How strong is US military power ?

[otago]

It is amusing to read of some boasting how strong US military power is.
Now there is one thing the USA will never do and that is attack any country that has nukes and the means to deliver the same.
So North Korea, China, etc is off the list of targets that can be attacked.
Want to be safe from a USA attack, develop nukes, you will then be put on the too hard list.
How strong is the US military, against nuclear armed countries ,not strong at all.
Nor is their record so hot against countries with a medium population like Vietnam.
Against Grenada ,sure no problem.
Some seem to believe that countries like Russia would never use tactical nukes on their own soil to wipe out invaders, I suggest you read some Russian history from around 1812,

 

[warpus]

Vietnam was difficult for the U.S. because of the terrain & the Vietcong's excellent use of it, not the country's population level.

 

[bigdog5994]

The US never lost a battle in Vietnam

 

[SG-17]

The US never lost a battle in Vietnam

The only battle we lost was the battle of public opinion.

 

[warpus]

The US never lost a battle in Vietnam

There are no homosexuals in Iran?

 

[Dachs]

Some seem to believe that countries like Russia would never use tactical nukes on their own soil to wipe out invaders, I suggest you read some Russian history from around 1812,

...when they didn't use tactical nukes on their own soil to wipe out invaders?

 

[bigdog5994]

There are no homosexuals in Iran?

no

 

[JohnRM]

It is not a matter of the US being unable to attack a nuclear-armed nation. It is a matter of such a conflict not being worth many of the pontential gains that could be obtained through warfare. The United States could very likely strike China and disable most of its ability to counter-strike the US mainland, but at what cost? What could be gained that would be worth it? The same is true of North Korea? What could be gained by striking them?

Vietnam is not a fair example. We were not just fighting Vietnam. We were fighting China and Russia, too, and our political leadership at the time lacked the will to escalate the war, and for good reason. There are also other circumstances that hindered our ability to accomplish our objective. In the end, our troubles in Vietnam had very little to do with the size or wealth of the country itself. It was a war that we committed to half-heartedly. It was war that was fought in too conventional of a manner. It was a war that should never have been fought, at all.

I have very little doubt that Russia would use tactical nukes to defend itself. The Russian anti-ballistic missile system uses nuclear warheads. Of course, the allied war plans during the Cold War called for the use of tactical nuclear weapons to halt any potential Soviet offensive in Western Europe. So, this is not unique to the Russians.

The reality is that if we have learned anything, it is that large-scale conflict, and war in general is not worth the price you pay in order to accomplish the goals you may have set out. War is and ought to be used as a last resort. Of course, some of our leaders do not think this way, but most Americans, and the international community, have come to this consensus.

And, for the record, Iraq had both a larger population, economy, and military at the time of the '91 Gulf War than Vietnam had throughout that conflict. We pummeled the Iraqi military into the ground and had to use a stick to remove the scraps from our boots, so we have absolutely no problem with countries with a "medium population".

 

[trader/warrior]

It is amusing to read of some boasting how strong US military power is.
Now there is one thing the USA will never do and that is attack any country that has nukes and the means to deliver the same.
So North Korea, China, etc is off the list of targets that can be attacked.
Want to be safe from a USA attack, develop nukes, you will then be put on the too hard list.
How strong is the US military, against nuclear armed countries ,not strong at all.
Nor is their record so hot against countries with a medium population like Vietnam.
Against Grenada ,sure no problem.
Some seem to believe that countries like Russia would never use tactical nukes on their own soil to wipe out invaders, I suggest you read some Russian history from around 1812,

You know, I wonder why it is expected of the US and only the US to be able to kill anyone, anywhere in the world on either small or large scale at any time, and if not it would be a weakness. No other country has it like this. Yeah, I know they are a "Superpower", but is it really necessary?

Are you suggesting they spend even MORE on the military?

