He isn’t wrong, the U.S. military alone is far more funded, professional, battle tested and strategically coherent of a fighting force.
The US and Russia would likely not enter into direct fullscale armored land war, but if it did somehow happen even at the beginning of the conflict when Russia hadn’t sacrificed such a stunning number of its soldiers and still was a mechanized army the US army would have kicked its ass.
Now? It would be a bloodbath.
I mean I am a leftist, I really don’t like the part of the US that worships military power for powers sake, but there is no debate here, yes the US would steamroll Russia. I wouldn’t want this battle to happen partially because I think the US military would go right for the throat and topple the entire Russian government in a way that wasn’t necessarily what the US population wanted in terms of destabilizing the world… I mean fuck Russia I simply mean the US military would do it so fast and brutally it would happen before the world was ready for it.
Ukraine? I am not so sure the US would have faired much better in the initial invasion, Ukraine understood early on how small drone fpv drone tactics can be used to grind an enemy force to a halt in a way the US military like most militaries largely resisted. The US would have adapted by now though, and the US wouldn’t keep sending its soldiers into battle in unarmored or fatally underarmored vehicles, that is never something the US has done in all its wars (which is NOT to defend those wars or endorse US militarism).
rant continues
I am not claiming US armor design has been flawless or the US military doctrine has prepared soldiers to be safe in war (i.e. soldiers being initially deployed to patrol in unarmored humvees in Iraq and Afghanistan), but that there is a real political cost to providing US soldiers with inadequate armor in war, and it has driven US armor design to evolve in a way it has clearly NOT in Russia. We have MRAPs now and while they are an evolution of the armored car, they represent genuine innovation in protecting soldiers from bomb and mine blasts.
I am not going to bother to compare US culture to Russian culture, I don’t know enough about Russia or Ukraine to make comparisons. All I can say is, the militarism in the US until recently has always been a form of militarism that seeks to elevate and protect its warriors. That leads to a far more lethal fighting force, outside of any ethical or moral analysis.
Why am I going on this rant? I want to point out that I believe a majority of the worlds most powerful “western” arms companies have consolidated around decisively defending Ukraine in a way they had been hesitating to before and I think one of the reasons that is happening is because of how different culture’s militaries can see what we can all see. Russia does not care about the lives of its troops… and both from a perspective of having an effective military and from the perspective of putting a PR spin on arms sales to democratic societies it just isn’t a winning strategy to openly have such disdain for your soldiers.
No matter your politics, I think most of the world looks down on the way Russia clearly treats the lives of its troops, and I think that is why you are beginning to see such rapid geopolitical consolidation around defending Ukraine more decisively. I wouldn’t be surprised if there was starting to be political costs to Russia’s allies purely from how clearly Russia throws away the lives of its soldiers and how bad that makes their allies look by extension.
All of these points go for most of the European militaries as well. Looking at the hard numbers, the truth is nothing more than Ukraine is in play for a long time for Russia, the problem is Putin seems to be in denial about that and is prolonging a war Russia cannot win… and in the mean time Ukrainians die. Putin however is a fool to give western military powers the chance to so humiliatingly crush the Russian military, it will make it muchhhh harder to sell Russian military arms to other countries for a good price…
Ukraine? I am not so sure the US would have faired much better in the initial invasion, Ukraine understood early on how small drone fpv drone tactics can be used to grind an enemy force to a halt in a way the US military like most militaries largely resisted.
Russia failed the initial invasion alone. Troops were standing in towns with no idea what they were doing or where they were. Massive columns ran out of gas before getting anywhere. Ukrainian defense, once it popped off, was mostly guerrilla tactics with anti tank launchers from NATO. They didn’t really start using kamikaze FPVs until weeks or months into the war. Also there was very little Russian air support in the early days of the invasion.
The US going up against a near peer threat is scary. Take a look at one of the many videos about day 1 of the gulf war. The US knocked out two early warning radars and completely destroyed all communications infrastructure in Baghdad all within the span of about a minute due to meticulous timing of missile launches and bomb drops.
Another example of US near peer response, against Russia/ Wagner this time. We went 0- (55-200)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Khasham
I would wager, based on what we heard from the soldiers that survived that the actual total was closer to 150 dead.
When I first heard about the battle I thought it was a ragtag bunch in trucks. But no, they had artillery, tanks, and other heavy equipment, so it was a serious threat to the ground forces. However, as is seemingly normal for Russia, Wagner and the Syrians had zero air defense or cover. It was basically a turkey shoot from the entire US close air support lineup.
A third excellent example is operation Paul Bunyan. No shots were fired, but the absolutely overwhelming show of force cowed north Korea into backing down and issuing the closest thing to an apology they’re capable of.
Operation Paul Bunyan as told by the right wing history teacher we all really needed to have. It would be nice if he was left wing, but he teaches history so well that lefties can see the truth of what is going on in his stories of actual patriots.
I like his enthusiasms
That’s a nicer kind of stroke, then?
Leonid Slutsky snicker .
Sorry, yes, I am immature.
Ok, and then what?
one imperial force dominates another, the cycle continues, time moves on, the plebs suffer for it
What minerals are buried in Kaliningrad? Or are they primed for golf resorts and concentration camps?
It is basicaly a thorn in NATO defenses, a Russian millitary base deep inside NATO borders.
You know they’re quietly freaking out about the number of US military bases in the EU behind closed doors. What happens it things ever switch from apathy to hostility….
Don’t they have nukes stashed there
They do indeed.
