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.
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?
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.
In its last REAL WAR (against a real standing army) the U.S. couldn't defeat the North Vietnamese and the Vietcong weren't even a superpower! Backed by China, the Vietcong killed over 50,000 military personnel, shot down almost 2,000 U.S. fighter aircraft, (which were the most sophisticated and advanced aircraft duirng that era), and had he U.S. running out of Vietnam with it's tail between it's legs.
Last edited by dorado0359; 02-01-2015 at 07:31 AM..
In its last REAL WAR (against a real standing army) the U.S. couldn't defeat the North Vietnamese and the Vietcong weren't even a superpower! Backed by China, the Vietcong killed over 50,000 military personnel, shot down almost 2,000 U.S. fighter aircraft, (which were the most sophisticated and advanced aircraft duirng that era), and had he U.S. running out of Vietnam with it's tail between it's legs.
Well said my friend! The U.S./Anglo community has always had a knack for inflating their own importance to try and make themselves seem superior to others. It's the main reason why some people 'think' they want to move here. Because of how the U.S. sales and talks about how it's the worlds one indispensable nation, and how there's sooo much opportunity here, more so than anywhere else in the world blah blah blah. When people hear that on TV over and over and over, there's bound to be some who actually believe that America is the best country in the world.
In its last REAL WAR (against a real standing army) the U.S. couldn't defeat the North Vietnamese and the Vietcong weren't even a superpower! Backed by China, the Vietcong killed over 50,000 military personnel, shot down almost 2,000 U.S. fighter aircraft, (which were the most sophisticated and advanced aircraft duirng that era), and had he U.S. running out of Vietnam with it's tail between it's legs.
This is not true at all we didn't lose Vietnam, we didn't fight the type of war that could win it. The US fought it conservatively because they were worried about civilian deaths. We have morals unlike they did. If we fought in Vietnam like we did in WWII they
could have never won it. I know it's some sort of a feel good statement for the America haters but we could have leveled that country if we wanted to.
You're dreaming if you think anyone could conquer the US in this day and age. Even multiple countries combined could not do it.
Last edited by wanderlust76; 02-01-2015 at 11:37 PM..
This is not true at all we didn't lose Vietnam, we didn't fight the type of war that could win it. The US fought it conservatively because they were worried about civilian deaths. We have morals unlike they did. If we fought in Vietnam like we did in WWII they
could have never won it. I know it's some sort of a feel good statement for the America haters but we could have leveled that country if we wanted to.
You're dreaming if you think anyone could conquer the US in this day and age. Even multiple countries combined could not do it.
And I take it you feel that the Americans won WWII and not the Russians? There's just no reasoning with delusional Americans sometimes....
This is not true at all we didn't lose Vietnam, we didn't fight the type of war that could win it. The US fought it conservatively because they were worried about civilian deaths. We have morals unlike they did. If we fought in Vietnam like we did in WWII they
could have never won it. I know it's some sort of a feel good statement for the America haters but we could have leveled that country if we wanted to.
You're dreaming if you think anyone could conquer the US in this day and age. Even multiple countries combined could not do it.
Worried about civilian deaths???? Say what? You went off the reservation there.
The war was fought with the most screwed up set of ROE's due solely to political interference.
To conquer you all it would take is for Russia or China to do what they do best; throw more people at you than you're prepared to lose yourselves, which they have prevailed by doing time and time again, but something you have yet to experience. It would not necessarily take a nuclear holocaust to reduce the largest military nations to throwing rocks at each other.
"we could have leveled that country if we wanted to" that's exactly the point; those in charge never want to.
Now tell us what's changed in your perception of America's commitment to wage war with a will to win rather than the military complex a long lasting return on shares and your politicians their share of the kick-backs?
Two major threats, one obvious, one not. I will say the middle east is the next major war (obvious). This not so obvious threat will come from china and it will be for, (hold your breath) economic motivations and women. Yes i said it, china kills millions of chinese girl babies every year because there is a birth restriction of one child and girls are less valuable then male children in the eyes of its citizens. The problem now is you have a huge inbalance between male & females in china. Whats going to happen to a generation of chinese males who won't be able to find a mate or a girl to hook up with in china? Like other situations when there are no resources, people will be forced to take the resources.
I don't think anyone could beat us, but then again. 100 chinese soldiers to our 1. i don't care how advanced you are, sometimes you can just overwelm a technically advanced army.
This is not true at all we didn't lose Vietnam, we didn't fight the type of war that could win it. The US fought it conservatively because they were worried about civilian deaths. We have morals unlike they did. If we fought in Vietnam like we did in WWII they
could have never won it. I know it's some sort of a feel good statement for the America haters but we could have leveled that country if we wanted to.
You're dreaming if you think anyone could conquer the US in this day and age. Even multiple countries combined could not do it.
Why did 2 million Vietnamese civilians die then? Why are the Vietnamese suffering from dioxin poisoning? I thought America fought with concern for civilians.
You are also dreaming if you think the US could conquer a great power. Almost all of America's wars after WWII have been against Third World countries that are barely industrialized. You can brag all you want about the unconditional surrender America coerced from Germany and Japan but America will NEVER EVER get an unconditional surrender from either Russia or China.
Why did 2 million Vietnamese civilians die then? Why are the Vietnamese suffering from dioxin poisoning? I thought America fought with concern for civilians.
You are also dreaming if you think the US could conquer a great power. Almost all of America's wars after WWII have been against Third World countries that are barely industrialized. You can brag all you want about the unconditional surrender America coerced from Germany and Japan but America will NEVER EVER get an unconditional surrender from either Russia or China.
WWII wasn't an American war, the Russians were the hardest hitters of either side. Without the Russians the Axis powers would have won the war. Without America, the Allied forces still would have won.
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.