If they wanted to, Russia and China could crush us right now.

[Nick Young]

Hypothetically, if Russia and China went for it right now, they would destroy us.

We have a weak leader and our military is stretched thin like butter.

This is just like when Rome fell for the first time.

At full strength, if we weren't wasting so much money and effort on two careless wars, we MIGHT be able to still defeat China and Russia. However as things stand, they have all the power and we have none.

This is a very sad day. We used to be the greatest country in the world but poor leadership has lead us to this place.

We are no longer the dominant super power.

[chains5000]

If a war happened, the whole world would be f*cked, as all three countries would use nukes sooner than later.

[dunksby]

It's surprising that you think that, although not surprising that you have a completely different view than me, I still believe US is the world's boss. Even if one forgot US military power, none can ignore what US brings to world's economy both production and consumption wise. China and Russia would collapse without America.

[Nick Young]

It's surprising that you think that, although not surprising that you have a completely different view than me, I still believe US is the world's boss. Even if one forgot US military power, none can ignore what US brings to world's economy both production and consumption wise. China and Russia would collapse without America.
China does much more for the world's economy then America does, both in terms of consumption and production. You can't use that 'Economic power' excuse anymore either. China and Russia would run the world without America, and eventually China would overtake Russia and become the sole super power. Face reality.

We had military power and we f*cked it up by stretching ourselves too thin under weak leadership.

[miller-time]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_carriers_by_country#Numbers_of_ai rcraft_carriers_by_country

What exactly are they invading with? I mean unless it is an all out nuclear war how is China and Russia exactly going to invade continental USA?

[TheReturn]

Military power is incredibly overrated. When was the last time the US was in an all out war for territory?

[Dresta]

What a load of bullcrap.

[Nick Young]

What a load of bullcrap.
You believe that if China and Russia allied against USA and attacked right now America would come out on top?

Putin recently laid down fighting words and Obama buckled out of fear. He knows Putin has no fear of America anymore.

[SpurrDurr]

Cyberattacks will start and decide the outcome of an eventual world war, Russia isn't a threat in this field but China is plain scary.

They have buildings full of hackers working for Chinese goverment 24/7.

[Im so nba'd out]

we had a good run

[IcanzIIravor]

You believe that if China and Russia allied against USA and attacked right now America would come out on top?

Putin recently laid down fighting words and Obama buckled out of fear. He knows Putin has no fear of America anymore.

Yes, we would win. We'd have aerial superiority and their overwhelming numbers are overrated. The US military has been in one conflict or another since WW2. The last major conflict China was in was multiple decades ago. The last major conflict for Russia was the Afghan war. You can train all you want, but actual full scale combat is a different ball game. There is a reason the world is more and more about economic hegemony and cyber conflict.

[Nick Young]

Yes, we would win. We'd have aerial superiority and their overwhelming numbers are overrated. The US military has been in one conflict or another since WW2. The last major conflict China was in was multiple decades ago. The last major conflict for Russia was the Afghan war. You can train all you want, but actual full scale combat is a different ball game. There is a reason the world is more and more about economic hegemony and cyber conflict.
We can't even defeat Afghanistani randoms, despite our 'Air superiority' and every other kind of superiority. We couldn't even defeat Vietcongs. We will get owned by China and Russia, if it ever came down to it.

Maybe at full strength we could come out on top, I believe it, but not stretched as thin as we are with the leader we have.

If you pay attention to Putin's recent words he is very aware of this, he is calling Obama's bluff and Obama is backtracking and buckling

[OhNoTimNoSho]

China does much more for the world's economy then America does, both in terms of consumption and production. You can't use that 'Economic power' excuse anymore either. China and Russia would run the world without America, and eventually China would overtake Russia and become the sole super power. Face reality.

We had military power and we f*cked it up by stretching ourselves too thin under weak leadership.
I'm guessing you're just going to repeat that over and over for any argument presented

[OhNoTimNoSho]

We can't even defeat Afghanistani randoms, despite our 'Air superiority' and every other kind of superiority. We couldn't even defeat Vietcongs. We will get owned by China and Russia, if it ever came down to it.

Maybe at full strength we could come out on top, I believe it, but not stretched as thin as we are with the leader we have.

If you pay attention to Putin's recent words he is very aware of this, he is calling Obama's bluff and Obama is backtracking and buckling
see I was right...


Your point sucks anyway, why would China and Russia ally to attack us?

[Nick Young]

see I was right...


Your point sucks anyway, why would China and Russia ally to attack us?
THey are already united against us on the Syria issue. Don't you know what's going on in the world?:facepalm

[IcanzIIravor]

We can't even defeat Afghanistani randoms, despite our 'Air superiority' and every other kind of superiority. We couldn't even defeat Vietcongs. We will get owned by China and Russia, if it ever came down to it.

Maybe at full strength we could come out on top, I believe it, but not stretched as thin as we are with the leader we have.

If you pay attention to Putin's recent words he is very aware of this, he is calling Obama's bluff and Obama is backtracking and buckling

Russia and China are not going to use guerrilla hit and run tactics. The US excels at conventional warfare. We would own the air and the sea. You sounds like a novice when it comes to the study of warfare.

[Nick Young]

Russia and China are not going to use guerrilla hit and run tactics. The US excels at conventional warfare. We would own the air and the sea. You sounds like a novice when it comes to the study of warfare.
:roll: :roll: :roll:

You think stretched thin as we are right now we'd still prevail against Russia and China in head to head combat?:roll: :roll: :roll: The only novice here is you. This isn't Red Alert: Command & Conquer, kid.

[TheMilkyBarKid]

I heard a few years back that America's military budget by far the world's biggest, and is larger than that of the the next ten (might've been 20) military budgets combined.
Not only does America have the best weapons, it also has the best defence, I believe they have anti missile stations set up in various locations in the EU and I'd assume other places in the world.
Im pretty sure china has the USA economy by the balls with the amount of debt owed, but will that mean a lot if a war started?
For all we know events such as 9/11 and whatever action is ultimately taken with thw current Syria situation may be looked back on as catalysts/contributors to the cause of WW3.

