Question A topic for discussion

[rynnor]

Wait another 20 years and the Americans won't be able to win a conventional war either; China won't have caught up in the technology race, but they'll be close enough for sheer numbers to fill in the gaps.

China are catching up far faster than that because they use every opportunity to steal US secrets.

The Stealth helicopter that was unsucessfully destroyed in the Bin Laden raid was displayed to the Chinese by Pakistan and its pretty much assumed they were allowed to take pieces away.

Just a small piece of the skin of that craft would be enough for them to duplicate the stealth coating - the US will be lucky to have any real technological advantage in another decade.

 

[DaGaffer]

China are catching up far faster than that because they use every opportunity to steal US secrets.

The Stealth helicopter that was unsucessfully destroyed in the Bin Laden raid was displayed to the Chinese by Pakistan and its pretty much assumed they were allowed to take pieces away.

Just a small piece of the skin of that craft would be enough for them to duplicate the stealth coating - the US will be lucky to have any real technological advantage in another decade.

Except that's 20 year old tech (more actually). Copying already deployed weapons won't get you a technological advantage; copying what's on the hard drives at DARPA and the Lockheed and Boeing Skunk Works might.

 

[DaGaffer]

Besides, technically speaking. America has not won a war in a very long time and certainly never won a war on its own. I am not sure I would count Iraq as a victory, much of the place is the same as it was. Obviously the modern world being what it is, they will always have their allies, which they rely heavily on in all conflicts. On their own? I doubt they would last very long at all really, not in a hypothetical world vs them war.

Nonsense. Of course America has won wars on its own. And the last war the Americans won outright wasn't that long ago; Gulf War I.

 

[Mabs]

Nonsense. Of course America has won wars on its own. And the last war the Americans won outright wasn't that long ago; Gulf War I.

were talking WARS here, not beating up some brown people with 20 year old weapons (and some oil)

 

[Tuthmes]

Also Irak just came out of a war (which the US funded).

 

[Wij]

were talking WARS here, not beating up some brown people with 20 year old weapons (and some oil)

Surely that's the point. The US has the manpower and the military technology to make conventional battles against any single country a joke. It's still the world's number one military. Of course if it started to get into a war with some of the other big boys then alliances between countries and the threat of nuclear weapons would lead to a big fucked-up pile of shit where everyone's a loser.

As for the original question, they need to define exactly what kind of war the US could win. Even less developed militarily countries could do a whole lot to fuck over the US and lead to the US population losing the stomach for war or the US running out of money. Is the battle supposed to be on some vast neutral continent ? Is it supposed that the home countries cannot be touched ? Is it supposed that noone will run out of money ? Is it supposed that political matters aren't going to interfere ?

 

[Mabs]

war of independance - french won
civil war - they technically lost
2 world wars - they won, according to them
vietnam - they didnt lose , honest
korean - still going on so doesnt count
iraq 1 + 2 - failed /ongoing
afghan - failed/ongoing

south america drug war - losing
bay of pigs - failed

ok they won the mexican/texas war

 

[Mabs]

It's still the world's number one military.

thats the point though, it isnt

China is , in all REALISTIC scenarios. ok we can nuke each other till earth is a large burnt crater, but any conflict that -anyone- wins, they arent

 

[Raven]

Nonsense. Of course America has won wars on its own. And the last war the Americans won outright wasn't that long ago; Gulf War I.

That was hardly a war. Little changed and it was hardly America on its own now was it?

All it did was put Saddam back in his box for a few years. He was still the same genocidal maniac and he still ran the country. A few rich people stayed in Kuwait though!

 

[Punishment]

My dad could sooooooooooooooooooooo beat up your dad ... !

 

[Raven]

You also have to factor in the public's stomach for war, America has less by the day. They don't mind wars where they have low casualties but as soon as the body bags start getting shipped back, reality sets in and they decide they don't like it any more.

An invasion of America would be a different story though, their populous is armed and in many places spread out over large distances. It would be hard for any army to totally neutralise the entire population and I would imagine it would be years until you could say they have lost.

