1. Firaxis celebrates the "Asian American and Pacific Islander Heritage Month", and offers a give-away of a Civ6 anthology copy (5 in total)! For all the details, please check the thread here. .
    Dismiss Notice
  2. We have selected the winners of the Old World random draw and competition. For the winning entries, please check this thread.
    Dismiss Notice

USA and China Vrs. World! (in a "fair war")

Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by Eukaryote, Jun 19, 2008.

?

So who would win this crazy war?

  1. United States and China.

    47.4%
  2. The world

    52.6%
  1. Gooblah

    Gooblah Heh...

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2007
    Messages:
    4,282
    It's akin to dividing by zero. Something like this will occur:



    Basically, the ensuing Rapture/hellspawn/black hole will destroy the white area, filling it with seawater before winking out due to Hawking radiation (look, I know I just failed physics. Shut up.), while the dark grey area will be rendered inhospitable to humanity.
     
  2. Mowque

    Mowque Hypermodernist

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2006
    Messages:
    3,129
    Location:
    Mating With Your Queen
    :dunno: It's ok, Yemen will make it
     
  3. Patroklos

    Patroklos Deity

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2003
    Messages:
    12,721
    I am not sure where you got those airforce numbers, but if you go to the actual Russian Airforce page they only have 735 active fighters/fighter bombers.

    If you do the same for India, you get 771 counting trainers. 227 of those are worthless MIG-21s.

    Now a good bit Of China's airforce is MIG-21 type aircraft, but thats not the point. The point is that the US airforce, judiciously concentrated in turn, is more than capable of destroying ALL these airforces, especially on the defense (as would be the case with India).
     
  4. Patroklos

    Patroklos Deity

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2003
    Messages:
    12,721
    This is not why Japan and Korea would be out of it. They would be out of it because from day one they would be completely deprived of every resource required to continue civilized society, from food to oil. In fact, we can pretty much count on the capitulating without a fight just like Canada.
     
  5. innonimatu

    innonimatu Deity

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2006
    Messages:
    14,310
    #264 points and I don't think that anybody yet mentioned an obvious point which makes the whole discussion... pointless!

    If nuclear weapons were somehow banned, countries would have been preparing their military in a very different way - any "fair war" :)rolleyes:) would be fought with different weapons, on a different world.
     
  6. SS-18 ICBM

    SS-18 ICBM Oscillator

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2006
    Messages:
    15,274
    Location:
    Here and there
    Europe doesn't have naval forces?
     
  7. Squarg

    Squarg Awesomesauce

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2007
    Messages:
    583
    Location:
    I-Town, NY
    they do but the US's is larger and better equipped (think about the fact that there are 48 active air craft carriers in the world and the US has 12 of them).
     
  8. Steph

    Steph Multi Many Tasks man Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2002
    Messages:
    18,162
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Pont de l'Arn, FRANCE
    48 active aircraft carriers?
    Can you provide a list of the non American ones?
     
  9. SS-18 ICBM

    SS-18 ICBM Oscillator

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2006
    Messages:
    15,274
    Location:
    Here and there

    List of aircraft carriers in service.


    Brazil
    -NAe São Paulo

    France
    -Charles de Gaulle

    India
    -INS Viraat

    Italy
    -Giuseppe Garibaldi
    -Conte di Cavour

    Russia
    -Admiral Kuznetsov

    Spain
    -Principe de Asturias

    Thailand
    -HTMS Chakri Naruebet

    United Kingdom
    -HMS Ark Royal
     
  10. AceChilla

    AceChilla Goedheiligman

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2003
    Messages:
    2,333
    Location:
    Nijmegen - Netherlands
    Well since they have the backing of the entire world behind them, and thus the entire world resources I think they can relocate them whereever they want. Good options would probably be the Koreas and Japan and Russia.


    As I said I got them from the same wiki article posted by Aegis. Further more indeed if the US airforce would be defending mainland China it would actually be a very hard fight. However I think the US airforce will have enough on it's plate already in US conflicts and it's priority will not be the defense of the Chinese.
     
  11. Steph

    Steph Multi Many Tasks man Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2002
    Messages:
    18,162
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Pont de l'Arn, FRANCE
    That makes 9 of them... Very short from 36 isn't it?
     
  12. Patroklos

    Patroklos Deity

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2003
    Messages:
    12,721
    I was already kind enough to summarize the naval forces of Europe+Russia and compare them to the US. The US has more than enough firepower to handily defeat them in open water and still dominate the worlds oceans.

