touché sir …
1 Like
Four would probably be enough that would be each can hold about 90 air craft being 360 jets and we remember we have plenty of bases already in the Pacific. Guam, Hawaii, Japan, south Korea, Singapore. We have one in the Indian ocean which is close to china and 8 bases in Japan. You seem to think we have no counter measures against anti ship and anti air missiles which is wrong. The pentagon knows China has been stockpiling “Carrier Killer” missiles for years.
I meant more along the lines of food, medicine, etc. It would take a matter of hours for supply planes to reach Europe. A bit longer for supply ships.
The Coalition force on the western front was 4 million men in world war 2 (4 million Americans and 1 million common wealth troops) and they were able to supply them. Sure there were sometimes struggles but it was the 1940s. You’re also not taking economy into effect. Russia would never be able to match the industrial power of the United States during war time (as i said their economy is similar to California and thats just one 1 U.S state.
Well they are at war with the United States so now they have no one to sell to. They wont be buying any more fighters because their economy just collapsed. China is out of the question as far as im concerned. They will not go to war with us while our economies are so closely linked. It would be far more damaging to them than it would us. Big companies couldn’t build factories in China anymore and that would create tons of jobs for the United States.
The national guard is for defending the country. There are 350,000 army national guard, 103,000 air national guard which makes up for a total of around 450,000 stationed back home. Along with the 800,000 soliders in reserve. Which im willing to bet at least half of those would become active troops.
The U.S military was pretty much scraped when the Korean war started. Had it not been for Gen Mac Arthur’s (he was American in case you forgot) amphibious assault the war would have been lost. The Coalition had already been pushed out of Seoul and he turned the war around. China beat back NATO with sheer numbers which according to you does not matter today. You dont need to make this a competition between British troops and American troops. Need i remind you that America and Britain have fought before 3 times.The first time was an American victory, the second was a stalemate, and the third was a crushing defeat for Britain. So please lets not get into this.
Wrong Russia does. China has slightly more tanks than the United States but the Abrams are better than all of them except the new one which they only have around 500 of them. As for their air force i was talking about the new fighter the United States was developing. Then China announced its new jet and it looks exactly like the one the United States was working on. Just a coincidence im sure. All that said China still has a very small air force compared to ours. But China would never enter the war. They would stay out of it.
no counter measure is 100% there i9s no such thing as a unsinkable ship
you cant supply such a force by air alone , it would take ships . which takes days to arrive , russia has a matter of a few hours drive
[quote=“SirWarriant, post:270, topic:21032”]
The Coalition force on the western front was 4 million men in world war 2 (4 million Americans and 1 million common wealth troops) and they were able to supply them. Sure there were sometimes struggles but it was the 1940s. You’re also not taking economy into effect. Russia would never be able to match the industrial power of the United States during war time (as i said their economy is similar to California and thats just one 1 U.S state.
[/quote] you have very basic knowledge . the commonwealth force was just bellow 9 million men . and a lot more than 1 million in europe . as i said ealier the armies of europe then were better equped to support such a force than they are now . the armies of today in europe are built to support small flexible forces . not a slow sluggish war like you think would take place .
[quote=“SirWarriant, post:270, topic:21032”]
Well they are at war with the United States so now they have no one to sell to. They wont be buying any more fighters because their economy just collapsed. China is out of the question as far as im concerned. They will not go to war with us while our economies are so closely linked. It would be far more damaging to them than it would us. Big companies couldn’t build factories in China anymore and that would create tons of jobs for the United States.
[/quote] why would they need to sell ? and the world is much larger than the US china exports to practically every nation on this planet . you have your american hat on again .
and what i meant is the chinese could mass produced jets for its OWN military in the thousands of factories it has the US simply couldnt match this .
[quote=“SirWarriant, post:270, topic:21032”]
Big companies couldn’t build factories in China anymore and that would create tons of jobs for the United States
[/quote] why do you have it in your head that china relies on you ? you’re aware you owe them money not the other way around they can affect your enconmy more than you can affect theres . imagine if they stopped making your computers , phones , cars etc the US would struggle like fuck . the US companies do not own a single one of the factories so they would have to completely rebuild their entire manufacturing process . in the time of war this would be near impossible . while china could happily keep selling to the rest of the world .
[quote=“SirWarriant, post:270, topic:21032”]
The national guard is for defending the country. There are 350,000 army national guard, 103,000 air national guard which makes up for a total of around 450,000 stationed back home. Along with the 800,000 soliders in reserve. Which im willing to bet at least half of those would become active troops.
