How would the US fare in the next world war?

page: 21
4
<< 18  19  20    22 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 26 2008 @ 01:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ironclad

Originally posted by shortmanx5
No navy would get close enough to the usa to invade or anything like that. Worlds largest navy's #1. Usa navy, #2. usa reserve navy,#3. British navy,#4. Usa coast guard. Its well known the in any navy battle the usa is favored to come out on top by a lot. Also dont count on irans navy getting out of port let alone close enough to threaten a carrier. When our coast guard is bigger than most other navies, that should be embarrasing for other countries. And as for bombers the b-52s wouldnt have to enter the other countries airspace thats why we have stand off weapons like cruise missiles that can be launched from the plane. And most other countries dont have heavy bombers, expect russia but dont count on those all flying. Most of countries only have fighter/bombers. The war would never even reach usa soil, like most other wars we have fought. We keep a lot of planes in the desert jsut incase we have another world war. And the countries that boarder us would be no problem they would most likely be on our side. But is they werrent i dont predict mexico or canada putting up a fight.


Sea Superiority yeah, but a ground war on a country as large as say Ausralia would strain the US to breaking point.

You simply would'nt be able to keep an offensive up for very long here.

The deserts would get you, the Crocs would get you, the snakes & spiders, 100's of other deadly critters would get you & the Rugged Aussie bush would claim a lot of you.

And to top that off, the Aussies who know their country so well would cut your supply lines and our greatest tactic of all, the fighting retreat will streatch & dwindle your forces & send you bankrupt in a short period of time!!

You would lose!!

America isn't the be all end all. Eventough our militery is quite small, our stockpiles are quite massive & spread out & can quite easily be snapped up in a moments notice & handed out to volunteers all over the country.

The only factor in your favor, is the fact that you already have several massive bases here with 10'000's of personel, ready to move. But even those would be whacked pretty quick. Certainly before re-enforcements could arrive.

Oh and the fact that unlike the Iraqies, we know how to trick your IR & other Detection equipment..lol Half the time you'd never see us coming.

[edit on 12/16/2007 by Ironclad]



Simple way to fix all of that is blockade the island and starve ya into surrender...Hit a few targets from the air.....Nothing in or out and sooner or later yall are going to run out of crocs to eat




posted on Jan, 29 2008 @ 02:58 AM
link   
hmmmmm

nice question !! u calculated everything from sea to land !!

but consider this :

USA's Army is scattered all over !! afghanstan , IRAQ ... when u say 2 countries and im sayin that US sent a thousand no they sent hundred's of thousands and basicly the country is in lack of soldiers !! forget nuclear ! the earth cant handle that and will if they do ... kaboom to the earth !

as from where i see it we cant protect the states from incoming attacks on our homeland !! BUSH screwed everything in this world !! and im happy he's leaving his position as the president !! he dosnt deserve it at all !! he made wars on iraq with no right ! sadam hussein never made a threat to our country ! and never anyone to anyone !! if he abused his country or abused his people bush had no right to come in there and attack his country and then kill him !! HE HAS NO RIGHT ! and the whole 9\11 its crap basicly ! im sorry for the ones we lost !! but explain this to me !! on 9\11 why over 400 jew's didnt go to work that day ! on that specific day and its a huge number btw so why ??!! and osama bin ladin dosnt represent islam !! in no way for us ! islam orederd ppl in our religion to never kill civilans or people that never did anything to u (thats the basic thing btw) and US never attacked afghanstan so if osama bin ladin represents islam will he is not one !! this whole idea is to make everyone hate islam and muslims ! from where i see in this site or on the news or internet in general that every word that connects to muslim has to do with terrorism !! so its simple as that :

THE SAME WAY WE RESPECT YOUR RELIGION RESPECT OURS !

so before we say if US can handle a world war !! lets say if the US can handle or defend its own country !!

hope u respect my thoughts and try to think about it plz



posted on Jan, 29 2008 @ 03:04 AM
link   
While it may be true our military man power is a bit stretched at the moment, the majority have not the slightest idea of our true military potential. Do you realize how many classified defense projects are taking place and have taken place? I certainly can't give you a number, but I can tell you they're out there...



posted on Jan, 29 2008 @ 03:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by laiguana
While it may be true our military man power is a bit stretched at the moment, the majority have not the slightest idea of our true military potential. Do you realize how many classified defense projects are taking place and have taken place? I certainly can't give you a number, but I can tell you they're out there...


heh you got that right, Military experts say we have weapons 50 years ahead of what the world is even aware of. If a world war were to happen you would see the draft fill up the ranks real quick.

