It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

USA can take on the rest of the world???

page: 2
5
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 2 2010 @ 11:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dragon33
Ummm.. to state the obvious...
Surely the Yanks do realise that if they destroy the World 1000 times over with those nukes that they will lose the war just like every other living thing on the planet?
As for the Navy being as large as the combined fleets of the entire World... er.. yeah sure mate... whatever you reckon.
Well duuuh, that's precisely why I said it was "technically" possible.




posted on Jun, 2 2010 @ 11:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
we have enough nuclear weapons to destroy the globe 1,000 times over:

I'd say, technically this is a very accurate statement.



Well then technically Russia can also take on the rest of the world, their nuclear arsenal is actually larger than the US. Having the ability to destroy the planet is nothing to be proud of IMO. It's a hold over from the cold-war when the US and the USSR went eyeball to eyeball for decades each side escalating the nuclear threat. Those days are gone.


I know the OP didn't intend this thread as a bash America thread but that's what it will end up being. They always end up that way. Suffice it to say NO the US couldn't take on the whole world. First off many here wouldn't want to, second we are already stretched as it is. Simply saying we have the ability to nuke the planet into a nuclear winter doesn't say much in my opinion. that's not taking on the whole world, that's just killing mankind ourselves included!


PEACE

Slay



posted on Jun, 2 2010 @ 11:32 AM
link   
reply to post by Expat888
 


The arrogance that we're better than every other country, better than everyone else in everything we do. Are u serious?? We went in to 'liberate' these ppl, save them from themselves bcuz 'everybody should be like US, we're the model of how everyone should live' That to me is arrogance. The fact that we think they actually want us there in the 1st place is ignorance. The fact we believe we're saving the day, not accepting that just about all wars are based on lies and greed makes us ignorant If we did it out of the goodness of our hearts why are we not in Ghana? How about Sudan? Genocide is commited every day and we dont help those who need it most, thats ignorance to me. The thought that we're always going to be the world power despite our wrong doings is arrogant. Why would we invade countries that dont want our help, dont want us in their country, ignorance and arrogance. We stayed in vietnam way past the time we shouldve to save face-ignorant, not to mention the real reason we were there to begin with. We're still fighting in Afghanistan with little progress, our men and women dying for naught-ignorance. We invade a country illegally and immorally thinking we have the right to go against the UN and not have to be held responsible for it-arrogance. God, I really could go on for hours.



posted on Jun, 2 2010 @ 11:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69
Having the ability to destroy the planet is nothing to be proud of IMO.


That's Hippy talk and you know it!

We oughtta be proud of our nukes - they make us feared and Oh Sooo badass.








posted on Jun, 2 2010 @ 11:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by thoughtsfull
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Please can you show me where the US navy is greater than that of the rest of the world combined? I'd be really interested...

I can understand the US navy using a rule similar to that of the Royal Navy at height of Empire.. which was the 2 power rule . i.e greater than the combined force of the next 2 largest navies, but to claim the US Navy is bigger and can take on the fleets of the whole world combined needs a little support


Thanks
I heard the on the History Channel last week as a matter of fact. It was an interesting bit of information to me since I'm a veteran.


Well there are 2 ways of looking at it.. tonnage vs number of ships (of the same class)

Comparing the tonnage of the US fleet against the next 40 fleets (98% of the worlds naval power) the US fleet equals the tonnage of the next 40 fleets..

but is not equal when you compare number of warships.

I honestly dislike comparing tonnage as you could have an aircraft carrier being compared to 20 submarines, it's apples and oranges, which is a misleading comparison.

Hence the Royal navies 2 power rule, which was to be equal to or greater than the combined forces of the next 2 largest navies...

That is IMHO the kind of power project empires have... and no doubt in my mind the US has, and that to me is pretty impressive..



posted on Jun, 2 2010 @ 12:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by thoughtsfull

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by thoughtsfull
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Please can you show me where the US navy is greater than that of the rest of the world combined? I'd be really interested...

I can understand the US navy using a rule similar to that of the Royal Navy at height of Empire.. which was the 2 power rule . i.e greater than the combined force of the next 2 largest navies, but to claim the US Navy is bigger and can take on the fleets of the whole world combined needs a little support


Thanks
I heard the on the History Channel last week as a matter of fact. It was an interesting bit of information to me since I'm a veteran.


Well there are 2 ways of looking at it.. tonnage vs number of ships (of the same class)

Comparing the tonnage of the US fleet against the next 40 fleets (98% of the worlds naval power) the US fleet equals the tonnage of the next 40 fleets..

but is not equal when you compare number of warships.

I honestly dislike comparing tonnage as you could have an aircraft carrier being compared to 20 submarines, it's apples and oranges, which is a misleading comparison.

Hence the Royal navies 2 power rule, which was to be equal to or greater than the combined forces of the next 2 largest navies...

That is IMHO the kind of power project empires have... and no doubt in my mind the US has, and that to me is pretty impressive..

They definitely said "tonnage" now that you bring it up.



posted on Jun, 2 2010 @ 01:26 PM
link   
i've updated my first post if you want a read of the numbers!



posted on Jun, 2 2010 @ 01:37 PM
link   
America can't even win a war in Afghanistan against a rag tag bunch of herders and farmers, let alone well-trained Russian or Chinese troops.

Let's discount nuclear war, which would produce no winners, and say that America might win against either Russia or China alone, but could not stand up to their combined forces.



posted on Jun, 2 2010 @ 01:52 PM
link   
This speech by Ned Beatty is worth a watch from the movie Network concerning globilization and how borders mean nothing anymore, this was 40 years ago. Any animosity you see displayed between two nations is more or less an illusion to keep people in a constant state of fear.

www.youtube.com...

