It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


USA vs. the World

page: 6
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in


posted on Jan, 6 2005 @ 05:54 PM
Ok, so, time for this patriot to chime in. Though my opinion is going to be slighty biased, when is anyone's not!

My stance:

The US, Britain, Australia, and Israel against the EU would be a slaughter. America and her allies win in two to three years. Why? Let me explain.

Yes, the EU isn't going to be weak. However, before people ramble on using Iraq as the downfall of the US Military, lets get something straight. The objective in Iraq doesn't favor the US AT ALL. Why? Because the US military is not designed to capture and hold. It is designed in "blitzkrieg" warfare. Strike and destroy.

And we would do that. Efficiently. Think about it? A week to take out all of Saddam's army? Efficient. It isn't the destroying or beating that we have problems with. Its the holding.

So, with that stated, we would win a war against Europe. Simply because we wouldn't have to be politically correct. Like we are now. All we have to do is destroy and destroy some more for good measure. And we would do that. Now, of course there would be high casualties on both sides. The Europeans (besides the French) would fight their hearts out.

However, the US military and its tech would ultimately win. Our Air Force is the best in the world. Fact. This would be the US strategy:

a) Pre-emptive bombing of strategic sites.
b) After the war starts, ground forces are sent in. Before moving in, more bombing occurs. Napalm, "smart" bombs/missiles are used.
c) Ground forces take rubbles of cities remaining. Fight enemy on the ground.
d) Cover fire is provided by air. More bombs, vulcan cannons, etc.
e) US tanks and technicals, along with ground forces, advance to capital city of the enemy. Battle commences.
f) US flushes enemy out via more bombs, tanks, etc. Surgical strikes are used for close quarters combat.

NO HOLDING. At all. There wouldn't need to be. Our objective would be to kill. Not to "preserve housing structures and people to the best of your ability" like in Iraq. With a few mistakes, yes.

US wins no doubt. The EU is nothing to worry about. Not economically either. Sure, they are gaining strength, but if that happens too much, the US adapts. We always have, and always will.

And, on top of that, Americans are born fighters. We became a country through a fight. We have it in our blood.


posted on Jan, 6 2005 @ 07:37 PM

Originally posted by iksmodnad
call me crazy but I think the US would win a war, against the whole world without using nukes. What do you think all the "black budget" projects are for. I've said it before and I'll say it again the united states military is severely under estimated. Partly because the United states general public doesn't even know how powerful their own government is.

i agree with you about black budget. I believe at one point the US government was denying the existence of Area 51 even thought people had sattelite imges and stuff. IM not sure if they still do. I dont know if there is super alien etchnology but most be somethin cool. I also think that all the dirt roads leading to area 51 have signs at the complexs bnoundaries with some quite serious punishment for people tha cross the border. but i guess that would happen witbh lots of government bases.

posted on Jan, 6 2005 @ 07:38 PM
Well, no not exactly! There is no, 'what if'. It will not happen. And as long as we have the United Nations and the British on our side, we have nothing to worry about dealing with the European nations. If you top it off, countires such as Germany is demilitarized since the ending of World War 2 and they have no capability of fighting offensively. So that will definetly not happen! The United States and Britain are like brothers. And we are very close in relationship between our two nations. And most likely, if we get into a conflict, it most likely will be resolved faster than a conflict with another nation.

So most likely, that won't happen!

posted on Jan, 7 2005 @ 03:48 AM
Firstly, there is only germany that is under restrictions.
Secondly, we are loyal to europe before the US.
more to follow......

posted on Jan, 7 2005 @ 05:25 AM
difficult situation we have here.

Just because european countries don't spend on their millitaries does not mean they can't.

