I just know we could whip the crap out of Canada for sure. :upsidedown:

 

Doesn't really matter, because our boomers DO exist!

 

But that wouldn't make for an interesting discussion, because the whole world would lose.

I saw this video, the next one I watched was the US vs Russia and China. How come we can beat the whole world, but according to them, we get beat by Russia and China. What a laugh. Neither, or even both together, possess a merchant fleet large enough to supply their troops if they magically got here. Forget the fact that they lack the sealift capacity to get here in the first place. Then, you know, the US Navy................ Maybe we can't invade them for lack of troops, but they can't touch us for lack of ships.

United States (USA) vs Russia and China - Who Would Win? Military / Army Comparison - YouTube

I haven't watched that one. Did other countries support Russia and China? In the video in the OP, the US victory comes at a great cost to the world's economy due to the drastic measures taken.

I'd be interested in hearing what Japan, India, Australia and Canada are doing. Then there's the problem with missile components and rare metals for weapons. Maybe we can bring back mustard gas and napalm.

Japan, India and Canada are specifically talked about in the video.

Most of the US ground forces would be at home, so Canada and central/south America would not even be worth worrying about.

.

 

We are already losing the global war of the world on our Southern border. No need to go to war when you can invade, populate and change an entire nation by using our laws against us.

It's the death of thousand cuts. Absolutely no use of advanced weapons, just millions and millions of illegals entering, abusing, profiting and destroying our society.

Ghost Prepper

 

This is an example of what you get when a political solution is applied. Failure is inevitable.

A military solution would provide much different results. Unleash the dogs and let them do what they've been trained to do.

 

Very interesting. The scenario assumes no nukes are involved, and it is not a surprise attack, so all sides have a chance to get ready.

1: USA shuts down all middle east oil production with it's VASTLY superior air power and sink an oil tanker in the Suez Canal to block it, and uses naval ships to blockade any tanker travel. The ME has 800 billion barrels in oil reserves, and 60% of the world's oil passes through the Arabian Sea. Meanwhile, the USA can supply it's own oil.

2: USA Naval blockade of Indian Ocean and Pacific Ocean. The rest of the world will be busy for awhile trying to break up this blockade rather than attack the mainland. Meanwhile, their oil reserves are running dry.

3: Russia begins developing it's 80 billion barrels in oil reserves.

4: Europe decides whether to move all it's air and naval assets to the ME to dislodge the Americans, who have a navy larger than the next 8 largest navies... combined, and the US's 55 nuclear attack submarines.

5: Even if combined forces can dislodge the US from the ME oil reserves, the US will still use stealth bombers and naval air assets to ensure the oil fields are unusable. Meanwhile, the combined forces are moving assets on the ground with dwindling oil supply.

6: Global trade routes are permanently shut down by the USA.

7: China...

That's just halfway through the video.


The United States (USA) vs The World - Who Would Win? Military / Army Comparison - YouTube

I saw this video, the next one I watched was the US vs Russia and China. How come we can beat the whole world, but according to them, we get beat by Russia and China. What a laugh. Neither, or even both together, possess a merchant fleet large enough to supply their troops if they magically got here. Forget the fact that they lack the sealift capacity to get here in the first place. Then, you know, the US Navy................ Maybe we can't invade them for lack of troops, but they can't touch us for lack of ships.

 

I'd be interested in hearing what Japan, India, Australia and Canada are doing. Then there's the problem with missile components and rare metals for weapons. Maybe we can bring back mustard gas and napalm.

 

when the Columbians cut off the coffee, we're screwed

 

They grow coffee in Hawaii.

.

 

Tomac/Plessinger/Barcia have a chance for the US team.

Other than that, I can't say.

 

America could win in a nuclear exchange for about 30 minutes ,then they would be gone like everyone else. Hey Im pro USA but give me a break, against the world . Maybe if you started producing huge numbers of aircraft, ships and armoured vehicles. Implimented the draft and got about 5 million more people in the services. That might make it interesting but you would still loose. For one thing it would start a civil war in your country. Its one thing if the world had attacked you but if you started it that would turn the left against you too.

 

The US Navy may be strong enough to stop oil shipments from the Middle East by water, however, Europe, Russia, China and the Middle East are connected by land routes. We don’t have the power to shut down all land shipments, especially without the cooperation of our European and Asian allies.

 

Land routes are easy to disrupt, pipelines can’t move, and bridges are always vulnerable. They can’t move enough oil by land to stay warm, much less power their military, if we decide to stop them.

 

Stupid scenarios.

Bomb the holy living crap out of the capitals, shut down their air power, and offer terms that leave their politicians in power, and we don’t have to blockade crap, they’ll sell their people out in a heartbeat. They’ll sign whatever we tell them to, as long as they retain their titles and positions of authority with a cut of the proceeds, and the fact that it’s a sham won’t matter at all.