- Con



posted on Jan, 29 2008 @ 03:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Where2Hide2006

America Has Had TESLA's Notebooks for a HUNDRED YEARS... I would suspect that many of the Black Projects were involving his technology...Also HAARP.
Also Tesla came up with a diffent kind of missile defense...an electro magetic shield. He was quite litterally hundreds of years ahead of his time.


One of the biggest mistakes this country ever made was treating tesla like a quack instead of recognising his true genius.

really a shame


- Con



posted on Jan, 29 2008 @ 01:44 PM
link   
well ya !!

but dont think that nuclear weapons will solve your problem ! and dont get cocky with the 50 years ahead of weapons !

what if Iran hit the states with nuclear ! me and u and everyone are dead ! and plus all of our 50 year ahead weapons are gone


our country is one of the top leading country's in the world and they make the weapons and choppers .......etc !! but that dosnt mean that we cant be defeated !! all we need for our country is a good leader and well were good



posted on Jan, 29 2008 @ 03:02 PM
link   
Shame, I completely disregarded replying to this before, and forgot to ever again.

Let's get on it!


Originally posted by Ironclad
Sea Superiority yeah, but a ground war on a country as large as say Ausralia would strain the US to breaking point.


How would it manage that? Simply because the country is large? That's hardly logical rational, especially considering all the available infrastructure to use. Not as though we're trekking across vast deserts.



The deserts would get you, the Crocs would get you, the snakes & spiders, 100's of other deadly critters would get you & the Rugged Aussie bush would claim a lot of you.


The deserts would claim U.S. troops? Been pretty hard for them so hard.
And can you tell me why we'd wade near swamps, or wherever your crocodiles like to live? Considering Florida, filled with old, senile folk manages to keep its alligator fatalities down, I'm pretty sure twenty-something troops armed with machine guns, if they even run into crocs, could make a good pass of them.
Furthermore, what's this about snakes and spiders? Of Australia?
Hate to say this, but, Iraq is equal, and beating you in several ways.
Camel spiders? The Deathstalker Scorpion?
And Iraq is untamed. Australia is first-world.


And to top that off, the Aussies who know their country so well would cut your supply lines and our greatest tactic of all, the fighting retreat will streatch & dwindle your forces & send you bankrupt in a short period of time!!

This is just logical. Saying the indigenous forces will 'sabotage' the invaders is obvious. My issue is that you make it seem like Aussies are these extremely tricky, warrior-like folk built for conflict.
I've been to Australia.
Excluding the occasional crazy Bushy, you're tamer than most Americans.
[Given, we have Texas.]


The only factor in your favor, is the fact that you already have several massive bases here with 10'000's of personel, ready to move. But even those would be whacked pretty quick. Certainly before re-enforcements could arrive.


Right now, you're saying that our relatively massive experience over you is discounted because somehow, Australia would manage to destroy one of the largest, most advanced armies in the worlds who feeds the vast majority of their defensive capability simply because .. they're Australia?


Oh and the fact that unlike the Iraqies, we know how to trick your IR & other Detection equipment..lol Half the time you'd never see us coming.


So, you're saying that because Australia is a first-world country.
[ie. They know what IR is.]
We'd be screwed?
Not like we ever planned for an equal adversary before -- Say, the Cold War?

I don't mean to perpetuate or create the myth that America is invulnerable, but when someone says that their country would win simply because it's their country, then goes through paragraphs using idiot-logic to describe all the methods in which another country would be defeated, it's irksome.



posted on Feb, 27 2008 @ 09:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by truttseeker
First of all don't underestimate your enemy. The chinese are very tough fighters, along with all other asians the US has fought. China could raise some real hell. I am also from the US and know...well about the capabilities that have been released. China also has an army of over 2 million. Try around 200 million, along with a major industrial complex. WE also need THEM more than THEY need US.