    And we shouldn't be expecting that world to provided anything more than they already are in a timeframe useful for such a conflict. As has been repeated ad nauseum, most of that world you are thinking will be a boon to you is actually a liability.

    And as I said, you need to go to the country specific wiki pages to get accurate numbers.

    What conflicts would the US airforce be involved in exactly? Seriously, the US mainland is invulnerable to attack. The only nation with airframes capable of getting that far is Russia, and they will have their hands full with China. The US is literally free to concentrate its airpower wherever it wishes.

    I already did this comparison. Combining ALL of Europe with Russia, US still has a 1300+ edge in fighter aircraft, not to mention a significant qualitative edge.

    I have seen them count the US large deck amphibs as carriers before, which is technically true given they are just as aviation capable as the European psuedo carriers normally.

    Which brings up a good point. Not all carriers are created equal. Non US carriers really are floating coffins in a war of this sort.
     
  13. red_elk

    red_elk Deity

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2006
    Messages:
    16,282
    The US would quickly lose all their foreign naval and air bases in such scenario. Without them it will be impossible to have air superiority anywhere except North America. Controlling ocean would be also problematic, as significant part of navy will be destroyed, and the rest of it will be dependant on mainland bases. They will be forced to defend.
     
  14. Patroklos

    Patroklos Deity

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2003
    Messages:
    12,721
    Defend against what?
     
  15. RedRalph

    RedRalph Deity

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2007
    Messages:
    20,708
    this is a good point, apart form ones in naitons like Iceland, most countries would remove or effectively make unusable the US bases
     
  16. Yeekim

    Yeekim Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2006
    Messages:
    11,098
    Location:
    Estonia
    This discussion is pointless unless we establish some basic rules.

    What are the objectives of both sides in this war?

    Granted, US currently is the superpower of this world. They would be able to use their superior air force and navy to harass pretty much any other country while keeping any actual combat away from their home soil and inflicting disproportionate casualties EDIT: for long enough to make a reasonable adversary seek some peace deal - I believe this is a given.

    However, all this would come at a cost. And if we do not establish what would be the objective of US-Chinese alliance in such a war, we can't say whether they'd actually "win", "lose" or merely achieve a costly stalemate. Hell, it is generally agreed that US lost Vietnam war, although I am pretty positive Vietnam as a country suffered much larger casualties than US.

    Now, if our scenario is that everyone on Earth suddenly loses their free will to Aliens and is turned into mindless drones who carry on this fight in a huge combat simulator - no matter whether this would actually make sense or not (i.e there will be a deathmatch with no peace options available), then I believe that US and China would eventually be destroyed, as they are faced with overwhelming odds as regards to both manpower and national resources.
     
  17. Jazzmail

    Jazzmail King

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2005
    Messages:
    710
    Location:
    Gelderland
    Exactly.

    First question: which side is the hypothetical agressor and which side is on the defense?
    Second: do they want to keep the place intact, with useful workers and factories, etc?
     
  18. red_elk

    red_elk Deity

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2006
    Messages:
    16,282
    Against the rest of the world. At first, the US will be busy rescuing all their military personnel abroad, evacuating as much equipment as possible. After that, they will be unable to attack effectively far away from homeland, even if several carriers will survive.

    Israel/Iran/Arab/Turkey forces will establish control over Middle Eastern oil. China will be forced to keep large forces at Korean and Vietnamese fronts. They will capture Russian far east region, but further advance will be stopped by Russian/EU forces and then pushed back because of lost air superiority and eventually, oil shortage.
     
  19. Yeekim

    Yeekim Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2006
    Messages:
    11,098
    Location:
    Estonia
  20. Patroklos

    Patroklos Deity

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2003
    Messages:
    12,721
    Please list the assets of ROTW that are of any threat to North America.

    And you must realize that if you have your doubts about the power projection of America, thinking that any other nation is going to be able to project power is ridiculous.

    That doesn't matter, the VAST majority of that oil moves via ship around the Horn of Africa or through the Suez canal. The Suez canal will be a smoking collapsed crater, and there is no hope of resisting a US blockade of the Atlantic.

    Why?

    While I agree the Siberian confrontation will be a slug match that could go either way, your idea that ROTW will have air superiority is beyond fantasy. Are you paying attention to the airframe numbers I am posting?

    This is what I was getting at before. When discussing Russia you have to look at what is ACTIVE. The Russians stockpile and count everything, regardless as to whether it is crumbling pile of rust or not.

    It should be noted though that, while not even close to as bad as Russia, the European and American legacy fleets are also having aging problems. No matter how good a machine you design, it still has an operational lifespan.
     

Share This Page