Russia a "second-rate" power?

[pjohns]

Retired General Jack Keane made some very good points just yesterday morning, on FNC: He noted that Russia is "a second-rate military power," masquerading as a "superpower."He concluded, therefore (and I am paraphrasing), that the US should not take into consideration Russia's likely response (as, for instance, in Syria a few days ago), when we wish to take own military actions.Thoughts?

[Peter1469]

Russia is not a superpower, but it is certainly a regional power. As of now their artillery out-ranges ours.

[MMC]

Retired General Jack Keane made some very good points just yesterday morning, on FNC: He noted that Russia is "a second-rate military power," masquerading as a "superpower."He concluded, therefore (and I am paraphrasing), that the US should not take into consideration Russia's likely response (as, for instance, in Syria a few days ago), when we wish to take own military actions.Thoughts?

Yep, Russia is still second fiddle. For some odd reason with all the $#@! talking they do. They didn't want to test their S400 against the US and Brit Planes that just visited Syria.

But, that being said. Russia's response will come with what they do in the Ukraine and or around their border. Not with anything in Syria.

[Beevee]

Retired General Jack Keane made some very good points just yesterday morning, on FNC: He noted that Russia is "a second-rate military power," masquerading as a "superpower."He concluded, therefore (and I am paraphrasing), that the US should not take into consideration Russia's likely response (as, for instance, in Syria a few days ago), when we wish to take own military actions.Thoughts?

So it wouldn't bother you if Russia used their second rate power status against the USA mainland?

[MMC]

So it wouldn't bother you if Russia used their second rate power status against the USA mainland?

They need to start with somebody who is much simpler. Say like.....Canada. Where they wont have much resistance.

[Beevee]

they need to start with somebody who is much simpler. say like.....canada. Where they wont have much resistance.

lol
As their staging post, perhaps

[pjohns]

Yep, Russia is still second fiddle. For some odd reason with all the $#@! talking they do. They didn't want to test their S400 against the US and Brit Planes that just visited Syria.

But, that being said. Russia's response will come with what they do in the Ukraine and or around their border. Not with anything in Syria.

You are probably correct.

But I am emphatically opposed to the entire concept of "spheres of influence." So I no more think that we should tolerate Russia's interference in Ukraine than I think we should tolerate Russia's interference in Canada or Mexico.

[pjohns]

So it wouldn't bother you if Russia used their second rate power status against the USA mainland?

If any country were to invade the US mainland, then Congress should immediately declare war; and, even before that could happen, we should repel the invasion, with overwhelming force. (No, I am not in favor of a "proportionate" response; rather, I would suggest an overwhelming response.)

[Tahuyaman]

So it wouldn't bother you if Russia used their second rate power status against the USA mainland?

That is highly unlikely to happen because they know it would result in the elimination of their society.

[MisterVeritis]

You are probably correct.

But I am emphatically opposed to the entire concept of "spheres of influence." So I no more think that we should tolerate Russia's interference in Ukraine than I think we should tolerate Russia's interference in Canada or Mexico.

The US claims to have a vital national interest in not allowing a hostile nation to exist on our border. I frequently wonder if we are serious given Mexico's clear antagonistic dumping of illegals on our border.