Russia’s military far more advanced than US's: Analyst

[Holmes2]

If any country that is close enough to challenge US militiary is Russia.

 

[jhungary]

Well then i must say you are living under your world. Currently the only country who is facing difficulty in cash for defense research is US and Russia some how find China and India for their on going and future projects and b/c of that they multiple their research and funds into two folds. US never trust any one to enter into their research program

look like you are the one who is living under your own world.

US research is 2 to 3 fold more advance than Russia, it's not easy to keep 1 or 2 generation above any country currently contesting, hence at least 60% of US defence budget (That's nearly 300 billions) gone to R&D and other went to maintenance and acquisition. We would not be spending 560 billions a year on defence if we are ever strap for cash

And no, US does have MANY foreign research partner. F-35 lighting is a prime example. Also BAe (British venture) Rhinemetall (German venture) Thales Group (French venture) and Austal (Australian venture) were all heavily involved in new generation weapon design and development.

Russia can be said equal to the Americans but reality is america has lost much of it's power with which it was forcing it's policies on different nations (e.g)

Russia taking over Crimea and America couldn't do anything but talk

Russia in Syria working against American planning and doing quiet well whereas America only talking

America after 2010 I think has lost it's credibility and lost it's iron writ by which it threatened everyone and forcing them to follow it's policies and new powers have risen like China and Russia(coming back to it's former glory)

Why would America do anything when Russia take over Crimea?

If anything the American should thanks the Russian for doing such thing, which directly push Ukraine into the hand of NATO and created friction between the former Soviet allies with Russia.

Effective, by taking Crimea, Russia handed the whole Ukraine to NATO. It's honestly quite a dumb move on Russia account no matter how you see it.

 

[Aestu]

The technical gap between the US and Russia is smaller than generally believed and shrinking every day. Russia has a far superior educational system and its civilian space program makes NASA look like a manufacturer of tin pots. Russia's technical shortcomings are due to the corruption and disorganization in the country and not its actual capabilities.

That all being said, the claim itself is just a typical case of some hack making an ostentatiously controversial remark so he can get his five minutes of fame.

 

[anon45]

The technical gap between the US and Russia is smaller than generally believed and shrinking every day. Russia has a far superior educational system and its civilian space program makes NASA look like a manufacturer of tin pots. Russia's technical shortcomings are due to the corruption and disorganization in the country and not its actual capabilities.

That all being said, the claim itself is just a typical case of some hack making an ostentatiously controversial remark so he can get his five minutes of fame.

On a completely serious level you are moving goal posts.

The US has an excellent unmanned space program whose accomplishments are unmatched by any country or regional grouping in the world.

Its manned space program? There is great hope for the future is probably the best way to put it, but it isn't because of lack of technical skill, but congress, either in setting specifications or funding itself.

As for claiming Russia has a 'far superior' educational system, how do you reconcile Russia's problems with corruption and education practices? If Corruption in Russia is endemic it would be reasonable to assume this applies to Education as well.
http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1060816.pdf (focus on Russian corruption in higher education)
http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED499953.pdf (focus on American corruption in higher education)

It is interesting to see where corruption in higher education in both societies focus' on too. They aren't the same.


Also what about University rankings?

 

[Aestu]

On a completely serious level you are moving goal posts.The US has an excellent unmanned space program whose accomplishments are unmatched by any country or regional grouping in the world.

Past accomplishments =/= present capabilities

Its manned space program? There is great hope for the future is probably the best way to put it, but it isn't because of lack of technical skill, but congress, either in setting specifications or funding itself.

I would agree, but the relevant metric is the net result. Capabilities are always a permutation of material and technical capabilities and economic, social and political capital.

As for claiming Russia has a 'far superior' educational system, how do you reconcile Russia's problems with corruption and education practices? If Corruption in Russia is endemic it would be reasonable to assume this applies to Education as well.

