The United States (USA) vs The World - Who Would Win?
18 replies, posted
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1y1e_ASbSIE
Could this be Infographic Show's lowest point?
if a superpower is a state with the ability to project power on a global scale, the US would for sure win vs the world.
Think about it, the US is 50 states, therefore it can control 50 global scales! the earth is only one global scale. 50 > 1. Easy fight.
Just because the US is basically the leading force in military doesn't mean that other countries are a slouch by any means. I'm not sure about strategy and tactics, but Eurofighters, Leopard 2s, SU-57s, and T-14s are nothing to shrug at.
Basically the video assumes that US can carry all their shit around without any resistance and thus can be everywhere and win everywhere.
It assumes that there is no way for anybody else in the world to stop their carriers.
Whole world is stuck in the 70s or 80s and US tech is basically OP.
Canada and Mexican border apparently to insignificant to mention.
He also totally glosses over the instant half of any imports for the US, he goes on how everybodies economy would cripple and die but US probably dies first in that regard.
Oil isn't the only thing you need to provide.
Not sure why I even try to think about points that are wrong with this video, almost everything is wrong.
I did US vs world in Defcon. It didn't go so well.
hm sounds like we need to increase our military budget
Wasn't there some theory that USA has planted all sorts of devices (not the NSA stuff) across many countries' power plants including ones such as Japan and as soon as they stop being their allies they cut all their electricity across their country to disable them.
send Swedish submarines
HSwMS Gotland managed to snap several pictures of USS Ronald Reagan during a wargaming exercise in the Pacific Ocean, effectively "sinking" the aircraft carrier.[11] The exercise was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of the US fleet against diesel-electric submarines, which some have noted as severely lacking.
seeing as russia is doing the same vs the US right now, that theory does potentially hold water
The rule of thumb in air power is that what is usually newer is better unless its some kind of budget jet, its almost like computer hardware in a sense.
The Eurofighter could probably go toe to toe or anything less than a super-hornet, the only thing that can't be countered yet is the F22/F35, since the SU-57 isn't into production yet. And the Euro's are getting the F35 anyway
I'd love to see a bunch of of actual military experts to come together and discuss how what would happen in a nuke-less work war like this.
Saw this trash on my recommended, the guys scenario would never actually work out as it never counts in industrial mobilization.
The US doesn't really produce anything it needs while the rest of the world has a much better built up industry that can be instantly flicked to war effort mode, as for oil shortage, it'd get rationed and imported from russia etc.
The US Navy will have domination mostly but that could be drawn out depending how it goes when counting in mobilization.
Still its dumb, even without nukes there would still be traditional explosive based ICBMs and such in play that can wreck havok with little way to stop.
Pretty sure if the soldiers don't want to fight the world that would leave them in a precarious situation as well
I love how he immediately discounted Israel but if I remember correctly didn't a wargame with them result in the US "losing" an entire carrier fleet to kamikaze speedboats?
>Losing a carrier, much less an entire fleet
https://files.facepunch.com/forum/upload/1383/d9b37ed5-d76f-4994-ae9e-7eafa895a398/image.png
It's not entirely shelved, they're rolling out the actual next gen engine and still have plans to buy them in small batches, but in general you're right as the numbers are going to be negligible.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
