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.
None of those nations or any other nations could "win" an offensive war against the United States. The best they could accomplish is mutual nuclear annihilation.
The country we are most likely to lose a war to--in the sense of failing to achieve our war objectives--is the next one we are stupid or evil enough to pick a fight with.
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.
Korea and Vietnam were fought in politically correct manner . Vietnam we would not let our military invade or bomb the north.nether Korea or Vietnam we were trying to win
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.
China should send billions in dollars in gifts to Islamic terrorists and Israel. No group of people in any region has done more to divert American attention away from Asia. A lot of Chinese people were thrilled with the Iraq War since it allowed China to build up its military without any corresponding increase in the region from the US. Pro-Chinese Zionists like Sheldon Adelson are some of the best friends the Chinese will ever have especially since Adelson is so fanatically pro Israel while also wanting America to be softer on China since he made most of his billions from Macau.
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.
I'm by no means an expert on China-Russia relations, but I think the idea of China siding with Russia against the US is pretty absurd. We may not be besties with China, but they are more willing to work with us than Russia. An important part of US strength is how successful our diplomatic actions have been. Yes, we're secure because our military is far superior to anyone else. And yes, we're secure because we're well situated geographically -- friends to the north, friends to the south and nice big ocean on either side of us. But we're also secure because we've made a lot of allies over the years. Nixon, in a brilliant move of statecraft, managed to do the impossible in the Cold War era and developed a relationship with a Communist power. I have no illusions that China would not oppose the US on many issues big and small if it suited its national interests, but I can't really foresee it ever suiting its interests to ally with Russia against us. To put in colloquial terms, Russia has just proven itself to be too much of a jerk and an unreliable partner to be much of a friend. The US on other hand has done a pretty good job of proving itself to be a friend worth having.
Yeah, that would be bad. If aliens invaded the world would look to the US to provide the bulk of the military response. Meanwhile, the smart nations would immediately open up diplomatic channels to convey the message to their new masters that the US doesn't represent all of humankind.
Those need to be choices, because depending on the whims of our politicians, the Axis of Germany, Italy and Japan can be defeated and the USSR can lose the Cold War, or a backwater 3rd world country like Vietnam can send us home with our tail between our legs.
With Obama as President, pretty sure Greenland or Lichtenstein could conquer the US. With someone else...who knows?
Oh boy, it turns out I really made the understatement of the year when I said I'm no expert on China-Russia relations. It turns out the two have been playing foot-sy for years now and are exploring ways to strengthen their cooperation.
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.
LOL, the U.S. "won" WWII because the Russians kicked arse and many of the Germans were unfamiliar with how bitterly cold the Russian winters were and froze to death. WWII would have been won by the Allied Nations with or without the U.S.'s help.
Last edited by LookingForAChange; 01-27-2015 at 05:45 PM..
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.