Collectively they could outspend the US by over 10% in a time of war, so really the US would be the underdog... However with the UK as a staging post it's not inconcievable that Europe could be defeated

posted on Jan, 7 2005 @ 07:54 AM
So now its just USA vs. Europe??

posted on Jan, 7 2005 @ 08:19 AM

Originally posted by EastCoastKid
I've seen threads like usa v china etc. How bout what would the USA do if the European Union (prophecy's revived Roman Empire)

What prophecy says this, i am unfamiliar with it. I don't see why a united europe should be thought of as Rome.

became so powerful that they could convince the entire body of nations to follow them in a full-scale attack on the USA?

It would mean global thermonuclear war. No nation that wants to exist in a moderately comfortable lifestyle is going to attack the US or the Russian States. The US military and nuke arsenal was designed to push back and defeat a full scale soviet invasion of east europe. Its geared to defend and offend against a massive and powerful army. Also, with US bases thruought europe, it doesn't look very likely. Plus, what european nation has the force projection capabilities of the US? Britian, sure, russia, probably even now yes, but who else? The Germans are culturally wary of imperialism and the gaulists in france might like the idea, but they have what, a single aircraft carrier?

Are you ready for the mighty USA to become nothing more than a huge third-world country bowing before the newly mighty European Union?

The only people ready for that are those rightwing militia nuts.

All empires have fallen. We are no different.

Eventually the US will be no more, but of course Rome lasted for a thousand years, not counting the Byzantine portion. But, regardless, I don't see 'the world' mounting an invasion of the United States. If it were capable of it, then geopolitics would be completely different now anyways.

posted on Jan, 7 2005 @ 08:32 AM
France schmance what a waste of good soil!!!!!

posted on Jan, 7 2005 @ 08:57 AM
There are many forms of warfare. One of the most potent, is of course, economic warfare. Right now with the state of the U.S. economy (rise of Euro, fall of dollar, deficits, unhappy OPEC), it wouldn't really take a whole lot to bring the U.S. to its knees.

Our two greatest threats are joining forces:

China, Russia Will Hold First War Games

The Associated Press All Rights Reserved
Dec 13, 11:27 AM (ET)

BEIJING (AP) - China and Russia will hold their first joint military exercise next year, the Chinese government said Monday, as President Hu Jintao called for an expansion of the rapidly growing alliance between the former Cold War rivals.

The announcement came during a visit to Beijing by Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov, who was expected to discuss expanding the Kremlin's multibillion-dollar annual arms sales to China.

The exercises are to take place on Chinese territory, the official China News Service said. But that report and other government statements didn't say when they would take place or what forces would be involved.

Shaky economy:

"Japan Threatens Huge Dollar Sell-Off"

Heather Stewart,
The London Observer
Sunday December 5, 2004

Japan is warning the White House that there will be 'enormous capital flight' from the dollar if the Bush administration maintains its laissez-faire approach to the mounting currency crisis.
Tokyo fears that Japan's strongest economic recovery in a decade could be derailed by the sudden appreciation in the yen against the greenback.

The criticism of President Bush's inaction, by a senior member of the ruling Liberal Democratic Party, will be taken as a veiled threat that Japan could start to sell off its multi-billion-dollar holdings of US Treasuries. 'The Japanese government is going to ask for a strong dollar policy; if it continues to fall, there would be enormous capital flight from the dollar,' said Kaoru Yosano, chairman of the LDP's policy council, adding that Japan would be calling on its fellow G7 governments to demand the US deal with the massive fiscal deficit that has helped to prompt the dollar's decline.

The petro dollar in danger:

Opec sharply reduces dollar exposure

By Steve Johnson and Javier Blas in London
The Financial Times

Published: December 6 2004 21:12
Last updated: December 6 2004 21:12

Oil exporters have sharply reduced their exposure to the US dollar over the past three years, according to data from the Bank for International Settlements.

Members of the Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries have cut the proportion of deposits held in dollars from 75 per cent in the third quarter of 2001 to 61.5 per cent.

Middle Eastern central banks have reportedly switched reserves from dollars to euros and sterling to avoid incurring losses as the dollar has fallen and prepare for a shift away from pricing oil exports in dollars alone.

