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

[RedRalph]

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?

Well, I'm glad to hear it

 

[Patroklos]

Well, I'm glad to hear it

I have said that at least three times now.

 

[Steph]

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.

How do you plan to bomb the Suez Canal and control it?

 

[Yeekim]

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.

ROTW has uncontested superiority in manpower and every other kind of resource. Naval and aerial superiority of US is unlikely to survive a prolonged war of attrition.

It is probably easier and cheaper to shoot down a plane/sink a carrier than to build one.

 

[Patroklos]

How do you plan to bomb the Suez Canal and control it?

America is the sole country with an effective long range bomber force. A few hundred 2000lb bombs at the key points, as well as sinking every ship that is in the thing at the onset of hostilities will do the trick. It would take years to redredge the canal and raise all the blocking hulks. There is no need to control it.

I have zero confidence in Egypts ability to stop this from happening.

 

[Patroklos]

ROTW has uncontested superiority in manpower and every other kind of resource. Naval and aerial superiority of US is unlikely to survive a prolonged war of attrition.

Again, everyone needs to get out of their WWII mentality. Factories building Tatas are not going to be retooled to produce MIG37s inside a decade. No side (including America) will have the ability to produce advanced weaponry to any relevant degree, and most of it takes too long to build regardless. All sides will go to war with the navy/airfoce they have.

 

[RedRalph]

Again, everyone needs to get out of their WWII mentality. Factories building Tatas are not going to be retooled to produce MIG37s inside a decade. No side (including America) will have the ability to produce advanced weaponry to any relevant degree, and most of it takes too long to build regardless. All sides will go to war with the navy/airfoce they have.

Lets say the US does indeed bomb TROTW, etc etc to pieces, yet TROTW wont surrender. It happens. Countries have been totally and utterly defeated and still havent surrendered. What does the US do then?

 

[Patroklos]

Move onto the next target.

But those Yurp bastards are first on our list

 

[RedRalph]

Move onto the next target.

Meaning what exactly?

 

[Patroklos]

Meaning what exactly?

If say, after reducing Japan to a starved failing society they still won't surrender, it really isn't that big a deal. We don't want to occupy them anyway. As long as they are rendered impotent, move your forces on to another front that is still threatening.

 

[Yeekim]

Again, everyone needs to get out of their WWII mentality. Factories building Tatas are not going to be retooled to produce MIG37s inside a decade. No side (including America) will have the ability to produce advanced weaponry to any relevant degree, and most of it takes too long to build regardless. All sides will go to war with the navy/airfoce they have.

In our "drone-deathmatch" scenario, how long is "too long"? Yes, ROTW likely would not be able to effectively retaliate against US perhaps as long as for a decade. So what? If our fight starts tomorrow, we may finish last of you in your Midwest bunkers at around 2060.

 

[RedRalph]

If say, after reducing Japan to a starved failing society they still won't surrender, it really isn't that big a deal. We don't want to occupy them anyway. As long as they are rendered impotent, move your forces on to another front that is still threatening.

Nah, you have to win, you cant settle for leaving us in ruins (which ye wouldnt be able to do to ther whole ROTW anyway). Seriously, TROTW looks like Berlin in 1945 and we still dont surrender, what are you going to do now?

 

[Patroklos]

Nah, you have to win, you cant settle for leaving us in ruins (which ye wouldnt be able to do to ther whole ROTW anyway). Seriously, TROTW looks like Berlin in 1945 and we still dont surrender, what are you going to do now?

I can leave you in ruins for the moment. Japan might bravely resist while Europe and Russia are still slugging it out with the Chinese, but what about after all viable options for victory have exhausted themselves?

I could ask you the same question in reverse could I not? Nothing in the OP said this was a war of conquest, reducing the opposition to a point that they are no longer a threat is a win.

 

[RedRalph]

I can leave you in ruins for the moment. Japan might bravely resist while Europe and Russia are still slugging it out with the Chinese, but what about after all viable options for victory have exhausted themselves?

I could ask you the same question in reverse could I not? Nothing in the OP said this was a war of conquest, reducing the opposition to a point that they are no longer a threat is a win.

No no, the opposition surrendering is a win. you cant force surrender by airpower alone anymore, and you know it. so you'd have to go in on the ground

 

[Patroklos]

Your talking about end game, I am talking about in war prosecution. The point is that this will be more like an island hopping campaign. I don't have to physically take out all the threats in turn, I just have to render them irrelevant.

As for the end game, the OP says nothing about illiciting a formal surrender, but starvation and economic isolation are clearly options for soliciting said surrender. Why would this be an ideological death match?

 

[RedRalph]

Your talking about end game, I am talking about in war prosecution. The point is that this will be more like an island hopping campaign. I don't have to physically take out all the threats in turn, I just have to render them irrelevant.

As for the end game, the OP says nothing about illiciting a formal surrender, but starvation and economic isolation are clearly options for soliciting said surrender. Why would this be an ideological death match?

But we wouldnt be economically isolated from eachother, and ye would be form anything ye cant get form north america

 

[Yeekim]

Why would this be an ideological death match?

If you can come up with half-believable scenario why and how something like this should ever happen at all, I'll buy you a beer.

 

[Patroklos]

But we wouldnt be economically isolated from eachother, and ye would be form anything ye cant get form north america

How is South America going to trade with Europe again?

If you can come up with half-believable scenario why and how something like this should ever happen at all, I'll buy you a beer.

I really can't which is why I am treating this as more of an 18th centruy sort of thing when nations went to war over petty buisness and not shoot-myself-and-family-in-the-head-if-captured seriousness.

And as a reminder to "win" doesn't require surrender, it requires peace on decidedly favorable terms for one side.

 

[RedRalph]

How is South America going to trade with Europe again?

OK, the Americas are off limits to us, the vast majority of the world isnt. Almost everywhere outside Africa/Eurasia is going to be off limits to ye

 

[red_elk]

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.

Nobody will have assets and power projection enough to defeat enemy. After defeating China, this will be war on starvation.

Why?

Because both Korea and Vietnam have large land forces, and China will be forced to keep comparable forces at their borders.

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?

China will most certainly have superiority over far east region of Russia, closer to European part they will lose it.

America is the sole country with an effective long range bomber force. A few hundred 2000lb bombs at the key points, as well as sinking every ship that is in the thing at the onset of hostilities will do the trick. It would take years to redredge the canal and raise all the blocking hulks. There is no need to control it.

I have zero confidence in Egypts ability to stop this from happening.

Israel?