User blog comment:Battlefield3EX/Who would win in a fight US or Russia in a WW3/@comment-68.56.191.214-20111013144246/@comment-2224289-20111013161235

Biological and chemical weapons are restrictingly forbidden by the Geneva Protocol, which Russia glamourously signed. Maybe the US is retiring their military supplies because they don't need them (as most of it was a "just in case" equipment for a eventual WWIII during the Cold War, hurr durr), and instead of wasting the American taxes on the military, they can spend it on health and education. We're looking just like on post-WWI era, a Golden Age between the military powers and they retire and civilize the military bases. Now look at January 1942, the Pearl Harbor attack was a wake-up for the US, and they bonded togheter and their military construction and spendings went over the scale as you can see here. The US can wake up as a sleeping monster under attack, just as the NATO standards let us able to do.

Unlike China, as you speak, that doesn't give a CRAP about their population but only on their "looks" that they give to the Western World. But I don't see China and North Korea winning against NATO unless they really decide to nuke-tube them (which NATO does have response, either nuking them back or putting the ICBM defense network effective).

Don't really see what is your conclusion, the US can spend again their money on the military if they need it, but with the current debt I don't see the use for the population they're working on protecting