Bitcoin Forum

I heard from rt that USA is going to attack RUSSIA soon. How USA will attack and where invasion will start? I'd like to know  ???

If the United States attack Russia, then they will start with attacking all the nuclear weapon storage sites, air bases and facilities which can launch Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBMs). Russia is having the world's most powerful ballistic missile (SS-18 Satan), and if the Americans fail to destroy all of them at once in a sudden attack, many of the American cities will be converted in to post-apocalyptic wasteland within the next few hours time.

You mean like army attack ?? or some bullshits like Cold war
Anyway if you mean attack like attack by army and stuff , that's not gonna happen . Putin will simply screw them up it's not like they are in Iraq or Afghanistan , it's russia mate
@bryant.coleman which they probably won't success to do so they are screwed most likely :o

If they´re going to invade they´ll need to amass troops and materiel at a staging area or areas first. This takes time. Since there are no signs of such build-up now I guess we can safely assume that no invasion will take place any time soon. As for other attacks, nuclear or otherwise, well although the fruitcakes in Wash. D.C. are certifiable I doubt that even they are crazy enough for that.

This kind of thing was being said about USA and Soviet Union/Russia from before the cold war "from the end of the second world war" to now, I doubt it would happen now since in the more tense situation they were able to avoid going into war "cuba's rocket issue". just financial restrictions and trading penalties seem more possible.

An aerial attack might be suicidal for the Americans. Their fighter jets are good, but they are no match for the Russian S-400 Triumf anti-aircraft weapon system. Unless the Americans find a way for their jets to counter the S-400, I don't believe that they stand much of a chance. And a land invasion can be another wrong choice as well. In the past 600 years or so, no other nation has succeeded in invading Russia through the land-route.

In short, here are the challenges the Americans might face:

1. Russia is having more nukes compared to the US.
2. Russia is having the best and most powerful ICBM in the world (SS-18 Satan)
3. Russia is having the best anti-aircraft weapon system in the world (S-400 Triumf)
4. Russia is having the best Main battle tank (MBT) in the world (T-14 Armata).

USA will not attack Russia soon. Stop saying fake news. Instead, Putin seems want to do the "peace" (political fake peace, temporary).

BUT what if someday one of them really attacks? I don't think that they instantly use nuclear, because they know the consequences for all the world. I think if they really want to use it (nahhh), it's better to use at the end, when one of them haven't more the military control on their bases. Mine are speculations ;)

p.s: sorry for my english.

Are they really called satan? Do you really believe that Russia would use nukes because wouldn't they just get nuked back due to MAD.

Needless to say; they´re called Satan by NATO nutjobs. It´s just an advertising slogan if you will.

they don't have guts for this =))

US and Russia did this cat and mouse dance for 50 years without starting WW III.
Both sides are still posturing.
To me, Russia did less to harm us than our very own Gov…

Current NATO Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR) is General Philip M. Breedlove. No, not Strangelove but close. Seems to be about as looney tunes as that fictional character  ;D

The original Russian name was R-36M. The NATO gave it the reporting name as SS-18 Satan. Now no one outside Russia uses the original name. Media sources in the Western world only uses the NATO reporting name. Similarly, the NATO reporting name for the S-400 Triumf is SA-21 Growler. The real reason behind all this NATO propaganda is simple. They want to imply that the Russian missiles are "satanic" or bad to the human civilization, while the American missiles are dovish, and are used only for "peaceful" purposes.  ;D


I was predicting a scenario in which Russia is first attacked by the US with nukes (the topic also deals with it), and then Russia striking back at the US after the initial strike.

Yes, western political/military garbage and mass media whores give the retards that for some mysterious reason still take them seriously the impression that Russians really call that missile Satan.

Too bad Slim Pickens isn't still with us, maybe we could get one of the current crop of crazies like Rick Perry, Cheney, or even Dubya to ride the bomb

http://media.giphy.com/media/uH27sheFg9One/giphy.gif

yes but wouldn't the first nation to attack the other nations nuclear sites be able to win since most of the latter nations nukes wouldn't be able to fire?

What is "rt", your source?

USA is not going to invade Russia, if that happened there'd be a domestic revolution in the USA, which would quickly divert the USA attention from Russia to home. Do you live in Russia? Russian foreign affairs games are only successful when they get the attention of the world. The world needs to stop focusing on Russia so much. Crimea voted to join Russia, and if the Crimea people fell for or tolerated a rigged vote, they should leave or revolt.

Agreed. But the problem with Russia is that they are having a total of 8,000 nuclear weapons, stored in hundreds of sites. Russia is having nukes in land (missile silos), air (strategic bombers) and water (nuclear submarines) at the same time. And with the advanced anti-aircraft technology which Russia possess, I really doubt whether the Americans will be able to take out all these sites in one go.

The rest of the globe probably wouldn´t be very habitable after the event anyway.

Russian nuclear forces are also including unknown amount of mobile systems. These systems are disguised as hauliers, cargo containers and other stuff like that. Each container is registered as a property of some private enterprise, constantly transported over the country and ready to fire on some preconfigured coordinates, activation may be performed manually or automatically. Good luck with neutralizing these targets. 8)

P.S. By the way, we've seen one missile after some "grain carrier" derailed. That was quite unexpectable for railway staff. :D

The initial letter of the name indicated the use of that missiles: S — surface-to-surface missiles, including ship- and submarine-launched. A list of them can be found also in the Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_NATO_reporting_names_for_surface-to-surface_missiles.
I don't think someone willingly tought of implying that Russian missiles are satanic; but, probably laked enough fantasy to choose a nicer one. Soviets once had  a "Sibling" missile, SS-2 or (R-2) and...i cannot think negatively about a sibling.  ;)

To attack to Russia you need balls. I don't see any balls. I see only "peanuts"! lol

If the Russians set up the gay festival of all times close to their western border this should attract enough numbers of NATO girliemen soldiers to the area to stage a minor invasion. Maybe.

US and Russia has built an anti-ballistic missiles to prepare the next World War. If the war really happen, maybe other US hater country like North Korea or Iran will join Russia, and the other side US will cooperate with Israel and Western European Countries. But I don't think so if Obama will start the attacking, it depends to who the next US president is.

There's your mistake.  Hearing something from RT is one thing, but believing something from RT...

They regularly interview Alex Jones - that in itself should be enough to dismiss 99% of their 'claims'

For what it's worth, I'd suggest avoiding ALL mainstream news.  It'll do wonders for your mental and physical well-being.

Fixed.

RE: SACEUR. The first one obviously was General of the Army Dwight D. Eisenhower (1951-52). From back then it has been generally downhill unfortunately, hitting a new low with this Breedlove character.

Only in a game  ;D  Fallout 4 is coming out around September

http://images.vcpost.com/data/images/full/36412/fallout-4.jpg

US is smart enough to not start this kind of visible madness. there are many ways how to "destroy" other state without using guns and tanks..

Guns and tanks can still be used, as long as they're operated through a proxy...

But yes, 'economic hitmen' can do much worse, much quicker...!

Proxy warfare can be effective against weak nations such as Ukraine. But against Russia, I don't think they'll be having much effect. The US has already tried waging proxy warfare in Russian soil by supporting the Chechens. It didn't worked out according to their plans.


Already Russia is under the EU / US sanctions for more than a year. I am not seeing an economic collapse of any sort. On the other hand, the local manufacturers are gaining due to the ban on EU goods.

a russian invasion of any kind is unlikely to happen anytime soon (if ever) because of the nuclear missile threat. What's more likely is a proxy war in the Ukraine and possibly some other former soviet countries in the near future.

USA already has attacked Russia, with the FIFA arrests, the US is proposing that the Qatar and Russia World Cup selections be invalidated. If this were to happen both countries would lose their World Cup hosting dates!

The Americans have been attacking Russia for the last 70 years or so, using various means. So far, they haven't achieved the type of success which they wanted. Invalidation of the 2018 World Cup hosting hardly matters to the ordinary Russians. On the other hand, I can see a large number of countries (including Argentina and Uruguay) boycotting the event if the United Kingdom is given hosting rights.

If that were to happen i wonder what role China would play a war of these proportions. Europe would try diplomacy but China does not ...

Yes, they will attack with the ass. lol

I guess China would support Russia which both of them have a same ideology and never had contradict each other. Recently, China warships prepare the war on South China Sea with US because China did reclamation projects on that but the neighbor countries don't want it to be happen, so US came to help the countries. I don't know if there is other motive by US action, but it will be a World War trigger.

China and India will join the russian side

India is a neutral nation. It is not pro-US or pro-Russia. Unless someone attacks them directly, they are not going to get involved in a potential Russia vs United States conflict.

China is more pro-Russia than pro-US. But that doesn't mean that they'll immediately jump to the defence of Russia. The main concern for the Chinese is their own sovereignity and power. If the US can give them some sort of "reward" to keep quiet, then the Chinese will also take a neutral side in this conflict.

Seems very unlikely after recent events in Hong-Kong.

If US would attack, UK and some other western countries would back them, so by US it should be US+EU attack Russia, basically WW3 is on.

Oh, Please USA, don't attack to my penis with your ass. lol

Only some of the EU nations would back them. Germany and France are likely to stay neutral, along with other smaller nations such as Norway, Denmark, the Netherlands, Belgium, Spain, Portugal, Austria, Czechia, Slovakia, and Hungary. The only major EU nation which is going to side with the United States will be the United Kingdom (but this move will almost certainly trigger the secession of Scotland). In addition to the UK, the most rabid russophobe nations, such as Poland, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, and Estonia are likely to side with the USA.

only major EU nation which is going to side with the United States .......... ;D ;D ;D ;D

You live outside of reality
The world has already won over Russia has once and does not need to even one rocket ..1989 ...
and won again.
Russia is trying to attack the whole world but needs to somehow blamed on Americans .. And that everybody knows the Germans well as the whole of Scandinavia.
you always want to blame someone else ;) sobaka

Do you realize this list?

