USA vs the Whole World, guns included

[deadbody]

keep in mind that Guerilla warfare is only effective in a war where one side is trying to minimize collateral damage. If the US doesn't care about collateral damage the whole world is a giant parking lot in a matter of weeks. This is all non-nuke. The air force is so overpowering compaerd to the rest of the world that air and sea superiority is totally assured. Then it is a matter of just loading the planes with bombs and killing anything that moves on the other continents.

If collateral damage is a non-issue in a non-nuke war the US wins in a walk. Nukes involved everybody loses. This is predicated on the US president being able to issue a scorched earth war, congress would only allow that under extreme circumstances. The US would most likely just hunker down and fight a totally defensive war, taking over Canada, and Mexico, and then just using the defenses of North America, along with the fact that our Navy and Air Force are vastly superior to never lose, but never win (because we'd lack the willpower to go destroy another nation)

[Zurvan]

I think you guys have watched too many wars where the US wins against incredible odds! OMG!

Yes, the US has the best technology, blah blah blah. BUt wars are won by men on the ground, and you just don't have enough people. You do not have the naval force to blockade Canada & South America from massive landings - that would be done on peaceful ground.

A USA vs the World situation would be very much like World War 2, but on a much larger scale. A country blockaded from outside supplies against a whole worlds industrial production. Today you can dominate the world - in 5 years, you could not. Eventually, you run out of bombers, fuel, bombs & trained pilots.

And I think you're vastly underestimating the amount of men & effort it would take to invade & conquer Canada. It's a lot of coastline to cover, and allies would come flocking in like crazy (in the scenario presented). Russia & China in to Alaska, Europe & Nato could come in via the East. Hell, troops could move in over the Arctic.

Ultimately, against a determined wordlwide opposition, the US loses, badly.

[ThaSaltCracka]

We could invade and conquer Canada with ease. While Canada is a large country, the total population is tiny with a large large portion of your people living in a few big cities. We would move in very quickly taking over the entire central section. We would then be able to crush your coastal towns with our Navy and bombers. Throw in the fact that your country has a large number of recent immigrants, my guess is they aren't fighting for the Maple Leaf.


As I mentioned earlier our geographic location makes conquering us a logistic nightmare for anyone. We can "see" you coming from a 1,000 miles away and we could bombard the [censored] out of you. We also have the potential to hit any city in the world with any type of bomb we want. IF it came down to it, I think many of these countries fold once we start dropping 10,000 bombs on their neighborhoods. Jesus this is depressing and morbid to think about.

[miajag]

[ QUOTE ]
You do not have the naval force to blockade Canada & South America from massive landings

[/ QUOTE ]

Fleet Aircraft Carriers
USA - 12
ROW - 3

Missile Cruisers
USA - 22
ROW - 6

Nuclear Submarines
USA - 72
ROW - 71 (many of these are outdated Russian/Chinese subs)

Rest of world combined has a lot more smaller ships than we do, but LOL at thinking we couldn't prevent a seaborne invasion.

[MyTurn2Raise]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You're post WWII record isn't very good, Vietnam, Iraq etc, on a losing streak some might say.

[/ QUOTE ]

If we wanted to destroy these countries we could in like 3 seconds. The goals of these wars and a total takeover of the world is hardly the same.

[/ QUOTE ]


this is true....the US fights 'wars' with kiddie gloves these days

has the world forgotten Dresden and Tokyo?

has the world forgotten 'daisy cutters'?

For reference, the US can drop conventional weapons that suck all the oxygen out of a city due to the incineration at the beginning. It's sick.

[greyhawke54]

I dont know if anyone has mentioned it yet, but Tom Clancy's Red Storm Rising discussed something similar to this.

I believe that the premise was based on a wargame simulation, and he wrote a story around it. Basically WWIII. USA vs the WARSAW PACT in conventional warfare. No nukes not even the tactical variety. The information is somewhat dated, but it is still a pretty good read as Clancy puts so much into the research in his books.

[Zurvan]

[ QUOTE ]

Rest of world combined has a lot more smaller ships than we do, but LOL at thinking we couldn't prevent a seaborne invasion.

[/ QUOTE ]

Assuming you get all your ships in exactly the right spot, at exactly the right time, sure. But, realistically, it's impossible to cover South America & all of Canada with a naval blockade.

You wouldn't even have the advantage of worldwide satellite coverage: China recently demonstrated a land-based satellite killing missile.

[Zurvan]

[ QUOTE ]
I dont know if anyone has mentioned it yet, but Tom Clancy's Red Storm Rising discussed something similar to this.

I believe that the premise was based on a wargame simulation, and he wrote a story around it. Basically WWIII. USA vs the WARSAW PACT in conventional warfare. No nukes not even the tactical variety. The information is somewhat dated, but it is still a pretty good read as Clancy puts so much into the research in his books.

[/ QUOTE ]

That was NATO vs the Warsaw Pact. Very very different from USA vs the World

[guids]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Rest of world combined has a lot more smaller ships than we do, but LOL at thinking we couldn't prevent a seaborne invasion.

[/ QUOTE ]

Assuming you get all your ships in exactly the right spot, at exactly the right time, sure. But, realistically, it's impossible to cover South America & all of Canada with a naval blockade.

You wouldn't even have the advantage of worldwide satellite coverage: China recently demonstrated a land-based satellite killing missile.

[/ QUOTE ]

I honestly think that is an asset, there is no way to prevent us from communicating within our own country, there is no way for the rest of teh world to co-ordinate with each other. You guys are also forgetting that we run the largest intelligence agencies too, which is basically what I believe wins us the war.


PS, its also nice to know that even though I have no idea whether we would win, it is at least a possiblity, no other country in the world comes even remotely close to being as protected as we are.

[ThaSaltCracka]

We have Chuck Norris too.