 

[Thoughtful Thug]

It is amusing to read of some boasting how strong US military power is.
Now there is one thing the USA will never do and that is attack any country that has nukes and the means to deliver the same.
So North Korea, China, etc is off the list of targets that can be attacked.
Want to be safe from a USA attack, develop nukes, you will then be put on the too hard list.
How strong is the US military, against nuclear armed countries ,not strong at all.
Nor is their record so hot against countries with a medium population like Vietnam.
Against Grenada ,sure no problem.
Some seem to believe that countries like Russia would never use tactical nukes on their own soil to wipe out invaders, I suggest you read some Russian history from around 1812,

Military power follows money you know.

 

[warpus]

Vietnam is not a fair example. We were not just fighting Vietnam. We were fighting China and Russia, too, and our political leadership at the time lacked the will to escalate the war, and for good reason. There are also other circumstances that hindered our ability to accomplish our objective. In the end, our troubles in Vietnam had very little to do with the size or wealth of the country itself. It was a war that we committed to half-heartedly. It was war that was fought in too conventional of a manner. It was a war that should never have been fought, at all.

Of course variables are going to be against you in any war... In the case of Vietnam a lot of them were against the U.S. You guys fought on valiantly, but ended up losing. You're still pretty good at that whole war thing though! There's nothing to be ashamed about. Even Canada loses at hockey sometimes.

 

[kulade]

Let's just say when the time comes, New Zealand's going down.

 

[kosiosko 1]

Let's just say when the time comes, New Zealand's going down.

their anti nucular stance forbids U.S. warships to enter N.Z. So you can't go there


(unless you declare they have no nucular weapons/ power plants, which the U.S. won't do)

 

[Little Raven]

Orders of magnitude stronger than anyone else.

Not nearly as strong some people think.

 

[The Imp]

It is amusing to read of some boasting how strong US military power is.
Now there is one thing the USA will never do and that is attack any country that has nukes and the means to deliver the same.
So North Korea, China, etc is off the list of targets that can be attacked.
Want to be safe from a USA attack, develop nukes, you will then be put on the too hard list.
How strong is the US military, against nuclear armed countries ,not strong at all.
Nor is their record so hot against countries with a medium population like Vietnam.
Against Grenada ,sure no problem.
Some seem to believe that countries like Russia would never use tactical nukes on their own soil to wipe out invaders, I suggest you read some Russian history from around 1812,

Jesus, did the USA bang your girlfriend or something, because every single thread you make always revolves around the USA being bad.

 

[kulade]

forbids U.S.

Hahahaha... yeah

 

[Joecoolyo]

Jesus, did the USA bang your girlfriend or something, because every single thread you make always revolves around the USA being bad.

He's just angry over the fact that if we declared war on New Zealand, it would only take half a minute to bring down his entire country.

 

[capslock]

I'll be honest, there have been times when I wondered how we ever win wars, lol.

 

[Kennigit]

Damn. I guesss the Soviets really did suck. Russia had nukes in 1812 and the Bolsheviks lost all that technology.

Otherwise, you seem to have hit the proverbial nail on the head to seal the figurative coffin in terms of mutual destruction with nuclear weapons. Fresh observation.

 

[MobBoss]

It is amusing to read of some boasting how strong US military power is.

About as amusing as someone always boasting how maoris are so tough eh?

Now there is one thing the USA will never do and that is attack any country that has nukes and the means to deliver the same.

Pakistan has nukes and we have hit targets in Pakistan havent we?

So North Korea, China, etc is off the list of targets that can be attacked.
Want to be safe from a USA attack, develop nukes, you will then be put on the too hard list.

I think thats a overblown sense of security to be honest.

How strong is the US military, against nuclear armed countries ,not strong at all.
Nor is their record so hot against countries with a medium population like Vietnam.

Someone is having a problem realizing the differences between conventional and asymetrical warfare. Cant really use the same measuring stick to compare them.

Against Grenada ,sure no problem.
Some seem to believe that countries like Russia would never use tactical nukes on their own soil to wipe out invaders, I suggest you read some Russian history from around 1812,

I'm sorry...is there a plan or prediction that we will be invading Russia soon?

How about a new topic: How many medals is New Zealand going to win at the winter olympics?