(1) American Indian nations (1776 onwards, American Indian Genocide; 1803, Louisiana Purchase; 1844, Indians banned from east of the Mississippi; 1861 onwards, California genocide; 1890, Lakota Indians massacre)
(2) Mexico (1836-1846; 1913; 1914-1918; 1923)
(3) Nicaragua (1856-1857; 1894; 1896; 1898; 1899; 1907; 1910; 1912-1933; 1981-1990)
(4) American forces deployed against Americans (1861-1865, Civil War; 1892; 1894; 1898; 1899-1901; 1901; 1914; 1915; 1920-1921; 1932; 1943; 1967; 1968; 1970; 1973; 1992; 2001)
(5), Argentina (1890)
(6), Chile (1891; 1973)
(7) Haiti (1891; 1914-1934; 1994; 2004-2005)
(8.) Hawaii (1893-)
(9) China (1895-1895; 1898-1900; 1911-1941; 1922-1927; 1927-1934; 1948-1949; 1951-1953; 1958)
(10) Korea (1894-1896; 1904-1905; 1951-1953)
(11) Panama (1895; 1901-1914; 1908; 1912; 1918-1920; 1925; 1958; 1964; 1989-)
(12) Philippines (1898-1910; 1948-1954; 1989; 2002-)
(13) Cuba (1898-1902; 1906-1909; 1912; 1917-1933; 1961; 1962)
(14) Puerto Rico (1898-; 1950; )
(15) Guam (1898-)
(16) Samoa (1899-)
(17) Honduras (1903; 1907; 1911; 1912; 1919; 1924-1925; 1983-1989)
(18) Dominican Republic (1903-1904; 1914; 1916-1924; 1965-1966)
(19) Germany (1917-1918; 1941-1945; 1948; 1961)
(20) Russia (1918-1922)
(21) Yugoslavia (1919; 1946; 1992-1994; 1999)
(22) Guatemala (1920; 1954; 1966-1967)
(23) Turkey (1922)
(24) El Salvador (1932; 1981-1992)
(25) Italy (1941-1945)
(26) Morocco (1941-1945)
(27) France (1941-1945)
(28) Algeria (1941-1945)
(29) Tunisia (1941-1945)
(30) Libya (1941-1945; 1981; 1986;  1989; 2011)
(31) Egypt (1941-1945; 1956; 1967; 1973; 2013)
(32) India (1941-1945)
(33) Burma (1941-1945)
(34) Micronesia (1941-1945)
(35) Papua New Guinea (1941-1945)
(36) Vanuatu (1941-1945)
(37) Austria (1941-1945)
(38) Hungary (1941-1945)
(39) Japan (1941-1945)
(40) Iran (1946; 1953; 1980; 1984; 1987-1988; )
(41) Uruguay (1947)
(42) Greece (1947-1949)
(43) Vietnam (1954; 1960-1975)
(44) Lebanon (1958; 1982-1984)
(45) Iraq (1958; 1963; 1990-1991; 1990-2003; 1998; 2003-2011)
(46) Laos (1962-)
(47) Indonesia (1965)
(48) Cambodia (1969-1975; 1975)
(49) Oman (1970)
(50) Laos (1971-1973)
(51) Angola (1976-1992)
(52) Grenada (1983-1984)
(53) Bolivia (1986; )
(54) Virgin Islands (1989)
(55) Liberia (1990; 1997; 2003)
(56) Saudi Arabia (1990-1991)
(57) Kuwait (1991)
(58) Somalia (1992-1994; 2006)
(59) Bosnia (1993-)
(60) Zaire (Congo) (1996-1997)
(61) Albania (1997)
(62) Sudan (1998)
(63) Afghanistan (1998;  2001-)
(64) Yemen (2000; 2002-)
(65) Macedonia (2001)
(66) Colombia (2002-)
(67)  Pakistan (2005-)
(68) Syria (2008; 2011-)
(69) Uganda (2011)
(70) Mali (2013)
(71) Niger (2013)
(72) Ukraine (2014)

It is the list of countries invaded by the United States.

Now who is trying to attack the whole world?

US Air force unveils S-400 KILLER MISSILES to scare Putin

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A85Czh9KexI (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A85Czh9KexI)

Aint gonna happen any soon, i think both parties are doogs that only bark no bite. Eitherway if it happens not only those countries are going to get fucked and hopefully nuclear weapons stay where they are.

U.S. and NATO don´t have troops capable of any meaningful ground offensive against Russia which leaves really nothing worth considering. Unless they´re crazy enough for nuclear exchanges which unfortunately can´t be fully ruled out since these people have very convincingly displayed through a multitude of war scams that they´re totally certifiable. But those scams involved opposition that couldn´t defend itself. Russia is a whole another matter.

With the amount of nuclear weapons these two nations are having with them (Russia is having some 8,000 nukes, while the US is having another 4,760), it will be almost impossible for any one side to achieve victory without making the planet earth uninhabitable. So they will continue to bark about the nuclear winter and MAD, but will never step beyond that.

There wont be any active war between US and Russia, because it would be just M.A.D. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_assured_destruction)

The US and Russia are the only nations that have a nuclear triad - that means they have sea (submarines and other ships with rocket silos), land (silos and land based vehicles with a rocket launching system)
and air (strategic bombers) based launching systems for nuclear weapons.

It is not possible for either of them to destroy the following nuclear counter attack with a massive scale nuclear first strike.

Even nowadays 26 years after the cold war the US and Russia have active nuclear forces, which are always on alert and ready for a nuclear strike.

Btw. if it should come to a showdown my bets are on US+NATO+ASEAN+Japan+South Korea+Israel vs Russia+China+Iran+North Korea ; India vs Pakistan solo match ; South America and Africa will probaly just watch;
not sure where to put turkey and the saudis.


*edit

i'm pretty sure there exist a counterpart for this in the US: Dead Hand (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Hand_%28nuclear_war%29)
would be pretty funny if the devices would fail

ASEAN, Japan, South Korea and China are likely to remain neutral in case of the WW3. China want to grow at the expense of both the Russians and the Americans. If the Americans destroy the Russians, it will indirectly benefit the Chinese. They will have millions of sq.kms of mineral and resource rich Siberian land for themselves.

 
Don't worry. i think, USA will not attack Russia. This story recalls on Cold war. Everyone know, this war was war for predominance over the world. So that and today, USA and Russia are two big world powers that would be waged against each other. USA only prepare their powers if it comes to war. Trust me, matter of strategy.
 

I dont see china staying neutral because china is the direct economic opponent of the us.
And in the end money will govern the world.
The US know that and will probaly fight china sooner or later.
Dont think the US would like to see china get endless resouces through siberia.
china has a rather aggresive foreign policy in SEA, so alot if ASEAN Member states are very careful about china.
South korea and japan have pretty much the same stance.

We are in a BTC Forum and you guys mostly talk about physical, real weapons  :o
Do you know Mr. Glaser ???
Maybe you should read this -> http://www.newsweek.com/2014/05/02/art-financial-warfare-how-west-pushing-putins-buttons-248424.html
Today nobody is going to use nukes, these are just for showing how big your balls are, financial warfare is the new kid in town  ;D

Besides that, US started with warfare, and will also end with warfare, period  8)

Attack China first . Damn after some complaints our Country submitted to international tribunal to stop China's reclamation on Spratlys still they continue to expanding territories even without any treaty or strong evidence that the land belongs to them. Until US scout that area and Chinese government have questioned US action. Why questioned? Afraid that the whole world knows what they're doing there? We PH , along with SEA countries are condemning this action from China. Good thing US , Japan and there allies helping us. If US will have to face China , they'll face Russia too.

Could you please translate your post, so we know who is who and who is going to help who  ???

dont make Barry draw a red line. if you cross it, he will have to draw another one. you dont want the 3rd line drawn.

Sorry for my bad english . Not good at it.My main point here is US must attack China first. It's clear that China is now a security threat for our region (SouthEastAsia) and will be a thread in the whole world in the future. They don't listen to any countries to stop reclaming lands. They ignore UN and US appeals too. Everyone doesnt like to have a war but if war is the only solution for this so be it.

Both nations are armed to the teeth with nukes, yet, they seem to have forgotten the meaning of the MAD Doctrine - Mutually Assured Destruction.
I'm beginning to think that one, or more, world leaders may actually have a death wish, as their actions are insanely, suicidal. As it is, the world is going off the deep-end, even, without the nukes.

It's no wonder the Aliens are avoiding our planet  ;)

China is getting more and more powerful with passing time. If the Americans want to fight China, then they should do it now. Right now, the Chinese armed forces don't have the capability to defeat or even to defend against the United States in a one-to-one war. However, their military technology is getting better and better, and eventually it will create problems for their neighbors.

So the question here is, what the fcuk has the US to do with China or Russia and are you the wright strategic brain to state something stupid as you just did?

The US should stay at home doing their homework and give their own people an opportunity to earn and to life from their money, currently the US has to distribute foodstamps, not even thinking about playing with the big boys  ::)

I´ll give you an example:
Greece for example has roughly $25k government debts per citizen, 4 - 8% interest and is stated bankrupt
US has roughly $35k government debts per citizen, 0% FED interest and is stated as a "liquid" state....

US has nothing to live on their own, despite warfare, the only things the US can distribute is meat and GMcorn, so it clears up why the US has this hostile mentality towards other states.