Second, just because a navy doesnt have global capability doesnt mean its not formidable. What if China invades Taiwan, and tries for Japan, along with North Korea invading South Korea. That woudl cause some major problems for the US.


---

I actually doubt that, in a World War America would most likely implement a total war and in doing so it does not matter if they are tough fighters we will not have to hold back like we did in Vietnam (could not kill "everyone") same thing as Iraq, if we could implement total war we would be done over there.
200 million...Chin does not even have the food or enough weapons to have 10 million people wage a war, 200 million people would just be the people fighting and if it was a World War as previously mentioned it would probably be a total war and that would not do squat.
The navy thing, North Koreas navy is SMALL we could dispatch a tad there and knock it out really fast, China is also not formidable enough to split itself two ways, we could use the rest to knock out China and get the ones from North Korea to blockade them to make sure they stay in check.
Believe me a navy matters.



posted on Feb, 27 2008 @ 09:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Baxtoriafall
Chin does not even have the food or enough weapons to have 10 million people wage a war


Oh really.....


You mean the fact that china has been stationing close to 10million "armed troops" for 5 decades?


The navy thing, North Koreas navy is SMALL we could dispatch a tad there and knock it out really fast, China is also not formidable enough to split itself two ways, we could use the rest to knock out China and get the ones from North Korea to blockade them to make sure they stay in check.


Wow, comprehensive. Are you a naval planner of some sort?



posted on Feb, 29 2008 @ 09:23 PM
link   




Look up an article called food shortages for China and you will see what I mean a 10 million man army can not be supported by them in a war for that long or at all.

Well looking from the strengths of both of them you really do not have to be a naval planner to judge it, if you look at the strongest navy in the world the U.S.A is it and it could dominate those two in a war.



posted on Mar, 1 2008 @ 02:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Baxtoriafall
Look up an article called food shortages for China and you will see what I mean a 10 million man army can not be supported by them in a war for that long or at all.


Food storages?

You should read about the Strategic reserves of grain the government keeps


Well looking from the strengths of both of them you really do not have to be a naval planner to judge it


The PLAN and KLAN is going to go out into open water to combat the Americans?. Or maybe they should stay home and fight gorilla war at sea with submarines whilst being under air cover from 500 4th generation aircraft and countless anti-ship missiles with ranges of 100-300+km and SAM sites lined out on the Chinese coast



posted on Mar, 1 2008 @ 03:30 AM
link   
Bax, the biggest mistake you Americans make is underestimating your enemy and your belief that your weapons systems can do anything. History I'm affraid paints a very different picture, you had total war in Vietnam, everything in your arsenal was used other than nukes and you still could not beat an army of men and women wearing pyjamas.

That is a conflict in which you military planners have learnt nothing, decades later the US is bogged down in 2 illegal wars in which it is again getting its ass wupped by poorly armed but well motivated freedom fighters. Irrespective of the dreams you and others may have of the prowess of your military might the proof of how bad they are is ther for all to see.

When contronted with these facts the statement is then made well if we fight a total war if we kill everyone we will win. Again you are ignorant of history, its never been done and never will be achieved. Do you really think other counries of the world will sit back whilst you commit genocide for personal gain, if you do your in for a big shock. All tyrants get taken down sooner or later simply because you leave your potential and real adversaires no option other than to fight.

And fight they do, right now there are many who think that the real threat to world peace is the USA. The US is teetering on the edge of financial oblivion, the money you require to exist on is loaned by foreign banks, no money no war, no money the US is into a deppresion. You dont have to fight a war to bring a country to its knees, its happened so many times before and the US is not immune to this process.



posted on Mar, 2 2008 @ 09:56 PM
link   
So China has a 10 million man army?!!



posted on Mar, 2 2008 @ 11:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Daedalus3
So China has a 10 million man army?!!