 

[Wij]

thats the point though, it isnt

China is , in all REALISTIC scenarios. ok we can nuke each other till earth is a large burnt crater, but any conflict that -anyone- wins, they arent

China has the manpower but currently it's manufacturing base is geared towards iPads and pants. If they really got serious they could switch it to military gear and eventually they would be dominant. But they don't need to. Noone will start a war with China because they know they could win individual, conventional battles now, but long-term, whilst everyone was worse off, China could 'win'.

That's why I made my point. What type of war are we postulating that the US could, or could not, win ?

 

[Tuthmes]

My dad could sooooooooooooooooooooo beat up your dad ... !

Deebs started it so it's ok!

 

[Wij]

You also have to factor in the public's stomach for war, America has less by the day. They don't mind wars where they have low casualties but as soon as the body bags start getting shipped back, reality sets in and they decide they don't like it any more.

An invasion of America would be a different story though, their populous is armed and in many places spread out over large distances. It would be hard for any army to totally neutralise the entire population and I would imagine it would be years until you could say they have lost.

Similarly for most large countries. The US would never dream of trying to conquer China either. It's not practical and they all know it. If that's the definition of winning a war that's being bandied about then very few countries could do that and those that could could only do it to their smaller rivals. Back to definition of winning a war again.

/stuck record

 

[DaGaffer]

That was hardly a war. Little changed and it was hardly America on its own now was it?

All it did was put Saddam back in his box for a few years. He was still the same genocidal maniac and he still ran the country. A few rich people stayed in Kuwait though!

If the Falklands was a war, Gulf War 1 was a war. And no it wasn't America on its own, but truthfully it may as well have been . As for the outcome, ironically, this was a situation where the US fully complied with the UN. If they'd have been a bit more gung ho, and y'know, American, they could have saved the world a lot of trouble by driving on to Baghdad back in 1991. If they'd quickly booted Saddam and the Ba'athists out back then the world would be a very different place today; probably no Al Qaeda for a start.

 

[Mabs]

You also have to factor in the public's stomach for war, America has less by the day. They don't mind wars where they have low casualties but as soon as the body bags start getting shipped back, reality sets in and they decide they don't like it any more.

An invasion of America would be a different story though, their populous is armed and in many places spread out over large distances. It would be hard for any army to totally neutralise the entire population and I would imagine it would be years until you could say they have lost.

first, yes, exactly

secondly, no
If you bombed all the power stations/dams in the US they would descend into a police/militia-state nightmare. Same with us really, were too mod-conned to go back to a 1939-40 mentality. once the TVs go off, everyone would start robbing shops and stuff. would be a nightmare to police, US gun crime would go off the chart, wait 5 weeks, empty country

 

[Wij]

That was hardly a war. Little changed and it was hardly America on its own now was it?

All it did was put Saddam back in his box for a few years. He was still the same genocidal maniac and he still ran the country. A few rich people stayed in Kuwait though!

You could say they won the war and then left. Didn't enforce a proper surrender. And the US could have won that on their own. The other nations didn't NEED to chip in.

 

[DaGaffer]

war of independance - french won
civil war - they technically lost
2 world wars - they won, according to them
vietnam - they didnt lose , honest
korean - still going on so doesnt count
iraq 1 + 2 - failed /ongoing
afghan - failed/ongoing

south america drug war - losing
bay of pigs - failed

ok they won the mexican/texas war

*sigh*
War of Indpendence - Americans won. Britain lost. (claims otherwise are petty and childish)
War of 1812 - Americans won. Britain lost.
Mexican War - Americans won.
Civil War - US won.
Indian Wars. Americans won. Not nice I know, but we British can hardly criticise.
Spanish-American War - Americans won.
Philipines War & Moro War - Americans won.
WWI - Allies Won - American contribution...maybe 5% of the war effort.
WWII Allies Won - American contribution...maybe 20% in Europe (Britain 10%, Russia 70%), 80% in the Pacific.
Korea - "police action" not a war - UN drew.
Vietnam - US lost, but curiously never lost a major battle.
Panama/Grenada - comedy wars, US won
Cold War - well they won that fucker didn't they?
Gulf War 1 - US won
Gulf War 2 - jury's out
Afghanistan - jury's out

I'm no fan of ill-informed Americans banging on about saving everyone in WWII and all that crap, but it doesn't mean we should bullshit about the stuff they did do.

