dans59
|
  |
| Joined: 15 Apr 2011 |
| Total Posts: 8606 |
|
|
| 15 Apr 2014 02:47 PM |
I'm Canadian, so I don't need to be biased with any sides. I did a lot of research, as we have to do this for our History class, where we have to compare the past military power to the present, so I thought I'd share this with you.
United States of America Ranking Status 1 (of 106)
Total Population 316,668,567 MANPOWER AVAILABLE: 145,212,021 Fit for Military Service: 120,022,084 Active Military Personnel: 1,430,000 Active Military Reserve: 850,880 Total Aircraft Strength: 13,682 Total Tank Strength: 8,381 ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ Russian Military Ranking Status 2 (of 106)
Total Population: 145,500,482 MANPOWER AVAILABLE: 69,177,271 Fit for Military Service: 46,812,553 Active Military Personnel: 766,000 Active Military Reserves: 2,485,000 Total Aircraft Strength: 3,082 Total Tank Strength: 15,550 ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ Who's the stronger country? You decide. Also keep in mind about the trainings both countries do as well. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 15 Apr 2014 02:55 PM |
you didnt factor in logistics or naval forces which would just show that the us is even more strong than this |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
dans59
|
  |
| Joined: 15 Apr 2011 |
| Total Posts: 8606 |
|
|
| 15 Apr 2014 02:56 PM |
| I didn't want to have all of it there, I thought it'd be to much. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
dans59
|
  |
| Joined: 15 Apr 2011 |
| Total Posts: 8606 |
|
|
| 15 Apr 2014 03:02 PM |
But if you want the NAVY, I'd be happy to tell you.
United States of America: Total Navy Strength - 473 Total Aircraft Carriers - 10 Cervette Strength - 0
Russian Military: Total Military Strength - 352 Total Aircraft Carriers - 2 Corvette Strength - 74
|
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 15 Apr 2014 03:06 PM |
| The "Fit for Military Service" is incorrect, aswell as a large opinion. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
dans59
|
  |
| Joined: 15 Apr 2011 |
| Total Posts: 8606 |
|
|
| 15 Apr 2014 03:07 PM |
When I said "Fit for Military Service"
I don't mean hitting the gym type of fit, lol. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 15 Apr 2014 03:08 PM |
| I didn't assume that, but while we're on that subject... |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 15 Apr 2014 03:09 PM |
| its a widely accepted opinion |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
| |
|
dans59
|
  |
| Joined: 15 Apr 2011 |
| Total Posts: 8606 |
|
|
| 15 Apr 2014 03:12 PM |
| People think (this isn't coming from me) that USA has a LOT of obese people. xd |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 15 Apr 2014 03:13 PM |
| the armies of the world all have similar standards |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 15 Apr 2014 03:13 PM |
| They do, though. I don't see why people deny that. I mean, there are a LOT of macdonalds. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
dans59
|
  |
| Joined: 15 Apr 2011 |
| Total Posts: 8606 |
|
| |
|
AlteFritz
|
  |
| Joined: 22 Nov 2008 |
| Total Posts: 5936 |
|
|
| 15 Apr 2014 06:15 PM |
The US, simply because of its air and naval power.
Much of the US' technology goes into these branches, and plenty of aircraft were designed as tank busters, making Russia's superior tank numbers irrelevant.
As far as air-to-air, US has the advantage technologically and numerically, but Russia's planes are far more maneuverable and fast. Nevertheless, the US wins.
In sea power, the US wins hands down. Russia's navy has never been all that strong, and they have just 1 aircraft carrier, automatically giving the US a huge advantage. Russia's navy, though not as dated as Ukraine's, is still pretty old.
With no support from the air, the war on the ground would be fairly tough. US having again the technological and numerical advantage, while Russia has big guns and plenty of strong, modern tanks backing them up. However, Abrams have a much longer range than any Russian tank, and unless the Russians use EMP, they're going to be picked off from a long distance.
Overall, it's a US victory, especially with most of Europe backing it up. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 15 Apr 2014 06:18 PM |
| I'd like to know what propaganda-filled site you get your facts from. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
| |
|
dans59
|
  |
| Joined: 15 Apr 2011 |
| Total Posts: 8606 |
|
|
| 15 Apr 2014 07:17 PM |
@Alte,
I'd like to know where you get your facts from too. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 15 Apr 2014 07:29 PM |
well actually although the us have more numbers, quality>quantity.
russia might not have the most updated tech (then again, they don't spend trillions on it) but they do have better soldiers. the deadliest warrior* pitted the spetznaz against the green berets and who won? spetznaz.
*the deadliest warrior may be a simulation in the end but it still takes in *FACTUAL* data from *ACTUAL* people who were either former soldiers or studied in them heavily.
and a former sas soldier even said russia has better soldiers than the us and that it would make up for a lot in a potential conflict.
a fact people go missing on is that in ww2, who had the best tech and the best army? GERMANY!!!!
who won the war and beat germany? the soviets.
|
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
dans59
|
  |
| Joined: 15 Apr 2011 |
| Total Posts: 8606 |
|
|
| 15 Apr 2014 07:31 PM |
@TheH
USSR alone did not defeat Germany.
USSR could not have done it alone in WWII.
It was with the help of all the Allies who contributed in the war. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
dans59
|
  |
| Joined: 15 Apr 2011 |
| Total Posts: 8606 |
|
|
| 15 Apr 2014 07:32 PM |
| And in WWII, Britain had more advance planes than Germany, that was partially why Germany failed to take Britain over, and because Britain was surrounded by water. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 15 Apr 2014 07:33 PM |
%80 percent of german materials in ww2 were destroyed on the east.
and france and britian were both in ruin. the soviets won the war in europe for the allies by themselves and the only people who deny that are idiots from the us who think they beat everyone by themselves. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
dans59
|
  |
| Joined: 15 Apr 2011 |
| Total Posts: 8606 |
|
|
| 15 Apr 2014 07:35 PM |
I don't get where you get your facts from.
France was already taken over, and Britain was doing "ok" as in getting by, and Canada was supplying Britain with goods.
Britain did a lot on weaking their military, along with Canada, US, and USSR. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
dans59
|
  |
| Joined: 15 Apr 2011 |
| Total Posts: 8606 |
|
|
| 15 Apr 2014 07:37 PM |
| But US entered when the war was about to end basically. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 15 Apr 2014 07:40 PM |
"France was already taken over, and Britain was doing "ok" as in getting by, and Canada was supplying Britain with goods."
i said in my previous post, france and britain were both in ruin. you just epitomized what i mean.
"Britain did a lot on weaking their military, along with Canada, US, and USSR."
britain didn't do crap after stalingrad. it was all soviets from there. canada was assisting britain getting itself back up and the us was more concentrated on japan because who in asia would've stopped them?
the ussr won the war for europe, not the us or anyone else. they're the ones who conquered berlin and they're the ones crushed the german army.
|
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 15 Apr 2014 07:41 PM |
"But US entered when the war was about to end basically."
they went to germany after ww2 to hold that phony war crimes trial against the top nzi's and stole their secrets on nuclear warfare. that's it.
|
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|