Ok Sup Forums lets have a discussion here.
US of A, if they went to war with China, N.K, Russia, would USA win ? and how, backed by which strength etc.
Reason being my siblings are all anti-American anti-Democracy liberals and they're always babbling on about how USA 'would get their asses kicked' by ruskies or North K.
Today it pissed me off though as they said N.K is a great superpower that's stronger than America, and how America is scared of them.
...
Really need a lot more information. But what the hell.
NK would be hard for the US to invade but it would eventually be beaten.
Russia and China would be very hard for the US to invade. Large populations. Fairly tough terrain in some places and large populations.
Neither of the 3 would have any chance invading the US.
Ment large population and large militaries.
China and Russia each by themselves would destroy and be destroyed by the US if they used their nuclear arsenal
without nukes and combined they would be a challenge to the US
but they are fairly weak in their ability to project their power
most battles would be in Eurasia
and it would quickly turn in favor of the US if any of their industrial centers were destroyed or captured
their only hope would be to turn it into a war of attrition and propaganda war so that the US would just quit and go home
What about N.K backed by China then ? And would they really have a nuclear war considering a lot of civilians might die ?
Sure I suupose
I think this user spells it out pretty well.
The only problem the US would have with north Korea is that they are friends with China which would drag China and other countries into it.
One on one, nk would be obliterated.
>any industrial centers were destroyed
This. China's sheer population would be their undoing and they would tear themselves apart over the merger remaining resources.
>What about N.K backed by China then ?
PDRK is irrelevant
they don't have the industry or population to significantly contribute
the only reason they won't be overrun and occupied within a week would be because they are allied with a superpower
>And would they really have a nuclear war considering a lot of civilians might die ?
China might if the war was going bad for them simply bc they might think that they would have pockets of survivors from sheer numbers
Russia and the US wouldn't initiate a nuclear exchange for the same reasons they didn't during the cold war
PDRK would right off the bat simply because they can
with Russia and China being allied with PDRK it really depends on if the US retaliates only against PDRK or if they see the PDRK attack as an act of the entire alliance
>allied with a superpower
Very interesting, mind me though isn't China a great power and not a superpower or am I mistaken ? I thought only 'Murica was a superpower.
Also I continuously get told that Russia has more nuclear weapons therefor they would annihilate USA
First things first, you have neglected to say which country you and your siblings are from.
>China a great power and not a superpower
it depends on what criteria you use to define both terms
>Russia has more nuclear weapons
doesn't matter
both the US and Russia have enough atomics to (theoretically) wipe out the entire human race
and China has enough to (theoretically) wipe out the populations of Russia and the US
Why do they have more nukes than they could ever use? you might ask
mostly as bargaining chips for disarmament treaties
partly as a back-up in case a first strike targets their nuclear arsenal
>US wouldn't initiate a nuclear exchange for the same reasons
Missile defense: don't be confused by "defence", when you put these systems up next door to the guy you don't like (think NATO and Russia), it becomes part of a first strike weapon.
>allied with a superpower
Simply because China would like a physical buffer between itself and the U.S. Armed Forces. It's the only reason N.Korea even exists.
>US of A, if they went to war with China, N.K, Russia, would USA win?
Yes. USA has been fighting across the planet (constant training) since 9-11.
>Missile defense...
yes
but it doesn't evoke an immediate retaliation
as evidence I present Turkey and Cuba in the 1960s
Arabia kek, just messing, we're from Great Britain sadly this is how my own siblings are... Completely disgusting how they act and speak against the very democracy they live under.
What happened in the 60's ?
Yes they have been fighting since 9/11. Which only proves how over inflated American egos are.
Look how much trouble Iraq and Afghanistan have been for you. Yet you think you will easily defeat China, Russia or NK.
I realise "the war on terror" has been more about fighting insurgencies. But all three of those countries have far far larger populations and plenty of die hard followers of their leaders/govts/ideologies. They also have much more land to hide in.
>What happened in the 60's ?
Cuban missile crisis
>US installs missiles in Turkey
>USSR says fine w/e
>installs missiles in Cuba
>US freaks the fuck out
>US intercepts soviet cargo ships sending missile sight parts to Cuba
>US and USSR get ready to go to war
>US agrees to remove missiles from Turkey if USSR removes missiles from Cuba
It's a matter of scale. If there were no US China would have an impressive army. But just that. Since there is a US an impressive army is worthless. Last estimate the PAAF had about 600 modern aircraft. They might be able to 1v1 our Pacific Carrier group. We saw in Iraq I how useless a big army is once we can bomb them with impunity.
China and Russia are tough. North Korea is a joke.
>Look how much trouble Iraq and Afghanistan have been for you
You are funny. It has relativly been no trouble. In vietnam, 65k were killed.
I just looked this up btw: After 4,486 U.S. soldiers died in Iraq and 2,345 U.S. soldiers died in Afghanistan, 1 million U.S. soldiers wounded in both wars, and a potential cost of up to $6 trillion
(1) War dead is practically nothing, not enough to really raise eyebrows at home. And mostly poor hicks and niggers, so who cares.
(2) 1 million wounded. There's the VA for that. Takes care of them right quick
(3) The six trillion spent was borrowed from the future (loans that will be paid off long into the future by your kids and grandkids taxes). However, it did not flow out, it was mostly a redistribution of wealth, taken from the future and doled out to oil and arms producers.
(4) Iraq and Afganistan are totally ruined, but that does not affect us. It's there thing now.
But user what about S.K when America and S.K fought N.K backed by China ?
But who has as much experience as the USA?
Take drones. Sure China and Russia can make drones and fly them. Have all sorts of bells and whistles.
The USAF has been flying and killing with them for more than a decade. They've ironed out the types of glitches that the Chinese and Russian forces probably don't even know exist, becuase they've never used these toys for real.
You just pointed out what I was saying. Most of Iraq and Afghanistan are desert albeit Afghanistan is mountainous.
Large parts of China and NK are covered in dense forest and mountains. And China has massive cities. Russia is so large it has a bit of everything.
They are not even comparable to your current fighting in the Middle East.
at the time PRC and USA had similar technological capabilities and USA was prohibited from invading PRC and USA was not fully committed, the majority of their forces were still in USA, Europe, and Japan
A war in which 178000 "allies" died and ended in a stalemate. That just proves my point.
Hardly similar. China had been all kinds of fucked up by Japan less then 10 years earlier and the US had plenty of combat experience from ww2.
Well would you look at all the big brainy-brains in here that know exactly how the world works and stuff.
It's not that, we're comparing USA to other powers and predicting what would possibly be the outcome you coon
Dude, kick back and watch, it's happening as we speak.
Yesterday USAF shot down a Syrian jet (Syrian pilot, Russian jet). The Russians have the capability to down everything in the Syrian airspace S-400 and S-300 systems.
If you're worried about a war, a big scary nuclear war, it's likely to start here. Russia, Iran and Syria are more than capable of taking care of ISIS. Why haven't they, you're asking? Becasue up to now they've been dealing with the real threat to them, western backed "rebels."
In our vocabulary, when they fight us, these "rebels" are called insurgents, terrorists and unlawful combatants.
...
It would end up being nuclear. Even if It didnt start nuclear, after 5-10 years of terrible war itd end nuclear... we all know how the US likes to end their wars.
I would say that I would be worried had we not have a lunatic in the white house. I don't think he'd be afraid of using nukes early and often