[IcanzIIravor]

:roll: :roll: :roll:

You think stretched thin as we are right now we'd still prevail against Russia and China in head to head combat?:roll: :roll: :roll: The only novice here is you. This isn't Red Alert: Command & Conquer, kid.

You need to understand something. This is going to be difficult for you, so I hope you are sitting down. There would be a stampede of people volunteering for military service if the US actually felt threatened. Have you even studied the last century of warfare? A US fully committed to war is hard to beat. Now tell me how Russia and China are going to win the air and sea war let alone the ground war. Superior numbers on the ground are worth nothing if you can't control the air. Unless the war is going to strictly be one based in Europe and Asia how do you figure they will supply troops across the ocean with no sea power?

[niko]

A lot of this is really stupid.
1) China hasn't fought wars. Troops who haven't fought wars, countries which are not fighting wars don't do so well, even with really expensive nice toys. See Japan. They train 24/7, technology is A++ in anything, they have literally no capability to do anything unilaterally. So where would that come from?
2) Russia and China aren't allies to that level. They are not going to team up.
3) The US owes China such a ridiculous amount of money and our economies are so intertwined that such a war would never happen. China's economy would collapse if our money well out (ours would too). It's why i always laugh when people talk about Japan and China going at it over those islands, the small ripples from them taking shots at each other economically already did damage to both sides.

Are you like this is real life? Do you walk around just randomly declaring things and arguing to the death for no reason and little facts?

[code green]

I'm not saying who would win (I still believe we have the strongest military in the world), but don't underrate Russia's capabilities. Their surface to air defense systems are among the best in the world, and their intelligence isn't too far off of ours either.

[IcanzIIravor]

I'm not saying who would win (I still believe we have the strongest military in the world), but don't underrate Russia's capabilities. Their surface to air defense systems are among the best in the world, and their intelligence isn't too far off of ours either.

Defensively they would be formidable, but defense with a subpar offense will get you killed in a global war. It would come down to nuclear warfare as nullification. The days of conventional warfare on a massive scale are over. It's now proxy fighting, economic and espionage with a cyber flavor.

[Kblaze8855]

If the combined power of Russia and China had the means to move their army about the world they would be able to take it over now, 10 years ago, 20 years ago, or 50 years ago. But they dont so what does it matter?

What....are they gonna march through siberia and slowly build a bridge to Alaska and march through canada?

Have you any idea how hard it would be to get enough soldiers to America to take it over on the ground?

China and Russia given star trek like transporters could take over America. As it stands what are they gonna do? Of what use is a 350 million man army you cant move?

If I have 2 billion soldiers stationed in Australia and no ships to move them....im not a power. Im an idiot.

Advanced weapons gives a military power these days. And in a world where so many countries have enough nukes to possibly end humanity...it doesnt matter who can win a ground war. Especially when they have no way to wage one.

China and america in a real war gets nowhere. We cant win in china due to numbers. Their numbers can get to us anyway. So we sling missles?

Its not gonna happen. Its a loser for both sides.

Really....think these things out.

[daily]

:roll: :roll: :roll:

You think stretched thin as we are right now we'd still prevail against Russia and China in head to head combat?:roll: :roll: :roll: The only novice here is you. This isn't Red Alert: Command & Conquer, kid.
The US is not stretched thin. You can say it over and over again but it doesn't make it true.

[Derka]

Laughable.

In terms if raw force projection, the US is second to none. Having a huge army is awesome and all that...but if you want to deliver it somewhere you'd need rather massive air and sea assets to do so. Even combining their strength, Russia and China don't have the resources to pull that off to begin with...nevermind actually succeed. The only chance either nation would have is a first-strike nuclear attack on the American mainland and even then, the MAD policy would still take effect and all three nations would be summarily destroyed in the space of about 15 minutes. Not gonna happen.

This is also to say nothing of the fact that Britain, France, Germany, Israel, Japan and Canada would immediately enter the fray on the side of the US. The satellite states beholden to Moscow in the wake of the USSR's demise would probably seize the opportunity to cause some hell, as well...and that's not a region of the world that can be taken completely for granted.

This doesn't ever happen. Putin is a spy and a politician...not a warrior.

As an addendum to this, someone was quite right to make mention of China's formidable and illegal cyber warfare capabilities. There's a catch though...if we dunces here on an Internet forum are aware of China's capabilities, you can damn well believe the Pentagon is aware of them as well and has already developed a game plan to deal with it.

[longhornfan1234]

UK would jump in.


US and UK would push Russia and China's shit back. There wouldn't be any invading. US would dominate the air and sea.

[sick_brah07]

UK would jump in.


US and UK would push Russia and China's shit back. There wouldn't be any invading. US would dominate the air and sea.


:roll:

[longhornfan1234]

:roll:
:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

[nathanjizzle]

the U.S. could take on russia and china by ourselves :roll:
if such scenario ever happened,people like OP would sit at home bitching about obama while guys like me suit up and fight for our country.

[rezznor]

This doesn't ever happen. Putin is a spy and a politician...not a warrior.



sure he is

http://25.media.tumblr.com/bef9c9cbd1afb8eefc59ddb24e8676b4/tumblr_mhxc4mc8RF1qzpsuoo1_500.jpg

[travelingman]

Hypothetically, if Russia and China went for it right now, they would destroy us.

We have a weak leader and our military is stretched thin like butter.

This is just like when Rome fell for the first time.

At full strength, if we weren't wasting so much money and effort on two careless wars, we MIGHT be able to still defeat China and Russia. However as things stand, they have all the power and we have none.

This is a very sad day. We used to be the greatest country in the world but poor leadership has lead us to this place.

We are no longer the dominant super power.

Anyone who is hellbent on criticizing the presidency could make this case (about ANY president). Relatively speaking, I don't see what makes him a "weak leader". And yes, I'm now inviting you to rant. Also, if we are no longer the dominant super power....who is (in your mind)? Or would you say there no *dominant* superpower?