If, and black bush does not have the balls to do so, the US even thinks about attacking RUSSIA, it is going to get very hot in the US  ;)
Russia can life on it´s own, with it´s own little wars, but the US always want´s to play global law enforcement agency in the sandpit, nobody with an IQ above room temperature get´s the useless point why US always want´s to fight, destroy and kill more people than the church and Adolf did together...

Attack RUSSIA directly or indirectly and you´ll get the bill by return.
(I hope my english is readable..  ;D)

100% agree. China started it now. All of there reclaim island have military bases. And China get mad everytime a scouting team that will scout the area have a news reporters on board.


LOL what US have to do? Watched some news. US warned China because they destroying peace in Southeast Asia and eventually the whole world. All of reclaimed island have military bases . You think US and their allies will just sit down and let China do those stupid shits in the region that can affect even the whoel world?

In which pro-US propaganda channel? CNN, Fox News, MSNBC?


I am not seeing the Chinese invading any sovereign nation. On the other hand, the Americans don't respect the sovereignty of other nations, and regularly invade smaller nations every now and then. Are we supposed to ignore the American invasions, as they are some sort of world police?


Accept it. The Americans don't have the balls to attack China. It is not like attacking some small nation like Serbia or Libya.

You're not seeing Chinese invasion now? From what country you from? Of course if you're not in SouthEast Asia you wont see it. Didn't you know that they invading even inside our countries exclusive economic zone that only 124 nautical miles from our country? So just let China do the reclamation? OMG.

China owns a massive amount of American public debt.
Maybe enough to bankrupt the US.
American strategy could be to create the circumstances where Washington can grab those assets back or default.

In my humble opinion, China occupying some disputed and uninhabited sand bar can't be compared to America invading entire sovereign nations (such as Libya and Iraq) and bombing the orphanages and kindergartens in far away locations (such as Serbia). At least China is limiting itself to its immediate surroundings, unlike the US which is waging war all around the world.

what is happening with debt between two war parties? (serious question)

winner gets everything i guess?
im to lazy to look in the history someone please educate me :)

Did they asked the american citizens and soldiers if they want to attack?

usually it should work in that way, in this case we are talking about two of the most strong military countries, so no one else can interfere to dictate who will get it, anyway op should really add the source because i can't find it, it's very unlikely that a war between those two monsters will happen, it will probably led to atomic war and nothing else, and we know that atomic war will damage everything else around that, not possible to start a war vs a great military power without causing the third war, and most likely the world war 3 will end in a few days with nuke everywhere, not even worth watching it, if you are still alive


it does not work in this way, here people has seen many movie i think, reality is different, they can't simply start a war only because they fear their enemies and think that one day they could defeat their nation, this isn't a game, nor we are leaving in the past where a war could start for even a small disagreement


you think that they care about them? the Government will sacrifice everyone before their ass

The American soldiers are just cannon fodder, who work overtime to bring gigantic profits to private defense companies such as Blackwater and DynCorp. During the past 15 years or so, tens of thousands of US soldiers have been killed, fighting for war crazy politicians such as GW Bush and Hillary Clinton. Hundreds of thousands have been made handicapped, and similar numbers face psychiatric issues. Still these idiots will continue to vote for warmongers such as Jeb Bush and Hillary.

Sometimes the nutjobs in charge are candid. Or let it slip, whichever way you want to put it.

“Military men are just dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns in foreign policy.”

― Henry Kissinger

http://i187.photobucket.com/albums/x222/jo56_photos/11703dc10bc40d7f122b8af4a1ac8127_zps91ff2cd4.jpg

Haig of course was the late U.S. Army General Al Haig, Chief of Staff under Nixon and Ford, Reagan´s Sec. of State, SACEUR among other things.

is that a vote for Rick Perry or Rand Paul???

In my opinion, only Rand Paul is not a war-monger among the main candidates. Rick Perry is no good when compared to Ben Carson or Jeb Bush. When Obama was withdrawing the troops from Iraq, he called it a "national disgrace". That said, as of now he doesn't have the sort of support which the other GOP candidates such as Bush and Paul possess. He may even withdraw from the race later.

About posturing: In Russia there is a saying: "This animal is dangerous it bites when attacked!" :)

As long as Russia does not show any signs of weakness and continues with posturing backed by real strong defensive assets, then WWIII can be avoided. As history shows, as long as Russia shows some weakness, constant economic and verbal assaults are substituted with lethal weapons and an invasion.


Ha! Couldn't agree more with there!

....You seem to be a typical US "code orange", "DEFCON X" and "keep the citizens in fear" US politics and Media vaccinated victim without any self esteem for questioning the "Leaders" and the Motivation of your government....

Read trough the replies of the Ladies and Gents in this topic, and maybe you should ask yourself "Who benefits from global WAR and FEAR?" Surely not you!

We should life in consensus, understanding and prosper, not in destroying each other, that's what stupid people use!

stop watching Russia Today or Fox News. You will then be able to speak with intelligence about how other countries spend their money. If they need your financial wizardry, they know how to find you.

That's not going to happen. There's too much at stake here, and it would be simply irresponsible from both sides to engage in a conflict. Besides, USA has got to stop acting as a world policeman when matters do not concerne them; if anything, they should act all grown up here and try to calm the situation, not send troops to the Black sea. It is provoking, and showing off

You should watch RT and find out the exact details...they know everything, just make sure you catch the next episodes...:)

I regularly watch the RT, and I have fund them to be much more unbiased and honest, when compared to the American propaganda channels such as the MSNBC, CNN, BBC and the Faux News. I don't care about their true intentions, but they seems to be the only information channel which is safe from the American news censorship.

its all rumors for sure and will not happen anytime soon as the arsenal of weapons from both country could leave a devastating affect on the entire world should they think to fight each other.

Agreed, not physical but financial. I had a good laugh due to the press release of the G7 summit "Germany will endorse it´s sanctions against russia..."  ;D
Russia can life without Germany, Germany without Russia tends to get a problem on the long run  :o

So let´s see what the NATO will try to do against russia, and i have to agree. A WWIII would last about 24hours. I think that even black bush has enough brain to not start this one, it will leave him and his rich dictators with a lot of money, but nowhere to spend it  :P

Would be a good idea in terms of world peace and a humanistic exercise of distributional justice  ::) ;) ;D

i heard that when i was child i heard from my historic teacher that 2 country like a tom and jery :D but you know actually iam not ready if the cold war will happen, thats enough for cw I and II dont repeat again,we should not make a rumor like this we should share about the harmonize connected about us and russian  :-* sweet :D

We are at war with Eurasia, we have always been at war with Eurasia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geostrategy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geostrategy)
[....."For the United States, Eurasian geostrategy involves the purposeful management of geostrategically dynamic states and the careful handling of geopolitically catalytic states, in keeping with the twin interests of America in the short-term preservation of its unique global power and in the long-run transformation of it into increasingly institutionalized global cooperation. To put it in a terminology that hearkens back to the more brutal age of ancient empires, the three grand imperatives of imperial geostrategy are to prevent collusion and maintain security dependence among the vassals, to keep tributaries pliant and protected, and to keep the barbarians from coming together."
—Zbigniew Brzezinski, The Grand Chessboard....]

Facts through the "UncleSamLense" -> https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/asia/1997-09-01/geostrategy-eurasia (https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/asia/1997-09-01/geostrategy-eurasia)

"...Accordingly, NATO and EU enlargement should move forward in deliberate stages. Assuming a sustained American and Western European commitment, here is a speculative but realistic timetable for these stages: By 1999, the first three Central European members will have been admitted into NATO, although their inclusion in the EU will probably not take place before 2002 or 2003; by 2003, the EU is likely to have initiated accession talks with all three Baltic republics, and NATO will likewise have moved forward on their membership as well as that of Romania and Bulgaria, with their accession likely to be completed before 2005; between 2005 and 2010, Ukraine, provided it has made significant domestic reforms and has become identified as a Central European country, should also be ready for initial negotiations with the EU and NATO...."

Interpret it in your one manner, this is from 1997....

EDIT: THIS one is pretty good -> http://www.eurasia-rivista.org/u-s-strategy-in-eurasia-and-drug-production-in-afghanistan/4670/ (http://www.eurasia-rivista.org/u-s-strategy-in-eurasia-and-drug-production-in-afghanistan/4670/)

I'm not expert in history, but when was the cold war II happened? Or did you mean World War?  :)  imo that's a nice idea, we can share about peace instead of war. But, we must prepare ourselves with the speculation news like US-Russia relationship, because their action can make impact to the society, politic, and economy of the world.  :)

Yeah as we know that usa and russian is a big country and their action can make impact especially for small and poor country i cant imagine the impact from this war ( by the way on my last thread i mean world war) will much starving people,dead,and crush evrywhere

This is just a stupid propaganda .... to fear Russian people ... to keep the Anti-US beleive in Russia ...

Russia prefer to put the fear of USA than getting food and money ...  keeping low price Vodka ... during this time Poutine can continue to put the mess around ...

And he has good excuses to buy new non working Tank ... like in the 4 May ... LoL

Army is so good as RT show ... that during the last seven days ... 3 army planes crashed  ;D

When all the main candidates for the 2016 American presidential elections (with the notable exception of Rand Paul) are arguing in favor of attacking Russia, the Russian authorities are right in warning their citizens that a war could break out in the near future. If the warmongers in the United States could keep quiet, there will be no need for the Russian citizens to believe any of this.

With regard to this news:

Russian gold reserve has been increased to $361.6 billion, which is $5.1 billion more than at the same time last year. Russian Cetral Bank aims for a "comfortable" level of $500 billion in gold within the next 3-5 years:
http://news.rambler.ru/business/30479416/

There is a certain pattern of the last years: when a country's gold reserve increases, it gets attacked by the USA, provided that county is not in a position to defend itself.

Oh common... It's just a propaganda which is spread by CBR and neoliberals. Don't let them fool you.

