The U.S. and allies would most likely win a war against Russia/China.

The amount of money invested on defense and production does have a significant affect on a country's military effectiveness and strength. Why is it that America has the strongest conventional military in the world? The answer is that it spends a signficant amount of money on its military. The only reason why Russia is the second strongest nation in the world is because it spends a lot of money on its military. If the U.S. and Russia didn't spend such large amounts of money on their military, their militaries would not be on the scale and strength of what they are today. Money determines the strength of an nation's military, Russia and the U.S. are two examples here. I don't think you realize how big $650 billion let alone $87 billion is. Though $87 billion is not $650 billion, it's still a lot of money being spent on military. Tanks would be proven ineffective in such a war scenario with the U.S. and allies. A land based war between both parties is highly unlikely(unless air superiority is secured), only further proving the importance of sea and air domincance in such a confrontation. I think you misunderstood the title of the debate, TheRussian. The title is "The U.S. and allies would most likely win a war against Russia/China." I didn't specifically say NATO, but rather all of the United State's allies. At times I did only mention NATO, but American allies in the Pacific are included as "allies". In a full scale war, Japan, S. Korea, and Taiwan would come to the U.S. aid (Japan already is having bad relations with China). Now you said that Taiwan has a very weak airforce, which is not true. The Taiwanese air force has some of the best U.S. aircrafts such as F-16's, which are expected to be upgraded to specifically counter new Chinese aircrafts. You can safely say that all of Taiwan's military is focused around defending itself from China. Taiwan has numerous air defense systems to protects its from Chinese missiles and aircraft. Any major offensive on Taiwanese airfields or airbases would most likely not be a surprise due to the massive intelligence channels Taiwan uses. Read this "Taiwan's Security and Air Power: Taiwan's Defense Against the Air Threat from Mainlaind China" The 6th and 7th fleets can launch rapid strikes against Chinese targets and Russian targets in a short period of time due to their location on the map. How can Russia and China repel the attacks coming from so many different locations? You most likely will have US aircraft being sent in from Japan, S.Korea, Taiwan, Germany, etc. to strike communication lines and key areas. Again, how can Russia and China repel such a massive offensive which would most likely take them by surprise? U.S. carriers don't need to be close to a target to strike, they can stay at a distance. The Chinese navy presence in the Pacific is not capable of stopping a full U.S. naval offensive. Top U.S. officials are not concerned about the building of a second Chinese carrier, which only suggests China's navy doesn't pose much of a threat. And we must not forget that the U.S. will not just send in a bunch of fighter jets to be shot down, they're going to take care of Russia's and China's air defenses. Before striking, the U.S would disrupt radar and communication in both China and Russia. This would temporarily paralize Russia's and China's air defenses, leaving them vulnerable to U.S. fighter jets. By the time Russia and China are able to restore order, damage would already be done. US and NATO carriers and ships can easily penetrate through the Black sea, bypassing Russia's naval presence there. Russia's Black Sea fleet is just outdated and not on par with NATO'S naval force. It's actually relatively weak, with two frigates, a destroyer, an aging guided-missile cruiser, submarine, landing crafts, and an anti-submarine cruiser. In fact, it's so weak, the Italian navy can destroy it. After getting in the Black Sea, NATO and U.S. ships could launch further airstrikes on Russia's west. Though Russia and China combined have more land based weapons, they cannot used it to attack The United's states home turf. Russia and China simply lack the sea power to move large numbers of troops and equipment to the American coast. In a war scenario, those tanks and artillery would most likely not be deployed. And if they were, with U.S. air superiority, what do you think will happen to those tanks once they are spotted? Boots on the ground is only possible with both sea and air dominance, and if that happens, Russian and Chinese armory and factories on the ground would be easy picking for F-18s, F-22s, etc. America has numerous air defenses outfitted on its aircraft carriers, and numerous air defenses in the Pacific. And like I stated earlier, the first action of the U.S. and allies would be to jam radar and communication lines, crippling Russia's and China's missile systems. U.S fighters would strike these missile launch sites, bypassing one of Russia and China's defenses. With destroyed missile launch sites, Russia and China cannot defend itself by U.S. airstrikes. I do agree with you here, being on the defense is always easier than being on the offensive. The U.S. and allies would need to spend more money than China and Russia to transport such massive numbers of equipment and aircraft. Regarding NATO members being left without natural gas, recently, NATO members have been starting to stop being overly dependent on Russia's natural oil due to rising tentions.