Discussion Russia vs North America or Russia vs USA alone land wise and resources?

[Remobz]

As we know Russia is the largest Country with a land mass full of natural resources and wealth. If Russia was isolated, it could survive on its own due to its vast land and natural resources available. Russia looks like a formidable force indeed.

What if the USA was isolated. I mean all shipping lanes cut off. Would USA be alone to survive or would North America (NAFTA) working as one large entity help each other?

Or better yet, USA and Canada are the closest trading partners and allies. They both have agreements to defend each other and work as partners in many areas. If one lacks something, then the other covers the slack and so on.

If, any enemy invaded USA, then they would have to conquer Canada as well and vice versa.
Meaning any enemy would have to deal with two allies covering over 18 million square km. A land area larger than the whole of Russia.

Am I looking at this the wrong way? What do you think?

 

[Jaskalas]

All shipping entirely cut off seems WAY too hypothetical.
No nation would function under those conditions, unless already predisposed and prepared for it.
Which case, all else being equal, Russia has proven itself far less than the second best army. Sure they (had) numbers... but it is extremely dysfunctional and outdated.

Furthermore, any actual war between us on our own soils would devolve into nuclear weapons. Rendering the entire planet and all other considerations moot.

 

[Remobz]

All shipping entirely cut off seems WAY too hypothetical.
No nation would function under those conditions, unless already predisposed and prepared for it.
Which case, all else being equal, Russia has proven itself far less than the second best army. Sure they (had) numbers... but it is extremely dysfunctional and outdated.

Furthermore, any actual war between us on our own soils would devolve into nuclear weapons. Rendering the entire planet and all other considerations moot.

I was struggling how to word it. LOL!

What am I am trying to say is that can USA and CANADA since they are SO CLOSE in many ways be considered almost one entity working as one?

when I hear people ask, what if this Country attacked USA or this other Country. I always assume they will attack BOTH USA and Canada as one large cohesive entity. Canada will always automatically enter the fight as well.

Do you understand what I was asking? Do you agree with my way of thinking here?

 

[alien42]

Am I looking at this the wrong way? What do you think?

yes, i think your hypothetical is absurd and lacking any real forethought.

 

[IronWing]

I was struggling how to word it. LOL!

What am I am trying to say is that can USA and CANADA since they are SO CLOSE in many ways be considered almost one entity working as one?

when I hear people ask, what if this Country attacked USA or this other Country. I always assume they will attack BOTH USA and Canada as one large cohesive entity. Canada will always automatically enter the fight as well.

Do you understand what I was asking? Do you agree with my way of thinking here?

I understand your idea but NATO is still alive and well. An attack on Canada or the US brings a response from Europe.

 

[Indus]

As we know Russia is the largest Country with a land mass full of natural resources and wealth. If Russia was isolated, it could survive on its own due to its vast land and natural resources available. Russia looks like a formidable force indeed.

What if the USA was isolated. I mean all shipping lanes cut off. Would USA be alone to survive or would North America (NAFTA) working as one large entity help each other?

Or better yet, USA and Canada are the closest trading partners and allies. They both have agreements to defend each other and work as partners in many areas. If one lacks something, then the other covers the slack and so on.

If, any enemy invaded USA, then they would have to conquer Canada as well and vice versa.
Meaning any enemy would have to deal with two allies covering over 18 million square km. A land area larger than the whole of Russia.

Am I looking at this the wrong way? What do you think?

Your thinking is absurd.
Militarily you can't block off the US both coasts..
Remember the US has 10 aircraft carriers,
and like 3 more in reserve.
Most other countries don't even have three.
Whatever tried to invade would be sunk before it could land.

That said if you in your hypothetical world..
Say both Russia and USA were surrounded by Aliens..
and they build an inpenetrable forcefield
and we couldn't get out..
and had to get everything from within..

the main problem would be FOOD & WATER.

As far as Russia's resources goes.. sure it can survive but it needs to IMPORT FOOD because most of the time it's too cold to grow anything. So you can starve them out. As for the US.. we EXPORT FOOD so we have plenty for ourselves.

However water wise.. Russia gets tons of snow which can be melted. The US is actually facing droughts due to climate change.. especially the south west!

 

[nickqt]

You're aware of the US Navy and the US nuclear arsenal?

The United States could destroy the rest of the world if the entire rest of the world decided to try to destroy the US, as should be expected, nevermind any notions of nationalism.

Russia is having problems taking some land from its version of South Carolina.

The Russian people, god bless them, have been trampled by Kings and Dictators for as long as there has been Russian people. They deserve a lot better, but they're essentially Stockholm Syndromed into being happy they have electricity and food.

 

[woolfe9998]

OP's military hypothetical is absurd. But it got me interested in the comparison of natural resources.

Which 10 Countries Have the Most Natural Resources?

Commodities are the raw materials used for products manufactured worldwide. This article lists the top 10 countries with the most value in natural resources.

www.investopedia.com

Russia has a lot of resources for a country that can't even beat a country with less than a third of its population and probably a fifth of its resources in a shooting war. That's what corruption does.