 

[Mabs]

*sigh*
War of Indpendence - Americans won. Britain lost. (claims otherwise are petty and childish)
War of 1812 - Americans won. Britain lost.
Mexican War - Americans won.
Civil War - US won.
Indian Wars. Americans won. Not nice I know, but we British can hardly criticise.
Spanish-American War - Americans won.
Philipines War & Moro War - Americans won.
WWI - Allies Won - American contribution...maybe 5% of the war effort.
WWII Allies Won - American contribution...maybe 20% in Europe (Britain 10%, Russia 70%), 80% in the Pacific.
Korea - "police action" not a war - UN drew.
Vietnam - US lost, but curiously never lost a major battle.
Panama/Grenada - comedy wars, US won
Cold War - well they won that fucker didn't they?
Gulf War 1 - US won
Gulf War 2 - jury's out
Afghanistan - jury's out

I'm no fan of ill-informed Americans banging on about saving everyone in WWII and all that crap, but it doesn't mean we should bullshit about the stuff they did do.

they wouldnt have won the war of independance without french naval help
1812 - yea ok
civil war - decimated the population and caused massive social and political rifts still active to this day.. great "win"
WWs, yerp that was my point
korea still isnt over technically, whole of UN vs NK + china - we didnt win, so we lost due to size of each side, they fought us to a standstill
vietnam - er, you sure ? i know most of them were lost as French Indochina, so cant remember
cold war burnt itself out and the russians drew the line, so nobody won or lost but the russians should get the credit for bending in the end
gulf war 1 - win ? sort of, didnt do any good , cos we had to do it again, thus why i would argue they didnt "win" it

 

[Mabs]

only one thing i would add to the original question/idea:

remove the CNN-live-warzone-feed news cameras. let them get on with it, war is messy and unpleasant, but doesnt need almost live critique on TV.

and yes that way lies warcrimes and so forth, but hey, they still do those anyway so ...

 

[Tuthmes]

If they'd quickly booted Saddam and the Ba'athists out back then the world would be a very different place today; probably no Al Qaeda for a start.

I'd suggest you start reading and watching some history. The BBC Docu - The Power Of Nightmares, would be a good start.

 

[Punishment]

If they won the 1st gulf war why did they have to go back ?

 

[Uncle Sick]

The US has the largest, most powerful military on the planet. For good or ill, we have the military capability (albeit not the strength of character or stomach) to defeat the entire rest of the world combined. And we have paid dearly for that capability.

I mean.. this is some serious USA!USA! redneck bullshit. The world combined? Good night, America. lol

The subject itself is interesting enough, though.

I know USA bashing is en vogue at the moment -but- look at it anyway you want, the United States might be a super power in decline but I'd say power block vs power block, the US would probably win any conventional war.

Look at:
- logistics. The US can deploy anywhere in the world. Who else can? Who has the capability to add air power to the mix? The Chinese have one nuclear carrier at this point. The Russian fleet is rusting away in their ports.
The US Marines practically developed modern amphibious doctrine.
Add nuclear submarines armed with cruise missiles, being able to target communications and logistics.

In other words: the US can choose where and when to attack. The rest of the world is currently incapable of doing so.

- geography. So you want to attack the US? You'll have to cross either the Pacific or the Atlantic. You'll have to deal with US Navy. All of it. Attacking via Cuba and/or Siberia (a la "Red Dawn") is impractical. Get close enough to either coast and you'll have the Air Force AND the Air National Guard to deal with. You'll still have to defeat the US Navy with their ports close by. Yours are where?

If you do manage to invade, the US will mobilize the National Guard. Plus you'll have to face regular ground forces. And lets not forget that a large part of the population is armed.

- the people. The war in Afghanistan and Iraq isn't popular here. Why? Because people have realized that there is no gain whatsoever. Once US troops return Afghanistan will go back to it's savage roots and so will Iraq. People have realized that nation building G.W. style does not work.
If the people felt it was a 'righteous' war, ie and invasion/the US being attacked, there would be broad support for the 'cause' in the populace.