If your gonna be a bully, be a smart bully.:thumb:

 

If the entire world is against us, I would hope they would win. Afterall, there would have to be some seriously big reasons for all of them to be against us in the first place.

 

The entire world is already against us. If they make any agreements at all with us, it's because they want our money, our military, or our consumers, and they do it while talking about us behind our backs.

They hate us because we don't accept the globalism they embrace. Imagine what it will be like in 30 years, after the migrants have taken FULL control of Europe, and all of south america is fully socialist?

Imagine if we pull out of the UN and NATO because we put in a lot more than we get out of it, and the EU desperately resorts to allying with Russia. Russia is already allied with China and Iran. (BTW, that's my argument for staying in the UN and NATO).

So it's not inconceivable that it could be the US vs every other powerful country in the world when we have done nothing wrong. And you'd side with the enemy? smh

.

 

Take off the collar and ditch the leash on our armed forces.....unstoppable.

South America and Canada first. Too easy.

Africa....why bother but it may come in handy. Resources and labor. Give The bloods and crips uniforms and drop them off. Shouldn't be a problem.

The ME, bomb them out of existence and park Exxon and Mobil all over the region. China would crack if trade with Iran was severed. Almost all their oil is imported so cut that off and let the Chinese sit and suck on that for a bit.

Europe. D-day all over again minus a tough and determined army a la Germany circa 1942. Europe is overloaded with pansies and third world immigrants these days. France would surrender before we even landed anyway.

Once Europe is secure and the Chinese are using mules to drag their tanks into defensive positions the Navy can bombard them since 90% of their population is clustered along the coastline. Maybe throw in some heavy carpet bombing and then once that's done maybe send in enough troops to secure what's left.

And finally Russia.....tougher nut to crack as they are heavy in the natural resources needed to sustain a fight but still beatable. Assassinate Putin and use air power to soften them up followed by heavy armor and arty and lots of Marines.

Let the Army handle the " Easier " fights while Paris Island pumps out killers for what's left of Russia and China, really the only two countries capable of putting up much of a fight.

Screw the F-35. For the equivalent cost of that stupid program you could up production and crank out 16's, 15's, B-52's, and of course a couple thousand more A-10's for those stubborn idiots that want a fight on the ground and still save a few bucks.

Couple more carriers wouldn't hurt either, although that would be rather expensive. Maybe take Canada and S. America and make them pay for it. Oh yeah, almost forgot. Use the wall money for this since we won't need it once we just take Mexico. And just imagine all the workers we could then put to work in factories to support the war effort! They want jobs.....here ya go senor.


::: That was fun!

Could work but I can't see it happening without someone/s resorting to Nukes. That's a non starter.

Bummer.

 

Are we really going to hash this same debate every damn month?

 

Maybe I haven't been paying attention. This is the first time I've seen this one.

 

I’m just wondering...what’s the over/under on the EU folks getting done with their meetings about who’s in charge, what language to use, how to meet emissions standards and green energy requirements, and what flags to fly in what order, before it’s all over and France is a new US suburb?

 

.
Well, the bookies will have to figure into the odds the following likely scenario:

The French won't even be present at the meeting to agree upon a date to start and a language to use for the aforementioned discussions.

The French would have already surrendered and handed us the keys to the USS Charles de Gaulle and its accompanying aircraft; which will have already sailed to its new home port of Norfolk, to be retrofitted with American flags, English labeling and signage, and to pick up its new crew.
.

 

40 million (about 13%) of people within US borders were born somewhere else. Chance are if there is a war with everyone else, its going to get really messy internally

 

Our Navy wouldn't be that impressive after Russia and China unleashed their hypersonic anti-ship missiles at them. We have no effective defense against them. While I think we could defend our homeland, if we have no support from other countries, our ability to project power beyond our borders wouldn't last long.

 

Never underestimate the MAD DOG:thumb:

 

If the entire world is against us, I would hope they would win. Afterall, there would have to be some seriously big reasons for all of them to be against us in the first place.

as a moderately successful older brother, I know what that would be: resentment. it's a festering chronic disease.

 

No one wins a global war. We all suffer for it.

 

Yep. We all suffer. But the winner is the last country still standing . . . if there is one.

 

Ridiculous navel gazing.

 

I feel like we would run out of critical components for missiles and such before we really ever got going. Worldwide is a lot of targets!

I think the naval blockade of the Indian Ocean would be pretty hard. Swarms of anti-ship missiles and torpedoes would eventually take them down.

 

So....you think we’d run out of munitions, but they wouldn’t run out?

I’m not sure, but I think you don’t really grasp the sheer volume of stuff we have ready to go, and the ability we have to shift gears and start making critical components if required.

World wide isn’t really that many targets, if you select the right targets first, the rest will fall in line pretty quickly.