[Rose'sACL]

i am not taking russia into account at all.
if china attacks US, they will lose badly. If US attacks china, we will lose badly. it is that simple. Both countries can't win a war against the other. US can't attack india let alone china. of course, india can't attack US either or else they will lose even worse.
War between really big economies with big population will result in loss for the one which is attacking and win for the one which is defending.
there is no logic in china or russia attacking the US or vice-versa. I don't think there will be a war between countries like china, india, russia and US in the next 30-40 years at least.

[MavsSuperFan]

see I was right...


Your point sucks anyway, why would China and Russia ally to attack us?

Its not that inconceivable both countries have national interests that American challenges.

Russians fear nato/American influence in eastern europe and American influence in the middle east. Specifically the planed American missile shield based in Poland outrages them. We claim it is meant to protect against a possible Iranian Attack. The Russians (I believe correctly) believe that the missile shield is not meant to deter an Iranian attack, but rather an attempt to create the first stages of a defense system that attempts to neuter their nuclear deterrent.

Chinese fear American naval presence in the south china sea. Chinese also resent the fact that America supports all of the claims of china's enemies/rivals for the energy deposits of the south china sea/east china sea.

Eg. America supports Japan's claims to the Senkaku islands (or Diaoyudao Islands if you are chinese)

America supports the philippines and vietnam in claims to energy deposits against chinese claims. But these cause less tension. The chinese people really hate the japanese because of history. Eg. Nanjing Massacre, Unit 731, Comfort women, using civilians for baynet practise, etc. Japanese also really hate the chinese.

Also America has pledged to defend Taiwan in the event of a chinese invasion. The chinese still see taiwan as integral territory that they are still too weak to claim. at least the people do. Eventually the chinese will attempt to incorporate taiwan in someway.

[andgar923]

Hypothetically, if Russia and China went for it right now, they would destroy us.

We have a weak leader and our military is stretched thin like butter.

This is just like when Rome fell for the first time.

At full strength, if we weren't wasting so much money and effort on two careless wars, we MIGHT be able to still defeat China and Russia. However as things stand, they have all the power and we have none.

This is a very sad day. We used to be the greatest country in the world but poor leadership has lead us to this place.

We are no longer the dominant super power.

A. it is in their best financial interest to NOT attack us. They attack us, they fail as well.

B. Our military is actually in perfect striking position to attack both of them. Much more than they are attacking us. We can quickly strike them from Afghanistan or from a Navy fleet abroad.

C. Like somebody mentioned, the new war will be a 'cyber' war. We'd go all out trying to destroy their economic interests via hacking, and vice versa. Aside from that, we can hack their communications, spread propaganda via our culture, hack their military and government systems etc.etc. And

[boozehound]

China does much more for the world's economy then America does, both in terms of consumption and production. You can't use that 'Economic power' excuse anymore either. China and Russia would run the world without America, and eventually China would overtake Russia and become the sole super power. Face reality.

We had military power and we f*cked it up by stretching ourselves too thin under weak leadership.
as usual, this guy is talking hyperbole through his ass. First off, we still consume way more than the Chinese any way you measure it. Second, we spend nearly 40% of all the money spent on military in the entire world. We spend nearly 3 times as much as russia and china combined. We have much greater tactical strike ability and can mobilize around the world in a way neither of those countries could hope for.

[boozehound]

This isnt a simple 'merca is the best and always will be! But the facts speak for themselves.

[MavsSuperFan]

Hypothetically, if Russia and China went for it right now, they would destroy us.

We have a weak leader and our military is stretched thin like butter.

This is just like when Rome fell for the first time.

At full strength, if we weren't wasting so much money and effort on two careless wars, we MIGHT be able to still defeat China and Russia. However as things stand, they have all the power and we have none.

This is a very sad day. We used to be the greatest country in the world but poor leadership has lead us to this place.

We are no longer the dominant super power.

No we would win if we fought a conventional war against russia and china.

As long as it didnt go nuclear we would win. If it went nuclear we have the best chance of some form of our government surviving. We have the most accurate nukes and the most capable missile defense systems. 99% chance we would die with them, but our chances of survival are better than theirs.


We have a weak leader and our military is stretched thin like butter.

Obama is not so weak that he would surrender.
We would immediately break off from any war in the middle east or anywhere else to focus on the much larger threat of russia and china.

Also the minute a war of this caliber happens, we reinstate the draft. in 1945 we were prepared to invade the japanese home islands with 12 million men when our total population was about 150 million people.

Our total population now is about 316 million.

I doubt the russians and chinese would be able to work together on a tactical level. Nato has difficulty doing this and we are much more integrated. More likely they fight us individually in different theaters. Russia would attempt to invade eastern europe most likely or the middle east from the north, small chance that they try to secure the oil in alaska. The chinese would try to secure the south china sea and invade taiwan. Neither country could invade US territories.

[bdreason]

The U.S. dominates the oceans, which is the most important factor given our geographical position. If we remove nukes from the equation, China and Russia would have no shot at winning a war against the U.S.. If we include the use of nukes, China and Russia would be obliterated, as the U.S. has placed tactical nukes all across the globe, and as I mentioned earlier, dominates the oceans.

[COnDEMnED]

Military power is incredibly overrated. When was the last time the US was in an all out war for territory?
Vietnam, on behalf of the French. We lost that war, although technically it was not a war.

[travelingman]

Vietnam, on behalf of the French. We lost that war, although technically it was not a war.

Hardly an all-out war. U.S. forces would have defeated the NLF and the NVA if given enough time. The same could be said of Soviet forces in Afghanistan. Both conflicts were halted due to political moves, not military-based decisions.

[riseagainst]

you know what this thread reminds me of?

"If he wanted to, Kobe could be an elite defender."

