QA回答：俄羅斯與美國的軍事實力差距有多大？請客觀分析

Toma? Vargazon
Let’s put it this way.

我們這樣說吧。


Ukraine in orange, Iraq in green
Back in 2003, USA (with UK) invaded Iraq. It had fairly modern weaponry, a large mobilized army that was prepared to face the invasion. USA was fighting on the other side of the world, Saudi Arabia prohibited the use of their territory and Turkey didn’t want to join the coalition, so all the forces were coming in from Kuwait. Iraqis knew exactly where Americans were coming from and had ample time to prepare. Americans were fighting almost 10,000 km from their home.

烏克蘭橙色，伊拉克綠色
回到2003年，美國（與英國）入侵了伊拉克。伊拉克擁有相當現(xiàn)代化的武器裝備，一支龐大的、已動員起來準備應(yīng)對入侵的軍隊。美國在世界的另一端作戰(zhàn)，沙特阿拉伯禁止使用其領(lǐng)土，土耳其也不愿加入聯(lián)軍，所以所有部隊都從科威特進入。伊拉克人清楚地知道美國人從哪里來，并有充足的時間準備。美國人距離他們的家鄉(xiāng)將近10,000公里。

The war lasted six weeks and took fewer than 200 coalition lives, 139 Americans and 33 British soldiers died, approximately 600 were wounded. Saddam was removed from power and a new government installed. You can quibble about what happened later, the army part was done flawlessly.

戰(zhàn)爭持續(xù)了六周，聯(lián)軍傷亡人數(shù)不到200人，其中139名美國士兵和33名英國士兵陣亡，約600人受傷。薩達姆被趕下臺，新政府成立。你可以對后來發(fā)生的事情吹毛求疵，但軍事行動部分是完美無瑕的。

Back in 2022, Russia invaded Ukraine. Ukraine too had some modern weaponry, but was caught by surprise. No one in Ukraine thought Russia would launch the invasion, it would be outright silly. Russia was fighting on their border, within 400 km of Moscow even and invaded not only through Russia, but through Belarus as well, driving hard for Kyiv. Ukraine had only about 24 hours to prepare, that’s when Ukrainian high command realized the Western intelligence was right.

回到2022年，俄羅斯入侵了烏克蘭。烏克蘭也擁有一些現(xiàn)代化武器，但被突襲。烏克蘭沒有人認為俄羅斯會發(fā)動入侵，那將是徹頭徹尾的愚蠢行為。俄羅斯在其邊境作戰(zhàn)，甚至距離莫斯科不到400公里，不僅通過俄羅斯，還通過白俄羅斯入侵，直奔基輔。烏克蘭只有大約24小時的時間準備，那時烏克蘭最高指揮部才意識到西方情報是正確的。

The war is now 2.5 years old. Russian casualties are in hundreds of thousands. The armored fist of their army is no more, they’re making do with old Soviet-era weaponry and barely trained recruits. They lost dozens of planes, thousands of tanks and haven’t yet captured a single provincial capital - save for Kherson, which they lost back to Ukrainians. The few towns they managed to capture despite fierce resistance are now smoldering ruins. Ukrainian forces occupy a part of Russia and are striking deep inside Russia with drones and saboteurs. A private army rebelled and drove to Moscow, it was only stopped by the fact their commander was even stupider than he looked (and he looked very stupid).

戰(zhàn)爭至今已持續(xù)2.5年。俄羅斯的傷亡人數(shù)已達數(shù)十萬。他們軍隊的裝甲鐵拳已不復(fù)存在，現(xiàn)在只能依靠老舊的蘇聯(lián)時代武器和訓(xùn)練不足的新兵。他們損失了數(shù)十架飛機，數(shù)千輛坦克，并且尚未攻占任何一個省會城市——除了赫爾松，但后來又被烏克蘭人奪回。他們設(shè)法攻占的少數(shù)幾個城鎮(zhèn)，盡管抵抗激烈，現(xiàn)在也變成了冒煙的廢墟。烏克蘭軍隊占領(lǐng)了俄羅斯的一部分，并用無人機和破壞分子深入俄羅斯境內(nèi)進行打擊。一支私人軍隊叛變并開往莫斯科，他們之所以被阻止，僅僅是因為他們的指揮官比他看起來的還要愚蠢（他看起來非常愚蠢）。

Since the beginning of the summer Russians lost more men each day than Americans and the British lost to bring down Saddam Hussein in 6 weeks, while fighting on the other side of the world. In fact they lose about twice as many men each day these days, thanks to fierce Ukrainian offensive.

