|
the year is 2017. the world's nuclear arsenal have been disarmed by the obummer treaty of 2015. president cruz begins his genocide against democrats. the world declares war to end the genocide. assume that the genocide is performed by young republicans that would otherwise not be in the military, that the military is exclusively full of republicans and every democrat would be worthless militarily, that all strategic nuclear weaponry is gone (but not things like nuclear powered carriers, etc), and that the united states is at war with a coalition of every single country on the planet. also, the only requirement for victory is that the united states must defend its shores and maintain the federal government long enough to complete ted cruz's second term as president. could the united states win? i want to see fair argument from both sides here. i have my opinions but i don't want to bias the discussion by using my authority as OP to influence the debate.
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 22:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 17:15 |
|
|
no theyre too fat lol
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 22:26
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:no theyre too fat lol
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 22:27
|
|
|
if there was no use of nuclear weapons I don't really see how anyone could beat us and that was 2011 we've only spent more since then afaik for one thing we've got a way bigger navy than anyone else by far, like we have 11-12 aircraft carriers and meanwhile the next country on the list has 2-3 (and they aren't as good as the US ones). if all we had to do was defend and not try and occupy the whole globe and no one could use nukes on us I think we'd have a fair shot.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 22:28
|
|
|
yeah the US navy would decimate the rest of the world's pretty quickly and then they'd just keep launching cruise missiles into countries until they surrendered.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 22:32
|
|
|
Moridin920 posted:if there was no use of nuclear weapons I don't really see how anyone could beat us where is all the oil coming from to make your things work
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 22:33
|
|
|
All those illegal Mexicans will act as fifth column and BAM republicans were actually right all along. Prez Cruz is probably one of them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 22:38
|
|
|
duckmaster posted:where is all the oil coming from to make your things work maybe you havent heard but the us actually has a gently caress ton of oil in it its just weird to get to
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 22:39
|
|
|
Sure, the rest of the world has basically negligible capacity for overseas operations, because why would you even bother fighting a country halfway around the world? Can we add a magical land bridge from Asia/Europe to Canada?
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 22:39
|
|
|
If every country on earth stopped trading with the US during the war it might do more damage than any actual physical war itself.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 22:39
|
|
|
Ya except against north Korean hackers
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 22:41
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure we still have enough nukes to make the planet uninhabitable, so it depends on your definition of "defeat"
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 22:43
|
|
|
duckmaster posted:where is all the oil coming from to make your things work the us, canada and mexico, where the usa gets most of its oil from
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 22:46
|
|
|
Simstim posted:the us, canada and mexico, where the usa gets most of its oil from so the US has to defend canada and mexico as well to win this war? it's getting harder!
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 22:47
|
|
|
The foreigners would pretty much have to ride cargo ships or something over and vaporizing every last one of those would be the one application the US's quadrillion-dollar planes that don't fly and boats that don't float are actually completely qualified for. I guess they could head across the north pole through canada, but driving through canada would leave them bored, listless, and unwilling to fight, gradually wandering off to Tim Hortons blend in seamlessly with the natives.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 22:48
|
|
|
could an adult pummel an dendless stream of children into dust? probably, at least for a while before succumbing to fatigue, so the answer op is: it depends
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 22:49
|
|
|
duckmaster posted:so the US has to defend canada and mexico as well to win this war? no, they just have to defend the oil fields. and that's assuming dictator cruz hasn't enacted mandatory rationing like during ww2
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 22:49
|
|
|
FuturePastNow posted:I'm pretty sure we still have enough nukes to make the planet uninhabitable, so it depends on your definition of "defeat" read the rules rear end in a top hat
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 22:50
|
|
|
duckmaster posted:so the US has to defend canada and mexico as well to win this war? Nobody's going to invade Mexico are you kidding me they have entire fields of just heads there. Any invaders trying to get into WWIII from the south will route around mexico through the gulf cause it's just too violent. And attacking canada has its own set of issues as noted above.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 22:51
|
|
|
The numbers game suggests the US could hand every other country on the planet its rear end. But let's be honest: we're far too incompetent for it to actually play out like that. We'd trip over ourselves fighting a war on every front. We'd find a way to lose.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 22:51
