Instigator / Pro

The USA has a stronger military than Russia


Waiting for instigator's argument

The round will be automatically forfeited in:
Debate details
Publication date
Last update
Time for argument
One week
Voting system
Open voting
Voting period
Two weeks
Point system
Four points
Rating mode
Characters per argument
Required rating
Contender / Con
1. No forfeiting
2. No trolling
3. No excessive cussing
Round Format
R1: Opening statements
R2: Rebuttals
R3: Defense
Round 1
     USA - The United States of America, a country of 50 states covering a vast swath of North America. [] Stronger - More able, competent, or powerful in a specific field. [] Military - the armed forces. [] Russia - A transcontinental country in Eastern Europe and North Asia. [] I shall now present my arguments on five fronts:
  Military Technology:
   Common propaganda considers American technology superior to that of Russia, yet Russia’s military has been more successful in recent conflicts, while the US has not. American wars in the Middle East became multi-year quagmires, in comparison to Russia’s rapid victories against Georgia and Ukraine. Most people consider Russian technology to be "Quantity over quality". Contrary to common understanding, I apply this phrase from a different perspective to the Russian military. To illustrate what I mean, take a look at two scenarios: First, Country X has terrible military technology; and they are massed. Second, Country Y has great weapons technology; and they are massed. Russia is an example of Country Y.

  Throwing as much as they can muster into the fight is a classic Russian strategy:
  • 22,170 MBTs, 3 times more than the US. 
  • 70 Corvettes, 35 times more than the US.
  • 17 Submarines, 9 times more than the US.
  • 449,000 personnel, 41 times more than the US.
  Military Campaigns:
  The US intervention in the war in Afghanistan, soon to enter its 18th year, is the longest-running conflict in American history. US-led forces managed to root the Taliban out from the country’s major cities, but have since been locked in guerrilla fighting as the Taliban still controls and contests much of the rest of the country. 
  Contrast Russia’s experience. In 2008, it launched a surprise invasion of Georgia, a small country on its southern border. Georgia’s two secessionist regions, South Ossetia and Abkhazia, worked quickly with Russia’s military to declare and secure independence. The war officially lasted less than a week, as Russian forces quickly overwhelmed Georgia’s army.

  Ask yourself: Do we know how much our adversaries spend on their military, and what they are getting for their money? Russia, for example, presents a glaring problem for academic and policy circles alike. Most comparisons are done in current U.S. dollars based on prevailing exchange rates, making Russia’s economy seem the size of South Korea’s. This approach is useless for comparing defence spending, or the country’s purchasing power. Yet, it is used frequently to argue that despite a large military modernization program, and a sizable conventional and nuclear deterrent, Moscow is a paper tiger. As a consequence, the debate on relative military power and expectations of the future military balance is warped by a low-information environment.

  The American Army was led by a Ukraine asset, although he is not technically Russian, Ukraine employs Russian technology, tactics and training, which proves that the Russian military is made up of more than a bunch of California gangsters. If you consider the American Army strong at all, it is because of the strength of this Ukraine commander. 

Round 2
Not published yet
Not published yet
Round 3
Not published yet
Not published yet
--> @AvoidDeath
You did not abide by your own "No forfeiting" rule.
--> @Ragnar
Thanks, I just checked my opponent's profile and I reckon I'll need that luck.
--> @AvoidDeath, @VonKlempter
Good luck!
--> @AvoidDeath
Infographics Show did a good comparison:
--> @oromagi
Nope, he is a Ukranian asset now. Maybe he will be a Zimbabwean one next week.
An army is only as strong as its commander, and America's commander is a Russian asset. Therefore RU is stronger.
This is pretty much a truism.
No votes yet