[COnDEMnED]

You need to understand something. This is going to be difficult for you, so I hope you are sitting down. There would be a stampede of people volunteering for military service if the US actually felt threatened. Have you even studied the last century of warfare? A US fully committed to war is hard to beat. Now tell me how Russia and China are going to win the air and sea war let alone the ground war. Superior numbers on the ground are worth nothing if you can't control the air. Unless the war is going to strictly be one based in Europe and Asia how do you figure they will supply troops across the ocean with no sea power?
Truth be told, if this hypothetical situation ever happened, it wouldn't JUST be Russia and China VS U.S.A... It would be more like China, Russia, North Korea, Iran, Syria, VS U.S.A, France, Australia, Great Britain, Japan, and Israel. Mexico and Canada would side with the USA, but probably offer little military support. In the first days of war, I could see South Korea taken over first by China and North Korea to stop USA from having a landing point. Japan would probably be hit next by China. Iran and Syria would attack Israel, Russia would strike France. USA would probably attack Syria and Iran (with the help of Israel), North Korea (with the help of Japan) and Russia (with the help of Great Britain).

[longhornfan1234]

Truth be told, if this hypothetical situation ever happened, it wouldn't JUST be Russia and China VS U.S.A... It would be more like China, Russia, North Korea, Iran, Syria, VS U.S.A, France, Australia, Great Britain, Japan, and Israel. Mexico and Canada would side with the USA, but probably offer little military support. In the first days of war, I could see South Korea taken over first by China and North Korea to stop USA from having a landing point. Japan would probably be hit next by China. Iran and Syria would attack Israel, Russia would strike France. USA would probably attack Syria and Iran (with the help of Israel), North Korea (with the help of Japan) and Russia (with the help of Great Britain).


First mistake. Israel would run through them. South Korea and Japan would be in deep shit. US and Australia would have to send major back up. Germany would join US side. Germany, France, and UK would give Russia run for their money.

[Flash31]

America still the GOAT and it ain't even close


Uh,NOPE
They were at one point like Britain was,France,Spain,Italy,Germany,Russia,Greece,Turke y and so on

They ARE NOT anymore
China has a visegrip on them

Nobody is scared or intimidated by the US anymore
The US economy is in crap
The media is known to be a massively,manipulative pile of crap
The American people and most of the World Hates the US Government
Russia and China aren't taking any crap from them


Japans not helping them even with all the tech,bc of the US Japan's Military is nonexistent
The UK cant afford another war and have voted off military support for US Attacks(Syria)


If the US bombs syria without autgoruzation,approval
its facing economic and world consequences not to mention
being on even worse terms with Russia or inciting a War


The US can get a draft,but itll go a lot worse than people think
US citizens have a severe distrust of the gov and with tge way the economy has been going and all those doc leaked,

Chaos,Collapse,Anarchy

[Flash31]

Truth be told, if this hypothetical situation ever happened, it wouldn't JUST be Russia and China VS U.S.A... It would be more like China, Russia, North Korea, Iran, Syria, VS U.S.A, France, Australia, Great Britain, Japan, and Israel. Mexico and Canada would side with the USA, but probably offer little military support. In the first days of war, I could see South Korea taken over first by China and North Korea to stop USA from having a landing point. Japan would probably be hit next by China. Iran and Syria would attack Israel, Russia would strike France. USA would probably attack Syria and Iran (with the help of Israel), North Korea (with the help of Japan) and Russia (with the help of Great Britain).


well in that case

Japan has virtually 0 military and they might not be as willing to help the US in war as people think
Israel is literally surrounded by opposing forces that they would be wiped off the map if it happened
Without support from UK,US,and other major countries Israel would be wiped out and its the only thing keeping them afloat

Australia,Really?
and Mexico with their problems alteady in gov,corruption,crime and economic status wouldnt help much
Canada may or may not join


And well China has the WORLDS Largest MILITARY By far,
And it wouldnt just be those countries its basically


Russia,China,NK,Iran,Saudi Arabia,Argentina,Vietnam,,Cuba,Nearly whole middle east
up against

UK,US,Germany(maybe,war hasnt been kind to Germanys economy and afteraffects)
France has differing views and might not support the war

and the US,UK eceonomies arent doing so well
and the World really doesnt like US gov


If it happens,Half the World Pop is Gone,Done
Worldwide ruin,and Worldwide economic collapse

China runs most if the trade and economies through trading and selling
US functions off of China
The World Economy runs off of the Euro,Dollar,Yen

And if it becomes a nuclear war or missile strike war
Total Chaos,Anarchy,loss of control will happen

China basically literally OWNS the US

[rezznor]

well in that case

Japan has virtually 0 military and they might not be as willing to help the US in war as people think
Israel is literally surrounded by opposing forces that they would be wiped off the map if it happened
Without support from UK,US,and other major countries Israel would be wiped out and its the only thing keeping them afloat

Australia,Really?
and Mexico with their problems alteady in gov,corruption,crime and economic status wouldnt help much
Canada may or may not join


And well China has the WORLDS Largest MILITARY By far,
And it wouldnt just be those countries its basically


Russia,China,NK,Iran,Saudi Arabia,Argentina,Vietnam,,Cuba,Nearly whole middle east
up against

UK,US,Germany(maybe,war hasnt been kind to Germanys economy and afteraffects)
France has differing views and might not support the war

and the US,UK eceonomies arent doing so well
and the World really doesnt like US gov


If it happens,Half the World Pop is Gone,Done
Worldwide ruin,and Worldwide economic collapse

China runs most if the trade and economies through trading and selling
US functions off of China
The World Economy runs off of the Euro,Dollar,Yen

And if it becomes a nuclear war or missile strike war
Total Chaos,Anarchy,loss of control will happen

China basically literally OWNS the US


vietnam doesnt get along with china, they are more likely to side with the US then with china. weird, i know.

[Goon Time]

THey are already united against us on the Syria issue. Don't you know what's going on in the world?:facepalm

do you? good job reading headlines and making a ridiculous hypothetical claim. another scratch-the-surface type idea from one of the least thoughtful people on here.