Things to Come:

As The World Burns

Michael C. Ruppert

Copyright 2004, From The Wilderness Publications, All Rights Reserved. This story may NOT be posted on any Internet web site without express written permission. Contact May be circulated, distributed or transmitted for non-profit purposes only.

-- But when the run on the dollar begins, OPEC will inevitably at some point switch its pricing to the Euro, which the entire world is wrangling - much to Europe's chagrin - into not only a safe-haven currency, but a profitable one. The next house is being built before the old one is abandoned. When the run on the dollar begins, it will be as if the rest of the world declared war on the United States of America by launching a missile, dropping a bomb, or landing an army at Bethany Beach, Delaware. That this will lead ultimately to widespread global warfare seems certain. This is exactly the way the administration is setting it up to appear to the American people. Think of 9/11 times fifty.

The rest of the world is merely defending itself with non-violent means - for the moment. But it will be portrayed as an attack upon the US. "Why?" George Bush will ask, rhetorically. "They hate us because of our freedom."

And, barring a miracle, the end results will be exactly the same as from a physical attack: devastation so complete and unthinkable - magnified by the brutal impacts of Peak Oil - that only a few will even try to prepare for it. That is sad because preparation will make all the difference (barring luck or divine intervention) in who survives and to what extent they remain intact and functioning afterwards.

Run on the Dollar Imminent - The American People and Economy Will Be Among the First Casualties

The World Draws a Line in the Sand Around Iran - There will be No Invasion

Ukraine Possible Sarajevo for Global Conflict; Africa Ready to Explode in Proxy Wars; Latin America Heats Up; More

US Strategic Abandonment of the Korean Peninsula Inevitable; Taiwan Likely

Permanent Blackouts in Industrialized Nations Possible by 2008

If the countries and organizations BushCo. has pissed off and thrown aside decide to work together to cripple the U.S. economically, it can do great harm to us. They have the ability to bring on an economic Armaggedon here. If, for example, OPEC made the switch to Euros for their trading currency, our economy would go tits up.

Strange to ponder: One thing analysts are looking at is that the Bush administration is actually ok with our economy being wiped out. Think about it - those biggies have all of their assets safely tucked away offshore, so it wouldn't hurt them AND.. if our economy went bust, and tons of people were out of work, they'd be much more willing to join the military. They wouldn't need a draft. How machiavellian is that?

All that aside, the bottom line is this: The United States of America, no matter how big, bad and beautiful it is, cannot take on the world and win. If our country was ever invaded after the softening of said economic meltdown, it would make Iraq look like a playground. With all the personal weapons and vast territory, Americans would put up a fight unlike anything the world has ever seen. (Much as today's Iraqis are.) Essentially though, the U.S.A. would fall from greatness and become a third-rate power mired in a hellish Revolution.

posted on Jan, 7 2005 @ 09:34 AM
I wouldn't worry too much about the war games that the chinese and russian forces are taking part in..quite harmless....imagine if the chinese took the Indo-U.S. exercises so seriously..they'd be freaked out by now!!..

posted on Jan, 7 2005 @ 10:48 AM

Originally posted by surfkat157
France schmance what a waste of good soil!!!!!

First i think that remark deserves flameing, you are lucky i am not in the mood for that.

They have an aircraft carrier larger than our "three" and a bigger navy.

If you look up the RN website on our navy you will see that most is a lie.
Look up some of the ships, take the glasgow for exsample , she is now decommisioned.
Yet another ship gone. This time the norfolk.

[edit on 7-1-2005 by devilwasp]

[edit on 7-1-2005 by devilwasp]

posted on Jan, 7 2005 @ 12:12 PM

Originally posted by Daedalus3
I wouldn't worry too much about the war games that the chinese and russian forces are taking part in..quite harmless....