It would be reasonable... but not factually correct. Russia has traditionally had an excellent technical education system. And technical ingenuity does not necessarily translate into moral upstandingness.

Also what about University rankings?

Petrodollar driven. Nothing else. If the US dollar crashed, the import/service economy that supports higher education in the US would implode and there would be no reason to come to school here.

 

[TaiShang]

Pentagon Expert Says Russians Would ‘Annihilate’ US Army on Battlefield
:20 05.11.2015(updated 18:08 05.11.2015)Get short URL
3770161014

Despite the size of its military budget, the US Army isn’t as strong as one might think it is and it would certainly lose to the Russian Army in a direct confrontation on a battlefield, retired US Army Colonel Douglas Macgregor said, according to Politico Magazine.

The deployment of the US Army 2nd Cavalry Regiment from Germany to Hungary that was intended to scare Russia was a joke and it wouldn't help in a real-life fighting scenario, said Macgregor, who also holds a Ph.D. in international relations from the US Military Academy at West Point.

"This Stryker parade [the line of US military vehicles that drove from Germany to Hungary] won't fool anyone in Moscow," Macgregor said, adding that perhaps the Russians may not know how to do certain things well, but when it comes to fighting wars they're second to none.

Macgregor is a famous US war hero whose squadron destroyed an entire Iraqi Armored Brigade in 23 minutes, while suffering only one casualty, at the Battle of 73 Easting, a decisive tank fight during the Gulf War.


Later, reflecting on his famous victory, Macgregor said that if his military unit came to a face-to-face confrontation not with poorly-trained Iraqi soldiers, but with the Russians, his army would have been defeated.

"Defeated isn't the right word, the right word is annihilated," Macgregor told US military expert Mark Perry, according to Politico.

During his presentation at the US Congress in November of 2013, Macgregor compared the state of the US Army to a nine-passenger rowboat, in which "four would steer, three would call cadence and two would man the oars," according to Politico.

In other words, Macgregor said that the US Army is poorly organized or not well-trained, and if it had to face another army, equal in numbers and as technologically advanced, such the Russian or Chinese forces, on a conventional battlefield there is a high chance that US forces would be destroyed.

"Even if you increased the Army to 600,000 in its current form… it would still fail. That's the problem and, by the way, the Army knows it," the US military expert said, as cited by Politico.

 

[anon45]

Past accomplishments =/= present capabilities

We just had a flyby of Pluto this year, we landed a probe the size of a car on mars in 2012... this stuff was front page news... (at least on google)

I would agree, but the relevant metric is the net result. Capabilities are always a permutation of material and technical capabilities and economic, social and political capital.

Well if technical capability is not in dispute then all I can say is we can come back to this in 5 years and see if the answer is the same.

It would be reasonable... but not factually correct. Russia has traditionally had an excellent technical education system. And technical ingenuity does not necessarily translate into moral upstandingness.

Speaking of technical ingenuity...

How do you reconcile superior educated Russian technical ingenuity with the amount of innovation coming out of the US vs Russia, on the university level?

The World's Most Innovative Universities| Reuters

Russian universities are even trying to figure out how American ones do it.

U.S.-Russia Innovation Corridor: Connecting Engineering in Higher Ed to Entrepreneurship

Petrodollar driven. Nothing else. If the US dollar crashed, the import/service economy that supports higher education in the US would implode and there would be no reason to come to school here.

Well regardless of reason then US universities are top ranked on research, teaching, knowledge transfer,etc, while Russian ones aren't, and you acknowledge this, even if you believe it is driven by the petrodollar.

The answer to that can only be answered when the dollar crashes.

 

[pher]

If the two were at war, russians can beat the shit out of amerians. US soldiers are a bunch of sissy who are only good at killing civillians or bully poor-equipped backward third-world army, which we witnessed again and again in the past 30 years.

That is why US-trained army also fought as shit as their teacher. Look at the performance of South korea, south vietnam and iraq troops, we all know why.