[LJJ]

well in that case

Japan has virtually 0 military and they might not be as willing to help the US in war as people think

Japan has one of the highest military budgets in the world.

[reppy]

I'm so sick of this "Obama is weak" shit.

He's just as good at being a warmonger as anyone! :lol

The only thing he's been weak at is actually standing up for the values he claimed to profess before he was the Democratic nominee for president.

[DonDadda59]

I wish a ruski and a chinaman would

http://www.lobshots.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Ready-4-Sandy.jpg

[Flash31]

Japan has one of the highest military budgets in the world.


Japan has a RESTRICTED Military

[OJ SIMPSON 2.0]

This guy is stupid.:facepalm. He constantly harps on the US yet he lives here.

[Flash31]

vietnam doesnt get along with china, they are more likely to side with the US then with china. weird, i know.


Theyre more likely to side with China then US on account of well a
certain thing called the Vietnam War

The US imposed a militarized zone on them
Dont think thats such a friendly reception theyll get either

If anything,Vietnam wont join either and side with the Country that helped them the most,RUSSIA and since Russia would probably side with China

Itll be like Russia siding with US over Germany
or like France supporting the UK even though the UK is sided with the US

[LJJ]

Japan has a RESTRICTED Military

They have a "defense force", which is mostly a technicality. They could flip that "defense force" into something else in weeks. With a top 10 military budget in the world they hardly have "0 military".

[rezznor]

Theyre more likely to side with China then US on account of well a
certain thing called the Vietnam War

The US imposed a militarized zone on them
Dont think thats such a friendly reception theyll get either

If anything,Vietnam wont join either and side with the Country that helped them the most,RUSSIA and since Russia would probably side with China

Itll be like Russia siding with US over Germany
or like France supporting the UK even though the UK is sided with the US
seeing as I am vietnamese, and was just there 2 months ago...I'm pretty sure i am more qualified to speak on vietnam-chinese relations then you are. newsflash, the majority of the vietnamese population wasn't even alive during the war.

china and vietnam are in a heated dispute right now regarding south china sea energy reserves. guess who is backing vietnam? america.

by your logic, japan won't side with the US because zomg HIROSHIMA

[boozehound]

seeing as I am vietnamese, and was just there 2 months ago...I'm pretty sure i am more qualified to speak on vietnam-chinese relations then you are. newsflash, the majority of the vietnamese population wasn't even alive during the war.

china and vietnam are in a heated dispute right now regarding south china sea energy reserves. guess who is backing vietnam? america.

by your logic, japan won't side with the US because zomg HIROSHIMA
wait, I thought you were Tongan? :D

[Flash31]

seeing as I am vietnamese, and was just there 2 months ago...I'm pretty sure i am more qualified to speak on vietnam-chinese relations then you are. newsflash, the majority of the vietnamese population wasn't even alive during the war.

china and vietnam are in a heated dispute right now regarding south china sea energy reserves. guess who is backing vietnam? america.

by your logic, japan won't side with the US because zomg HIROSHIMA


They might not back China but theyll Back Russia

and no this has nothing to do with Japan or bombings

While Vietnam and China arent pn friendly terms
the US isnt exactly a buddy either

and the reason US backing them,CONTROL,POWER,INFLUENCE in that area
theyre not doing it to back Vietnam,theyre doing it to stop China and help the US,

Its like how the US backed Panama as a country,only to install the Panama canal
or how they backed South Korea up so they would have a control,presence there and stop communism

Vietnam is more likely to back Russia than either China or US

[niko]

Japan has a RESTRICTED Military
They have a very advanced millitary. It's the same way they are not a nuclear power, they have material and knowledge though to build bombs in almost no time at all.

[CeltsGarlic]

I dont get it guys... Some of you would really fight for your country? Like you would be ready to die for it? I would, with my family, just move to some safe place. Why the fvck to risk my only life to a country I was born in?

[rezznor]

wait, I thought you were Tongan? :D
what, you've never met a viet-tongan? :D

[Flash31]

I dont get it guys... Some of you would really fight for your country? Like you would be ready to die for it? I would, with my family, just move to some safe place. Why the fvck to risk my only life to a country I was born in?


Blind Unwavering Illogical Support

How do you think there are so many people all around the world supporting some stupid gov cause and getting killed in the process all for what exactly?
A shiny copper or zinc medal


The media controls the people
people are ingrained from day one That whatever country they live in is the best,greatest,their "home"
and fight for "their" freedoms

Its beyond stupid,
Old Men Order and say,Young Men do and ask how

[outbreak]

what, you've never met a viet-tongan? :D
I used to know king topou's nephew.

[Goon Time]

This isnt a simple 'merca is the best and always will be!


sadly that's all Nick is trying to disprove. he likes to challenge accepted truths which is admirable but the boy talks out of his ass on the regular. He grew up hearing and believing that america was the greatest country of all time, come to find out it's not the truth he thought it was, so he does bare bones "research" and makes asinine assertions based on his findings. Ghandi a great man? No, he read one article saying otherwise so now he'll forever preach Ghandi being a fraudulent historical hero. Global warming? No, he read one thing on some falsified evidence between scientists so he comfortably discounts the idea that we can do any damage to our planet. Nick is like our resident Christopher Hitchens without any of the credibility but all the smugness. If you're looking for someone to take rudimentary understanding of a topic and address it with grossly unfounded certainty, see Nick Young, junior skeptic and contrarian.

