Would America still win a war with Britain? Would we be able to make Britain our bitch if we wanted to?

Would America still win a war with Britain? Would we be able to make Britain our bitch if we wanted to?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_ships_of_the_United_States_Navy
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_active_Royal_Navy_ships
businessinsider.com/these-are-the-worlds-20-strongest-militaries-ranked-2015-9):
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_employers).
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_2002
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

No, Britain would win

>Would we be able to make Britain our bitch if we wanted to?
they are

>Would we be able to make Britain our bitch?
They're our bitch now

...

would be a fucked up stalemate that would inevitably lead to errybody flinging their nukes 2bh

>Winning a war with a nuclear state

>he wants to fight england a 4th time
no thanks. suffering the beatles and who last time was enuf

Not sure. Probably. Invading Britain would be pretty difficult, near to impossible in fact. Ruling out Nukes, I would say that it would lead to a stalemate.

They could just blockade you and let you starve to death.

Is britain even capable of agriculturally supporting its own population?

you probably have few enough nukes that we could stop them all with ABM systems. The real problem will be trying to occupy yet another Islamic nation

Of course, why ?

America would win a war with anybody.

Although any war in which both countries have nukes is probably not going to end with any real winners.

Westerners fighting amongst themselves just gives the eastern powers the opportunity to sweep the leftovers.
The more interesting question would be how would the rest of Europe would react to US vs. UK.

>dat shitty grammar
don't merge two sentences together guiz

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_ships_of_the_United_States_Navy
>430+ active naval vessels
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_active_Royal_Navy_ships
>77 active naval vessels

>Britain
>Muh navy
toppest of keks britbongs thanks for not trying

You'd abandon all of pacific security to wail on the bongs? You're a bug guy, clapistan-senpai, you have responsibilities all over the world.

You'd only have about a third of the total available. Which of course is still a lot, but with bongs being able to sortie more effectively it isn't as clear as it was before~

>US naval budget $379.8 billion

>UK total military budget 56.2

Gee I wonder why

These stats are from October, 2015 (Source: businessinsider.com/these-are-the-worlds-20-strongest-militaries-ranked-2015-9):

>United Kingdom
Budget: $60.5 billion
Active frontline personnel: 146,980
Tanks: 407
Total aircraft: 936
Submarines: 10

>United States
Budget: $601 billion
Active frontline personnel: 1,400,000
Tanks: 8,848
Total aircraft: 13,892
Submarines: 72

>10x the budget
>100x the manpower
>22x the number of tanks
>15x the number of aircraft
>7x the number of submarines

Seriously. It's not a contest. We could allocate 1/4 of our military and still flatten them. You forget that the United States Department of Defense is the largest organization in the world, let alone largest military (Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_employers).

We already have infiltrators. Agent Paltrow alone could...
I've said too much.

And yet time and time again the royal navy has beaten the US navy in war-games...

Provide sources and/or proofs for your otherwise-unfounded claims, please.

>7 off

That's because the word royal sounds intimidating and you are a bunch of islanders.

...

They might be able to blockade the Atlantic, but I doubt they could blockade te north sea, so they could simply trade with Europe and Russia

USA couldn't win against North Vietnam so I wouldn't be so sure...

>let's have a nuclear war just because
How about we don't do this

>100x the manpower
>American maths

>Would we be able to make Britain our bitch if we wanted to?

They already are.

UK military doesn't have much chances. Not only they're outnumbered, but the technology is more or less the same, inferior in some cases. Plus their defense systems is connected to the US Navy, without it they're sitting ducks.

Couldn't they just sink shipping convoys with their submarines germany style?

if you like to talk to tomatoes

>146,980 * 100 = 14,698,000
Ah. I may have added an extra zero by accident.

>146,980 * 10 = 1,469,800
Then we just round it.


My argument remains though. Literally 1/10 of our military would be comparable to the UK's.

>Submarines: 72
We should build a few more

I know, right? Best freakin' ship sinkers around, subs.

Invade it please and finish with everyone.

The US can't even win against a "random" middle eastern country

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_2002

>mfw britbongs are avoiding this thread

he doesn't understand the point of war-games