Could the US Defeat Russia On Its Own

In this in-depth analysis, we delve into the hypothetical scenario of a one-on-one military showdown between the United States and Russia. Former CIA director and four-star army general, David Petraeus, believes the U.S. would dominate, but is it that straightforward? We explore the military capabilities of both nations, from ground forces to air and naval power, considering factors like equipment, tactics, and the potential use of nuclear weapons. Join us as we break down the numbers and examine the strengths and weaknesses that could determine the outcome of such a conflict. Share your thoughts in the comments and subscribe for more insightful military analyses! #USvsRussia #MilitaryAnalysis #Geopolitics

#themilitaryshow

[paulcooper]

The US doesn't need to take down all of Russia.
Much of Russia would be ok with not being part of Russia.

[mcribenthusiast]

I love how during the discussion of naval power it's showing a ship that's currently at the bottom of the Black Sea.

[annalorree]

Could the US defeat the Russian conventional military? Yes. Could the US *hold* Russia afterward? No. Could the US prevail in a nuclear exchange? No, we all lose in that conflict.

[Itravelbackintime]

Russia's only aircraft carrier can't even make it out of the port without catching on fire on it's own.

[rhettg]

Russia's navy can't project power in the Black Sea but the U.S. needs to be wary of them in the Pacific?

[XGenKaneShiroX]

As an American who lived in the USA for most of my entire life, I would say a firm and very strong *NO* to the title of the video.

[TheStruggleFest]

equipment is useless if training is junk. Quantity may have a quality of its own to a point, but quality is always the knifes edge.

[scoobiusmaximus]

So that whole analysis of Russia's navy neglected to mention how shitty Russian ships are. That aircraft carrier they have for example has spent more time on fire than in combat. It has spent most of its life in port for "repairs"

[felurfalas]

This video is really generous towards Russia--massive emphasis on being generous.

[eugenepavlov]

Comparing those numbers is pointless. Even if we are talking conventional war the question is where the potential conflict takes place and therefore how much of that military power each side can project. The fighting on US territory is something that is hard to imagine. That is also not something that Russia ever wanted or planned to do. The whole point of the Russian military strategy since the cold war is defense and deterrence, and it massively depends on nukes as a measure of last resort in that aspect. The function of the fleet is the same, it was pointed out in the video.

US fighting on Russian territory doesn’t look impossible, because it does have military presence in Europe and seems to be willing to aggressively project power very far from it’s own borders. But whether it can deliver everything it has to the continent and use it effectively on the Russian turf is a big question. Fighting on Russian territory with Russia mobilizing it’s population would be a terrible prospect for NATO and super costly in any scenario. But even if Russia started to loose in a direct confrontation with NATO which would be possible if the EU somehow managed to ramp up production and mobilize, it would resort to nukes. So the simple conclusion is: neither side is capable to take on the other in a war

[lovellewilliams]

I guess we’re going to just ignore the fact that Russia is destroying U.S. weapons

[shavar]

Not sure how accurate these numbers are after the Ukraine invasion.

[atklm]

1000 modern tanks > 1000 or even 2000 tanks from 1970's. You can't say that a 100 SU-27's equals 100 F-22 Raptors. Against Raptors, they amount to nothing at all.

[danielbelshazzaraffumaprek]

Ur analysis is like a joke. Every USA military analyst keep saying US can't match Russia Military

[jimisse]

A dog fighting for survival can laugh instead of crying. Having plenty of arms means nothing. Niger and Burkina Faso defeated France kick them out without a fight. Macron is crying now. Don’t underestimate Russia

[himiehonor]

The same US, and its mates that could not defeat the Afghans 😅😂🤣 Will the US fire conventional dollars at the Russians while the Russians fire Artillery shells at the US. Ukraine was meant to be a degradation of Russian power for the west, it has become the West Depletion Show😅

[johnharris]

Biggest Air Force in the world, the US Air Force. 2nd biggest Air Force in the world, the Combined Air assets of the US Navy and Marine Corps. Largest Rotary wing air force, the US Army.

[mohdizzulasmawimusa]

Russia can defeat the US army in conventional war if they fought equally each others..this matter also mentions by former mossad intelligent..the US army never in war agains large technology army..

[OZZEEY]

Left to the US and Russia alone without other NATO members, the US will definitely struggle. The war in Ukraine is an eye opener. Russia is fighting 30+ NATO members under heavy sanctions, yet still standing strong, while NATO nations are struggling with declining
arms production and economy.

It is public knowledge that the US doesn’t fight wars alone or without a coalition. Without NATO being the backbone of the US fighting strength, the US isn’t a formidable military threat to Russia

[adamtheninjasmith]

There's one thing people always seem to forget about the US military compared to some other countries. The entire US military is comprised entirely of people that volunteered. No forced military service. That means every single soldier decided to be there instead of being forced unlike Russia, China, North Korea, etc. Hell we have ex military guys that go out and do work of their own volition without the aid of the government. Think about that one for a bit.