 

[Aestu]

retired US Army Colonel

Right

If the two were at war, russians can beat the shit out of amerians. US soldiers are a bunch of sissy who are only good at killing civillians or bully poor-equipped backward third-world army, which we witnessed again and again in the past 30 years.

Gulf War? What to you would be a satisfactory opponent?

That is why US-trained army also fought as shit as their teacher. Look at the performance of South korea, south vietnam and iraq troops, we all know why.

Are you saying the modern RSK isn't competent? What about Israel and Germany?

 

[anon45]

If the two were at war, russians can beat the shit out of americans. US soldiers are a bunch of sissy who are only good at killing civillians or bully poor-equipped backward third-world army, which we witnessed again and again in the past 30 years.

That is why US-trained army also fought as shit as their teacher. Look at the performance of South korea, south vietnam and iraq troops, we all know why.

Id love to see you say that to any American soldier's face.

 

[TMA]

look like you are the one who is living under your own world.

US research is 2 to 3 fold more advance than Russia, it's not easy to keep 1 or 2 generation above any country currently contesting, hence at least 60% of US defence budget (That's nearly 300 billions) gone to R&D and other went to maintenance and acquisition. We would not be spending 560 billions a year on defence if we are ever strap for cash

And no, US does have MANY foreign research partner. F-35 lighting is a prime example. Also BAe (British venture) Rhinemetall (German venture) Thales Group (French venture) and Austal (Australian venture) were all heavily involved in new generation weapon design and development.



Why would America do anything when Russia take over Crimea?

If anything the American should thanks the Russian for doing such thing, which directly push Ukraine into the hand of NATO and created friction between the former Soviet allies with Russia.

Effective, by taking Crimea, Russia handed the whole Ukraine to NATO. It's honestly quite a dumb move on Russia account no matter how you see it.

A dumb move? What?! The whole purpose of the Zionist created USSR was to weaken and destroy Christian Russia. One of the ways was by giving Crimea to Ukraine (without asking the Crimeans) so when the time for the collapse of the USSR, Crimea would belong to the Ukraine who would be enticed and brow beaten to becoming part of NATO. That is what the illegal coup was all about, trying to install a NATO friendly government in Ukraine...which would mean what? That Crimea would then be out of Russian hands forever. And NATO warships would be docked there. And Russian naval power would impotent!! So Putin honorable accepted Crimea after the Crimeans wanted to come back to Russia. And now NATO is seething at the fact that the Black Sea is now a Russian Sea. And they cannot do anything (except for Nuclear world war).

Not so dumb after all.

 

[jhungary]

A dumb move? What?! The whole purpose of the Zionist created USSR was to weaken and destroy Christian Russia. One of the ways was by giving Crimea to Ukraine (without asking the Crimeans) so when the time for the collapse of the USSR, Crimea would belong to the Ukraine who would be enticed and brow beaten to becoming part of NATO. That is what the illegal coup was all about, trying to install a NATO friendly government in Ukraine...which would mean what? That Crimea would then be out of Russian hands forever. And NATO warships would be docked there. And Russian naval power would impotent!! So Putin honorable accepted Crimea after the Crimeans wanted to come back to Russia. And now NATO is seething at the fact that the Black Sea is now a Russian Sea. And they cannot do anything (except for Nuclear world war).

Not so dumb after all.

lol, dude, set aside the religious tone (Beside it's all wrong, simply because Soviet oppression of Jews cannot even be compare to the holocaust in WW2, that's why most Jewish population escape to Israel or the US were from Soviet Union)

The act that Russia annex Crimea is simply dump.

Black sea have not change anything as long as the Turks still holding on the exit to Aegean Sea and what Sevastopol can give Russia have already been done by Port of Novorossiysk already, plus don't forget, Sevastopol was already rented to Russian Navy before the maiden and before the annex, the only thing changes from annexing Crimea in Black Seas for Russia is that they don't need to pay the rent on the Naval Base anymore.

