The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

In a war between the US and Russia, the US would prevail.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/9/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 479 times Debate No: 54315
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (0)




NOTE: To keep this simple, do not include either countries allies, including international organizations like the UN and NATO, and pretend neither country has nuclear weapons. Otherwise this debate would end in a draw as mankind would fall.

For now I'll just stick to factual stuff, other, less factual things, can be brought up later.

The US has a gargantuan military, budget included, that has a presence in every continent (excluding Antarctica) while Russia's presence is mostly limited to Eastern Europe and the Arctic, with some foreign bases in the Middle East and the Far East. This is not to suggest that Russia isn't powerful, it kept most of the USSR's massive arsenal, and continues to develop new tech, as does the US. The US would prevail, but not without millions of lives lost and one hell of a fight.

I apologize if some of the numbers are outdated or off.

Active Troops:

US: 1,430,000

Russia: 766,000

Active Military Reserves:

US: 850,880

Russia: 2,485,000

Number of Bases Abroad:

US: 600-1,000

Russia: Around 10, with some under construction

Total Plane Strength:

US: 13,683

Russia: 3,082

Total Helicopter Strength:

US: 6,012

Russia: 973

Total Naval Strength:

US: 473

Russia: 352

Aircraft Carrier Strength:

US: 10

Russia: 1

Submarine Fleet Strength:

US: 72

Russia: 63

Frigate Strength:

US: 15

Russia: 4

Destroyer Strength:

US: 62

Russia: 13

Corvette Strength:

US: 17

Russia: 74

Mine Warfare Craft Strength:

US: 13

Russia: 34

Patrol Boat Strength:

US: 13

Russia: 65


The only part of your data that seems to be outdated is the the US does not have 17 corvettes, the US has none.

Now, I would like to note that my opponent conveniently left out information about basic ground forces such as tanks. I will provide this data.

Russia: 15,500
USA: 8,325

AFV (Armored Fighting Vehicle)
Russia: 27,607
USA: 25,782

SPG (Self Propelled Gun)
Russia: 5,990
USA: 1,934

Towed Artillery pieces
Russia: 4,625
USA: 1,791

MLRS (Multiple Launch Rocket System)
Russia: 3,781
USA: 1,330

From the above, it is evident that Russian ground forces are far superior to that of the US. This will be crucial and would lead to Russian victory. US forces would shatter under the pounding of the enormous amount of SPGs, MLRSs and regular towed artillery. They would be outmaneuvered, outflanked and out-gunned by the Russian tanks. In more or less open areas (esp. Russian plains), tanks would be a very important element of combat and Russia would not fail to use her advantage. Although the US definitely has the upper hand with air-force, but the US air force would fall victim to Russian anti-air systems such as the S-400. The S-400 can shoot down targets at a range of up to 400 km and altitude of up to 60 km, meaning it can hunt down targets even in space as well. A full division of these can simultaneously track 36 targets and guide 72 missiles.

Using Russia's mine warfare force, she would mine the sea around Russia and choke points (such as the Bering Strait). This would make it much more difficult for the US to use its advantage at sea. The lack of American anti-mine ships would make it so that the only way to find the mines would be to go straight into them with a ship.

My opponent mentions bases abroad. The US definitely has bases all over the place, but many are no where near Russia and do not have significant forces.

The US would also have to supply its forces at very long distances while Russia would not have to because she is massive and shipping on your own territory is not difficult.

The US consumes about 19 bbl of oil per day while only producing 8.5 bbl per day. Russia, on the other hand, produces 11 bbl per day and consumes 2.2 bbl of oil per day. This means that in a war of attrition, the US would simply run out of fuel much faster. Without oil, the US war machine would be dead.

I would like to note that my opponent has not provided any sources. (By the way, sorry for being aggressive.)
Debate Round No. 1


Cappin forfeited this round.


I have nothing to refute.
Debate Round No. 2


Cappin forfeited this round.


TheRussian forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by justindmack 1 year ago
"As of September 2013, the Russian Army has five S-400 regiments: two in Moscow, one in the Pacific fleet, one in the Baltic Fleet, and one in the Southern Military District" (Yes Wikipedia I know not the best)

5 Regiments= 10 Battalions
10 Battalions= 160 Launch Points
Each launcher carries 4 missiles (640)

I assume the U.S. military knows about these, and due to the fact that it is a United States attack, let's assume that they target them with surprise attacks with stealth planes. The regiments in the Pacific and Baltic fleets will be taken out easily due to lesser warning time because they are on the edge of Russian territory and father outside the Russian detection net than the ones in Moscow. This smaller warning time combined with the stealth features of B-2s and F-22s and the surprising nature of a first strike should allow these to be destroyed with minimum losses.

This does leave the other three regiments, and after the initial surprise it will be much harder to destroy them. However, as you can see from the numbers, Russia has a limited number of these S-400s (96 launchers after the strike). Additionally, these launchers would only carry 384 missles, and due to the highly trained American pilots with planes carrying ample countermeasures, we cannot assume a 100% hit rate. I'll say 90% hit chance on non-stealthy planes (purely theoretical number, I could find no data on hit chance) meaning about 350 planes would be committed to destroying them.

To conclude, although the s-400 is an effective air defense system, they would be destroyed in the early hours of war. It would take significant losses for USAF to destroy all 5 regiments, however, they will not negate U.S. air superiority in the conflict.
Posted by Mechanic1c 2 years ago
I might do this... I'm not sure I believe the Con, but I can make a case for it. I'll accept if nobody else does.
Posted by revic 2 years ago
I believe Russia will never be too stupid to seek war so far away so they will definately have an advantage. With the current situation, the US is the provoker and the US will be the one attacking Russia, be it in Ukraine.

That being said, I believe those numbers don't matter for the US: it's impossible that they would get all that strenght relocated in Europe. They can't even, as that would mean leaving their own country unprotected (not even talking about all the troops already deployed abroad). Russia however, can easily and very fast deploy all those troops in Europe. In other words, the US will not go to war with Russia because they know that they do not have the means to supply their troops fast enough.

I might also need to remind you that many of the US soldiers aren't paid that well (relatively) and have fought only with weaker enemies in the past few decades. We do not know how they would do against real soldiers, that are as thoroughly trained, armed and organised as them. Russian soldiers on the other hand, will be extra careful as they haven't fought for a while. The question that arises is, has the US military become weaker due to fighting easy wars? This is ofcourse from a soldier's perspective, and not from the strategicists behind it.
No votes have been placed for this debate.