自夏天開始以來，俄羅斯人每天損失的人數(shù)，比美國和英國在世界另一端作戰(zhàn)六周以推翻薩達姆·侯賽因所損失的人數(shù)還要多。事實上，由于烏克蘭的猛烈攻勢，他們目前每天損失的人數(shù)大約是那個數(shù)字的兩倍。

I think this showcases the differences quite well. It’s rather stark.

我認為這很好地展示了差異。相當鮮明。

Benjamin Muller
There is one specific comparison, and it’s very much a key relevant comparison, that actually sums up the difference rather well.

有一個具體的比較，而且這是一個非常關(guān)鍵且關(guān)聯(lián)性很強的比較，它實際上很好地總結(jié)了兩者之間的差異。

This is the F-35 -

這是F-35——


One of the most capable warbirds ever made, a fifth generation fighter.

有史以來最強大的戰(zhàn)機之一，第五代戰(zhàn)斗機。

This is the SU-57 -

這是蘇-57——


Supposedly a fifth gen fighter according to Russia and their fanboys. Certainly this is the answer Russia offers to the F-35(as far as actually produced planes, their vaporware wunder weapons don’t count as they don’t exist yet, if they ever will).

根據(jù)俄羅斯及其狂熱粉絲的說法，這應(yīng)該算是第五代戰(zhàn)斗機。顯然，這是俄羅斯針對F-35給出的回應(yīng)（僅就實際列裝的機型而言——他們那些還停留在PPT階段的"神奇武器"可不算數(shù)，畢竟那些東西目前根本不存在，未來能否問世也未可知）。

You don’t want bias, so I’ll skip opinions about which is the better plane, and stick to obxtive numbers relevant to military strength… Russia has 14 - that’s fourteen - Su-57s and the US currently produces about that many F-35s per month(13 per month). The US currently has about 630 of them, and that number continues to grow rapidly, with a target of having about 2500 of them within the next 16 years. If Russia ever makes even another 14 of them given what dysfunctional corruption they’ve sunken into, I will be surprised.

你不是想聽偏見，所以我不會評價哪款戰(zhàn)機更優(yōu)秀，只列舉與軍事實力相關(guān)的客觀數(shù)據(jù)……俄羅斯目前擁有14架——注意是十四架——蘇-57，而美國F-35的月產(chǎn)量就差不多是這個數(shù)字（每月13架）。美軍現(xiàn)役F-35約630架，這個數(shù)字還在快速增長，計劃未來16年內(nèi)將規(guī)模擴充至2500架左右。考慮到俄羅斯深陷系統(tǒng)性的腐敗泥潭，他們要是能再生產(chǎn)出14架蘇-57，我都會感到驚訝。

So even if you buy every last bit of bullshit the fanboys claim about the Su-57 being a superior fighter, the US currently has 42 F-35s for every one Su-57 in existence, a ratio that continues to grow. And not even the most rosy assessments of the Su-57s capabilities paint it as something that can achieve even a 2 to 1 kill ratio against an F-35, let alone a 42 to 1, the conversation of its alleged superiority is always in a 1 to 1 matchup.

所以，即使你完全相信那些狂熱支持者關(guān)于蘇-57是一款更優(yōu)秀戰(zhàn)斗機的所有廢話，美國目前擁有的F-35數(shù)量是現(xiàn)存蘇-57的42倍，而且這個比例還在持續(xù)增長。即使對蘇-57性能最樂觀的評估，也無法將其描繪成能夠?qū)笷-35時達到2比1的擊落比，更不用說42比1了，關(guān)于其所謂優(yōu)勢的討論始終是在1比1的對抗中進行的。

And that right there is a perfect example of the gap between the US military strength and Russia’s.