1) These are not the droids you are looking for... Russia's reserves but the Bank of Russia's reserves. Central Bank isn't responsible for the government obligations, it's a privately-owned puppet of IMF.
2) It's not quite correct to use the "gold reserves" term while speaking about CBR reserves. Exact definition is "зoлoтoвaлютныe peзepвы" i.e. "gold and currency reserves" or "foreign exchange reserves", and these reserves are kept mainly in the US dollars. However, the term is frequently replaced with "gold reserves" for propaganda purposes. To hide a fact that keeping reserves in the US dollar it's exactly what is needed for the United States.

Do you really believe what you are writing? http://kolobok.us/smiles/light_skin/crazy.gif I'm asking because it's ridiculous. It looks much the same as if the Bank of USSR would have bought 500 billion deutsche reichsmarks in 1942. You know, to maintain a proper position for defending itself. http://kolobok.us/smiles/light_skin/crazy.gif

never happen

Truly a nuke exchange between the U.S. and Russia would be horrible. These  leaders may doom the rest of us to a terrible destiny

Oh, yes! Very soon! Tonight in their dreams! lol

Its already happening, and has done since russia stopped them in syria.

Russia needs to make sure that they learn from history, and do not get set up as a evil aggressor, and make sure its america and uk that are seen as this. America does not go after there enemies, unless they build alot of public opinion against them, and then set them up in some way to claim they are attacking them.

So judging by history, america will try and keep pushing russia, and russia should not fall for the trap.

Russia has a strong media too, which is very important, in dealing with the witch hunt of the west against it. They need to use this to counter all the lies about it, and keep western public opinion balanced to a degree.

America will not go full out on russia, and try and keep setting them up as they have tried to push russia into doing aggresive things already. Russia has done well to hold back, but its not going to end, and keep going, as america are wanting to get rid of its nemesis in  getting complete control.

So you can be sure america has been attacking russia since russia stopped it in syria, and thats a few years now. Russia has done well to not play there game, of making russia into this evil enemy.

It all started before bush left office, but i am sure it stepped up since russia stopped america in syria.

War between russia and usa would be be nice, coz it's really nothing to watch right now.

Its already happening, and i doubt either country will go all out, as both do not want to be seen as the aggressor.

America surrounding russia, and this has been planned for ages. Just that russia stopping them in syria, americas plans for russia moved forward.

america will not attack russia, they will provoke others to do this

so many insite to make this war to happen, so guys what we gonna do if this war is really happen, are we build a banker and suply our food for 5 years maybe and live there till the war is end? :D

There are plenty of low IQ idiots there in the Eastern Europe, such as the Right Sector guys in Ukraine, Poles, Lithuanians and Latvians. If Hillary becomes the POTUS in 2016, then she can use these idiots as cannon fodder to start a war against Russia. I don't think that the major EU nations such as Germany and France will join, but a proxy war using the Poles and the Lithuanians can really stretch Russia.

Thanks for doing the sanity check. :)

Given what you wrote in part 1, I am not sure what to believe. I hoped that they were increasing the stash in metal and were just denominating that stash's value in USD for convenience. If it's really the talk about increase in holding of US bonds, then it's bad.

I also wonder why Russia is still a member of WTO and IMF, and why the heck is Kazahstan pushing for WTO membership...

Countries such as China, Russia, Belarus, and Kazakhstan should never become a part of the WTO, as WTO is always working on the interests of the Americans and their allies. For example, the WTO forces other countries to accept the cancer-infected GM corn from the United States, without any restrictions.

After watching House of Cards season 3, I don't think that is possible  ;D

US can only make diplomatic and political moves to weaken Russia. But neither US nor Russia can afford a WAR at this time of economic crisis in world.

It doesn't matter who has what. Main thing will be who will support whom? This is for sure that G7 nations will support America, but whom China will support, will decide the winner. Then there are other players too, such as India & Pakistan.

I have to agree, it's Russia we're talking about. Massive Russia, don't imagine US would do something so outrageously insane.
I'm not gonna comment on strength of either in terms of war, but one thing is certain, if this were to happen (I don't think so) it would be one of the deadliest battles.

why  and when usa attack to russia?

this world to many conflict maybe project of madara can handle  conflict in this world...:(

USA should attack Russia just like a player does in Clash of clans. Break into a particular wall showcasing attack with ground forces, while air forces destroy defense. They close in and make them surrender and destroy the town house haha. Beer party for the boys.

Sorry but what is this bullshit, i mean you can't just start a thread like that and think somebody answers with legit information.

Yeah it was Russia of course. It was Russia who have staged a neo-nazi coup d’état in Kiev.  :D

Sounds you have knowledge better about it. You can tell us what you have known here  :)

That won't happen, and don't even think about that. That is just media trying to manipulate you, these tensions are rising just because of that... Not to mention those mavericks in the US Goverment who want to deploy tanks and F-22 near the Russian border...

No one has any problem when the NATO is slowly encircling Russia, by building missile bases and army stations all across the Eastern Europe (in particular Poland, Romania, Turkey, Lithuania, and Ukraine). But when Russia does something in retaliation (Crimea, Georgia.etc), the Western media will raise hue and cry.

Well, they're not gonna do that anymore even if they were planning to because Russia is probably on cold war mode.

If US would attack, UK and some other western countries would back them, so by US it should be US+EU attack Russia, basically WW3 is on.

The United Kingdom might back the US, but other than that, I am not sure about the other members. Germany and France are likely to stay out of the conflict. The same seems to be the case with Spain, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Portugal, Czechia, and Austria. The smaller Russophobe nations like Poland, Lithuania and Estonia might join the war against Russia, but they are likely to suffer disproportinate levels of damage in a counter-attack from Russia.

What is your opinion about all the other countries backing U.S? India is also nuclear strong and will side with U.S if a war goes down. A lot of other countries will slide with U.S, what are the countries that the Russia will get primarily support from?

I don't think that India will side with the United States. The current NDA government is mostly neutral in its stance towards the US and Russia. In a probable US vs Russia scenario, this will be the composition of the warring sides:

US/NATO:
1. United States
2. United Kingdom
3. Israel
4. Saudi Arabia & GCC
5. Turkey
6. Canada
7. Japan
8. Romania
9. Poland
10.Romania

Russia/China:
1. Russia
2. China
3. Thailand
4. Iran
5. DPRK
6. Venezuela
7. Argentina
8. South Africa
9. Egypt
10.Belarus / Kazakhstan

Neutral:
1. Germany
2. France
3. Italy
4. Indonesia
5. India
6. Pakistan
7. Nigeria
8. Brazil
9. Switzerland
10.Vietnam

Its like "we already learned what world war does"

It's on RT, this news channel. I agree with you, but I don't think he's trying to say fake news.

ROFLMAO. Germany is still suffering from the consequences of the two world wars, which it had started. They lost both of them, and as a result of that they are left without full sovereignty. Tens of thousands of American troops are stationed in Germany, and even the German gold reserve is owned by the United States. So, although frau Merkel is interested in creating a fourth Reich, she will hold the horses this time around.  ;D

http://cartusers.curry.com/lackofvoicehvdt/enc/20130219152245_neocet5.jpg

Staged ...LoL all the people in Maidan was from US/EU ???

Show me where USA / EU comes with heavy weapons ... where they send troops with weapons to create a so called "free vote" ... LoL

"When crowds of people, under the orders of commanders in armored, transport vehicles, and with heavy weapons, are on the territory of another country, crossing the border, this is my sense of invasion"

If you do not like truth ... this is your problem.

Could we imagine if an external country send "faked little green men" to defend some minority in Russia ... how they could get kicked with weapons ... LoL

Always wanting to re-write the story ...

You are sure ??? Ok then let's tomorrow all EU stop to buy stuff from Russia ... and we will see again how the ecomic crisis will hit the "poor landed russia"...

Russia stand up only by selling at high price hydro-carbure... remove it like now ... and ??? days after days thousand of people go in poverty ....

The fact are there ... 3 millions of people living in Russia has been added to people living under poverty ... and 2 millions will be added soon ....

So yes then let's keep sanction ... and we will see how Russia will live ... just by building new weapons ... does we need to recall you how URSS falled ?? ....

Making 2 times the same mistake ... is just a sign of stupidity !

When you do not fear about someone ... no need to claim that you fear them all the time ... just to push propaganda .... and getting more funds for weapons build ...

Russia is in crisis actually ... and everyday we heard nothing about fixing it ... but just more escalading in the weapons terror ...

Strange 80% of RT post are about New rockets, New tanks , New nuclear ...

..... Does we need to recall you what Tstar Poutine told about Crimea ... -> WE Was ready with Nuclear weapons during our intervention ...

So ... who is always putting oil on fire ???

Strangely we do not hear the " Humanist " like you ... about Yanoukovitch escape with more then 30 billions USD to his friend Poutine .... Where do you think he get this money ???

Why do you think people was out ... in Maidan ... because they get vanished about corruption .... and wanted a better life .....

Poutine helped his thieve friend ... and send army trolls.... who is the liar ???

Open your eyes ... LoL truth is truth LoL

First you take care of the poor people living in your own country (Ukraine), rather than mocking the Russians. During the past one and a half year, the poverty rates have tripled in Ukraine. The average salaries have nosedived by as much as 50% and majority of the young people are unemployed. At least the situation in Russia is not this bad.

This type of nonsense is ridiculous. So much more so than fake oblivious op and their like spamming their 'russia being attacked by west' non sense in these forums.

Russians, you are fooling yourself if you think west is your primary concern. You got 1.3 billion rival on your borders who hate you on ethnic level - you have no room to mess around with petty concerns.

