Russia cannot afford a war. It simply doesn't have the money or military to go against USA and Europe. And, no, China is not going to help them out
I suppose it's monetarily/mechanically true, but it's almost like saying you can afford a new car when your life insurance pays out.
With the cults-of-personality in place throughout Russia, China, North Korea, and the US, I'm nowhere near believing that such a person is in the right place, but I suppose that's the difference between hope and fact.
I think I have an idea of who will be invading, escalating, and hoping there won't be consequences.
Russia has been working on strategies for limited use of nuclear weapons; they don't believe in MAD. It's called Escalate to De-escalate:
https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2017-02/escalate-...
https://www.defensenews.com/smr/munich-security-forum/2018/0...
https://thebulletin.org/why-russia-calls-limited-nuclear-str...
It's as crazy as it sounds; a miscalculation could destroy humanity. Consider that their ability to significantly influence foreign publics through social media could be valuable for the de-escalation portion. No doubt we'll see people claiming (false) equivalency between Russia's and the U.S.'s actions - 'they bombed Japan, we bombed Ukraine'.
Would having a single known enemy make for a more unified and ultimately productive world?
Probably sounds ridiculous to anybody steeped in the current wave of anti-Russian hysteria in the American media (or the earlier wave in the 80s). Why somebody might be producing warmongering propaganda against Russia I don't know, but clearly I'm supposed to take it as an unquestioned first principle that of course Russia is out to get us (as if we weren't busy "getting" ourselves) and of course Putin is the bogeyman -- Putin, a guy who has something like an 80% approval rating among his people and whose every public speech seems to be about conciliation, cooperation and peacemaking. Something isn't quite right. (Probably both sides are full of shit.)
Anyway no one has ever invaded Russia and won, including Napoleon and Hitler. Russians are proud of that. Their navy is about 2/3 as big as the US, but if what you're defending is most of Asia (an ocean of dirt) maybe that's not the biggest concern. Anyway if China does join in, their navy is comparable to the US's, and together with Russia's, it'd be bigger.
The Russian air force is tiny (same for China) but given that all our aircraft carriers are basically sitting ducks for all the various Russian carrier-busting missiles they have nowadays, our air superiority might not matter as much as we'd like to think. Also they tend to stretch money further. Their jets are fairly cheap, indestructible metal cans with loose tolerances... kind of like flying AK-47s... while ours are exquisite and expensive (because they're made out of porkbarrel) and you have to walk the airfield and pick up every little bitty piece of debris before you take off, otherwise it might suck something in and choke... so the equivalent of a flying AR-15 that always jams.
That's clearly not true, as recent history shows, unless one has a fairly broad definition of what Russia’s “own territory” is.
No, it wasn't, though much of it was politically, through conquest, part of Russia for a couple centuries (and a bit more of of it for just over one century) prior to the formation of the USSR, and there was certainly an intense effort by Russia to colonize Ukraine with Russians to break it's distinct culture during that period where much of it was under the Russian imperial rule.
Clearly, you view Russia’s own territory as anything that has ever in the past been subjugated by Russia independently of where modern nation-states lie, and in that respect, sure, Russia may be primarily concerned with fighting wars to re-establish empire in those places.
But that's not a sign of a peace-loving nation, but instead of a warmongering imperialist one that prioritizes restoring it's “glorious” past.
This is way off. The USN is about 4x the size of the Russian navy and about 5x that of China.
Except the Mongols.
Pride in this myth is one of the reasons often given for why the New Chronology and the associated conspiracy theory of how all of what is held to be history prior to the middle ages is a fabrication (and much of that of the middle ages, too), since that allows the idea that the Mongol invasion never happened.
> Anyway if China does join in, their navy is comparable to the US's, and together with Russia's, it'd be bigger.
Numerically, maybe, but numerical comparisons aren't comparisons of capability. (Ditto with the comment on Russia’s Navy.)
It is much cost-effective and efficient to engage in low-intensity sabotage while making an innocent face, scaring the population, and balancing in the gray zone.