Could the US capture Europe?

[warpus]

US military spending: $490 billion
EU military spending: $190 billion

It'd be quite a war.

The EU would likely also get support from Russia.

 

[QuoVadisNation]

"Could the U.S capture Europe?"

I think all of this depends on circumstances. Who's fighting who, how and where all the battles fought, what is the motivation, economics, how long would the war be fought, is the war proportionate?

By ignoring the above, we're kinda just speculating and talking out of our a**es.

I mean, don't get me wrong, it could be possible, but it also could not. eh.

 

[capslock]

Well, one bomb at a train station in Spain could get them to surrender.

Threats and riots abroad could get Denmark and many other places to back down (as we saw with the cartoon issue).

How'd britain handle the bombings there? Were people taking up arms in the streets against the wrong doers?

I don't think I have to mention France's reputation...

IDK, but I think conquering most of Europe would be pretty EZ.

 

[Winner]

Winner I see your point on moblizeing more troops( but we could draft aswell, may not equal the same but we would have a higher percentage of trained based on existing troops) but Europeans wouldn't be able to arm them with the most advanced hi-tech weaponary. You run into the same problem the US right now, cost.

Basically, to successfuly invade Europe, you would need:

1) Complete air superiority over the area

-> I very much doubt that US naval airforce can do that. Even if it had better planes (which is not true), it would have to operate from carriers. I guess Europeans would take all their available fighters and destroy US carrier groups with massive strike if they attempted to get anywhere near the coast.

So without air superiority, invasion is out of question.

2) A lot of transports to quickly unload large numbers of your troops

-> Which is also a problem.
Moreover European countries still have a lot of Cold war stuff. Germany alone has hundreds of world's top MBT's. So even if you actually managed to form a beachhead, it would last for long.

To sum it up - US is perfectly able to invade weak countries like Iraq, but great powers, that's a different story.

 

[MobBoss]

They'll have to raze us.

We could do that.

The title of this thread should be changed to "how nationalistic are you?".

Could the USA invade and overrun Europe? Yes.

Could the USA hold it? Yes, but doing it would require tactics we would find reprehensible. But since thats not the question, my answer is yes.

 

[bhsup]

People, the threat is not Europe. The threat is Kansas, and I invite all of Europe to join Missouri in the glorious invasion of Kansas.

However, to answer the question, yes we could capture Europe. Holding it would be difficult, but there would probably be enough collaborators willing to sell out their own countries for a small taste of power that it would be possible. IT would take such a revolutionary change in Americans and their attitudes that I cannot fathom us ever trying it.

 

[Kozmos]

No effing way, all you could do us is solve our unemployment problems as we would rush build war factories, and start mass producing weaponary. Kinda like Hitler did.

 

[QuoVadisNation]

"Basically, to successfuly invade Europe, you would need:

1) Complete air superiority over the area. . . "


..or they could try and cripple the infanstructure before actually making a head-on naval assault at multiple countries during it's maximum alert of readiness. If that were accomplished, how could a country stop air superiority? If war did start, I would like to think it'd start with rockets and subs. But again, circumstances!

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

For my sanity I will have too asume that some of you are joking. I won't accept another explenation for some of the answers given

 

[MamboJoel]

Consider also -in the case of US razing Europe- that some US cities are going to be nuked by France and UK, possibly Russia and China.

I don't believe in an invasion scenario, it's modern armies and crossing the atlantic in front of modern navies. The US will destroy most of the navies but suffer great casualties. Air domination will be almost impossible without any bases near the continent. Landing 200 000 soldiers (is it what is operational today considering the amount in Irak, and the logistic available ?) in Bretagne or Wales in front of 150 000 French or English soldiers (+reinforcement from Germany, Italy etc... + constant mobilization on the continent) is suicide.
If any invasion succeeded, USA couldn't occupy such a large territory.
Just compare this to the Irak occupation or the Vietnam war.

 

[C~G]

The Soviet Union wasn't exactly "beating the crap" out of Germany. The Germans were at first beating the crap out of them. The Soviets won at great cost, 20 million people many of them being civilians. It was a Pyrrhic victory.

Well, "beating the crap".was only matter of speak, mainly referring to the later times when the Red Army had become unstoppable force.
The reason I opposed the idea not giving the nod to the Soviet Union since it did the work. They lost so much men and still kept going, it was almost inhumane effort. We're talking about real warmachine here.

Could the USA invade and overrun Europe? Yes.