Also, RT is a propaganda arm of the kremlin.

mungen tsukiyomi can handle this confict

i still waiting for madara project xD

Nice attempt to create a Russia - China divide. But unfortunately for you, people are becoming more and more intelligent. Tricks such as this one doesn't work anymore. Perhaps it will work in low IQ nations such as Ukraine and Lithuania, but not in Russia. Both the Russians, and the Chinese have realized that the Americans are their no.1 enemy.

Russians, wear your condoms immediately! USA is attacking! lol

Fortunately I have CCR5 mutation so I'm one of these 1% who are immune to majority of HIV strains.

Hahaha RT? hahaha  :D

are you talking about Russia Today?
I highly doubt so, they'd laugh their asses off over the idea of US attacking Russia

I think that this attack will not occur. If there was a conflict between two currently strongest force in the world, it would be a lot of losses on both sides, and then it would not only conflict between these two forces, but should this conflict triggered a lot of countries that would be involved in the conflict . There would be a third world war.

USA won't attack because there's nothing to gain by doing it. Even if the war was conventional both sides would just reduce their fighting potential and possibly make themselves vulnerable to an attack by someone else  like Isis.

I beg to differ. Just like after WWII, debts will be written off and war industry will profit. And ISIS, just like Taliban/AlQuaeda is the product/weapon of USA.

Good. I have already fed up with this world. I'd like to see nuclear apocalypsis. Death of 1 or 2 billion people also would be nice, coz this planet is rather overcrowded. So c'mon America, show me what you've got.

Why US want to attack russion? it doesn't make any sense.
                                                                                                                                                                       

You have absoloutely no clue what you are talking about!!!
9,6% of the earth surface, thats 30% of the global landmass, are agriculturally utilised.
If i take another 9,6% for the people to live, this eqauls to 6745m² per PERSON on the planet!
So who says that we are overcrouded, we tend to be undercivilized and aggressive towards each other ::) :o
So dear USA, stick up your fcuking aggression and underexposed mentality up your ......  >:(

Russia is a dictatorship and dictatorships need an arch enemy. Makes perfect sense. According to North Korea we are invading them as well.

Lol it will never be.
The 2 strongest nations in the world will never attack each other. If it will happen it will be the biggest world war ever.

The LAST one dude  ;)

Why everyone say this?
It will never be a last worldwar, until humans develop a weapon that can destroy the world.

A few hundred or thousand nuclear bombs dont kill all humans and dont destroy this planet, there will be billions of people who will survive a new world war.
Nearly all people in africa, south america asia and so on will survive imo.

How can you be sure that no nukes will be dropped in Africa, Asia.etc? If a world war actually happens, then most of the world nations (including those from South America and Africa) are likely to side with one of the two warring factions. And also, today's nuclear weapons are 100x to 1,000x more powerful than those bombs which were dropped in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Even if they are dropped in Europe, the effects will reach Africa and Asia.

In Russia people know that America can be destroyed only by nuclear strikes. So the coming war must be a nuclear war

The oil fields of the middle east and the pipelines to Greece
The economic struggle over the Eurozone vs China basically war is economics now a days.

Do you know what the word sarcasm means?

Sarcasm
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sarcasm is "a sharp, bitter, or cutting expression or remark; a bitter gibe or taunt."[1][2] Sarcasm may employ ambivalence,[3] although sarcasm is not necessarily ironic.[4] "The distinctive quality of sarcasm is present in the spoken word and manifested chiefly by vocal inflections".[5] The sarcastic content of a statement will be dependent upon the context in which it appears.[6]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarcasm

It would be foolish for the United States launch an attack against Russia.

For US it is difficult to destroy the Russian nuclear warheads all at once because Russia have road mobile ICBM's which can be hide in cities and forests so it was difficult to locate all these an destroy them. Another thing is that both the countries have huge number of nuclear warheads.  so it will be foolish to say that US attack Russia.   

You should consider the sudtainability of your comments, before you make these  :o ??? >:(
Sarcasm is inappropriate on this matter  ::)

In addition, China would not be looking at being a spectator.

What kind of attack are you talking about ? Is it a cold war attack , or a verbal attack? Because USA might not have time to plan another attack since it is itself struggling through its million dollars economy. I hope this is not true.

Any major conflict with the US, Russia or China together would be the bloodiest war the world has ever seen.

I don't think so. The Chinese politicians are not that fond of Russia. In case a Russia vs United States (NATO) war happens, then China is likely to remain neutral. Once the war is over, both Russia and the US will be devastated, economically. At the same time, China will emerge as the sole world super-power, displacing the half-a-dozen or so super powers who exist as of now.

Won't happen...the two countries make enough off proxy wars as it is ;)

Subject's scholars & practitioners seems to disagree with your statement. Studies shows that even a limited nuclear regional war - e.g. India vs Pakistan conflict, a scenario dire enough to have about 20 million people dead due to bomb blasts and subsequent fires and radiation - could have consequences on a global scale due to a global cooling of about 1.25 °C (average) by killing crops & possibly starving about 1 billion people worldwide. A regional nuclear war could cause widespread loss of life even in countries far away from the conflict.

http://content.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1873164,00.html

http://climate.envsci.rutgers.edu/pdf/RobockToonSciAmJan2010.pdf

http://envsci.rutgers.edu/~robock/

https://scholar.google.it/schhp?hl=en&as_sdt=0,5

In my mind one of the biggest problems in dealing with Russian aggression in Ukraine , is that the instant the west becomes directly involved against Russian forces the whole situation is liable to slide very quickly out of control.

Haha, that’s funny. We do not have any resources available to go after Russia. We are making our own military smaller, I have family who were released from their service because of the downsizing before their time was up, we are fighting the War on terrorism still, and we just agreed to a nuclear weapon thing with Iran. We do not have the time for going after Russia, one of the few countries in the world who is seeing their economy grow and things going well. The complete opposite of us. We are not going to attack Russia. We’ll put little sanctions on Russia like the bully all full of steam and no action in the playground, but nothing else will happen.

Putin is not someone I would mess with and all of the countries in history who have gone after Russia have failed. Remember Napoleon or Hitler? Both were the biggest powers at their time and both failed the second they started going after Russia. Who says we will have a chance that those people did not have? Russia will just retreat into their country and wait out the winter while our economy gets better because so many people die and the jobs need filled. It would be foolish to try and it is all just talk to get people riled up and distracted from more important things. 

And today's nuclear weapons are much more powerful, when compared to those bombs which were dropped in Nagasaki and Hiroshima in 1945. The radiation will spread for thousands of kilometers (just like the Chernobyl incident, which caused a sharp increase in cancer rates in countries such as Sweden and Finland, which were far away from the nuclear plant).

USA to attack Russia?

Hmmmmm, perhaps you should take this seriously.

The USA is, after all, the undisputed 2 time back to back WORLD WAR CHAMPION

who is bound to "3-peat" because of their seemingly supernatural abilities.

Also, it truly does appear that God or "The Gods" favor them and their cause.

Damn those handsome devils!!! >:(

There is no any provocation from both country for now, maybe US is being busy to prepare the election for next president. I think Russia will take advantage of this situation.

Dead Hand, Russia's doomsday machine.

...Valery Yarynich glances nervously over his shoulder. Clad in a brown leather jacket, the 72-year-old former Soviet colonel is hunkered in the back of the dimly lit Iron Gate restaurant in Washington, DC. It's March 2009—the Berlin Wall came down two decades ago—but the lean and fit Yarynich is as jumpy as an informant dodging the KGB. He begins to whisper, quietly but firmly.
"The Perimeter system is very, very nice," he says. "We remove unique responsibility from high politicians and the military." He looks around again.
Yarynich is talking about Russia's doomsday machine. That's right, an actual doomsday device—a real, functioning version of the ultimate weapon, always presumed to exist only as a fantasy of apocalypse-obsessed science fiction writers and paranoid über-hawks. The thing that historian Lewis Mumford called "the central symbol of this scientifically organized nightmare of mass extermination." Turns out Yarynich, a 30-year veteran of the Soviet Strategic Rocket Forces and Soviet General Staff, helped build one.


The point of the system, he explains, was to guarantee an automatic Soviet response to an American nuclear strike. Even if the US crippled the USSR with a surprise attack, the Soviets could still hit back. It wouldn't matter if the US blew up the Kremlin, took out the defense ministry, severed the communications network, and killed everyone with stars on their shoulders. Ground-based sensors would detect that a devastating blow had been struck and a counterattack would be launched.... more

http://archive.wired.com/politics/security/magazine/17-10/mf_deadhand?currentPage=all

I'm sorry but your statement is pure nonsense.

Even the most dirty nuclear war would be far cleaner than any mediocre NPP incident. The reason is significantly lesser amount of fission products. Nuclear reactor maintains a sustainable reaction, it's a fuel cycle which goes on for years. On the other hand, the fission process in nuclear bomb is sustainable only during 100-200 ns interval, which is too short. Reactor operation results in accumilation of enormous amount of fission products while the nuclear explosion is unable to produce significant of fission products. Because the bomb vaporizes before this would be possible.

Russia Prepares Mock Nuclear
Attack On US And Britain

Russia will soon launch a mock nuclear attack against the U.S. and Britain during military exercises over the next week.
 
Moscow's Nezavisimaya Gazeta reports that Russia's strategic bombers and nuclear submarines "will deliver hypothetical nuclear strikes on the U.S. and Britain, while locating and destroying aircraft-carrier groups of the U.S. Navy."
 
The massive air, sea and land maneuvers are being conducted in the wake of America's stunning victory over Iraq, a long time client state of Russia.
 
The paper said the exercises are taking place because, "Russian military leaders have learned a lesson from the Iraq war, and intend to show the U.S. and its allies their determination to repel any potential threat coming from the West."
 
