U.S. vs. Russia: What a war would look like between the world's most fearsome militaries

U.S. vs. Russia: What a war would look like between the world's most fearsome militaries:



Russia's increasingly aggressive posture has sparked a sweeping review among U.S. defense strategists of America's military policies and contingency plans in the event of a conflict with the former Soviet state. Indeed, the Pentagon's senior leaders are asking questions that have been set aside for more than 20 years:

• How much are the Russians truly capable of?
• Where precisely might a conflict with Russia occur?
• What would a war with Russia look like today?

Make no mistake: Experts agree that the U.S. military's globe-spanning force would clobber the Russian military in any toe-to-toe conventional fight. But modern wars are not toe-to-toe conventional fights; geography, politics and terrain inevitably give one side an advantage.

Today, the U.S. spends nearly 10 times more than Russia on national defense. The U.S. operates 10 aircraft carriers; Russia has just one. And the U.S. military maintains a broad technological edge and a vastly superior ability to project power around the world.

Russia remains weak, according to many traditional criteria. But it is now developing some key technologies, new fighting tactics and a brazen geopolitical strategy that is aggressively undermining America's 25-year claim to being the only truly global superpower. The result: Russia is unexpectedly re-emerging as America's chief military rival.

F-22 Raptors deploy to Middle East

F-22 Raptors deploy to Middle East: An undisclosed number of F-22 Raptors of the Hawaii Air National Guard and the U.S. Air Force have been deployed to the Middle East for as long as six months.

The Hawaii Air National Guard, or HIANG, said the deployment of most of the fighters and more than 200 personnel from Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam in Honolulu took place Sept. 26 but was kept secret for security considerations.

The aircraft and personnel are now in an unidentified location in the region, which is in the area of responsibility of the U.S. Central Command.

Billions From U.S. Fail to Sustain Foreign Forces - The New York Times

Billions From U.S. Fail to Sustain Foreign Forces - The New York Times: With alarming frequency in recent years, thousands of American-trained security forces in the Middle East, North Africa and South Asia have collapsed, stalled or defected, calling into question the effectiveness of the tens of billions of dollars spent by the United States on foreign military training programs, as well as a central tenet of the Obama administration’s approach to combating insurgencies.



The setbacks have been most pronounced in three countries that present the administration with some of its biggest challenges. The Pentagon-trained army and police in Iraq’s Anbar Province, the heartland of the Islamic State militant group, have barely engaged its forces, while several thousand American-backed government forces and militiamen in Afghanistan’s Kunduz Province were forced to retreat last week when attacked by several hundred Taliban fighters. And in Syria, a $500 million Defense Department program to train local rebels to fight the Islamic State has produced only a handful of soldiers.

BAE Systems developing new, digital EW system for F-15s

BAE Systems developing new, digital EW system for F-15s: A new, all-digital electronic warfare system for U.S. Air Force F-15s is to be developed by BAE Systems under a contract received from Boeing.

BAE Systems said the system is part of a multi-billion dollar program to develop the Eagle Passive Active Warning Survivability System, or EPAWSS, an integrated system to provide enhanced aircraft protection and improved situational awareness.

"This selection builds on our extensive electronic warfare legacy, a history we were able to leverage to develop an executable, affordable, and low-risk solution for the F-15 fleet," said Brian Walters, vice president and general manager of Electronic Combat Solutions at BAE Systems.

"By upgrading to an enhanced all-digital system, the Air Force, in conjunction with the platform prime (contractor), Boeing, will provide next-generation electronic warfare capability to F-15C and F-15E aircraft to help keep the platform capable and mission-ready against current and future threats."

New carrier Ford adds more crew comforts

New carrier Ford adds more crew comforts: Just when you thought its crew comforts couldn’t get better, the Navy’s new supercarrier added a few new extras.

Life aboard the Gerald R. Ford is the envy of Norfolk’s waterfront. It is not hard to imagine why. The flattop has 6,800 square feet of gym space, wider p-ways, a mess decks design that cuts down line length, fewer racks and private heads in the berthing areas, and more than 1,000 flat screen TVs with 30 high-definition channels (instead of the eight snowy channels common to most ships).

“This is a carrier built around the needs of the people,” said Aviation Boatswain's Mate (Launch/Recovery) 1st Class (AW) Jernelle Smith, who has been aboard for one year. “It’s very different from anything I’ve seen.”

Navy Times toured the ship on Sept. 23 to see the crew's progress in moving aboard and finishing spaces. Though still in construction, roughly 1,700 of 2,700 spaces have been turned over. Everything on the main deck and below is owned by the crew. Power cables and ventilation tubes no longer snake through most passageways. Steel bulkheads and decks are now covered with fresh paint and tile — and one berthing area added a unique twist.

US Army tests remote controlled weapon towers

US Army tests remote controlled weapon towers: The tests are part of the Network Integration Evaluation (NIE) 16.1, which is currently being conducted at an experimental expeditionary base camp at Fort Bliss, Texas. The camp consists of 15 air-conditioned billeting containers – complete with latrines, laundries and shower – that can house ten soldiers each, plus two containers for tactical operations. It's here that 9,000 participants from the US Army and a 14-member coalition made up mainly of NATO nations are evaluating new technologies designed to make forward base operations more efficient in terms of energy, water and manpower.


The Tower Hawk System replaces conventional guard towers with unmanned towers set around the edge of the razor wire. It's shipped in the form of containers and the towers that can be erected in less than an hour by six soldiers with only minimal training. Each tower is equipped with a Browning M-2 50-caliber machine gun and a 338 Lapua sniper rifle, though any other gun system can be swapped in.

Meanwhile, two soldiers in the base tactical operations center sit in front of large screens providing normal, thermal, and infrared vision for watching outside the perimeter. The operators use handheld controllers, at least some of which appear to be commercial video game controllers (that's clearly an Xbox gamepad in the image below) that allow them to raise, lower, and rotate the weapons by 360 degrees, as well as fire them remotely. These are linked to the Joint All Hazard Command Control System software, which can differentiate between friend and foe, and can automatically track identified hostiles.

Lawmakers Concerned Army Commission Headed In Wrong Direction

Lawmakers Concerned Army Commission Headed In Wrong Direction: Two Republican House lawmakers are concerned the commission tasked by Congress to study the future of the US Army is headed in the wrong direction.

With four months left before the National Commission on the Future of the Army must issue its report to Congress, Rep. Kay Granger, of Texas, and Rep. Steve Womack, of Arkansas, sent a letter Sept. 30, obtained by Defense News, to the commission leaders expressing "high hopes" that it would "identify areas where improvements can be made, and efficiencies found," as budgets decline and force structure shrinks.

But the two House Appropriations defense subcommittee members said they "have some concerns with the conduct of the commission itself. It seems that the scope and breadth of the commission's work is narrower than Congress directed. The commission appears to be focused on small, incremental changes rather than comprehensive changes."