|
|
|
yeah the us is p good at stomping poo poo in
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 22:52
|
|
|
Simstim posted:no, they just have to defend the oil fields. and that's assuming dictator cruz hasn't enacted mandatory rationing like during ww2 The day the American people cannot fill up their Hummer H3s is the day the war is already lost
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 22:52
|
|
|
have you ever played civ and you're in a completely dominant oposition, in fact imagine you've already completed win coniditions bu chose to continue to game "for fun" / sadistically, and now you leave a few other civs alive to toy with, like surrnounding their cities entirely with armies and occasionally just wrescking their poo poo or making them dow hat you want them to do for hundresds of years that's us basically
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 22:52
|
|
|
The Whole Internet posted:The numbers game suggests the US could hand every other country on the planet its rear end. I feel like immediately after fending off the first wave the US government would respond by trying to invade everywhere, simultaneously
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 22:55
|
|
|
You think we're going to lift a finger for the loving Democrats? No thank you. Sincerely, The rest of the world
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 22:56
|
|
|
the rest of the world would have to gear for total war which would be painful but would win in the end. I'm pretty sure how to build several big badass aircraft carrier isnt really a secret but no one else can afford em atm. However cruz's term would probably be over by the time the united human forces defeat america
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 23:16
|
|
|
america would complete the alpha centauri project before the rest of the world could full mobilize and thus america would win by having an entire planet of america
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 23:29
|
|
|
Russia hosed us up pretty bad in a simulation I saw once called modern warfare, so no OP
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 23:34
|
|
|
the concerted effort of the entire world to destroy the crazed goliath of the united states is a fascinating contemplation, i imagine six or seven normal people, who have rarely had to deal with such terror in their lives, physically subduing a violent psychotic, perhaps a huge one like andre the giant, hoping against hope they can quell his murderous rage before they are all crushed to death in his mighty hands
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 23:49
|
|
|
You mean take over and occupy the rest of the planet? Lol no, not until we finish developing Terminator legions. We would rule the oceans with our 10 carrier battle groups and ~40 nuclear subs, though, and the navy could gently caress up any place within a few hundred miles of the coast.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 23:53
|
|
|
lmao we couldn't even defeat unorganized, illiterate, malnourished goatherders who fight with 40 year old soviet surplus gear and drive 80s pickups, and you ask if we could defeat the rest of the world?? How much time do you spend playing CoD?
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 23:56
|
|
|
to be fair those goatherders are the strongest enemies available
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 23:57
|
|
|
dirty mountain dudes are the paper to the civilization's rock cf. ibn khaldun's muqaddimah
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 23:59
|
|
|
If we're seriously talking the whole world uniting against the US, then yeah, US would lose just like Nazi Germany did to Soviet Russia.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2014 00:05
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:all strategic nuclear weaponry is gone (but not things like nuclear powered carriers, etc) make the nuclear powered subs/carriers meltdown and autopilot/suicide crew them onto enemy shores
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2014 00:06
|
|
|
without nukes the US navy would beat the rest of the worlds navies, it's larger than nearly every other navy combined, wed defeat mexico and canada in a land war very quickly securing both borders and then steadily conquer latin america, probably europe and africa. probably wouldnt be able to defeat the asian countries on land
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2014 00:09
|
|
|
Machai posted:make the nuclear powered subs/carriers meltdown and autopilot/suicide crew them onto enemy shores there would be like 50 areas around the world where you are told not to get near like 15 miles of them?
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2014 00:09
|
|
|
I completed, like, most of high school and I listen to talk radio all day, so you can assume I basically know everything there is to know on any subject. Economically speaking, it's not like we get anything critical to our very infrastructure from a bunch of dirty goddamn foreigners. We can get along without the rest of the world, but can they say the same for us? Without our Bud Light, NASCAR T-shirts, and Adam Sandler movies the rest of the world crumbles into a Mad Max hellscape within six months.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2014 00:18
|
|
|
we could actually just wait and most of the world would starve
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2014 00:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 17:15 |
|
|
like with most fights, it's all about who gets the first punch. see 9/11. we lost that war b/c they got the first punch (WTC centers) ----------------
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2014 00:22
|
|
