No. But Russia does believe they can outplay the US in regions where Russia has particularly strong interests. So far they've mostly managed to do that. The current Ukraine mess is of course a debacle, but until that Russia had made some serious gains on the international arena.It worries me that Russia is so full of bravado in terms of provoking the mighty US; say with these bomber and fighter sorties close to the North American continent.
It worries me because it gives the strong impression that Russia firmly believes in itself to be able to give the US a fair old whack on the chin.
What exactly are you asking?Is it all just a bluff from political calculation?
You know the opinions of Russian general staff, high command, and military scientists in the academy? Real ones, not the "Russian Stronk!!!" stuff for the media.Looking at the videos all over the web, Russia firmly has the opinion that it has superior fighter aircraft and electronic missile capabilities.
NATO does hold large scale exercises. Perhaps not as grandiose as the ones Russia has, but if you look closer at the details you will realize that while Russia has regained the ability to move and deploy masses of men and equipment, this ability is not nearly as solid or foolproof as you might think. And of course there are tons of lower-level problems from old equipment, to a badly trained NCO corps, to inadequate training methods and standards, etc.Then look at the recent exercises conducted in Europe and the Far east by the Russian military and it becomes clear that they have a greater state or preparedness to go with their advanced weaponry.
NATO never does anything on that scale any more.
For example Russian line infantry (Motor-Rifles) don't train for rapid-reload drills, don't know what a combat glide is, etc. Individual accuracy with personal weapons (AKs) is poor, and not just because the weapons lack optics or is inherently inaccurate (it's not), but because the standards for weapons training are low in general. The low-level officers and NCOs don't have the skills themselves, and thus can't pass it on to the soldiers. Contract soldiers, especially NCOs, are better, and quite valuable, but they're not nearly common enough (they're heavily concentrated in technical jobs that require more knowledge like SAM operators).
NATO is nowhere near falling behind Russia. If the Russian economy continues to develop successfully for another 10-15 years, and Russia continues to maintain a high level of military spending, with a competent and capable Ministry-level staff that understands how to get what it needs despite civilian pressures, then Russia may have a military comparable to that (in training, gear, etc.) of western Europe. But that's a big "if".No wonder then that NATO is steering clear of an engagement. From what I can see it had better get it's act together and quickly before it really falls behind and faces an adversary that it cannot match.
Also if you honestly think that the primary reason to avoid going to war with Russia, is because NATO is afraid they will lose, you've lost touch with reality. War is expensive, messy, and damaging. Europe has no desire for a major war. So the reason NATO is not going to war with Russia (the primary, if not only, reason) is that it's members don't want to. Even Britain has no desire for a large scale war with Russia.