- technology. There's no way around it. Military technology wise, no other nation can really 'give it' to the armed forces here. I'll be glad to go into more detail if required.

- Air Power. The key to victory in any conventional war. The US has it.

I have no stake in glorifying the US military. I was drafted into the German army (Bundeswehr) when I was 20 in 1997. I served two years in a heavy weapons team in Mittenwald/Bavaria. (Gebirgsjaeger Bataillon 233).

I do enjoy this kind of discussion, though.

 

[Tuthmes]

I was about to make a point and then noticed the USA has 11 aircraft carriers while the rest of the world combined has 11 aswell.

 

[Uncle Sick]

I was about to make a point and then noticed the USA has 11 aircraft carriers while the rest of the world combined has 11 aswell.

Well, lets just roll with the hypothetical US vs The World nonsense... 11 carriers under US command vs 11 combined carriers under who's command?
What did Wellington say about fighting with allies?

Lets also not forget the level of training US carrier pilots have compared to the rest of the world. They fly actual combat missions compared to...?

Command and Control + veteran skill level = win.



(imo)

 

[Deebs]

My dad could sooooooooooooooooooooo beat up your dad ... !

Deebs started it so it's ok!

Back on topic lads, this is something I am interested in, hence why I started it.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Well they have Chuck Norris

-------
Serial now;

Military power isn't all though and i doubt they could take on the world. Germany had one of the most advanced and trained, not to mention strict, armies in the world and they didn't manage to beat all. Even if they gave one hell of a fight.

Then there's the fact that small nations shouldn't be counted out, Finland being a good example at same points in time.

 

[Deebs]

I mean.. this is some serious USA!USA! redneck bullshit. The world combined? Good night, America. lol

The subject itself is interesting enough, though.

Look at:
- logistics. The US can deploy anywhere in the world. Who else can? Who has the capability to add air power to the mix? The Chinese have one nuclear carrier at this point. The Russian fleet is rusting away in their ports.
The US Marines practically developed modern amphibious doctrine.
Add nuclear submarines armed with cruise missiles, being able to target communications and logistics.

In other words: the US can choose where and when to attack. The rest of the world is currently incapable of doing so.

I do enjoy this kind of discussion, though.

As I stated in my first post, Russia, France and the UK operate Blue Water fleets. Russia is currently rearming and regularly flies sorties near the Northern tip of Scotland, the RAF have scrambled jets as well.

Don't forget all those nice subs that have managed to sneak inside the perimeter of these fleets and could have taken out/severely damaged the carrier in the middle.

I won't disagree that the Americans have great tech but they do not always have the best in all:

M1 Abrahms vs Challenger 2 = UK win, it is said by many and based upon actual combat figures the Challenger 2 is the best battle tank in the world at this point.

Eurofighter is on a par with America's best.

Not sure about submarines.

 

[Deebs]

Well they have Chuck Norris

-------
Serial now;

Military power isn't all though and i doubt they could take on the world. Germany had one of the most advanced and trained, not to mention strict, armies in the world and they didn't manage to beat all. Even if they gave one hell of a fight.

Then there's the fact that small nations shouldn't be counted out, Finland being a good example at same points in time.

The German Army didn't fail, Hitler did. He spread his wings too far and didn't listen to his Council.

 

[DaGaffer]

I'd suggest you start reading and watching some history. The BBC Docu - The Power Of Nightmares, would be a good start.

I've seen The Power Of Nightmares and my point stands; Al Qaeda got traction because of US troops "defiling" Islamic holy places by having bases in Saudi. If they'd taken out Saddam in 1991, no no-fly-zones, probably no US troops in Saudi, less cause for the likes of Bin Laden to hang his hat on. Sure, Al Qaeda had its roots in Egypt long before GW1, but it was the GW1 aftermath that really got things going.

Of course the Americans could and probably would have found other ways to fuck it up for themselves in the middle east, but in our history, GW1 is a defining point in US-Islamic relations.