BEIRUT, LEBANON (6:00 P.M.) – In an article in the National Interest magazine, the American military expert, Chris Osborne, evaluated the United States’ chances in the event of a ground war with Russia.

The writer pointed out that the Russian armed forces have 12,000 tanks, which is twice what the United States has, stating that the data presents several possibilities in a wide-scale ground war.

The expert considered that the prediction of the likely outcome of the collision is complicated by the absence of data on the technical modernization of the T-72B tanks.

Osborne also stressed that Russia is a great land power, and the United States has “a huge naval and air force,” and in connection with that, he believed that the Americans would be able to defeat Russia, if they gained supremacy in the sky.

While war between Russian and the United States is unlikely, the comparison between their armed forces has been a topic of great discussion for several decades, dating back to the 1940s.

Share this article:
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  • 1
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
    1
    Share
ALSO READ  Azerbaijan announces destruction of 2 Armenian tanks

Notice: All comments represent the view of the commenter and not necessarily the views of AMN.

All comments that are not spam or wholly inappropriate are approved, we do not sort out opinions or points of view that are different from ours.

This is a Civilized Place for Public Discussion

Please treat this discussion with the same respect you would a public park. We, too, are a shared community resource — a place to share skills, knowledge and interests through ongoing conversation.

These are not hard and fast rules, merely guidelines to aid the human judgment of our community and keep this a clean and well-lighted place for civilized public discourse.

Improve the Discussion

Help us make this a great place for discussion by always working to improve the discussion in some way, however small. If you are not sure your post adds to the conversation, think over what you want to say and try again later.

The topics discussed here matter to us, and we want you to act as if they matter to you, too. Be respectful of the topics and the people discussing them, even if you disagree with some of what is being said.

Be Agreeable, Even When You Disagree

You may wish to respond to something by disagreeing with it. That’s fine. But remember to criticize ideas, not people. Please avoid:

  • Name-calling
  • Ad hominem attacks
  • Responding to a post’s tone instead of its actual content
  • Knee-jerk contradiction

Instead, provide reasoned counter-arguments that improve the conversation.

5 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Tartus 69
Tartus 69
2020-09-21 20:37

Oh man they always quote misinformation on purpose, such as Russia has 22,000 tanks its navy is the most technologically advanced by way of missiles radars and air defence adaptation. Plus it numbers 430 warships considerably larger than the US Navies 290. Airforce numbers are smaller but are rated as the alpha airforce, numbers on US airforce are inflated by counting long term stored aircraft that may have been in storage for over 20 years. Often with parts missing totally out teched as no upgrades have been done nor are there any pilots trained or allocated. Sure in a long… Read more »

Daeshbags Sux
Daeshbags Sux
2020-09-22 16:59
Reply to  Tartus 69

Oh, there are highly exaggerated stuff with the Russians, especially air defences quality which is highly overhyped, and in RuAF, there are many old cows. Now you’re confusing US active squadrons with retired gear that usually ends at the Davis Monthan “boneyard”

Daeshbags Sux
Daeshbags Sux
2020-09-22 17:09

If things don’t go nuclear, even an EU coalition can defeat Russia, and so would it be for China, but the weakest would end going nuclear, and since everybody is nuclear, everybody loses.

Daeshbags Sux
Daeshbags Sux
2020-09-22 17:13
Reply to  Daeshbags Sux

The only nuke power enough dumb for having started a war on another one is Pakistan, and it wasn’t far from escalating. Pak would have hit India hard, likely killing 100M, but there’d now be an “interdiction zone due to radiations” named ex-Pakistan.

Daeshbags Sux
Daeshbags Sux
2020-09-22 17:23
Reply to  Daeshbags Sux

Military planners always do war scenarios like Osborne, it’s their job to consider all possibilities, and all countries do this, some publish, others don’t. The truth is that you can’t really know the results! Israel defeated vast superior forces, had Argies cooked a good strategy, UK would had lost its fleet sent to the Malvinas isls and it took a gigantic coalition to defeat Napoleon.