[RidonKs]

sadly that's all Nick is trying to disprove. he likes to challenge accepted truths which is admirable but the boy talks out of his ass on the regular. He grew up hearing and believing that america was the greatest country of all time, come to find out it's not the truth he thought it was, so he does bare bones "research" and makes asinine assertions based on his findings. Ghandi a great man? No, he read one article saying otherwise so now he'll forever preach Ghandi being a fraudulent historical hero. Global warming? No, he read one thing on some falsified evidence between scientists so he comfortably discounts the idea that we can do any damage to our planet. Nick is like our resident Christopher Hitchens without any of the credibility but all the smugness. If you're looking for someone to take rudimentary understanding of a topic and address it with grossly unfounded certainty, see Nick Young, junior skeptic and contrarian.
:applause:

[Graviton]

USA still spends more money on their military than every other nation combined, Russia and China stopped concentrating on their military power long time ago. They are mostly all bark, why do you think America is allowed to just do whatever they want around the world, put bases in 200+ countries and no one says or does shit, because they can't stand up to the big bully. As bad as you think the economy and current state of USA is, it's much worse in Russia and China. The quality of life in those 2 countries for majority of the population makes our lower class look like the 1%. Neither country has the resources to spend on a prolonged war.

And I doubt America is in any danger for at least another 50 years. We control the whole entertainment industry of the world. Movies, music, sports, video games, gadgets, electronics, phones are all provided by American companies. We supply the world their break from harsh reality. Just imagine how bad it would get without America. China may control the manufacturing, but the actual ideas and breakthroughs come from USA. America is like the asshole boss that orders everyone around, but no one has the balls to get rid of him because the guy that will replace him would be even worse.

[COnDEMnED]

Hardly an all-out war. U.S. forces would have defeated the NLF and the NVA if given enough time. The same could be said of Soviet forces in Afghanistan. Both conflicts were halted due to political moves, not military-based decisions.
Americans killed in Iraq= 4,486. 10 years
Americans killed in Vietnam= 58,209 20 years
Difference= 53,723
Ask any Vietnam veteran if it wasn't an all out war. Be prepared to block your face from impact. I have friends who fought in Vietnam, covered with multiple bullet wound scars.

[IcanzIIravor]

Americans killed in Iraq= 4,486. 10 years
Americans killed in Vietnam= 58,209 20 years
Difference= 53,723
Ask any Vietnam veteran if it wasn't an all out war. Be prepared to block your face from impact. I have friends who fought in Vietnam, covered with multiple bullet wound scars.
He is correct though. Ask those vets about the restrictions placed on them. The enemy ran in and out of neighboring countries and we did not allow our people to wage total war. We didn't ant the war escalating though we knew who was providing aid, munitions and weapons to the enemy.

[COnDEMnED]

I dont get it guys... Some of you would really fight for your country? Like you would be ready to die for it? I would, with my family, just move to some safe place. Why the fvck to risk my only life to a country I was born in?
I enlisted to the marines, twice, during the Iraq war. All of my friends from high school enlisted in the marines. Many people in my family, in the past, have enlisted in the marines, throughout generations.

I was denied entry into the military because of permanent health issues.

If they reinstated the draft tomorrow, I would be at the front of the line to join the marines. I would willingly die for my country, I'd prefer I live, but that would be up to my ability. I would accept either outcome, however it happened.

[travelingman]

Americans killed in Iraq= 4,486. 10 years
Americans killed in Vietnam= 58,209 20 years
Difference= 53,723
Ask any Vietnam veteran if it wasn't an all out war. Be prepared to block your face from impact. I have friends who fought in Vietnam, covered with multiple bullet wound scars.

IcanzIIravor gets it. Apparently you don't. If it was an all-out war...why did we not launch a full-scale invasion North Vietnam? Why were we so reluctant to bomb Haiphong, the chief port of North Vietnam, from 1968-1972? Why did it take a Communist campaign (Easter Offensive) aimed at overrunning the government of Saigon for the U.S. to resume bombing Haiphong? Why did Johnson place restrictions on bombing levels, bombing targets, troop levels, and mobilization of troops in that theatre yet outside the borders of South Vietnam? Johnson didn't want to take political flack for any decisions on Vietnam, so he made concessions to both parties that ultimately achieved next to nothing. He managed this war as a politician, not as a commander-in-chief. That is why this was not an all-out war.

Also, wouldn't it be more insulting to tell a Vietnam vet that it WAS an all-out war? That's basically saying "As strong as you were, you couldn't fortify your allies in Saigon enough to keep them around. You failed in your objective, as your allies were overrun by the Communists not three years after you formally left."

As opposed to "You could have taken down North Vietnam if your "allies" in Washington had had your back during the entire process. You were strong enough to win most of the major battles, but the politicians decided you shouldn't be able attack the Communists across the border with ground forces. They were the ones who lost the war!"

[MavsSuperFan]

Japan has virtually 0 military and they might not be as willing to help the US in war as people think



Japans not helping them even with all the tech,bc of the US Japan's Military is nonexistent

:biggums:

Japan Self-Defense forces is one of the most potent military forces on the face of the earth.
Budget $55.9 billion[1][2] (2011)

The Japan Air Self-Defense Force (air force) and the Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force (Navy) are some of the most advanced in the world.

The Japan Ground Self-Defense Force (Army) uses the type 90 tank, which is a modern MBT.

Just because they call them self defense forces doesnt make them weak :facepalm


Japan has a RESTRICTED Military

Japan has a self imposed sanction on itself that prevents it from fielding aircraft carriers, high capacity bombers, ICBMs and nuclear weapons. 99% of the world cant develop these things. Japan could tomorrow decide to build them.

The restriction is basically only a name. If Lebron went around calling himself unathletic would that in itself make him unathletic?



World total $1,753 billion (2.5% of GDP; 100% of world spending)
1. United States $682.0 billion (4.4% of GDP; 39% of world spending)
2. China $166.0 billion (2.0% of GDP; 9.5% of world spending)
3. Russia 90.7 billion (4.4% of GDP; 5.2% of world spending)
4. United Kingdom $60.8 billion (2.5% of GDP; 3.5% of world spending)
5. Japan $59.3 billion (1.0% of GDP; 3.4% of world spending)

There are tons of countries that call their militaries Armies, navies, air forces, etc that are weak than japan.

[eliteballer]

Neither of them have a navy or air force that would pose a threat to us...and you need both to wage global war. That's what makes the US so far beyond everyone...we have the tech to project power fast and hard globally.