The Russian military, in plans drawn up at the request of President Vladmir Putin, argues that the only way Russia can deal with an escalating regional conflict with the U.S., would be to employ nuclear weapons.
 
Though Russia's military has been considerably downzied since the end of the Cold War, and its conventional forces hold little weight against a modern, equipped army, Russia has continued to invest heavily in strategic and tactical nuclear weapons.
 
Sometime during the 90s, Russia attained nuclear superiority over the U.S. While Russia's large, strategic nuclear weapons have remained in parity with the U.S., Russia's tactical nuclear arsenal has been estimated to include between 20,000 to 40,000 weapons.
 
At the same time Russia has continued its nuclear buildup, the U.S. has virtually destroyed its arsenal of tactical nuclear warheads. Under orders from the Bush administration, the U.S. has also been moving to further reduce the U.S. strategic arsenal. Currently, the nation's most modern fleet of ICBM, the MX missiles, are being destroyed.

http://www.rense.com/general37/newsm.htm

The former USSR achieved nuclear superiority during the 1980s, and after the disintegration of the USSR, Russia managed to maintain that superiority. The United States Armed Forces might be the most capable armed force in the world, but it lags behind Russia, when capability for conducting a nuclear attack is taken in to account.

The S-400 air-defense systems of Russia are capable of intercepting the LGM-30G Minuteman III ICBMs of the United States (which is the only American surface-to-surface missile capable of carrying a nuclear warhead). Also, the S-500, which is currently in development can intercept as many as 10 ballistic missiles at the same time.

And meanwhile, no American air-defense system is capable of intercepting the SS-18 Satan ICBM of Russia.

Obama would need aprovation of the Congress before launching nuclear attacks. Of course Russia would not just watch while the congress discuss the matter, so the surprise element will not be present. Most military won't obey an illegal act of  war to another country.

Even if Obama manages to keep it secret without Congress aproval and no one refuse to obey, Russia has informants in the high US ranks, so US won't attack first.


I wonder what would happen in case of another Tunguska event

lol, RT is not news.
In fact I'll bet on it. Anyone want to bet that no invasion of Russia happens in the next year?

Well, they,d probably need a year or so to assemble men and materiel in a staging area ahead of an invasion and it,s kind of difficult to imagine where such a staging area would be located. Poland? Ukraine? Even though these are total vassal states of the U.S. it,s unlikely that staging would be possible there. Anyway, such an obvious preparation for an invasion would equal a declaration of war rather obviously  which would mean a Russian pre-emptive strike as in wiping out said staging area.

I heard that Russia is trying to rebuild the Soviet Union and the Vladimir Putin is an insane megalomaniac who has decided to start invading former soviet bloc countries like Ukraine, Georgia, etc.  Is this true?  I'd like to know?  Thanks.

they are trying to rebuild the Russian empire from the tzars, not the USSR.

USSR was such a big failure that even KGB people don't want to redo it.

To be absolutely correct, they are trying to rebuild Russia that was destroyed through USSR, which was the result of the first colour revolution in history - the red one.

Well, that crap comes from people that have never told you the truth about anything, ever. Not even by accident. So, if you still believe those serial liars better check if you really have a pulse.

 So Russia has invisible nuclear submarine with nuclear weapon on the board.Thay can blow up wast or east coast


Thay will decide which one,rather east i think,Than China army will invide USA from one side and Russia  from second
Hackers will turn off electricity and will shuted down all systems before attack

Why so much doom and gloom. Russia has absolutely no interest in "invading" USA - it has enough with keeping its own land and borders safe and can leave destruction of USA to USA itself - no help required there.  ;)

But the new generation sub, that has started it service as part of the Black Sea fleet, sends some signals to the US ships, that for some inexplicable geographical conundrum are always to be found in the Black Sea, on the other side of the world from where USA is.

Forget it; U.S. has no number of combat troops to invade anything except small and primitive opposition that has no real capability of defending itself. I doubt that they have more than say 50,000 soldiers usable for combat operations. If that. And they certainly have no capability of occupying what they manage to bomb to smithereens and invade.

As far as I´m concerned this joke of a military is basically good for five things: 1. blowing things up on a grand scale from afar 2. mowing down unarmed civilians 3. sitting on their asses in countless bases around the world doing nothing 4. rendering other peoples´military forces utterly useless through "training" and 5. organizing drag shows.

then all the story behind the Red October is real ???

Hope its not happen as both the countries are Nuclear. Wars hardly solve any problems. They should sit together and sort out their differences peacefully

At least the Russians are limiting their presence to the former Soviet Bloc, unlike your Gaymerica which has built 800 military bases across the world. What about the 70 or so invasions Gaymerica has conducted over the past 7 decades? What about the bombing of the hospitals and orphanages in Serbia in 1999. Suffering from memory loss?

Good news everyone! Some really great drag shows coming up.

Obama to nominate first openly gay service secretary to lead the Army

By Greg Jaffe September 18

President Obama, in a historic first for the Pentagon, has chosen to nominate Eric Fanning to lead the Army, a move that would make him the first openly gay civilian secretary of one of the military services.

Fanning, 47, has been a specialist on national security issues for more than two decades and has played a key role overseeing some of the Pentagon’s biggest shipbuilding and fighter jet programs. Now he will oversee an Army that has been battered by the longest stretch of continuous combat in U.S. history and is facing potentially severe budget cuts. It’s also an Army that after a long stretch of patrolling Iraqi and Afghan villages is searching for its postwar role in protecting the nation. ....

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-to-nominate-first-openly-gay-service-secretary-to-lead-the-army/2015/09/18/d4b1aafe-5e30-11e5-8e9e-dce8a2a2a679_story.html

^ if they know what they're doing and are the best for the position what is the problem? Who cares if they are gay? Better than someone less competent getting the position.



Not that they would be able to collect anyway. But no, no invasion will happen. Russia isn't defenseless. Most that will happen are proxy wars and a lot of talk.

Disadvantages of war include death and injury of large numbers of people, loss of economic resources, destruction of the environment, loss of productivity and lasting damage to military personnel.

And if US and Russia rage war against each other probably the end of the world, both sides have nuclear weapons that can wipe all atmosphere, specially the russians.

US and Russia posses thousands of nuclear weapons respectively. That almost guarantees that the presidents of both these nations will not authorize a pre-emptive nuclear strike on the enemy. Both are likely to follow a No first use (NFU) policy. However, this can change if some lunatic is elected as the president. For example, Hillary Clinton of the United States, and her Russian alter ego, Vladimir Zhirinovsky.  ;D

A US attack on Russia, would debastador for Europe and the rest of world populations. I do not believe that to happen, especially when the Cold War was overcome. Now the enemy is not communism, is terrorism, they have been attacked in their own land.

Secret societies which run USA are trying to destroy Russia and still free parts of the world at any cost because Russia still has moral and family values they hate because those values make people strong and stable and not so easily controllable. So USA will do everything to make Russia collapse, main way is to destroy it's family values and freedom by homosexual propaganda. Most of the west is already made weak, now they are trying to take the rest of the planet under their influence using homosexual propaganda as one of their main mind control weapons.

This article shows how their mind control works
http://library.gayhomeland.org/0018/EN/EN_Overhauling_Straight.htm (http://library.gayhomeland.org/0018/EN/EN_Overhauling_Straight.htm)

It is more likely a proxy war like as always.

If you attacked Russia, DeadHand system will auto attack back. And it will send all missiles to its designated cities. Simply end of the world.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Hand_%28nuclear_war%29

With the freedom in the United States as it is, there are only one or two ways to talk people into joining the military. People won't join without a good reason, and we don't have enough military to fight Russia with our military spread out around the world like it is.

The ways to get us to join our military are:
1. Do another thing like the 9/11 inside job with Russia as the culprit this time, instead of the Arabs;
2. Crush the economy somehow, like with a bank collapse, so that people join the military just to have a job.

:)

The United States had already tried its part of Proxy war in Russia. There was serious support from the Americans for the Chechen Islamists, when the latter was fighting the Russians in the 90s. Also, the Americans have tried to instigate civil war in other Muslim majority regions of Russia, such as Daghestan, Ingushetia and Kabardino-Balkaria.

dont get nervous calm down no attacts will be made terror can never happen into europe or russia or usa or any peoples country

^ don't disagree with the idea but:


2. democratic peace theory? Never really believed it. Maybe it's easier to demonize enemies that are different and scary. And harder to do that in a democracy. But it comes down to how effective the propaganda is in the end.
3. and arming opposition forces in other countries. And training them. And financing them. And conducting propaganda to incite revolts. Etc. They don't do all this directly because it would be hard to convince the public not to complain. But it's done. And not that economic battles don't have a terrible effect on the population too. Sometimes more than direct conflict. But it's spread out in time so people don't pay as much attention.


Maybe. But probably only after they were beaten up enough that they would be easy to control later.

5. If somehow a skirmish happened the US Military far exceeds the Russian military in terms of strength

I´m not so sure about that. What kind of skirmish do you have in mind and where? If it´s on Russia´s borders it´s difficult to imagine that the U.S. would have any overwhelming force there. Any meaningful skirmish elsewhere, where would that be? Syria? What is the strength of U.S. forces in the area? I guess Russia could pretty quickly fly massive forces over to Syria if needed, it isn´t like it´s half way across the globe or anything.

Yeah kingcolex, they would never escalate some minor skirmishes. And hopefully they make extra sure that any skirmishes don´t take place at all because I guess you never say never. It´s easy to start wars but more problematic to control how they develop. So, war between these nuclear superpowers is simply out of the question. I´m sure that the people in charge realize this very well and take the necessary precautions, unless they are insane.

Hmmmmm, what the hell happened?? Did average IQ in the US suddenly jump by several points recently??