這正是美國和俄羅斯軍事實力差距的完美例證。

Bill Chen
Well, the question is better frxd as “does either country have the CAPACITY to go to war directly?"

嗯，這個問題最好表述為“兩國是否有直接開戰(zhàn)的能力？”

And the answer is a clear no.
Otherwise america would have done so long ago, when Russia was far weaker.

答案是明確的“不”。
否則美國早就這樣做了，那時俄羅斯要弱得多。

Hypothetically, in a controlled boxing match between individual systems, many US weapons may have the edge over Russian ones, especially if the fight is between frontline units.
But war isn't a controlled boxing match. War is a fight to the death between doctrines.

假設(shè)在個體系統(tǒng)之間的受控拳擊比賽中，許多美國武器可能比俄羅斯武器占優(yōu)勢，特別是如果是在前線部隊之間的戰(zhàn)斗。
但戰(zhàn)爭不是一場受控的拳擊比賽。戰(zhàn)爭是不同軍事學(xué)說之間的殊死搏斗。

What is a doctrine? It is the system of systems integration to deliver controlled and precise firepower to destroy the enemy.
And Russian doctrine is optimized for northern latitudes, and focused on rugged equipment that can be easily repaired, even in remote locations. Russian warfighting also give prime consideration to the long and harsh winter, as well as the ceding of strategic depth to buy time.

什么是軍事學(xué)說？它是系統(tǒng)集成的系統(tǒng)，旨在提供受控和精確的火力來摧毀敵人。
俄羅斯的軍事學(xué)說針對高緯度地區(qū)進行了優(yōu)化，并側(cè)重于堅固耐用、即使在偏遠地區(qū)也能輕松修復(fù)的設(shè)備。俄羅斯的作戰(zhàn)方式還優(yōu)先考慮漫長而嚴酷的冬季，以及通過放棄戰(zhàn)略縱深來爭取時間。

US arms are, for the most part, not optimized for the cold and require complex, time-consuming base-level maintenance to keep going. American doctrine is also focused on front-foot aggression, to demonstrate the scourge of power away from home. It is doubtful America has the industrial base to supply a large scale conflict given the trouble NATO has supplying Ukraine, with even basic artillery shells in short supply.

美國武器在很大程度上并未針對寒冷條件進行優(yōu)化，并且需要復(fù)雜、耗時的基地級維護才能維持運行。美國的軍事學(xué)說還側(cè)重于主動進攻，以在海外展示其強大的力量。鑒于北約在向烏克蘭提供援助方面遇到的困難，甚至基本炮彈都供應(yīng)短缺，美國是否擁有支撐大規(guī)模沖突的工業(yè)基礎(chǔ)令人懷疑。

Russia has been outproducing NATO and friends in war materiel since 2022.
Logistics is what wins wars and Russia isn't the warrior nation for nothing.
I don't see Russia losing a conventional war defending its sovereignty against the US.
A nuclear war will have no winners.

自2022年以來，俄羅斯在戰(zhàn)爭物資生產(chǎn)方面一直超過北約及其盟友。
后勤是贏得戰(zhàn)爭的關(guān)鍵，俄羅斯“好戰(zhàn)民族”的稱號并非浪得虛名。
我不認為俄羅斯在保衛(wèi)其主權(quán)免受美國侵害的常規(guī)戰(zhàn)爭中會失敗。
核戰(zhàn)爭沒有贏家。

Carl Hamilton
The current military gap between the USA and Russia, quite depends on which aspect. To honestly say that a country has military power as a single static value doesn’t make sense, like wise, simply pointing to a past operation as an anecdote is a fallacy, and only marginally gives an indication of what experience shapes the ideas of the respective military.

當前美國和俄羅斯之間的軍事差距，很大程度上取決于具體哪個方面。坦率地說，將一個國家的軍事力量視為一個單一的靜態(tài)數(shù)值是沒有意義的；同樣地，僅僅將過去的某個軍事行動作為軼事來指出也是一種謬誤，它只能在很小程度上表明什么經(jīng)驗塑造了各自軍隊的思想。


Let’s start with the highest level of capability. Russia and USA are nuclear superpowers, no matter what people claim about them otherwise. They are peerless in their ability to destroy the world, both maintain thousands of nuclear warheads and delivery systems. Even China only maintains 10% of the warheads of either Russia or USA. In this respect there is no gap, and both nations are peerless.