..and Russia would have to worry about NATO//Europe, while Japan and India would be a handful for China.

[CeltsGarlic]

I enlisted to the marines, twice, during the Iraq war. All of my friends from high school enlisted in the marines. Many people in my family, in the past, have enlisted in the marines, throughout generations.

I was denied entry into the military because of permanent health issues.

If they reinstated the draft tomorrow, I would be at the front of the line to join the marines. I would willingly die for my country, I'd prefer I live, but that would be up to my ability. I would accept either outcome, however it happened.

But why? You would die for nothing. Simple as that. Just as a whore or puppet of a sick gov. that needs more oil. That goes to any country, not only US, but anyone from everywhere.

I would somewhat kinda understand if it was your country that would be engaged but to fight in foreign country for nothing, but 50cents cheaper gas is stupid as fvck. Im with what "Flash31".

[COnDEMnED]

He is correct though. Ask those vets about the restrictions placed on them. The enemy ran in and out of neighboring countries and we did not allow our people to wage total war. We didn't ant the war escalating though we knew who was providing aid, munitions and weapons to the enemy.
Im not going to get into a full blown debate with you, I will only say this, to those who fought in the war, and those who died in the war, it didn't seem like a non full blown war to them. You would hate to think you gave up your life for a "non full blown war". Their is nothing fake about dodging bullets in the ****ing jungle. To insinuate to those still living Vietnam vets that it was not a full blown war, I would once again say brace your face for impact. From their point of view, what would you know about war.

[MavsSuperFan]

Im not going to get into a full blown debate with you, I will only say this, to those who fought in the war, and those who died in the war, it didn't seem like a non full blown war to them. You would hate to think you gave up your life for a "non full blown war". Their is nothing fake about dodging bullets in the ****ing jungle. To insinuate to those still living Vietnam vets that it was not a full blown war, I would once again say brace your face for impact. From their point of view, what would you know about war.

Nobody was saying that.

You have completely missed their point.

To summarize their point, America held back in vietnam because of political reasons.

Not sure I agree that it was only political reasons, I also think they didnt want to get too close to the chinese border (Eg korean war).

[CeltsGarlic]

Im not going to get into a full blown debate with you, I will only say this, to those who fought in the war, and those who died in the war, it didn't seem like a non full blown war to them. You would hate to think you gave up your life for a "non full blown war". Their is nothing fake about dodging bullets in the ****ing jungle. To insinuate to those still living Vietnam vets that it was not a full blown war, I would once again say brace your face for impact. From their point of view, what would you know about war.

I know, Ive read a lot of literature from Remarque ,for instance, who suffered what you are explaining, but even he felt it was nonsense even tho he fought for freedom.

Im not debating about how stupid the war is as an act, but how stupid the war reasons are, which make the war stupid in the end... well you know what Im saying. :lol

[travelingman]

Nobody was saying that.

You have completely missed their point.

To summarize their point, America held back in vietnam because of political reasons.

Not sure I agree that it was only political reasons, I also think they didnt want to get too close to the chinese border (Eg korean war).

Yes, I sort of lumped in the fear of escalating any war with the Soviet Union in with the larger group of political deterrents. The reason I mentioned Haiphong is because it was deemed "off-limits" by the U.S. government for a period due to the presence of Soviet ships there, so they obviously wanted to avoid any Soviet casualties in a strike against the strategic port that could cause a further deterioration in diplomatic relations.

[MavsSuperFan]

Yes, I sort of lumped in the fear of escalating any war with the Soviet Union in with the larger group of political deterrents. The reason I mentioned Haiphong is because it was deemed "off-limits" by the U.S. government for a period due to the presence of Soviet ships there, so they obviously wanted to avoid any Soviet casualties in a strike against the strategic port that could cause a further deterioration in diplomatic relations.

alright fair enough, but even that is a military consideration to me.

Political considerations to me are the ones that take into account how unpopular the war was at home.

[G-train]

USA has some powerful allies in this situation.

[travelingman]

alright fair enough, but even that is a military consideration to me.

Political considerations to me are the ones that take into account how unpopular the war was at home.

Well, the absolute worst (but much more unlikely) resulting action arising from Soviet casualties in Haiphong could be strikes from the USSR against the US. However, the more likely outcome would be a further deterioration in relations between the two superpowers (so, mainly political effects). That's why I would prefer to include it within the political sphere over the military one, but I see what you are getting at.

[COnDEMnED]

IcanzIIravor gets it. Apparently you don't. If it was an all-out war...why did we not launch a full-scale invasion North Vietnam? Why were we so reluctant to bomb Haiphong, the chief port of North Vietnam, from 1968-1972? Why did it take a Communist campaign (Easter Offensive) aimed at overrunning the government of Saigon for the U.S. to resume bombing Haiphong? Why did Johnson place restrictions on bombing levels, bombing targets, troop levels, and mobilization of troops in that theatre yet outside the borders of South Vietnam? Johnson didn't want to take political flack for any decisions on Vietnam, so he made concessions to both parties that ultimately achieved next to nothing. He managed this war as a politician, not as a commander-in-chief. That is why this was not an all-out war.

Also, wouldn't it be more insulting to tell a Vietnam vet that it WAS an all-out war? That's basically saying "As strong as you were, you couldn't fortify your allies in Saigon enough to keep them around. You failed in your objective, as your allies were overrun by the Communists not three years after you formally left."

As opposed to "You could have taken down North Vietnam if your "allies" in Washington had had your back during the entire process. You were strong enough to win most of the major battles, but the politicians decided you shouldn't be able attack the Communists across the border with ground forces. They were the ones who lost the war!"
Semantics. In the political point of view, it was not, I guess, an "all out war". Question any Vietnam vet if what they did was participate in a real "all out war". This is not a point of view I will budge on, if you cant agree with this, we have nothing further to discuss. These people were not just playing with their guns in the jungle, to them, it was a hellish nightmare, to them, it was an all out war.