1. Russia​

Russia's natural resources reserves are worth $75 trillion by Statista's estimate. This amount incorporates, among other things, coal, oil, natural gas, gold, timber, and rare earth metals. Russia's Ministry of Natural Resources and the Environment produced a much lower estimate of $910 billion in 2019.

Russia holds the world's largest proved natural gas reserves at 1.32 quadrillion cubic feet, accounting for nearly 20% of the global total as of 2020. Russia also has the second largest gold reserves at 6,800 tons, or more than 12% of global total as of 2021.

Russia was the world's third-largest crude oil producer at 12% of global supply in 2020. Russsia's proved oil reserves were the world's sixth largest at an estimated 107.8 billion barrels.

In industrial diamonds, the country accounted for a third of 2021 global production and 61% of the commodity's reserves.

2. United States
The estimated value of natural resources in the U. S. is $45 trillion, almost 90% of which are timber and coal. In fact, the U.S. is the leading producer of coal. As of 2020, it had the largest proven coal reserves in the world.

Other resources include substantial copper, gold, oil, and natural gas deposits. Also making the list are lead, molybdenum, phosphates, rare earth elements, uranium, bauxite, iron, mercury, nickel, potash, silver, tungsten, zinc, petroleum, natural gas, timber, and arable land.

 

[Jaskalas]

The Russian army is currently in shambles, with almost all of it inside Ukraine.
That becomes a major issue in this scenario. They are spent.

 

[zinfamous]

For all the resources Russia has, they sure are wonderful at using them to create an impoverished, kleptocratic mafia state with an hilariously incapable military running off of 40 year-old+ technology.

....not afraid.

 

[sdifox]

You saw what happened in Ukraine and think this is worth posting?

After Ukraine beat Russia senseless, the PRC will annex Siberia.

 

[ralfy]

There's no need for anyone to attack the U.S. because it will likely fall on its own weight, i.e., more moving away from the dollar while its debts, now totaling over $90 trillion plus $180 trillion in unfunded liabilities, continues to go up. Even now it can barely pay for the annual interest on previous loans.

 

[you2]

OP's military hypothetical is absurd. But it got me interested in the comparison of natural resources.

Which 10 Countries Have the Most Natural Resources?

Commodities are the raw materials used for products manufactured worldwide. This article lists the top 10 countries with the most value in natural resources.

www.investopedia.com

Russia has a lot of resources for a country that can't even beat a country with less than a third of its population and probably a fith of its resources in a shooting war. That's what corruption does.

1. Russia​

Russia's natural resources reserves are worth $75 trillion by Statista's estimate. This amount incorporates, among other things, coal, oil, natural gas, gold, timber, and rare earth metals. Russia's Ministry of Natural Resources and the Environment produced a much lower estimate of $910 billion in 2019.

Russia holds the world's largest proved natural gas reserves at 1.32 quadrillion cubic feet, accounting for nearly 20% of the global total as of 2020. Russia also has the second largest gold reserves at 6,800 tons, or more than 12% of global total as of 2021.

Russia was the world's third-largest crude oil producer at 12% of global supply in 2020. Russsia's proved oil reserves were the world's sixth largest at an estimated 107.8 billion barrels.

In industrial diamonds, the country accounted for a third of 2021 global production and 61% of the commodity's reserves.

2. United States
The estimated value of natural resources in the U. S. is $45 trillion, almost 90% of which are timber and coal. In fact, the U.S. is the leading producer of coal. As of 2020, it had the largest proven coal reserves in the world.

Other resources include substantial copper, gold, oil, and natural gas deposits. Also making the list are lead, molybdenum, phosphates, rare earth elements, uranium, bauxite, iron, mercury, nickel, potash, silver, tungsten, zinc, petroleum, natural gas, timber, and arable land.

While you are answering the op question; the problem as i see it - the op failed to asked who had the most natural resources AND technology+infrastructure to utilize those resources. IF we assumed borders were actually closed from allies that can be reached via land routes I would speculate that Russia would fail catastrophically due to lack of technology (this presume both sides refrained from going nuclear); if we include neighbors then things become more interesting since we presume China would provide manufacturing for Russia (though this is not a given); and USA could lean on Canada as well as Mexico.

As we are seeing from Ukraine/Russia war - Russia is heavily dependent on others for manufacturing due to lack of technology and infrastructure.

 

[woolfe9998]

While you are answering the op question; the problem as i see it - the op failed to asked who had the most natural resources AND technology+infrastructure to utilize those resources. IF we assumed borders were actually closed from allies that can be reached via land routes I would speculate that Russia would fail catastrophically due to lack of technology (this presume both sides refrained from going nuclear); if we include neighbors then things become more interesting since we presume China would provide manufacturing for Russia (though this is not a given); and USA could lean on Canada as well as Mexico.

As we are seeing from Ukraine/Russia war - Russia is heavily dependent on others for manufacturing due to lack of technology and infrastructure.

But given their population of 145 mill and their natural resources, they really ought to have the technology and infrastructure. The reason they don't have it is because half the tax money their government takes in is stolen by Putin and his cronies. Example: there is a public works infrastructure project, and the contract is awarded to a Putin crony who is paid double for the work. So it could have been two infrastructure projects instead. Or the crony may have used cheap, substandard materials. How do you think this plays out with military contracts?

Corruption will make a country with loads of resources weak.