Its a great scene, helps put things in perspective.



posted on Jun, 2 2010 @ 04:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheComte
America can't even win a war in Afghanistan against a rag tag bunch of herders and farmers, let alone well-trained Russian or Chinese troops.



You do realize the Russians got their butt kicked in 8 years and lost over 19.000 killed in Afghanistan and that the Chinese got their rear handed to them by the Vietnamese in a matter of weeks back in 1979 RIGHT?!


I Library with real history books can be your friend. Not ignorance.
Source



[edit on 2-6-2010 by SLAYER69]



posted on Jun, 2 2010 @ 04:15 PM
link   
Admin edit: Spammer banned.

[edit on Jun 2nd 2010 by Djarums]



posted on Jun, 2 2010 @ 04:33 PM
link   
mac, stop storming my threads to get your post count up. and slayer, you're correct, and if im correct, the vietnamese also defeated the french?
i'm not sure if it actually escalated into a war, but they got themselves out of french rule for sure.

edit: i got it wrong, the french had previously defeated the viet's but eventually gave them independance.

[edit on 2-6-2010 by Dr Slim]



posted on Jun, 2 2010 @ 04:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Solomons
It can destroy the world, but it would also be destroyed...


Exactly. Most people in the US understand this. Seems like some people have problems coming to grips with that statement, tho.



posted on Jun, 2 2010 @ 04:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Demetre
In Germany we got Our asses kicked by their inferior air force/army.


This statement just caught my eye and I thought, "WTF, over."

When did this little event happen?



posted on Jun, 2 2010 @ 04:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheComte
America can't even win a war in Afghanistan against a rag tag bunch of herders and farmers, let alone well-trained Russian or Chinese troops.


Hmmmm.....If I remember correctly, a handful of SOF personnel pretty much took over the country with the Northern Alliance.

And your "well-trained" Soviet troops pretty much got their asses handed to them in a BRDM hubcap in A-stan.

Well-trained Russian or Chinese? Not sure about the Chinese, but I seriously doubt that the Russians are getting as much training time as US troops.

And if you compare Russian, US and Chinese forces, want to guess who has the most combat time right now?


Originally posted by TheComte
Let's discount nuclear war, which would produce no winners, and say that America might win against either Russia or China alone, but could not stand up to their combined forces.


And? You think the Chinese could stand against the US and Russia? Or the Russians against the Chinese and US?



[edit on 2-6-2010 by signal2noise]



posted on Jun, 2 2010 @ 04:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by signal2noise

Originally posted by TheComte
And? You think the Chinese could stand against the US and Russia? Or the Russians against the Chinese and US?
[edit on 2-6-2010 by signal2noise]


signal, i agree with most of your post, but maybe you didnt understand, this is the point i'm trying to make, the whole origin of this post was to prove the arogance of certain individuals who think that the US can take over the world. De-bunked.



posted on Jun, 2 2010 @ 04:52 PM
link   
Right!!

Could America beat the rest of the world? Lets see. NO

IF you are talking about war then we assume that people are fighting fair under the various conventions then there is no way America could win jack.

They LOST Vietnam, they have been getting whipped in Afganistan and would do against China and Russia.

IF America used Nukes then YES they could win. And that is the only way America could win any war against a substantial nation.

Americans are pure cowards. They strut around thinking they are cool but everyone mocks them. They start all wars and can never finish them. Look how many people they have lost in the Gulf...bucket loads (no sympathy from me) . I don't care about dead soldiers one bit. especially American ones. I am from a military background myself, Northern Ireland, Sierra Leone, Bosnia. Im still alive without any so called war Post war syndrome BS. Like all Americans suffer from. Too soft and too metrosexual.

They are not well trained....except for in ganging up on people in large numbers. They have big mouths and they purely rely on they superior weapons. YES they do have the best kit and weapons.

But they have zero standards. Zero initiative and zero brains. They try to win with brawn alone.....and without NUKES in todays world that dont win anything but beauty pageants.

Im can honestly say that if there were no nukes allowed....then America can win nothing alone. Not without dragging some other country in to do its planning and backup. Its like a school bully. On there own useless...with their little friends around they think they are the man.

They are ill disciplined, have no real talent for war (they have the numbers so they can sacrifice many men without a seconds thought), have the dumbest people commanding units, regiments.

Without their great technology they are worthless. Not one other nations including Canada like serving with the Yanks. Its a fact.

[edit on 2-6-2010 by C11H17N2NaO2S]



posted on Jun, 2 2010 @ 04:53 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 





Chinese got their rear handed to them by the Vietnamese in a matter of weeks back in 1979 RIGHT?!


Did they really?, China pretty much burnd North Vietnam to the ground.

As for Afghanistan, # that, no one apart from Ghengis has ever really conquerd that crazy place. Britain and Russia fought each other for about a 100 years for Afghanistan with no real succes and seems like folks will keep on fighting for it with no great success.

[edit on 2-6-2010 by Johnze]



posted on Jun, 2 2010 @ 04:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Dr Slim
 



I think this same thread was started a year ago. Usually, it's someone that's not a US citizen that starts it. And then it goes down hill from there with anyone taking cheap shots slamming the US.



posted on Jun, 2 2010 @ 04:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Dr Slim
 


i feel the quote "you know the type, loud as a motorbike, but wouldn't crush a grape in a fruit fight" fits what you are feeling, i hold no hate to america though, you can do that to yourself, i just found the quote to fit.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join