讓我們從最高層次的能力開始。無論人們對俄羅斯和美國有何其他說法，它們都是核超級大國。它們摧毀世界的能力是無與倫比的，兩國都擁有數(shù)千枚核彈頭和運載系統(tǒng)。即使是中國，也只擁有俄羅斯或美國核彈頭數(shù)量的10%。在這方面，兩國之間沒有差距，都堪稱無與倫比。

If we talk about projection power, the USA is the only true superpower and peerless in their ability to deploy their air and naval forces around the world, usually for influence and punitive actions. Russia is a regional power, they can project only with the consent of host countries, or within their immediate region, such as Ukraine and Georgia, but the very idea that Russia could militarily influence anything in for example South America is close to unthinkable.

如果我們談?wù)撏渡淠芰?，美國是唯一真正的超級大國，在世界各地部署其空軍和海軍以施加影響和采取懲罰性行動的能力是無與倫比的。俄羅斯是一個地區(qū)大國，他們只能在東道國同意的情況下，或者在其周邊地區(qū)（如烏克蘭和格魯吉亞）進行投射，但俄羅斯能在例如南美洲進行軍事影響力投射的想法幾乎是不可想象的。

In terms of actual naval power, the US Navy is almost certainly the most powerful navy in the world, even with Chinese naval power reaching new heights, it is still a regional and very inexperienced navy, while the Russian navy is more experienced, it is under funded. The US navy is very experienced, very well equipped, and very well funded. It is a very well organized US military arm and the basis for most of it’s power.

就實際海軍實力而言，美國海軍幾乎肯定是世界上最強大的海軍，即使中國海軍力量達到新高，它仍然是一支區(qū)域性且經(jīng)驗非常不足的海軍，而俄羅斯海軍雖然經(jīng)驗更豐富，但資金不足。美國海軍經(jīng)驗豐富，裝備精良，資金充足。它是美國組織非常完善的軍事部門，也是其大部分力量的基礎(chǔ)。

In terms of air power, the US also has a clear edge. The US maintains the only large fleet of stealth aircraft, the largest fleet of AWACS, the only truly capable carrier based air force, as well as an overall advantage in numbers. However, the Russian air force is no joke, they are highly capable and have a large percentage of modern aircraft, what they lack in stealth they make up for in advanced missiles and carriers for them notably the MiG-31 with Kinzhal air to ground missiles, and R-37M ultra-long range AA missiles, both have proved highly effective in a near peer conflict. The Russian air force also have a lot of experience fighting in high ECM and high AA environments, which no US pilot can claim, as the enemies of the US rarely have any air defense at all, and they tend to fly their planes like AA missiles barely exist. The gap here might not be as great as one might think.

在空軍力量方面，美國也擁有明顯優(yōu)勢。美國擁有唯一的大型隱形飛機機隊、最大的預(yù)警機機隊、唯一真正具備實力的航母艦載航空兵，以及總體數(shù)量上的優(yōu)勢。然而，俄羅斯空軍也絕非等閑之輩，他們能力很強，擁有大量現(xiàn)代化飛機，他們在隱身方面不足之處通過先進導(dǎo)彈及其載機來彌補，特別是搭載“匕首”空對地導(dǎo)彈的米格-31和R-37M超遠程空空導(dǎo)彈，兩者在近乎對等的沖突中都證明了高效。俄羅斯空軍在強電子對抗和高防空環(huán)境下作戰(zhàn)經(jīng)驗豐富，這是任何美國飛行員都無法忽視的，因為美國的敵人很少擁有任何防空能力，而且他們傾向于飛行飛機時仿佛防空導(dǎo)彈根本不存在一樣。這里的差距可能不像人們想象的那么大。