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

1/2 of Americans see their government as threat – poll

Almost half of the US population - 49 percent - regards the government as a threat to their lives and liberty, according to a new Gallup poll. Distrust in the federal government has been on the rise since 2006, when it stood at 46 percent.
The poll was conducted between September 9 and September 13, and included an open-ended question whether the US government was an “immediate threat to the rights and freedoms of ordinary citizens.” Two in three Republicans and one in three Democrats answered yes, Gallup noted.

Among those agreeing, one in five was most concerned about the government becoming too big, too powerful, and having too many laws. Another 15 percent cited violations of freedoms and civil liberties, while 12 percent cited gun control efforts and threats to the 2nd amendment.

General complaints about the government included runaway spending, “socialism,” involvement in things outside its purview, and violation of the separation of powers. Another common concern was that the government was showing favoritism towards the wealthy, or racial and ethnic minorities.

Respondents citing specific complaints were worried about freedom of speech and religion, the behavior of law enforcement agents, government surveillance of private citizens, the government’s involvement in gay marriage issues, and healthcare, as well as immigration, taxation and business regulation.

Currently, Republicans are twice as likely to distrust the government as Democrats. The proportion was almost exactly the opposite a decade ago, during the George W. Bush administration, prompting Gallup researchers to point out that “these attitudes reflect more of a response to the president and disagreement with his policies than a fundamental feeling about the federal government in general.”

However, Democrats who feel threatened by the government generally cite similar reasons as Republicans, Gallup researchers noted. Democrats were “somewhat less likely” to mention gun control and issues like marriage, taxes, immigration, government spending, or healthcare.

The poll also found that, while no single issue dominated, the three most pressing issues identified by respondents were dissatisfaction with the government, the economy in general, and immigration.

“The role and power of government remains a key issue of our time,” Gallup researchers concluded.

READ MORE: Nearly 1/3 of Americans would back military coup against government – poll

Other recent polls have suggested that voters are increasingly concerned over gun control and illegal immigration. According to a CNN/ORC poll from September 8, 42 percent consider gun policy an “extremely important” concern in the presidential campaign, while 39 percent named illegal immigration as a key issue.

A September 9 poll conducted by UK researcher YouGov indicated that a third of the country would back a military coup, and that the public perceived the military as far more inclined to act in the public interest than Congress.

Gallup’s new poll was based on a sample of 1,025 US adults over 18 years of age, from all 50 US states and the District of Columbia, with a 4 percent margin of error and a 95 percent confidence level.

http://www.rt.com/usa/316139-govt-immediate-threat-poll/?utm_source=browser&utm_medium=aplication_chrome&utm_campaign=chrome

Distrust of the government by the looks of the poll is due to spying,spending and marriage so reasonable concerns.
Economy of course still tops them all.
As for arming themselves with Guns well nothing out of the ordinary there  and with all the support for the military I can see why they would support said Coup ;D

Yes freedomno1, and to divert attention from problems at home and somehow try to unite the populace behind you there are endless external "threats" (commies, terriers, russkies, isis - once one gets too old you just create a new one) and wars. It´s certainly nothing new in the history of the world. It´s both for control and profit. The Romans were the overwhelming military power of their time but they were always under attack at least according to the people in charge. So of course they were forced to invade the "attackers". Problem solved and they got more land, resources and slaves. But it was all for peace and civilization. Pax Romana, Pax Americana.

Good answer.

America attack Russia with sling and stone.

 ;D

But it gets better. This constant war business was extremely costly and sometimes the Romans took out loans from friendly kingdoms on the periphery of the empire to help fund it. Well, sometimes when it came time to pay up friends turned into enemies and needed to be invaded, taken over and civilized. Pretty ruthless but those were the times. Nowadays it´s much more subtle. But it´s the same patterns.

Actually, that's what it is all about - the debt money system.

Debt money gives the controllers of the system (the banks), funds so that they can move forward with whatever plans they have. It improves everyone else somewhat. But there is no foundation to it. The improvements come fast, but they are not strong, foundationally, because they need to be repaid.

The only way to keep the debt money system afloat is to borrow more. The more that is borrowed, the more somebody needs to make loan payments. The whole world is on the edge of being used up making the loan payments in this Ponzi. When the loan payments can be made no longer, the debt money system collapses. But by then, the wealthy have bought up and own the land by deed.

:)

It is quite fake map of military bases. Because in Turkmenistan there are no military bases at all! The United Nations General Assembly recognized and supported Turkmenistan's "status of permanent neutrality" on 11 January 1996!

USA lost many allies.For example my country, Turkey.Turkey is a member of NATO, but not a strategic partner to states.I do not think that USA will have allies against Russia other then UK.

If there will be a war, the war will take place in Middle East at Syria, Iraq, Iran etc.

Iran is a potential ally for Russia.

Ukraine,UK, Israel are potential allies for USA.

If the econical crisis continues during 2016 that scnerio may come true.

If USA block all bank account's of Russian politicians and arrested Russian investing programs. And also ban all oil and gas trade.  Then Russia will fall down in economic chaos. Western countries have huge power on Russia, all family's of our politician live in western countries. So IMHO it will never be war between Russia and USA. Not now not in future     

Best of luck with that.  ;D

Do you even know that the United States and the European Union are the biggest importers of crude oil? Their economies will break down within days, if the petroleum and natural gas imports from Russia are stopped. Anyway, leave it. The average IQ level of the pro-NATO guys here seems to be somewhere between 50 and 60.

Well, ignorance is not knowing, and stupidity is the inability to know or comprehend.

So, it´s probably not politically correct to call that guy stupid  ;D

IMHO everyone have right to have an opinion.

Absolutely. And an opinion may be supported by facts and become an argument. But opinions alone are like ######## everybody has them.

But those facts may be fabricated or spun deceptively, you know. North Korean propaganda is also based on "facts" as millions of North Koreans believe.

you have better chance to ban food and water trading, at least people can create woodstuff and dig water pits, but normal people can't dig oil pits

water and crops to da moon  :)

Yes and the most horrible example of that in recent times is the Mongolian war. Those fabricated facts really can kill millions. Let me go over that briefly.

According to the North Koreans Mongolian strongman Balykin Sabalgiu had weapons of mass destruction and that was an irrefutable fact. To rid him of these non-existent weapons NK invaded in 2003. More than a decade later millions have been killed and maimed and millions more displaced. The NK military retreated from the country a couple years ago, tail between legs, leaving behind a total basket case with escalating violence for years to come.

Here´s NK dictator Gling Glong Glue joking about those weapons:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mdDp_jlgC9M

But that´s North Korea. Only a dictatorship could sell its populace such ludicrously transparent tissue of lies as that used as pretenses for the Mongolian war. That´s the beauty of democracy. It´s just inconceivable that an enlightened electorate could vote into power psychopaths, pathological serial-liars and homicidal maniacs.

That wouldn't be good at all...
I seriously hope that never happens! If a USA attack on Russia happened it would be the end of the world.

You just have to believe that it's not gonna happen  :) Like people who believe in a certain alt coin   :)

Sanction and economic attacked already started a year ago.

Well I see your point.  I disagree but thats' just my opinion. Now, I'm not going to start a long political discussion here. Great American present-day writer Joss Whedon said: “The news isn't there to tell you what happened. It's there to tell you what it wants you to hear or what it thinks you want to hear.” We all should be aware of that, I think.

Why would USA attack Russia instead of cutting their moneymaking lines?

Big countries like USA and Russia won't fight each other in the future, because it is stupid. That would be fun watch tho. Instead of fighting directly they raise terrorist organisations to fight for them.

Everybody knows Isis created by USA out of nothing.

Didn´t the Americans brainwash this Baghdadi guy, king of ISIS or whatever, in a prison in Iraq between 2005-9? He was their prisoner that´s documented.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/256164952/Baghdadi-Detainee-File

The Russians anticipate the obvious: The U.S. will eventually sic this ISIS terrorist vermin on them. It has already been probing. That´s why they want to wipe it out at the source there in the middle east. Which should be relatively easy, this terrorist force has no defenses against air attacks. And after that it´s just mopping up. Even the U.S. media is complaining about the half-hearted and useless U.S. operations there. Everybody sees through this shit if they have half a brain and enough time to figure out how to use it.

Where have we heard that before? Doesn't matter where isis came from, the truth is they have some support from the population. Bombing them can easily increase that support when the bombs start killing the wrong people. And that always happens in massive campaigns. Didn't Assad say something like that of the western attacks against isis? That it was just increasing their support? He should have been happy if it was that simple.


The mostly right wing american media? That is to be expected from them. It's what they are there for.

Doesn´t matter where ISIS came from? You can´t be serious. What if it´s created by US intelligence? The head of ISIS was US prisoner in Iraq for years, that on the historical record.

If it´s created by US officials would that mean war crimes trials or doesn´t it matter?

That wasn't the point of my post. Doesn't matter where they came from because americans didn't invent everyone that currently supports isis in those countries. I was criticizing what you proposed was the solution to the problem because it leads to more support for isis from all those that live through the bombing campaigns and occupation. And then to more war. And us officials shouldn't be on trial only for creating isis. They should be on trial for attacking Iraq and the hundreds of thousands they killed in the first place.

It´s true that this whole mess is the result of that invasion and the decade long occupation. But where is the evidence that this ISIS has any meaningful support from the population there? Don´t tell me that it comes from U.S. intelligence (which feed the media spin). Obviously the creators aren´t very interested in having their creature destroyed. So this spin sounds like it comes from them.

I'm still waiting for that attack. zzzz

U.S. is unlikely to do anything of much consequence in the near future. The president is a lame duck by now so things should be relatively quiet until 2017. There´ll be the same saber rattling and rhetoric but it should just muddle through.

