U.S.A. vs The World. no nukes

[Sbane]

The world wins no doubt. We should remember that we have been selling all our wonderful technology around the world, and the russians have been doing the same. The world will just have way more resources than we will in the end.

[Sbane]

The world wins no doubt. We should remember that we have been selling all our wonderful technology around the world, and the russians have been doing the same. The world will just have way more resources than we will in the end.

Name the technology.  Explain HOW they beat us.  What resources? 

Yes we sell tech, but we don't sell the BEST tech.  Some nations come up with their own tech that is better than ours, but just because you have a better rifle or missles doesn't mean dick if you can't do anything with it.

Resources as in everthing??? You do need money and wealth for war. As for technology, we may have the best but it only goes so far. Also it depends on what constitutes a "victory". It is just more plausible to see the world defeating America than the world being overrun. How would that even be possible?

[Sbane]

The world wins no doubt. We should remember that we have been selling all our wonderful technology around the world, and the russians have been doing the same. The world will just have way more resources than we will in the end.

Name the technology.  Explain HOW they beat us.  What resources? 

Yes we sell tech, but we don't sell the BEST tech.  Some nations come up with their own tech that is better than ours, but just because you have a better rifle or missles doesn't mean dick if you can't do anything with it.

Resources as in everthing??? You do need money and wealth for war. As for technology, we may have the best but it only goes so far. Also it depends on what constitutes a "victory". It is just more plausible to see the world defeating America than the world being overrun. How would that even be possible?

What resources would the US need though?  We have well more than enough oil to run a war for a long time.

"winning" might be a difficult task if we must kill everybody else on the planet.  Still, we aren't losing.  Whomever controls the sky and the sea wins this fight and I've yet to see anything that gives the world the advantage in either.

Why are you so sure America will control the skies and seas? There are huge armies out there like the Europeans, Chinese, Russians and Indians with lots and lots of planes and ships, and this is 4 countries/regions. Imagine what the whole firepower of the world could do. We have the best technology no doubt, but its not as if these armies are pieces of sh**t or anything like that. If this was 1950 then America would have a good chance of winning, but today the world is a different place. Your opinion/ignorance of it is hilarious. Anyways I don't think the world or America would win in the end. I think only a religion such as Buddhism can win from a scenario such as this.

[Sbane]

...are huge armies out there like the Europeans, Chinese, Russians and Indians with lots and lots of planes and ships, and this is 4 countries/regions. Imagine what the whole firepower of the world could do. We have the best technology no doubt, but its not as if these armies are pieces of sh**t or anything like that. If this was 1950 then America would have a good chance of winning, but today the world is a different place. Your opinion/ignorance of it is hilarious.

Dude, American military dominance is far, far greater in 2009 than it was in 1950. 

American military dominance over any one nation could be greater today, but against the combined resources of the whole world? Most of the world was in the ravages of colonialism back in 1950 so it would be hard for them to mass produce the technologies needed to compete. Today most of the world, especially asia, has become industrialized and all they need is the blueprints.

[Sbane]

Why are you so sure America will control the skies and seas? There are huge armies out there like the Europeans, Chinese, Russians and Indians with lots and lots of planes and ships, and this is 4 countries/regions. Imagine what the whole firepower of the world coudl do. We have the best technology no doubt, but its not as if these armies are pieces of sh**t or anything like that. If this was 1950 then America would have a good chance of winning, but today the world is a different place. Your opinion/ignorance of it is hilarious. Anyways I don't think the world or America would win in the end. I think only a religion such as Buddhism can win from a scenario such as this.

Military expenditures by nation
1  United States               713,100,000,000 2009
—  European Union Total 311,920,000,000 2007
2  France                          61,571,330,000 2008-2009
3  United Kingdom            61,280,890,000 2008
4  PRC                               61,090,000,000 2008
5  Russia                          50,000,000,000 2009
6  Japan                           48,860,000,000 2008
7  Germany                      45,930,000,000 2008
8  Italy                             40,050,000,000 2008
9  Saudi Arabia                31,050,000,000 2008
10  Turkey                       30,936,000,000 2008


 World Total                1,470,000,000,000


The world's only chance is air superiority in the opening couple of days by using extremely overwhelming force.  I think the US air shield is strong enough to win that.  Getting past the Navy will be hard.  Getting past the SAM sites that will quickly encircle our nation will be hard.  Getting past the thousandsF16s,F15s and F22s will be impossible.  But lets say a few squadrons sneak in amid the chaos and bomb...what?, a couple of runways/infrastructure?*  They won't make it back.  The US Navy is far beyond the rest of the world.  The USAF is far beyond the rest of the world.  The US Army is battlehardened and there is a nation of potential NCOs that have gotten out in the last few years that would join right back if we were fighting for our survival.  Don't get me started on the Jarheads. 