Could the USA hold it? Yes

Your military experience is being overrun and routed by your patriotism here.

 

[Theige]

US military spending: $490 billion
EU military spending: $190 billion

I think that says a lot of it right there.

The U.S. has been spending a TON more per year, for many, many years than Europe.

Right now, if you pitted the existing U.S. military forces versus Europe's, Europe really doesn't stand a chance.

Not only is the U.S.'s force far larger, but adding up the EU forces isn't really possible; does Europe have a unified command structure the way the U.S. does ?

It would be impossible to get the EU's forces coordinated and fighting together as one unified force. Where as they would be fighting a much larger, completely integrated military thats been continually fighting for the last 65 or so years. The U.S. would just destroy one country's infrastructure at a time from the air

The only way to hold Europe however would be to assassinate all leaders straight away, and resort to terror tactics to control the population. I.E no regard for civilian life, etc.

Of course if I was European, I would make the complete opposite argument thats already been made several times

 

[thetrooper]

Right now, if you pitted the existing U.S. military forces versus Europe's, Europe really doesn't stand a chance.

'You' are the invading part. 'We' are just defending. Take that into the picture.

 

[MobBoss]

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 military budget is more than twice that of the entire EU and has been spending like that for a long time. The EU cant just quadruple their spending and wave the magic wand and create more troops/material. That takes time - time the EU wont have. Economy is not going to matter, especially if the war is being fought on your soil. Your economy will be disrupted.

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.

We dont have to fix it. We have hundreds if not thousands of planes shrink wrapped and in storage in the SW. You can even see them on google:earth.

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.

Having been on a large number of military exercises I can tell you one thing for certain that I have seen with my own eyes. Foreign militaries are allowed, ALLOWED, to suceed in such exercises; not to simply sooth their ego, but to also see what our forces would do in such a "what if" scenario. I have seen it time and time and time again, from NATO exerices in Europe to joint force exercises in Japan. The "real" chance of a modern Danish sub sinking a US Carrier is nil. The ASW net that a carrier battle group has is immense.

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

And if it came to it, we have more than enough ammo to wipe them all out.

 

[MobBoss]

Your military experience is being overrun and routed by your patriotism here.

Nope. The only exception to this assumption was that nukes would not be used. Not a strategy of complete annihilation or extermination. In this assumption, the US military doesnt have to "play nice" and hold back. There would be no "Geneva convention" laws to protect the populace.

In the question at hand, patriotism is not a question nor a factor. It is simply cold hard logic. In a no holds bar war, excluding only nukes, the EU would fall.

One other thing people have not mentioned here is battle experience. When was the last time Germany was in a war? Or any of the EU powers for that matter? The only nation with any real veterans, on any real scale, would be Britain. American troops are currently battle hardened and of veteran status. That makes more of a difference than people think.

 

[Bigfoot]

Obviously a ridiculous scenario. Population, economic power and logistics all favor the European side. Political disunity is their only Achilles Heel -- to have a chance the US would need to use a 'divide and conquer strategy', coupled with some well-timed and very creative blitz attacks. Also, it would have to employ space based weapons to negate pure reliance on carrier-based aircraft (as other have pointed out, the US carriers are quite vulnerable). There too, the Europeans could take effective counter-measures, and respond in kind against targets on the US continent. Even if a military victory could be achieved, the occupation would almost certainly fail.

 

[Masquerouge]

In the question at hand, patriotism is not a question nor a factor. It is simply cold hard logic. In a no holds bar war, excluding only nukes, the EU would fall.

While I tend to side with you, I would like to point out that logic usually is not a reliable factor in wars.

 

[Princeps]

It was a Pyrrhic victory.

Absolutely not. Soviet union became a leading economical, political and military power after the second world war and it was partly due to their success in that war.

 

[Hotpoint]

According to the IISS in The Military Balance 2003-2004 (the last time I checked it) the comparative numbers were:

European Union

1,846,910 Active Duty Personnel
2,827,080 Reserves
10,712 Main Battle Tanks
3,182 Combat Aircraft

United States

1,427,000 Active Duty Personnel
1,237,700 Reserves
8,023 Tanks
3,513 Combat Aircraft

The EU has more warships/submarines than the United States but lacks Carrier Aviation. It would however be able to keep the USN out of the Med and Europes' Atlantic Coast readily enough (most EU subs are conventional but in littorial waters that doesn't matter)

Just thought I'd throw in some stats.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

And take into account that the US can't just march out and leave it's homesoil undefended.