[CeltsGarlic]

Well if a soldier finds war for this reason necessary: gov is happy, soldier is proving himself - everybody wins. except the poor fella with a headshot.

[travelingman]

Semantics. In the political point of view, it was not, I guess, an "all out war". Question any Vietnam vet if what they did was participate in a real "all out war". This is not a point of view I will budge on, if you cant agree with this, we have nothing further to discuss. These people were not just playing with their guns in the jungle, to them, it was a hellish nightmare, to them, it was an all out war.

So, basically, anyone who experiences a significant amount of pressure/paranoia/outright fear/isolation/danger on a battlefield could make this argument since it is all based on the subjectivity of the individual living through this, right? Even though that is not the definition of experiencing or being a participant in an all-out or total war?

[COnDEMnED]

Nobody was saying that.

You have completely missed their point.

To summarize their point, America held back in vietnam because of political reasons.

Not sure I agree that it was only political reasons, I also think they didnt want to get too close to the chinese border (Eg korean war).
I'm only speaking on the point of view of the soldier, the only point of view that, in my opinion, matters. The united states government did what it did. Knowing that, I will not accept that those people fighting on the front line didn't feel it was a full out war. From their point of view, It doesn't get more real than life or death. People in fat cat suites can claim it wasn't a real war, all out war, what would they know? Does the restraint of arms mean it wasn't an all out war? Does it make a difference to the people in the fox holes? In my opinion, no, it doesn't.

[Lebron23]

Hell No

US and UK and the rest of their alllies would beat China, North Korea, and Russia. It might be the biggest War in History, but at the end of the day Team USA has the best weapons, best soldiers, and modernize nuclear weaponry.

[IcanzIIravor]

I'm only speaking on the point of view of the soldier, the only point of view that, in my opinion, matters. The united states government did what it did. Knowing that, I will not accept that those people fighting on the front line didn't feel it was a full out war. From their point of view, It doesn't get more real than life or death. People in fat cat suites can claim it wasn't a real war, all out war, what would they know? Does the restraint of arms mean it wasn't an all out war? Does it make a difference to the people in the fox holes? In my opinion, no, it doesn't.

You are letting your emotions dictate your response. Broach the subject with your Vietnam vet relations and I would wager they will agree that the US held back and that I what played a significant part in the casualty totals. Do you understand what total war means? What Sherman did in his march to Atlanta and beyond was total war. Deliberate targeting of the populace as a means of breaking the will of those you are fighting being used as an overt policy. No one can tell you with a straight face that we waged total war in Vietnam. The fact that you see that as a slap in the face to the vets if we speak that truth is ludicrous. Do you think it is a slap in the face to Afgan and Iraq vets to speak of how policy held them back?

[tgan3]

I heard a few years back that America's military budget by far the world's biggest, and is larger than that of the the next ten (might've been 20) military budgets combined.
Not only does America have the best weapons, it also has the best defence, I believe they have anti missile stations set up in various locations in the EU and I'd assume other places in the world.
Im pretty sure china has the USA economy by the balls with the amount of debt owed, but will that mean a lot if a war started?
For all we know events such as 9/11 and whatever action is ultimately taken with thw current Syria situation may be looked back on as catalysts/contributors to the cause of WW3.

America's military budget is the world's biggest doesn't mean anything as China can get the equivalent for 10x cheaper, as their subcontractors are much cheaper. Using that as comparison is null. Though I agree america's military is way more advanced then China/Russia.

Also to add, alot of America's highest tech weapons are black budget programs, they never see the light of the day, so you'll never know what they have in their toy box....

[CeltsGarlic]

America's military budget is the world's biggest doesn't mean anything as China can get the equivalent for 10x cheaper, as their subcontractors are much cheaper. Using that as comparison is null. Though I agree america's military is way more advanced then China/Russia.

Also to add, alot of America's highest tech weapons are black budget programs, they never see the light of the day, so you'll never know what they have in their toy box....

just like you dont know what china and russia has.

[JtotheIzzo]

Hypothetically, if Russia and China went for it right now, they would destroy us.

We have a weak leader and our military is stretched thin like butter.

This is just like when Rome fell for the first time.

At full strength, if we weren't wasting so much money and effort on two careless wars, we MIGHT be able to still defeat China and Russia. However as things stand, they have all the power and we have none.

This is a very sad day. We used to be the greatest country in the world but poor leadership has lead us to this place.

We are no longer the dominant super power.

Paper tigers.

Russia is a backwards, useless, homophobic backwater with no real punch. They are an embarrassment to white people. We were weened on cold war hysteria so there is a false belief that they are tough and equals, but reality is they are a dumpster fire.
Russia has a naval base in Syria, that is why they are posturing, but the reality is it is their only play.
Russia is way too deep in the sack with Israel to go against the US and the US knows this, the only thing that will stop an attack in Syria is massively negative public opinion and by the looks of Barry's backpedaling it may be the case.
The toothless Russian army is a farce.

China has a lot of soldiers, but conventional warfare is so last century. US troops in South Korea, Guam, Japan and Hawaii would run roughshod over the East Coast of China and they'd be on their knees. Then fly bys from the Middle East bases would take care of the oil reserves in Xinjiang and the inland cities like Chengdu, Chongqing etc.

IF

China could even keep the US at bay they would have landed in Taiwan a long time ago, now good relations between both 'Chinas' makes that unlikely but still a dream nonetheless.

Because of the Spratly Islands and Mindanao, the US will soon reopen bases in the Philippines. Another point of attack to keep China from bullying their south east Asian neighbors.

[Bandito]

I dont get it guys... Some of you would really fight for your country? Like you would be ready to die for it? I would, with my family, just move to some safe place. Why the fvck to risk my only life to a country I was born in?
is not the land you are protecting, but the people living in it.

[CeltsGarlic]

is not the land you are protecting, but the people living in it.

I care the most about my family and my friends and I would make sure they are somewhere safe, wherever it might. Those people I am protecting.