You might want to read up on 20th century history for a better understanding of the relative importance of economic might to world domination.
The most effective army wasn't the winner of WW2.
A country with land area almost as big as the next two countries put together, in possession of thousands of nukes, is a major threat.
What good is all that tundra going to do them in a war?
They're not a threat to their neighbors (EU and China), because their neighbors are much, much larger in what matters - manpower and industrial capacity.
In fact, Russia’s nukes are probably the primary reason we’ve been so laid back with respect to Russia’s attempt to annex Ukraine.
Russia's re-assertion on Crimea, territory that is historically Russian, not Ukrainian, should have been a predicable response to the coup, if our State Department was worth a damn. That coup was just another in a long string of idiotic moves by the neocons. Same cabal that is trying to get us neck deep in Syria.
In any case, no one’s saying we should invade Russia. It’s only prudent to joust with Russia the way it jousted with us in Korea and Vietnam, where Russia’s support of our enemies resulted in 100K dead Americans
And why exactly are Koreans and Vietnamese our enemies? Americans never should have been there in the first place. Just like we shouldn't in the Middle East trying to play 'power behind the throne' and just generating more enmity for Americans.
Enough! End our involvement in these stupid wars that just cost us blood and treasure and give us nothing but perpetual debt payments. We've been bombing the Middle East every year since 1991 - at some point folks have to wake up to the idea this isn't working.
Out of curiosity, what “most effective army” was it that lost WW2?