My exact words were "armed troops"

en.wikipedia.org...
en.wikipedia.org...'s_Armed_Police



posted on Mar, 3 2008 @ 12:15 AM
link   
Who cares how the U.S. would fare in the next World War... we ALL know that Canada would come around at some point, waving our hockey sticks and flinging our maple syrup, and presenting a new proposal for peace by celebrating Thanksgiving in October like it should be!!!!

Sheesh... World War???? C'mon people, the size of the military will not matter in the next World War, it will be the size of the hearts - in the patriots of those countries involved...

But, for argument sake... I mean for debate sake... The power of the Navy that the US has... well, that could play a major role for the USA... I would imagine, that in a World War, strategies for global security would weigh in heavily on the combatants.... and as stated the US ground forces have been spread too thin already with that as reason... the Air Force is spread lite as well I would guess... so that leaves a well versatile US Naval fleet, that in reality could probably win a "War" on it's own - provided the opportunity... (Nukes not included)...

But in the end, the people walking the earth, would be the deciding factor... what would the #'s come up with... say if the Naval branches of the world were taken out of the picture too, not just Nukes... It would make more sense to argue that point, "How would the US fare in the next world war - Ground Forces only"?... and my answer to that would have to be... that they would probably hold their own, just like in the past two world wars.... hence the word "World"....



posted on Mar, 4 2008 @ 01:09 AM
link   
I think we forget that with the wars in the middle east , the US had to fight with a more politically correct, palatable style. In WW2 they just bombed the begeezus out of Berlin. Men women children, it didn't matter they had to win the war and it worked.


If the US carpet bombed every major population center in Iraq, moved in and set up martial law to deal with the remaining population, the war in Iraq would have been over in a few months. Funny though, when all said and done they probably would have been the same amount of casualties as this long "careful" war that they fought.



posted on Mar, 8 2008 @ 09:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Baxtoriafall
 


Bax I understand that a navy matters and we could blockade them. The simple fact is there's to many to fight. They could probably knock out most of our surface fleet by air to ship missiles. Dont underestimate your enemy. Im in the navy and I'll still admit that our stuff is good, but not against the overwhelming numbers that you'd see in a conflict such as a world war.

You are right though, most of our recent wars have been waged with wayy too many restrictions. Given the oportunity we would probably win with heavy, heavy losses.



posted on Apr, 1 2008 @ 08:00 AM
link   
Interesting topic!!!


I would have to say that it depends on WHO America fights. If it is total war then I see America winning.



posted on Apr, 18 2008 @ 08:38 AM
link   
reply to post by shortmanx5
 


ill tell you what chinas gonna do they're gonna put nuclear chemical or a plague on all those products that they sell to the usa and it will kill off millions then all other countries will band against the usa in order to keep it in quarenteen also you should see the fact that china is your biggest supplier as a threat not an advantage because if they dont sell it to you you dont get it not to mention the fact that china supplies just about every where on the planet not just the usa



posted on Apr, 18 2008 @ 10:44 AM
link   
Common people, get your stuff together, UK does not have the second largest navy, Russia has the second largest navy. American Carrier battle groups are vulnerable to a whole variety of missiles just like any other ship formation, CIWS Phalanx is a last ditch effort protection system and it was never invulnerable, it might stop a missile but then it takes about an hour to reload the thing. If Russia or anyone with enough anti-shipping missiles wanted to sink the US surface fleet it can be done.

In the air, with S-400s, Tor-M2s and Pantsir-S1s I doubt even your B2s will live long. It all really depends on the scenario, say if US attempted to invade Russia it would loose any hope of air superiority.

On the ground, this is getting a bit annoying, the only reason M1s were so successful in Iraq was because the Iraqies had Lions of Babylon, a stripped down, Iraqie made rip-off of the first T-72 export model the T-72M. More so they used anti-tank munitions that discontinued service with the Soviet army in early 1970s. Modern T-72s and the T-90 can penetrate Abrams armor at about 2.5 kilometers or 5 kilometers if firing the Reflex ATGM. Otherwise Abrams just like any tank is vulnerable against top attack portable missiles like Kornet-E.

As for invading China....you do realize that the day you attempt to do that your economy will crumble into tiny little bits?

[edit on 18-4-2008 by Uncle_Vanya]





top topics
 
4
<< 18  19  20    22 >>

log in

join