will china and russia partnership end the reign of the USA

Any text with "these symbols" means I quote either you or a source. /Military The Nato forces got over 3.5 million army personnel plus reserves(plus other allies like Japan, South Korea, Australia. The Russo Chinese(as I call it) partnership(including India) got 4,7 million army personnel plus reserves. With that said the technology level on the western forces are much higher than any of the Russo Chinese allies. Russia and China(with India) may have more nuclear weapons than USA but you are forgetting NATOs nuclear defense. In almost all NATO countries in Europe there are Patriot missile batteries(or similar missile with the same task) and US carrier groups are protected with Cruisers/Destroyers outfitted with AEGIS making them a hard target for any ballistic missile. "- I have no boubt that north will have no difficulty to destroy the south if a war starts among them." If we compare north to south Korea south is definitely going to win. First while NK got nukes SK got anti ballistic Patriot missiles that easily can take down the presumed primitive nuclear weapons NK use. The NK military is also a standing joke with equipment that belongs more on a museum than in combat, like T55s and even their best tanks are basically updated old Russian tanks. The air force isn't much better with planes like Mig 21. That's the problem with both Russia and China, they may have the numbers on their side but the individual soldiers have bad equipment and bad training. Of the thousands of tanks Russia got only a couple of hundred are of the most modern types. The rest are old T72 and T80, the exact tanks M1 abrams are made to face. China got more modern tanks but the question is if its enough. /economy With all due respect, I understand that this debate is about USA and its allies vs a Russo Chinese partnership(with India) in many ways including but not limited to war. As I understood its how they would fare against each over in both war and peace(economic and political battles). If I am mistaken I am sorry and will change accordingly. "-looks like the USA and EU are the biggest partners but still they are with Russia, they and china are partners just for money but when comes to taking part whether they need to be with the USA or Russia, they are with Russia." They trade a lot with china and with Russia but most(if not all) of Europe is allied to USA. If you take a look at the NATO countries in Europe you can see that almost all European countries are part of NATO and many of the eastern block countries would rather be extinct that to be back under Russian "protection"(that many scarified their lives for to leave during the first time) "-china, Iran and Russia are behind Syria, despite the USA is the second biggest partner of china, china is still with Russia, it shows that china cares Russia more than they value the USA. even in 2008 china and Russia wanted ruble as an international money instead of dollar. this also shows that china values Russia. coming to Iran, no difficulty to understand that Iran hates the USA." China and Russia are of course allies in this scenario, as is Iran, Syria and India. However even if the Russians and Chinese wanted the Ruble as an international currency doesn't change the fact that the dollar is more worth than the Ruble. And the fact remains if USA and Europe stops to trade with China the Chinese economy will plunge down into chaos even if Russia will try to back up. The Chinese government may be closer to Russia but they are still dependent on the buyers in Europe and USA. /Politics "-Russia said they do not want to fight but putin said we may do anything if the international laws get chewed by the usa for attacking syria, and it is the policy of russia, they just sell weapons and they do not lose power for fighting liker they did in Vietnam. they want their weapons to be sold and get money, they dont care syrians, just money, and now Esad is the bigest source for money. " Syria is one of few Russia friendly nations in the middle east and a important ally to Russia. Of course they want to sell weapons to earn money without getting to much in the way for USA. USA on the other hand don't want to get into another Afghanistan/Iraq with prolonged fighting against Russia backed terrorists. So they both back their side with weapons and perhaps a few air strikes. Its nothing new. Its been done several times in history that one side is at war with a soviet/USA backed enemy. For example, Afghanistan(USA funded the Mujahedin), Vietnam(Soviet backed the NVA and Vietcong, USA backed south Vietnam) (Korea, NK were soviet backed) and so on. Both sides are careful not to be to aggressive as they don't want a full blown nuclear war. Thank you and good luck. links to different sources. patriot missile system http://en.wikipedia.org... Aegis system http://en.wikipedia.org... North korea army http://en.wikipedia.org...'s_Air_Force http://en.wikipedia.org...'s_Army_Ground_Force