Could the US capture Europe?

[Stylesjl]

Could the United States be able to launch an invasion of Europe (Excluding Russia, Turkey and other nations partly in and outside geographical Europe) and defeat all of the opposing forces and then capture all of Europe? (and hold it down).

This assumes nuclear weapons are out of the equation

 

[Peri]

If they cant do that with one country what hope is there for them to do it with an entire continent?

 

[thetrooper]

If they cant do that with one country what hope is there for them to do it with an entire continent?

Exactly!

.

 

[Rik Meleet]

Capture: Yes
Hold: No

They'll have to raze us.

 

[Peri]

Capture: Yes
Hold: No

They'll have to raze us.

Or put a GA in each city. But then the question becomes which GA would be acceptable to your city? Would everyone fight to have the PCD in their own city?

 

[Ingvina Freyr]

Could the United States be able to launch an invasion of Europe (Excluding Russia, Turkey and other nations partly in and outside geographical Europe) and defeat all of the opposing forces and then capture all of Europe? (and hold it down).

This assumes nuclear weapons are out of the equation

No. I don't think the US could even capture the UK as long as Britain had a flow of rawmaterial etc from the rest of Europe. The US army is big and strong, but it takes so much more to successfully invade a country as history shows.

 

[emzie]

Capture: Yes
Hold: No

They'll have to raze us.

No way man. The EU is 500,000,000 people and a larger economy. It's not like a US attack is going to come out of nowhere; Europe would be prepared. The US would have been kicked out of their bases all around Europe. Northern Africa isn't going to let the US stage jack there. Though yes, you would have to hold and secure your surroundings (Azores, maybe Iceland).

You have modern fighters and, while I don't have specific numbers, I would be surprised if Europe as a whole had less fighters than the US carrier fleet. I would be shocked if you didn't have the industrial capacity to fix that discrepency if you did have less.

In military exercises, modern German-made Danish diesel-powered subs have 'sunk' US carriers. The US Navy is not immune. You also have the same planes as the US. You have the radar capability to detect US stealth.

If it ever came to a ground war, which I seriously doubt, remember, you have half a billion people who have some nationalism in them

 

[zenspiderz]

It depends how it is done. Firstly to some extent the US is already the master and occupier of europe since the end of WW2. However the EU as a political instituion may enable european elites the political unity to ease out from under US hegemony especially if the US suffers a major setback like another depression or a dollar collapse. That being the case and EU becomes independant of US and the US wanted dominion back by force. The US should at first stand back and see if they can utitlise the principle of 'divide anc conquor'. This could work really well in europe because their is a long history of tribal rivalry and national pride in europe. Firstly the US should use spies to ascertain the political faultlines. Then use agent provocateurs and false flag attacks to increase the friction in these faultlines to cause civil unrest, terrorism, even in the best case scenario (from the would-be conquorers POV) all out, no holds barred civil war!!

Then the US just has to wait until europe has leveled itself then send in their troops as 'peace keepers'. This way they can conquor without hardly fighting and be praised as for it!!!

 

[BasketCase]

I've been able to capture and hold Europe, playing as the United States, in most world-war type games I've played (PC or otherwise--I used to have a serious hankering for cardboard wargames).

However, in such games, your troops generally go exactly where you want and do exactly what you want them to do. And they don't make mistakes doing it. In the real world, that level of coordination is difficult to get.

So, out here, we can never really know until a war between the U.S. and Europe actually happens.

 

[Phlegmak]

If we're talking Civ, then yes, but it would take a tremendous amount of resources and time.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

If they can find it on a map, maybe. But they'd just as easily invade Africa while reafirming their notion how imigration in Europe is poorly handled. "Look at all those ghettos!"

 

[MamboJoel]

Considering the amount of logistic and the % of US soldiers required for Irak and the fact that most European forces (UK, France, Italy, Germany) have modern equipments, it seems to me this scenario needs to postulate that the US enters a WW2 like 40% GNP military expenditures which is likely to me noticed from Europe who would respond in the same way.
The problem is that Europe has no military leadership yet, but invasion looks impossible to me.

 

[aaglo]

If the US tried to take all the countries at the same time, it would not be possible. USA simply would not have enough troops & equipment to take over the whole continent at once.

But if they would take time (let's say 50 years), and take one country at a time, they could propably have some chance. And I think they'd propably start with Norway and Sweden (and possibly Finland) to secure some part of the continent. And with quite low population these would propably be easier targets... or so would it seem (similar thoughts were in Soviet union in the year 1939...)

 

[ferenginar]

I think Bush would need a geography lesson first.

 

[BasketCase]

Naah. All Bush does is say "go conquer Europe" and his executives go find out where it is and send the troops.

 

[Truronian]

A divided Europe: possibly
A united Europe: probably not

 

[thetrooper]

And I think they'd propably start with Norway and Sweden (and possibly Finland) to secure some part of the continent.

Hmmm... You, TLC and I have to fight on the same side.

Maybe the US have a chance after all.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Naah. All Bush does is say "go conquer Europe" and his executives go find out where it is and send the troops.

I can just picture them thumbing through an atlas's index mumbling: "Yurp, Yurp, nope, this one hasn't got Yurp either "

 

[sysyphus]

No. I don't think the US could even capture the UK as long as Britain had a flow of rawmaterial etc from the rest of Europe. The US army is big and strong, but it takes so much more to successfully invade a country as history shows.

Depends, if they do it whilst Blair is still in power, not only could the Americans do it, but Blair and Straw would actually commission the British military to help them.

 

[AL_DA_GREAT]

The Europeans wouldn't have the moral, uinity and the energy. Most Europeans would just not bother struggle or fight for this. Although if we stuck together and fought hard we could keep them of our land. The navy is important, if we could have a blockade like the one the Geramans had in WWII it would greatly help.