You're right, this isn't 1950.  Everybody was much closer then.  It ain't close today.




*What they bomb I suppose would depend on the stipulations of our "game".  If it's a fight to the death, then they would bomb the best military target they can hit.  If it's a fight to surrender, they'd still probably hit the military target, but a population center wouldn't be out of the question.

I think the US navy would be the biggest thorn in the side of the world. Air dominance I am not too sure about. Stealth technology does exist outside of America I do believe, so......

I think America will do better in the short term while "losing" in the long term. This is unless they can take over/ occupy and efficiently use the resources of all of the Americas. And America sucks at occupying countries, as proved by Iraq. The military budget of the world is pretty enlightening and shows the priorities of America. Of course in an epic battle like this the world could easily pump more money into their armed forces, and Europe has all the blueprints already. All they need is some good old fashioned mass production, which can even be done in "backward" and "third world" countries such as China, India, Africa etc.

[Sbane]

And can also be bombed by B2s there as well.

If the world doesn't take the skies in the opening days, the world doesn't stand a chance.  As far as I can tell.  If further evidence is brought forth I could change my mind.

No, I think America takes the skies in the opening hours. I am assuming this war would last longer than a few years of course. America's only chance in the long term is if they take north and south America and efficiently rule them. Does the scenario in your mind( and it is indeed in our minds as this is ridiculous) include a quick "surrender" by the world? F'in surrender monkeys.

[Sbane]

I was assuming a last man standing kind of thing.  It would take years of course either way.  Shorter if our aim was just to force govts to surrender and play ball (and also assuming our answer to revolt was very, very 'stern').

Either way, controlling the Western Hemisphere would be the likely first step and it shouldn't be challenging (other than those first couple of days admittedly).

I think you're forgeting the play of satellites and spy planes in war.  The "world" wouldn't be able to build up forces, we'd see it, and bomb it.  The longer it lasts, the better off the US would be.

Keeping the masses under control and running an efficient regime would be a bigger problem than taking it over. Look at Iraq.

How much of an advantage does America have with satellites? The rest of the world probably has enough I am guessing, especially with Russia on our side. And the Chinese.

[Sbane]

I'm going to go with my gut and say America, due to our abilities to finance a war with the world's largest economy, and due to our extremely good, well-equipped troops. But we need an "George HW" like president to do it. Not a "George W" type president. Now for the occupation, that Would be difficult.

The world has a larger economy than America, so wouldn't they be able to better finance a war against us? Also they have us beat at natural resources and manpower. We already spend so much of our GDP on the military that we would do very well in the short term, perhaps taking over the Americas if we wanted to. The next part would be very difficult; engaging in a war around the world while keeping control of our new territories. And I totally agree that the kind of leadership we have will determine the outcome. With dubya at the helm, I could guarantee you a world victory within a year.

[Sbane]

The next time anybody asks why everyone hates America, I will cite this thread as evidence.

[Sbane]

America, most likely.  We have the smartest people and more balls then any other country on Earth. 

Just the facts.  

"gut" "facts" I am guessing.

[Sbane]

America, most likely.  We have the smartest people and more balls then any other country on Earth. 

Just the facts.  

"gut" "facts" I am guessing.

Sometimes the truth hurts.

These colors don't run.
Don't tread on me.
Love it or leave it.

Your "truth" is very amusing. You got some more entertainment for me?

Anyways I would think the knowledge that America would be able to compete with the rest of the world would be enough to get the nationalistic juices flowing, but I guess not. Most countries wouldn't last a day against the world. America could even be on top in the short term. I don't think you can say that about any other nation.

[Sbane]

America, most likely.  We have the smartest people and more balls then any other country on Earth. 

Just the facts.  

"gut" "facts" I am guessing.

Sometimes the truth hurts.

These colors don't run.
Don't tread on me.
Love it or leave it.

Your "truth" is very amusing. You got some more entertainment for me?

I'm not being serious.

Oh ok. I thought you weren't but I wasn't sure.