Johnw1104 said:
Russia has absolutely no hope of sustaining a prolonged war as with each passing year they grow weaker. Their economy is in shambles (seriously, a drop from $2.2 trillion in 2013 to around $1.5 trillion today GDP), their diplomatic position is weaker than its ever been, and their reputation across the globe is in the gutter. The one thing they had going for them were their relations with China, but those have been chilling for ages now and there's absolutely zero chance China would actually engage the US in a war on Russia's behalf, both because their military is no where near prepared for such things and because the US is essential to their continued growth. Right now their best hope would be to deliver a kind of non-nuclear knock out punch early (unlikely) or keep the war localized in the form of a "proxy war" (a bit more likely), as they would have zero hope against a US/NATO coalition in the long term. They have an exceedingly strong military and navy, but those matter little when after a few months you can't afford to keep them in the field, and much of your territory across an enormous expanse is kept in check via expensive occupations (Crimea, Chechnya etc). Russia's erratic, reckless behavior as of late are signs of desperation, not strength. What would almost certainly happen is Russia would be chased out of its positions abroad and peace talks would begin once they were largely contained to Russia proper, as at that point there'd be no benefit to anyone if the war went any further. People certainly aren't interested in invading Russia, fighting those large armies, or pushing them to a desperation point that they might actually contemplate using nuclear weapons (wouldn't put it past Putin), and Russia's economy is already on the brink without a full scale war as it is. There's only two real reasons Russia has been so adamant in their defense of Assad: Assad leases them their only year-round warm water naval port in the Mediterranean and is the only nation in an important region of the world that they share close ties with (the warm water naval port is also the primary reason Putin wanted Crimea, as it has one that is available for use for most of the year in the Black Sea). If war broke out and the US/NATO forces immediately destroyed Tartus (the leased naval port), and you can be assured they would do that virtually day 1, and thereafter they actively fired upon the Assad regime, most of the motive for the war would vanish in an instant. For that reason I can't really see it ever venturing much beyond a short proxy war, though no doubt there'd be all kinds of threats and bluffs thrown both ways. The only country that would actively benefit from a full scale war, after all, would be a neutral China sitting back and watching. All countries involved know total war is not in their best interest, which is why we've been fighting proxy wars for decades now. |
You are really the special kind of stupid, arent you?. All this nonsense you flame here is but your wishfull thinking. I'll ask yoy one more time - who will be those brave men who will go and kill Russians in fucking Russia? French or maybe German? Id like to remind you that they all tried allready, and failed hard at that. Full scale war means millions will be dying from both sides, can you morons sustain that? You cant do shit bout Afganistan for a decade...
User moderated - Bristow9091
Last edited by Bristow9091 - on 14 April 2018