What changed in Ukraine, however, is a hundred time worse for Russia to imagine. Effectively, Russia lose the buffer of the whole country to the west, before annexation, Russia was buffered by Finland in the North, Belarus on North West, and Ukraine to the South West. Effective, by annexing Crimea, Russia have established a Land border with NATO with Ukraine swinging onto the NATO side. And Finland eyeing this annexation as an aggression and now shredding its neutrality now Not to mention they have lost a major Gas and Oil customer and also have to back up yet another province and fighting with sanction.

I don't know how you see things, but just by annexing Crimea, basically Russia lost a diplomatic relationship to the whole country, without any major defence or geopolitical gain. How much does Sevastopol worth in actual defence value? Did they worth as much as the buffer offered by Ukraine? Pretty sure any sane leader would have waited out for the Maiden to die down first, then they would have elected another pro-Russia leader again. Better that then move to annex Crimea and get drag into one of the nastiest fighting with their neighbour and former friends, Ukraine. If this is not dumb, then I don't know what is.

Chanting Novo-Russia tone does not mean they have gain anything but hot air in real world. unless a country can live on pride that "eventually some former Russian have came home"

 

[gambit]

If the two were at war, russians can beat the shit out of amerians. US soldiers are a bunch of sissy who are only good at killing civillians...

You mean like your PLA whose 'combat' experience consisted of monks and unarmed students ?

That is why US-trained army also fought as shit as their teacher. Look at the performance of South korea, south vietnam and iraq troops, we all know why.

What the Chinese military trained their North Korean and North Vietnamese fellow was the human wave tactic. Pretty much the only thing the PLA know.

Right now, any US National Guard outfit can take on the PLA and win in a landslide, DSI or not.

 

[Azeri440]

Pentagon Expert Says Russians Would ‘Annihilate’ US Army on Battlefield
:20 05.11.2015(updated 18:08 05.11.2015)Get short URL
3770161014

Despite the size of its military budget, the US Army isn’t as strong as one might think it is and it would certainly lose to the Russian Army in a direct confrontation on a battlefield, retired US Army Colonel Douglas Macgregor said, according to Politico Magazine.

The deployment of the US Army 2nd Cavalry Regiment from Germany to Hungary that was intended to scare Russia was a joke and it wouldn't help in a real-life fighting scenario, said Macgregor, who also holds a Ph.D. in international relations from the US Military Academy at West Point.

"This Stryker parade [the line of US military vehicles that drove from Germany to Hungary] won't fool anyone in Moscow," Macgregor said, adding that perhaps the Russians may not know how to do certain things well, but when it comes to fighting wars they're second to none.

Macgregor is a famous US war hero whose squadron destroyed an entire Iraqi Armored Brigade in 23 minutes, while suffering only one casualty, at the Battle of 73 Easting, a decisive tank fight during the Gulf War.


Later, reflecting on his famous victory, Macgregor said that if his military unit came to a face-to-face confrontation not with poorly-trained Iraqi soldiers, but with the Russians, his army would have been defeated.

"Defeated isn't the right word, the right word is annihilated," Macgregor told US military expert Mark Perry, according to Politico.

During his presentation at the US Congress in November of 2013, Macgregor compared the state of the US Army to a nine-passenger rowboat, in which "four would steer, three would call cadence and two would man the oars," according to Politico.

In other words, Macgregor said that the US Army is poorly organized or not well-trained, and if it had to face another army, equal in numbers and as technologically advanced, such the Russian or Chinese forces, on a conventional battlefield there is a high chance that US forces would be destroyed.

"Even if you increased the Army to 600,000 in its current form… it would still fail. That's the problem and, by the way, the Army knows it," the US military expert said, as cited by Politico.

LOL , what a load of BS

please tell me a single advantage Russia would have over US

US has bigger numbers , better trained professional military and a massive technology gap between the two

 

[boomslang]

How many Americans are emigrating to Russia ? And how many Russians are emigrating to the U.S. ? Tells a bit right there.