Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
^Keep in mind that one nuclear tipped torpedo will completely destroy an entire carrier group. Aircraft carriers are designed for WWII type strategy. In a real war with the USA, they would become irrelevant.
Well, I would say Russia, because of Nukes but everyone would lose in that case.
As far as a conventional war, Russia, China and India have too much invested in ground forces vs Navy and Airforce like the US. Theres a reason why we have an Airforce that is as large as the next 7 countries combined, air power is paramount.
If any one of those countries were in a Conventional war with the US they would lose before getting started. Within 100 hours every major Dam, bridge, powerplant, airport would be destroyed by Cruise missile or conventional Air power. Every military ship larger than 100 ft would be at the bottom of the sea. Kind of hard for them to get their Armor to attack us if they have no way to get them here. They being said, 50+ years from now it would be China.
^Keep in mind that one nuclear tipped torpedo will completely destroy an entire carrier group. Aircraft carriers are designed for WWII type strategy. In a real war with the USA, they would become irrelevant.
This is becoming an topic for great debates BUT....I suggest you study up on US ASW capabilities as well as the decline of Red Banner submarine fleet.... ....
The Commies don't have a sub that can get that close to a carrier battle group....
I was reading this article and it caused me to start thinking, is there any real possibility of WWIII within say... the next 100 years? And if so which one of these nations would most likely be the instigator of such a war?
We can win any war against any nation as long as we fight a war with no politically correct rules. As soon as we fight while constraining. Our military we lose. War should not be fought with PC . War needs to be so ugly that it is a last option. If the enmy is using human shields we need to take the enemy out. Our problem is we try to fight a nice friendly war . We won world 2 not worried about anything but winning. We can win any war that we actually try to win.
This is becoming an topic for great debates BUT....I suggest you study up on US ASW capabilities as well as the decline of Red Banner submarine fleet.... ....
The Commies don't have a sub that can get that close to a carrier battle group....
Commies? LOL The USSR has been gone for 23 years. I think you might be the one that should do a little updating on current military capability.
the entire CENTCOM and northern part of africom are an issue....there are two dozen countries with high populations of extremist/orthodox muslims
Agreed; but the question is when do we intervene? CENTCOM and AFRICOM are both a mess, Boko Haram ideology and even name literally mean something along the lines of "No Western Education", which means once there objectives in Nigeria are finished they could possibly turn an to more of the Western world eg US. Us Americans don't have a stomach for war, even really the finances for it, but if we can stop something in its tracks before it actually does require a large-scale intervention then I do agree with it.
We can win any war against any nation as long as we fight a war with no politically correct rules. As soon as we fight while constraining. Our military we lose. War should not be fought with PC . War needs to be so ugly that it is a last option. If the enmy is using human shields we need to take the enemy out. Our problem is we try to fight a nice friendly war . We won world 2 not worried about anything but winning. We can win any war that we actually try to win.
Vietnam War and Korean War both had millions of civilians killed and the US did not win those wars. North Korean cities suffered far more devastation than any cities in Japan (including Hiroshima and Nagasaki btw) and Germany that were bombed in WWII yet no surrender came. Massive civilian casualties generally do not always lead to victory and full mobilization is economically prohibitive for any country fighting a war. There is a reason why most American wars have been limited and that is because it is incredibly expensive to fight a war. WWII cost over 4 trillion dollars after accounting for inflation. Do you really think it is a good idea to spend trillions of dollars fighting a war against small irrelevant states that will lead to very little gains? The vast majority of Americans do not think so.
Vietnam War and Korean War both had millions of civilians killed and the US did not win those wars. North Korean cities suffered far more devastation than any cities in Japan (including Hiroshima and Nagasaki btw) and Germany that were bombed in WWII yet no surrender came. Massive civilian casualties generally do not always lead to victory and full mobilization is economically prohibitive for any country fighting a war. There is a reason why most American wars have been limited and that is because it is incredibly expensive to fight a war. WWII cost over 4 trillion dollars after accounting for inflation. Do you really think it is a good idea to spend trillions of dollars fighting a war against small irrelevant states that will lead to very little gains? The vast majority of Americans do not think so.
Yet many people don't understand that the nuclear option was truly the best option for both sides, the U.S. would've had more many casualties, but Japan would've suffered far more -- hell, we killed more with our bombings than the nuclear weapons. I do believe that we would've gone nuclear in Korea and Vietnam if it weren't for the Soviets and Chinese having a role in those wars, but then again I'm a firm believer the US can "win" against any country, but we have to think "is this fight even worth it?" It's like one arguing with his wife, you can "win" but is that win worth sleeping on a uncomfortable couch or even divorce? I think not.
Right now, I'm trying to predict where the next big conflict will be. Call me crazy, but I feel that China has some role in ISIS as of now, I know we previously did, but ISIS could potentially be good for China for a few years considering it will somewhat turn our attention from the Asian Pivot for more equipment will be needed in the Middle East. Then we also have to think what will PM Netanyahu say to our Congress in the coming days, meaning will we intervene in Iran someday? I truly hope not, I believe that's where we fall at, I don't think we even have the proper equipment (at least at a high level) to even invade Iran.
But then again, as someone else has said, it's all about being Politically Correct, if the US were acting like an empire, instead of negotiating SOFA's, we'd just force troops into neighboring countries to invade Iran. If we decided to invade tomorrow, we'd probably have to sail from Kuwait or Bahrain to get to Iran, and we all have already discussed that the U.S. would destroy anything before it comes to our shore, the same applies to Iran. Then even if we did get our troops there, it's a long road to Teheran, unless we're automatically building airstrips as soon as we arrive, our troops will be exhausted on that stretch to Teheran.
Yeah, I know we're speaking on other countries, but I do feel we need an honest conversation on Iran.
None of them is likely to go to war against us, because they know that even if they all united against us, they would still lose.
Better check that hubris. It didn't do the Roman Empire any favors.
Russia has the nuclear weapon advantage, China has sheer manpower. So either of those, but especially if they banded together in a war against the US.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
