Saturday, July 23, 2016

Comparing NATO Military Forces vs. Russia (In One Graph)

(Click on Image to Enlarge)

WNU Editor: Russia is outgunned in every-way .... but the narrative is that the Russians are the ones who will start a war. What's my take .... I agree with the general Western analysis that Putin is an aggressive leader when it comes to Russian affairs. But to start World War III .... I doubt it. Putin is many things but he is not suicidal.


D.Plowman said...

The stats don't tell the full story though.

That's all well and good if NATO had any cohesion, which it doesn't except for a few of the core members.

My money would be on Russia prevailing.

Simple American said...

That is a great representation of hardware and manpower.

The main wildcard, the known unknown, is the irrational aspirations and unbridled misteps by President Putin in Northern Hemisphere relations as it continues.

It is beyond the ability of all reasonable military and diplomatic bureau to understand Mr. Putin or to anticipate his next middle finger to the modern international peace and stability.

The same goes for President Xi. We are not dealing with rational actors anymore, even at the first tier of nation states.

Really sad great civilizations are represented by such......

Jay Farquharson said...


Putin and Xi are easy to read.

Western leaders seem to be insane. Take Lybia for example:
1) Get UNSC No Fly Zone,
2) Use No Fly Zone to kill the Lybian Military and Government,
3) ?????????????????????????????
4) Neoliberal Democracy and Oil Contracts!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Alex said...

They forgot to check the math of their own graphics before publishing. The Russia numbers don't add up to the total.

aaa said...

I agree that Russia, by itself, is outgunned. However, a few things need to be taken into account:

1. A big portion of NATO is U.S. troops and hardware.

2. Would the U.S. even come to NATO's aid? The U.S. has no appetite for war at the moment and there's a possibility that NATO would only get a hashtag response from the U.S. (see #BringBackOurGirls)

3. The U.S. and most European countries are in no shape for war. Debt, disunity, weak leadership, corruption, shrinking military budgets...and things seem to be getting worse.

4. If there ever is an attack by Russia on a NATO country, it would likely be accompanied by an attack by China on one or multiple countries that it's having border disputes with, as well as an attack on South Korea by the North.

The question for Putin is, would the U.S. get involved. My bet is no, they wouldn' least not for the Baltic states. Probably not for Japan either. The U.S. right now is afraid of war and afraid of confrontation.

Alex said...

They forgot to check the math of their own graphics before publishing. The Russia numbers don't add up to the total.

Simple American said...

I agree that the Chines would join in. What is the answer to the question, why would President Putin or the Chinese want to wage war? This I don't understand. What is the value for either party, for either country. Destruction, nuclear devastation, breakdown of societies.

Why to take suc a chance. This again is the wild card. It serves no purpose, even for the victor. Irrational leadership is the cause. The world can no longer afford first tier leadership, playing chicken with nuclear apocalypse.

The Olympic doping attitude is another example of noncompliance With international standards.

So to close, if President Putin or President Xi would even attempt to play by the loose international standards expected, there would be absolutely no chance of conflict between to great powers.

Jay Farquharson said...

Just like Saddam letting the Inspector's back in to finish their work, and complying with the UNSCR would stave off the US invasion,

Ooops, not so much.

Or the made up viagra/ rape/ genocide claims against Lybia.

Simple American said...

Or how about, Kuwait doing horizontal drilling in Saddams oilfield and being told by the us ambassador that the us had no interest in what Irag did. I agree, with your premise that the West, specifically the US, has a lot to answer for.

But bring it back to present, the question still stands, why would President Putin or President Xi seriously think that the US or NATO would want to disrupt either home country. That is not the case, they simply are looking for a minimum compliance with international standards.


Jay Farquharson said...

Ask the Cookie Monster about the Ukraine Coup.

Elements of the US Government Establishment have had a hard on for breaking Russia, since it was the Russian Empire.

Google Brezinsky. Ex Facist, ex Polish Prince, Carter's NSD, founded Islamic jihad 6 months before the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, founding father of the Taliban, al Quida, Islamic Jihad, ISIS, Boko Haram, Etc.

"What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?"
Interview with Le Nouvel Observateur, Paris (15-21 January 1998).

Simple American said...

Thank you for your response. All points well taken. I appreciate your knowledge. You are so right, sir. But like Japan, after their defeat, isn't it ever feasible to find common peaceful ways to coexist with former enemies and allies?

If not, well then, I feel sad. Because it seems to me we both see the errors of the past, are able to access blame, but must turn away from war. If for no other reason, there will be no winners. No chest thumping. Only the desire to turn the clock back.

Anonymous said...

This figure misses the point. Russia can focus more power than NATO at the point of engagement. They are a land power where it counts. They can mass more troops and material quickly against its neighbors borders than can be moved by land, sea and air by NATO. By the time NATO (read American's) can mass their formations to counter a Russian invasion the conflict would be over for weeks. The other NATO powers are either hollowed out shells or conflict averse.

That is the ugly truth about conventional warfare at the Russian border.

Jay Farquharson said...

A large element of the US Establishment, has no interest in peace with Russia.

That's why, the Warsaw Pact got loans and assistance after the fall of the USSR,

and Russia got nada while 22 million Russians died.

fazman said...

Problem is putin will make the call and USE the forces he has.Nato will hold meeting after meeting to agree to a response and by then it will be to late all the state if the art gear will remain shiny and new.

Young Communist said...

I am returned from a summer meeting of European Left at Chianciano Terme (very good place)in Tuscany (Toscana).

Before I go to sleep... I have see reports from our comrades of Moldavia that the political corruption and the push for end the neutrality of that country and others in the area, is beyond your imaginations.
They are really scared.

E.U. neoliberist partnership is clearly used as civil hand of NATO.
Trump diplomacy line is a false hope, is only a matter of time.

randy mull said...

There are to many things off on this graph as far as numbers go, but putting this aside or that America makes up a large portion of the Nato numbers and are to spread out to be able mass in the area in time to counter Russia the biggest issue is the European military. They lack Force Projection and a lot of their equipment is out of service if they could even get it to the battle field in time.

So outside of Britain and Frances small expeditionary forces the vast majority of these Nato forces couldn't make it outside their borders into their neighbors country in any meaningful numbers might a less to Poland or Ukraine.

So in reality America given 3-5 months if faced with no opposition could mass about 250k fully equipped men on the Russians border with 50-60k European troops who were lightly equipped. So if Russia is gracious and sits back like Saddam did and just waits while we build an Army next door to invade it will be a much more even fight than this graph shows.