In terms of Army, the Russians maintain a larger force than the US, additionally, the US are facing very serious problems with manpower, being an all volunteer army, Russian shortages can easily be fixed with conscxtion, and they maintain a reserve more than 10 times the size of the USA. As we can see from current conflicts, in a serious war, the ability to replenish casualties is very important, and the USA does not have this nearly to the same extent. Additionally, the Russian ground forces are now staffed by experienced officers and troops, who know how to conduct trench warfare and urban warfare on the modern battlefield against near peer adversaries. Again, no soldier in the US army can claim the same. The equipment of the Russian army is also rapidly adapting to the realities of modern warfare. Everyone laughed at the Russian cope cages in the beginning of the war, no one is laughing now. The Russian tactic for drones was correct, and everyone who is facing drones now copies the Russians, not the other way around, just ask the Israeli cope cages. Finally, the Russian ground forces have a very large, and very experienced and successful drone corps, which is now integrated at company to battalion level which includes an electronic warfare anti drone component. This is not a small advantage, and without a doubt this is going to be an essential part of any modern army in the very near future, but western militarizes including the USA are only barely beginning to do something like what the Russians already have in terms of drones. In short, in terms of ground forces, the Russian army is probably ahead of the USA and this is the area with the biggest difference in experience and innovation.

就陸軍而言，俄羅斯保持著比美國更大的兵力，此外，美國正面臨非常嚴重的人力問題，作為一支全志愿軍隊，俄羅斯的短缺可以很容易地通過征兵解決，并且他們保持著比美國大10倍以上的預(yù)備役兵力。正如我們從當前沖突中可以看到的，在一場嚴肅的戰(zhàn)爭中，補充傷亡人員的能力非常重要，而美國在這方面遠沒有達到同樣的程度。此外，俄羅斯地面部隊現(xiàn)在配備了經(jīng)驗豐富的軍官和部隊，他們知道如何在現(xiàn)代戰(zhàn)場上與近乎對等的對手進行壕溝戰(zhàn)和城市戰(zhàn)。同樣，美國陸軍中沒有哪個士兵能聲稱擁有同樣的經(jīng)驗。俄羅斯軍隊的裝備也正在迅速適應(yīng)現(xiàn)代戰(zhàn)爭的現(xiàn)實。戰(zhàn)爭初期，每個人都嘲笑俄羅斯的“籠式裝甲”，現(xiàn)在沒人再笑了。俄羅斯對無人機的戰(zhàn)術(shù)是正確的，現(xiàn)在所有面對無人機的人都在模仿俄羅斯人，而不是反過來，不信就去看看以色列的“籠式裝甲”。最后，俄羅斯地面部隊擁有一個非常龐大、經(jīng)驗豐富且成功的無人機部隊，目前已整合到連到營級，其中包括電子戰(zhàn)反無人機組件。這不是一個小的優(yōu)勢，毫無疑問，這將是未來任何現(xiàn)代軍隊的重要組成部分，但包括美國在內(nèi)的西方軍隊在無人機方面才剛剛開始做俄羅斯已經(jīng)擁有的事情。簡而言之，就地面部隊而言，俄羅斯陸軍可能領(lǐng)先于美國，這是經(jīng)驗和創(chuàng)新方面差異最大的領(lǐng)域。

In summary, this is my opinion:
Nuclear, the two forces have parity
Projection power the US has peerless lead over Russia
Naval forces the US has a significant lead over Russia
Air force, the US has a lead over Russia
Army, Russia has a significant lead over the USA

總之，這是我的看法：
核力量，兩國勢均力敵
投射力量，美國對俄羅斯擁有無可匹敵的領(lǐng)先優(yōu)勢
海軍力量，美國對俄羅斯擁有顯著領(lǐng)先優(yōu)勢
空軍，美國對俄羅斯擁有領(lǐng)先優(yōu)勢
陸軍，俄羅斯對美國擁有顯著領(lǐng)先優(yōu)勢

on Diplomacy & Warfare ·
Huge.
Russia cannot beat Ukraine, a country with 1/3 its population. A county it is adjacent to.
The US controlled Iraq and Afghanistan at the same time, thousands of miles from home.
Russia spent 149 billion on its military expenses in 2024.
In 2024, the US military spent approximately $997 billion on defense.
While not actually at war with anyone.
Ukraine just crushed Russia’s strategic bombers in one day.
The only thing that could stop the US conquering Russia is Russian nukes.

