See i don’t even think that they could do that. Yes they have the biggest navy but if they get close to the shore within Russian missile range all of their carriers just turn into giant sitting ducks, extremely easy to sink with a few comparatively cheap Russian missiles. A carrier has no defense against a hypersonic missile, and losing one would be an utter disaster for the US, those things cost billions of dollars and take years to build. The only thing they’re good for in today’s age of advanced missiles is bullying small defenseless countries.
So yeah the US can project power around the world with its giant navy and bases all over the place, but in a war with a peer or near-peer power, even one without much of a navy like say Iran, anything within missile range becomes a liability.
A blockade would have to either be done by patrolling the oceans, far from the shore, or with submarines, but of course Russia has its own subs and could cause a lot of havoc to shipping in both the Atlantic and Pacific if it got to that sort of level.
Also, NATO is basically just the US, Turkey and France, everyone else is irrelevant and their armies are all but nonexistent, and i am not convinced Turkey wouldn’t just sit a NATO-Russia war out if they don’t think they have anything to gain from it and too much to lose. In which case as i said, i think Russia can win a defensive war on its own turf even without having to go nuclear, i don’t think they’re that scared of NATO especially as long as the US is overextended and has to maintain military presence all over the world.
Pure delusion. The US cannot wage war without total air dominance, that’s literally their only real strength (on land at least) and what props up the whole rest of their otherwise mediocre army, but Russia has the best air defense in the world, literally designed specifically to counter NATO. The US would lose its airforce over Ukraine and would then get bogged down trying to maintain impossibly long supply lines from their mainland while Russia is fighting right across from their own border simplifying logistics, and logistics is what ultimately wins a protracted war.
There is no question about this, NATO cannot defeat Russia on Russian soil or right on their borders, just like Russia cannot possibly hope to defeat the US on its own mainland or push deep into central/western Europe. It would ultimately end up in standoff long range missile strikes with a risk of going nuclear.
The US and Russia both know this, which is why there will be no NATO intervention in Ukraine unless somehow the last rational people in the Pentagon are pushed out by neocon lunatics.
Those systems are indeed good, but as a Russian citizen I am still mildly sceptical. Don’t forget - capitalist corruption runs deep, military is no exception. And while the data from the most recent flare-up in Karabakh is likely overblown by NATO copers, it does look like there were issues with the AA systems like Pantsir.
Anything is possible i guess. But afaik even the Pentagon acknowledges they have a healthy respect for Russian air defense. Not that familiar with the Pantsir system but the S-400 and the state of the art S-500 are generally regarded as some of the best ground-to-air systems in existence, plus Russia has extremely good radar coverage and surveillance satellites.
Of course these haven’t yet had the chance to be field tested against a full scale NATO air army so you never know how they will perform under such a stress test. I hope we don’t have to find out. The military industry is the one part of the old Soviet industries that was the least affected by capitalism, it was not privatized to the same degree as everything else, so i am hopeful.
S-400 and S-500 can literally massacre(yes that is the correct word to use) NATO jets lol. We in Yugoslavia got F-117 new and most modern ‘‘invisible’’ in 1990s with Soviet anti-aircraft system from 1960s, lmao imagine what would happen today with S-400 and S-500… On one hand, I don’t want war, especially not that catastrophic, on the other hand, I’d like to see them falling from the sky like flies while burning in pieces for all they did to my country and 100+ others in the past 70 years…
And they also have S-550 systems which are apparently for intercepting missiles if i’m not mistaken.
The Americans are really freaked out by these things, i remember reading somewhere recently that apparently because they are so effective the only plan the Americans have to try and hit Russia if it comes to a direct conflict with possibility of going nuclear is to just throw everything all at once Hamas style and hope that at least a few make it through Russia’s air defense.
Russia on the other hand has those brand new Sarmats which go around the entire globe and can strike from the unprotected south of the mainland USA.
So i can understand why the US has been in a panic and scrambling to expand NATO, including into the Arctic, to get its missiles and missile defenses as close as possible.
Russia cannot invade USA on their mainland alone, that’s accurate, but it can level and decimate Europe, Eastern and Western alike.
They can cause a lot of destruction for sure, but i’m not sure they would have a very easy time rolling ground troops into Berlin or Paris, nor would they ever want to. The Russians have absolutely no desire to fight WW2 all over again. Been there, done that.
They have been in Berlin, next time there is no stopping in Berlin.
Inshallah! Let’s hope so.
The only thing the the US is the bigger dog is on the navy, so unless they want to do a bri’ish move and block ever single Russian port (good luck into paying the fuel for an navy divided into four different seas lol) but nato would definitvly be pushed on the war (basically the entire europe) but with the exception of the UK, France and Germany, all other european armys are made of paper. This would be an extremelly awful war that would probably end into nuclear warfare, as russia would eventually not handle the entire army of NATO. Its an war that literally everyone would lose, and thats exactly why the US and NATO will never start it.
See i don’t even think that they could do that. Yes they have the biggest navy but if they get close to the shore within Russian missile range all of their carriers just turn into giant sitting ducks, extremely easy to sink with a few comparatively cheap Russian missiles. A carrier has no defense against a hypersonic missile, and losing one would be an utter disaster for the US, those things cost billions of dollars and take years to build. The only thing they’re good for in today’s age of advanced missiles is bullying small defenseless countries.
So yeah the US can project power around the world with its giant navy and bases all over the place, but in a war with a peer or near-peer power, even one without much of a navy like say Iran, anything within missile range becomes a liability.
A blockade would have to either be done by patrolling the oceans, far from the shore, or with submarines, but of course Russia has its own subs and could cause a lot of havoc to shipping in both the Atlantic and Pacific if it got to that sort of level.
Also, NATO is basically just the US, Turkey and France, everyone else is irrelevant and their armies are all but nonexistent, and i am not convinced Turkey wouldn’t just sit a NATO-Russia war out if they don’t think they have anything to gain from it and too much to lose. In which case as i said, i think Russia can win a defensive war on its own turf even without having to go nuclear, i don’t think they’re that scared of NATO especially as long as the US is overextended and has to maintain military presence all over the world.