 

If Europe turned on us, I think we could get Russia and China to side with us to buy us time. It might end up more like when Hitler and Stalin carved up the Poland together in the long run. But a couple of years makes a big difference.

Those two are playing long games and would benefit from us fighting others without directly targeting them.

 

I'm 13 seconds into the video and hear "The United States, currently the worlds sole superpower"... oh brother.

 

If the entire globe declared war and attacked, any soldier not in the continental U.S. or on a ship, will either be killed or captured just by sheer numbers overwhelming them. As far as invading the U.S., it would be very difficult, but not impossible. Our northern and southern borders would be very hard to defend since the distance is too great to cover. If I were an opposing force (in coalition with others), I would attack the NW and the SE. With a coordinated attack on Washington and Florida, they could quickly move and work their way down south along the west coast, west of the Rockies (nothing really stopping them either). On the east coast, they work their way north. The large cities would be bombed before a major invasion. LA on the west coast, would be a real bitch to them because of how large of an area it is. IF they were able to get the east and west coast, they would then start in the central U.S. in the north (between the Rockies and the Mississippi). I would guess that they would save Texas for last, because we have several large cities, and every redneck and his cousin has firearms here and we're ready to use them. We also have an active military force as well as regular army. Between our tanker divisions, air force, state guard and army/air national guard, and neighboring states... it would be one helluva fight... and in the long run, we may just be our own country after all (with Louisiana and a few surrounding states). LOL

 

Or as has been mentioned before, they would just nuke Yellowstone and let it do all the work. They can clean up later...

 

Yellowstone isn't going to erupt if nuked.

Volcanic eruptions require 2 things. A weak spot in the planet's crust and pressure from magma building up.

We drill holes in the planet all the time. Weak spot abound on the planet without much incident.

Just because there is a massive sized weak spot at Yellowstone there currently isn't enough magma pressure to make it erupt.

If Yellowstone was about to erupt our seismologists would already know about it.

IF you had bothered to either read the OP or watch the video linked, you would know that it has nothing to do with the US being invaded. In fact, the US specifically WOULD NOT be invaded in this scenario.

I watched it.

What would be the point to a conventional war of that scale? Nothing would be gained by the opposition. We can generate munitions and equipment far faster than the opposition. Our logistics greatly exceeds theirs. Just destroying our military capability destroys theirs too and we'll be back in business faster than them. They won't get the opportunity to exploit a reduced US military military footprint.

All that could happen is reduce all three nation's ability to militarily influence other nations. So the small nations would have a free reign to push at each other without our 3 nations' influence. The nations that the Big 3 influence are controlled in different ways. Mostly it's money control but the US uses far less overt military pressure to bring them to heel. Russia and China would lose more satellite nations than we would. Both Russia and China have far more disputed parts of their empires than we do. If all 3 nations severely lose military presence then Russia will lose more of the Caucuses nations to the Muslims and leave their disputed Pacific areas wide open. China would lose the oil in the Spratleys, Tibet, and Xinjiang, plus likely their influence in Iran and Africa that they need for supplies. Plus their Nork puppet becomes vulnerable.

Wars happen for a reason. Expand influence, gain land, defense, and retribution. Russia and China to not gain land or influence in a war with the US. We aren't going to start the war, so defense is out. Retribution? Nukes then go on the table and everyone loses badly.

Your premise that they would attack us conventionally has no reason to happen.

This is why only proxy wars are fought now. Khrushchev and Kennedy figured this out about 60 years ago.

 

You also have to take in account that a lot of our snowflake youth won't fight to defend our country, and may even take up arms against it.

 

Not to mention the politicians that will be selling us out making back door deals all over the globe.

If the entire globe declared war and attacked, any soldier not in the continental U.S. or on a ship, will either be killed or captured just by sheer numbers overwhelming them.

Some locations, that may be true. Others...there simply aren't enough of them to do it, and all we have to do is hold out long enough for the air power to show up.

Now, if they hit us from the air before we've got control...yeah, it could be bad for the guys on the ground.

But you know what they say about payback...

As far as invading the U.S., it would be very difficult, but not impossible. Our northern and southern borders would be very hard to defend since the distance is too great to cover. If I were an opposing force (in coalition with others), I would attack the NW and the SE. With a coordinated attack on Washington and Florida, they could quickly move and work their way down south along the west coast, west of the Rockies (nothing really stopping them either).

How do they get this invasion force onto the beaches, without the air power putting them at the bottom a few (hundred) miles out?

I'm not seeing it.

LA on the west coast, would be a real bitch to them because of how large of an area it is.

Why would they want to attack LA? There's nothing worthwhile there unless you consider the propaganda arm of the movie industry to be of strategic importance, and the predominant industry and majority population there would probably be on their side anyway.