IMO, ISIS seems to be having considerable support in Iraq and Syria, as well as in other Muslim majority nations. Recently, a survey by a reputed European polling agency calculated the support for ISIS among the Syrian migrants to Europe at around 20%. In Iraq, large numbers of Sunnis support the ISIS, as it is the only viable alternative against the Shiite militias.

I'll just leave this here:

http://i58.tinypic.com/35kv69s.png


If the countries on the left fight each other, the game is over. It would be Armageddon.

Well, if that´s true it´s bloody scary. If they continue spreading where´ll it stop? At the Israeli border?

It´s all rather murky to say the least,

It will stop when Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, Israel, and Turkey stops supporting the Islamic State. Without the foreign funding and support, the Kurds and the Shiites would have routed the ISIS by now. But now Turkey is bombing the Peshmerga positions, making the Kurds extremely vulnerable against attacks by the ISIS, and the GCC nations have stepped up their support for the Islamists.  

Well, it always helps to try to read between the (pipe) lines. Of course it isn´t the fault of interests that want to transport gas from the Gulf over to the Mediterranean that Syria is in the way  ;D

Hmm... I am afraid that the Qataris need to find some alternate route to transport their gas. Why don't they transport their gas via Israel?  ;D That will be epic. Israel gaining billions of USD in gas transit fees, from some of their mortal enemies. Or they can transport it via Iraq and Turkey, but the geography and the terrain is not that good in that region.

Israel is set to become a major exporter of natural gas in the not so distant future so they´re probably not very interested in facilitating pipelines of any competition whether through Syria or their own land.

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

The Leviathan gas field is a large natural gas field located in the Mediterranean Sea off the coast of Israel, 47 kilometres (29 mi) south-west of the Tamar gas field. The gas field is located roughly 130 kilometres (81 mi) west of Haifa in waters 1,500 metres (4,900 ft) deep in the Levantine basin, a rich hydrocarbon area in one of the world's larger offshore gas finds of the past decade.  According to some commentators, the gas find has the potential to change Israel's foreign relations with neighboring countries Turkey and Egypt. Together with the nearby Tamar gas field, the Leviathan field is seen as an opportunity for Israel to become a major energy player in the Middle East. ......

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leviathan_gas_field

"defence spending" america world police

1. Nevada was nuked multiple times
2. 3000 synchronous strikes on russian cities
3. interceptors for the few counter launches
4. strike back to where it came from
5. it's easier to wait it rot... first it was nemsov that didn't get his share from the loot, then who?
6. or wait for an event that would usa in bad shape and lead the russian to have the hedge?

for sure 6 is a trade off that this potus can't do. it's too big... skin is closer to the nose.

well USA can't even bomb isis, why you think that they can bomb Russia???

Isis is finaced by the USA and the Saudis, so why should they bomb them, there are too much interests (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_State_of_Iraq_and_the_Levant#Countries_and_groups_at_war_with_ISIL) involved  ::)

Interests of ISIS (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_State_of_Iraq_and_the_Levant#Illegal_drug_trade)
Interests of CIA (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Intelligence_Agency#Drug_trafficking)

Hmmm... related  :o ::)

isis = CIA

Trained and financed pretty sure  :o ::)

Wow, the Russians are firing cruise missiles from the Caspian Sea over two countries and what 900 miles away in Syria wiping out western trained and backed terrorist scum. Great on the ground intelligence. Should give U.S./NATO girlie-men commanders and other screwballs on that side a clue about how any military operation in Eastern Europe would turn out. Yes, it was Warsaw Bloc/Soviet territory for decades and yes the Russians still have plenty of agents all over the place. There will be some barking from small NATO doggies, U.S. lapdogs, a Norwegian and a tiny Dane. Yawn. All will be quiet on the Eastern front.

Yet another scam bites the dust...

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

The White House just abandoned the big Syria rebel training program that Obama said he never wanted

BRETT LOGIURATO MILITARY & DEFENSE    OCT. 9, 2015, 8:23 PM

The Obama administration has ended the $500 million train-and-equip program, The New York Times reports, marking a sudden end to a troubled program that was supposed to be a cornerstone of the US strategy to combat ISIS.

The program, run by the Pentagon, has been hit by setbacks from its inception.

‘Four or five’

The Obama administration’s policy toward Syria and its more than four-year-old civil war is rapidly becoming a black mark on the president’s legacy.

A scathing report by Peter Baker of The New York Times last month detailed the White House’s refusal to accept any responsibility for the program’s crash.

The blame for the failed US effort to train Syrian rebels to fight ISIS “should be pointed not at Mr. Obama but at those who pressed him to attempt training Syrian rebels in the first place,” administration officials told Baker.

At that point, there were only “four or five” US-trained rebels left fighting in Syria, according to a top US general, after a group of 60 were ambushed in August by the Al Qaeda branch in Syria, the Nusra Front.

‘The devil made me do it’

Obama’s argument, according to Baker, is that “he reluctantly went along with those who said it was the way to combat the Islamic State, but that he never wanted to do it and has now has been vindicated in his original judgment.”

But some people who worked in Obama’s administration disagree — and they’re calling him out.

“It looks like the White House would like to blame its critics for its own operational illiteracy,” Frederic Hof, a former special adviser for transition in Syria under then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, told Business Insider over email. “I don’t think I’ve ever seen any other administration employ ‘the devil made me do it’ argument to excuse and explain its own shortcomings.”

“In this case a micromanaging White House saddled [the Defense Department] with something dead on arrival due to a lopsided anti-ISIL mission (one that tried to ignore Assad) and crippling vetting requirements,” Hof added, using an alternative acronym for the Islamic State, or ISIS.

Ryan Crocker, a retired career diplomat who was an ambassador to Afghanistan under Obama, echoed Hof’s sentiments.

“How un-presidential that sounds — ‘We didn’t want to do it. We thought it was unsound, but you made us do it,’” Crocker told The Times. “It’s just indicative of their whole approach to Syria, which is not to have a policy. This is the worst thing they could say.”


Read more at http://www.businessinsider.my/obama-syria-training-program-2015-9/#xWqZX3JE5o6OwsaJ.99

if USA attack in RUSSIA,  usa will fall piece by piece i think, the russian technology its 1000% more updated than the americans , its like to fight king kong(russia) vs monkey(usa) i dont say that usa he has low weapons and technology but russia its the first power in the world.

I can't imagine that any two super-powers at this point would want to directly clash heads, because this would start a ripple affect throughout the world on so many different levels.
Multiple countries would get involved and it would effectively turn into WW3 within the week.

I don't think that USA would be at benefit to attack Russia.

https://pp.vk.me/c543101/v543101466/13714/sYyOwVXduPg.jpg

I think it's clear even without translation.

You might want to have that crack habit checked. Russia has 1000% better technology? Uh yeah...

Like circa 1980 Migs?

No. Like the Sukhoi PAK FA, which is 100 times better than your $1.45 trillion Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II.

Americans still think that the Russians are stuck with Soviet-era weaponry, and there is your mistake. During the past 10-15 years, the Russian military technology got improved by a great deal, while the American one got stagnated.

This will never happen in future because noone can really effectively invade russia.
But if it really happens as a surprise, I guess it will turn into third world war and if russia brings china to table, they may win.

Well Ukraine was intercepted by the US, so let´s wait and see what Russia and China think of that in a year or two.
Remember the Georgia Guidestones (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgia_Guidestones)...

why USA do that?do you think they will win?

No one will be victorious in a war between two nuclear powers. And Russia is too large to be "conquered". I don't think that the Americans will be able to achieve what the Mongols, Napoleon, and the Nazis failed to achieve. To conquer all that territory, they might need 2 billion or 3 billion soldiers. And might need even more to hold on to those territories.

Yup...real wars between  USA, Russia, China, etc. are Civilization Enders...weapons are just too powerful.

American military technology is 30 years ahead of released public knowledge. You also need to look at sheer numbers of these equipment. Russia has the best tank force and more nukes. That's all. The US has air and sea superiority. Bottom line is if they fight, we all lose.

The American defense spending is not well managed. They are wasting a lot of money on useless projects. The Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II project is likely to cost somewhere around $2 trillion, and still the final version of this aircraft is likely to be much inferior when compared to its Russian rival (the Sukhoi PAK FA). And you should also remember that the total development cost for the Sukhoi PAK FA is somewhere in the vicinity of $8 billion!!!

It should be:

"USA to attack Russia soon"

Also, the US won't dare. It may start WW III.

Ok, and you honestly think that russia for example is sleeping while DARPA is trying to invent something new....
Well, you are very likely to be disinformed about other nations capabilities my dear friend.
If your statement would be true, why should i wait a single day if i am 30 years ahead of my oponent? You are not able to think logically  ::)

Ad hominem attack? We know nothing of other nations capabilities because they don't do anything.

I would rather say you know nothing, than saying we know nothing... ;)

USA became the no.1 superpower after the WWII, as it stayed neutral for a long time. While the other nations such as the USSR, Germany, Japan, and the United Kingdom were facing economic collapse and loss of working age males, the Americans utilized this opportunity to boost their cash reserves by selling food and equipment to the warring sides. If they trigger a WWIII, then they will be back to where they began.

Nice point of view, nothing to add except if they really trigger a WWIII, who gonna throw the Marshal-plan-II ?

Would you rather? Where do you live?

It's all printed anyway, they would just print more $$ for as many Marshals you want

Who would print the money? Or give the material help? After world war 3 not much would remain. Because of the destruction on one side. Because of the change to the climate coming from nuclear weapon use. Because of lack of manpower and materials that had been spent for the war. Etc.

Does it really mather  ::)

The Kremlin?    ;D

 ;D :D Almost  :o ;)