The combined might of Russian and Chinese forces harmless.. Come into the light my friend.. I suggest you study up on economic warfare, the state of the U.S. economy and the issue of Peak Oil. Or keep your head in the sand..

posted on Jan, 7 2005 @ 01:29 PM
i think that america will do somthing stupid which is'nt too far off the mark with george bush

Its amazing that a lot of people in Britain would like to get tony blair out of his seat hes georges loyal pup anything george bush says he does a lot of people are getting sick of it as he will walk blindly into a war that we dont need.

If there was such a war i think a lot of people would join with the E.U. from britain but having said that we dont really know the reason for war i would try to do the right thing when it happens no matter what country im from.

posted on Jan, 7 2005 @ 01:36 PM
The sad thing is, it shouldn't have to come to war. It's these warmongering idiot Neo Cons and their ridiculously stupid policies that endanger us.

posted on Jan, 7 2005 @ 02:45 PM
Devilwasp, 'we', who the hell is we? Who are you talking about?

posted on Jan, 7 2005 @ 03:41 PM
The sad part is the U.S. is playing in a rigged game. The good news is those who play in a rigged game get stupid depending how you look at it. Bush and his neocons can't turn back now unless they are fully expose and when everyone knows what they've done.

posted on Jan, 7 2005 @ 03:50 PM
It'll probably never happen in this lifetime. If the house of cards did fall, they'd be found guilty of war crimes, among other things.

I'm pretty confident God's got a special place in hell waiting for them.

posted on Jan, 7 2005 @ 07:24 PM

Originally posted by BJonesLHS
Devilwasp, 'we', who the hell is we? Who are you talking about?

We as in the british , aka british citizens.

posted on Jan, 7 2005 @ 07:45 PM
Against the EU or against the entire world? Against the EU alone the US would win if it happened today or in the near future. Years from now if countries like Ukraine and the rest of Eastern Europe were in the EU and had recovered economically the story may be different. Against the entire world the US wouldn't not last long, in the early days it would make a lot of ground but then it would find itself overstretched and the advance would be slowed and eventually turned around.

This should give a rough estimate of who would win. For the stats i will use the CIA world fact book. GDP will give you an idea of production compactity which would be an important factor when it comes to producing war equipment and sustaining the war. I will also include population which would be an important factor when it comes to occupying territories and drafting new soldiers to replace those that die.

EU vs US


Germany: GDP = $2.2 Trillion, Population = 82 Million

UK: GDP = $1.6 tril, pop = 60 mil

France: GDP = $1.6 tril, pop = 60 mil

Italy: GDP = $1.5. tril, pop = 58 mil

Spain: GDP = $0.9 tril, pop = 40 mil

Poland: GDP = $0.4 tril, pop = 38 mil

Netherlands: GDP = $0.4 tril, pop = 16 mil

Total: GDP = $8.6 Trillion, pop = 328 mil (well more than this but that should give you an idea)

There is lots more but i couldn't be bothered doing them all, that's most of the major ones i think.

US: GDP = $11 Trillion, pop = 293 million

[edit on 7-1-2005 by Trent]

posted on Jan, 7 2005 @ 09:56 PM

Originally posted by Trent
Against the EU or against the entire world? Against the EU alone the US would win if it happened today or in the near future. Years from now if countries like Ukraine and the rest of Eastern Europe were in the EU and had recovered economically the story may be different. Against the entire world the US wouldn't not last long, in the early days it would make a lot of ground but then it would find itself overstretched and the advance would be slowed and eventually turned around.

How though?
Europe has the best military tech on the planet in its grasp.
HK weapons, goal keeper designed by holland, french mirage's , sea harrier oh and eurofighter.

well lets see , the military availabilty of males from countries between the ages of 14-65.....
Britain =14,943,016
France= 14,487,165
Republic of ireland=1,029,525
Czech republic=2,623,386
Bosnia and herezegovia=1,133,847

Now these dont include; Turkey,The russian federation,Algeria,Morrocco and Tunisia.


136,760,738 - 73,597,731 =63,163,007

Now, umm please tell me again how the USA plans to win if it is out manned by a size 1.858219488 times larger than it?

[edit on 7-1-2005 by devilwasp]

<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in