WORLD WAR 3

[BCPVP]

I haven't seen it mentioned, but one of the biggest problems in trying to field a billion man army is actually supplying them. China/India/Russia have enough problems feeding themselves in peacetime. If the only people left tending the farms are women, children, and old men then the food situation isn't going to get better.

[guids]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Wiper,

They'd still have to get their troops into canada and mexico, which would be close to impossible as it involves air/sea travel which would all be knocked out before they touched land.

I like your outlook on the bears though, it might be our greatest asset. Lets just hope canada doesn't train their bears against us.

[/ QUOTE ] I don't know how practical it is to ho ashore in Alaska, but the west coast of Alaska is pretty damned close to the east coast of Russia. And if you have to protect the whole coastline of south america and canada, and maybe greenland too, that's a lot of coastline to protect.

I think you people overdo how impossible it would be for Russia/China to get troops to your continent. They obviously wouldn't just load up all their ships, send them away and hope for the best. Like it's already been said, the first step would be to knock out surveilance systems. Don't know how this would have to be done, but something about taking out satellites and hacking stuff and something something.

They would still be hopelessly lost in a land war on US soil of course.

[/ QUOTE ]

only china has the ability to shoot down a sat, and even then its not easy and we can defend against it, there is really no other way to disrupt our comm other than shooting down sats. It maybe harder for us to communicate, but the surveillance systems that monitor things like that would be damn near impossible to take out. not to mention knocking out all conventional radar.

[wtfsvi]

[ QUOTE ]
I haven't seen it mentioned, but one of the biggest problems in trying to field a billion man army is actually supplying them. China/India/Russia have enough problems feeding themselves in peacetime. If the only people left tending the farms are women, children, and old men then the food situation isn't going to get better.

[/ QUOTE ] If you do well you can take other peoples' food. If not, you probably die weather you have food or not.

(I'm not serious.)

[wtfsvi]

[ QUOTE ]
only china has the ability to shoot down a sat, and even then its not easy and we can defend against it, there is really no other way to disrupt our comm other than shooting down sats. It maybe harder for us to communicate, but the surveillance systems that monitor things like that would be damn near impossible to take out.

[/ QUOTE ] The satellites are controlled somehow from the US. I think it's a little arrogant to think it's impossible to somehow shut them down from China, say with the help of a few American traitors. It might be difficult enough that it would not be worth trying, but what do I know. And if the Russians can launch their own satellites into space, why is it unconcievable that they could shoot down some of yours?

[ QUOTE ]
not to mention knocking out all conventional radar.

[/ QUOTE ] That I can't see any possible way to knock out, but does that work well for tracking ships?

[Farfenugen]

[ QUOTE ]


really? china + russia has about 11 mm troops vs 2.3 mm for the US. to this you have to factor in that the US is already involved in afghanistan and iraq

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...f_total_troops

[/ QUOTE ]

The United States is not even close to its wartime potential. Comparing current numbers isn't right. If a full scale war erupted the US would bring back the draft and ramp up military production. Right now our military is still somewhat in peacetime mode with respect to force numbers.

Also, comparing troop numbers is nearly meaningless. We have bombs that can blow up several city blocks. Modern technology really has cut down the advantage in having greater numbers.


The United States wins a conventional war, hands down. It is a simple matter of force projection. We have carriers, overseas bases, and allies across the globe. We not only have a very strong military but can bring that military to bear against important targets at great distance very quickly.

If its nuclear war.... we all lose.

[Farfenugen]

[ QUOTE ]
but the surveillance systems that monitor things like that would be damn near impossible to take out.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is not entirely true. The chinese have reportedly developed a very powerful laser that can blind surveillance satellites.

[huber117]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
but the surveillance systems that monitor things like that would be damn near impossible to take out.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is not entirely true. The AMERICANS have reportedly developed a very powerful CAN-O-ASS-WHOOPIN that can DESTROY CHINA.

[/ QUOTE ]

[Shoe]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


really? china + russia has about 11 mm troops vs 2.3 mm for the US. to this you have to factor in that the US is already involved in afghanistan and iraq

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...f_total_troops

[/ QUOTE ]

The United States is not even close to its wartime potential. Comparing current numbers isn't right. If a full scale war erupted the US would bring back the draft and ramp up military production. Right now our military is still somewhat in peacetime mode with respect to force numbers.

Also, comparing troop numbers is nearly meaningless. We have bombs that can blow up several city blocks. Modern technology really has cut down the advantage in having greater numbers.


The United States wins a conventional war, hands down. It is a simple matter of force projection. We have carriers, overseas bases, and allies across the globe. We not only have a very strong military but can bring that military to bear against important targets at great distance very quickly.

If its nuclear war.... we all lose.

[/ QUOTE ]

One thing that I have not thought of until now... is this. In WWII, one of the main reasons the U.S. was able to win was because of how effectively we were able to convert all of our factories/manufacturing to producing whatever was needed for the war.

Since then, we have been building all of our factories in China. If China converted all of those factories for their wartime effort, we might no longer have the manufacturing capacity within our borders that we need to produce enough weapons, planes, ships, etc... that we could otherwise produce if we kept all of our manufacturing jobs here in the U.S.

I agree our army/air force/navy are all vastly superior, but just saying, if an extremely long, conventional war started, we basically built China's infrastructure while neglecting our own. It could take us a long time to get new factories up and running (as opposed to just converting existing factories to wartime efforts like we have in the past).

[LondonBroil]

I'm interested in an all-out conventional war between the U.S. and Belize. Who would win?

[shaftman11]

Who ever mentioned Canada isn't that far off. Fresh water is becoming more and more scarce all over the world. And guess what small (population wise) nation sits on roughly 1/3 of the worlds fresh water? Canada anybody? YES IT IS! I think they will make great states, don't you?