差距巨大。
俄羅斯無法擊敗烏克蘭，一個人口只有其三分之一的國家。一個與它接壤的國家。
美國同時控制了伊拉克和阿富汗，距離本土數(shù)千英里。
俄羅斯在2024年的軍事開支為1490億美元。
2024年，美國軍費開支約為9970億美元。
而且美國實際上并未與任何國家處于戰(zhàn)爭狀態(tài)。
烏克蘭在一天之內(nèi)就摧毀了俄羅斯的戰(zhàn)略轟炸機。
唯一能阻止美國征服俄羅斯的，就是俄羅斯的核武器。

Greg Brecht
The gap between the US and Russia in military terms is enormous. The American defense budget is about ten times the size of Russia’s, mostly because the US economy is more than ten times as large. Three US states each have larger economies than Russia (California, Texas and New York). The US has a population two and a half times as large—336,000,000 to 142,000,000.

美國和俄羅斯在軍事上的差距是巨大的。美國的國防預(yù)算大約是俄羅斯的十倍，這主要是因為美國經(jīng)濟規(guī)模是俄羅斯的十倍以上。美國有三個州（加利福尼亞、得克薩斯州和紐約州）的經(jīng)濟規(guī)模都大于俄羅斯。美國的人口是俄羅斯的兩倍半——3.36億對1.42億。

The US has better artllery, better command and control, more experienced commanders, considerably better trained and better motivated soldiers, sailors and aircrew. American troops are all volunteer, and they are better equipped, better fed and have much better medical care. American munitions are generally more accurate and more reliable. The Russia Navy is significant in the Baltic and Black Seas but on the oceans, is not a significant force.

美國擁有更好的火炮、更好的指揮控制、更有經(jīng)驗的指揮官，以及訓(xùn)練有素、士氣更高的士兵、水手和空勤人員。美國軍隊都是志愿兵，他們裝備精良，伙食更好，醫(yī)療條件也優(yōu)越得多。美國的彈藥通常更準確、更可靠。俄羅斯海軍在波羅的海和黑海有重要地位，但在大洋上，卻不是一支重要的力量。

Russia retains potent military forces in its missile submarines and its land based ICBMs and cruise missiles (which can also be carried in subs). The very best Russian equipment is good but there’s not much of it. The very best Russian troops are good, but some of them have been decimated in the invasion of Ukraine.

俄羅斯在其導(dǎo)彈潛艇、陸基洲際彈道導(dǎo)彈和巡航導(dǎo)彈（也可由潛艇攜帶）方面保留了強大的軍事力量。俄羅斯最精良的裝備性能優(yōu)良，但數(shù)量不多。俄羅斯最優(yōu)秀的部隊素質(zhì)很高，但其中一些在入侵烏克蘭的行動中遭受了嚴重損失。

The Russian invasion of Ukraine is showing that the nature of the battlefield is changing rapidly. Drones, highly accurate long range artillery and electronic warfare on the actual battlefield are among factors making numbers less important.

俄羅斯入侵烏克蘭的行動表明，戰(zhàn)場性質(zhì)正在迅速變化。無人機、高精度遠程火炮和實際戰(zhàn)場上的電子戰(zhàn)是使兵力數(shù)量變得不那么重要的因素之一。

The US has more and far more powerful allies in NATO that any of Russia’s (the North Koreans are not particularly useful as an ally; Russia would be the junior partner in alny alliance with China). France and Britain each have quite powerful strategic nuclear forces. In Asia, South Korea has one of the most potent conventional militaries anywhere, and Japan has quietly become a powerful military.

美國在北約擁有比俄羅斯任何盟友都多且強大得多的盟友（朝鮮作為盟友并不是特別有用；俄羅斯在與中國的任何聯(lián)盟中都將是次要伙伴）。法國和英國各自擁有相當強大的戰(zhàn)略核力量。在亞洲，韓國擁有世界上最強大的常規(guī)軍隊之一，日本也悄然成為一支強大的軍事力量。