[/quote] you dont understand military thinking what so ever . reserves are reserves they are spared for time of absolute danger they are not included in any long term military strategy . the US army would never leave the US guarded solely
by the national guard simples .
at the time when china got invloved we had all but beat N.Korea and at our strongest they beat us by a fast moving push with numbers yes but they were able to do this because of logistical reasons as they were so close .
the reason germany could not blitzs russia woas because it was so large that the logistics couldnt cope with the distance . its the same today you cannot keep an army of 8 million as you propose 100% equipped from the other side of the world . the reason we just about did it in WW2 was because of the armies of europe having the capacity to keep the allies moving , we do not have that capacity any more. it also helped that the british empire controlled most of the worlds oil supply that is also not the case anymore and if you think the middle east countries would back NATO you have another thing coming .
you’re correct there yes my mistake , however chinas production could easily mass produce more tanks alot faster than the US . the US cant compete with 500,000,000 12 year old slaves working for $1 a year 
also the NATO response force is only 13,000 men . the forces we are talking would take weeks to be at a state to be deployed meaning russia could push a good distance and be set up to receive NATO before we have even set sail . i believe personally that with todays current force we could not dislodge russia if they dug in however we could beat them if they were on the move. no reserve or draft would be called unless it had to be e.g we are losing
Of courses theres not but our carriers defense are extremely damn effective.
No but they could send them some supplies through air so until the ships arrive.
Look it up if you dont believe me. My numbers are correct.
China EXPORTS 90% of their shit to us. They relie on us buying that from them. Good luck find a replacement over night when we could have a naval blockade on them. As i said many Asian countries would not be trading with them because they dont like China.
We are already thousands of air craft ahead so by the time they reached the number of jets we had pre war we could potentially have thousands more.
China relies on us just as much as we relie on them this is exactly why they would not jump in a war like this.
The numbers i gave you were active guardsmen not reserves. They are trained to the same standards as our front line troops would be so yes they could leave them to guard the United States THAT is their sole purpose.
I already changed my numbers to around 1.5 million that 8 million would be if a draft was enacted.
the United States has plenty of oil on its own soil.
Yes they could but we would not invade China that would be suicide. It would probably be a navel air war which im confident would get beat them at.
Yes but a Russian invasion of Germany would probably call to arms as many men as they could muster. They have around 60,000 active troops along with the U.S troops stationed there.
That right there sounds like NATO is losing hard so would that mean a draft?
Didn’t see that earlier sure it would be a stalemate
how About a U.S U.K war 
and you no that how ? have they ever been combat tested ? no they have not
let me introduce you too mr SS-N-22 Moskit cruise missile the most advanced anti-ship missile on the planet , it flies at 1,700 mph just above the surface of the ocean . as it stands no ship is advanced enough to combat this missile effectively what i mean by this is if it is launched it will most likely hit . its a huge worry to the navies of NATO . this missile was designed for the sole purpose of destroying the US carrier groups .
[quote=“SirWarriant, post:273, topic:21032”]
We are already thousands of air craft ahead so by the time they reached the number of jets we had pre war we could potentially have thousands more.
[/quote] NATO does not possess enough to combat both china and russia so no your not thousands ahead at all and remember many of your jets would have to stay behind .
[quote=“SirWarriant, post:273, topic:21032”]
China relies on us just as much as we relie on them this is exactly why they would not jump in a war like this.
[/quote] china would 100% get involved . why? because russia is our ally its like saying the UK wouldnt back up the US because we rely on their trade so much .
secondly it would give them the opportunity to take all the land that they feel belongs to them and there is nothing china would love more than to kick ten shades of shit out of us .
[quote=“SirWarriant, post:273, topic:21032”]
The numbers i gave you were active guardsmen not reserves. They are trained to the same standards as our front line troops would be so yes they could leave them to guard the United States THAT is their sole purpose.
[/quote] they’re NOT however front line troops they are reserves there sole purpose is to SUPPORT the US military in the event of an invasion not to hold the house alone . you are not thinking logically
as of now . we could hold you at bay for a while but you would win eventually . in a fair numbers game however we would most likely win as our training is ten fold above yours .
not enough to support this entire force .
[quote=“SirWarriant, post:273, topic:21032”]
Yes they could but we would not invade China that would be suicide. It would probably be a navel air war which im confident would get beat them at.
[/quote] why would china engage you at sea where they’re weakest ? they would engage you on land where they are strongest .
[quote=“SirWarriant, post:273, topic:21032”]
Yes but a Russian invasion of Germany would probably call to arms as many men as they could muster. They have around 60,000 active troops along with the U.S troops stationed there.
[/quote] do you have any idea how long it takes to mobilize 60,000 men ? a fucking long time . if Russia steam rolled germany would fall pretty fast .
there isnt a nation in europe that could hold against russia its a shambles really .
Britain is without doubt the most successful war conducting nation that has ever been seen yet look at us now , reduced to fuck all
China and Russia are not hardly like the U.K and U.S. They haven’t been allies for a long time and have had border conflicts as recent as 2008. China would not destroy their own economy unless they were fucking stupid. We need them and they need us thats it plain and simple. Im sure they would love to try and kick ten shades of shit out of the U.S but they bottom line is they wont. Even if China and Russia were like the U.S and U.K there has been plenty of times we haven’t gone to each others aid. Vietnam, Falklands, Somalia.
Many guardsmen served in many of the major wars. They can and have fought on the front lines many times.
10 fold our troops train together you yourself said you trained with the U.S airborne. If your training was 10 fold above ours what gain would you have coming over here?
Lol what cmon thats not even close to true. Conquering people in grass skirts when you have rifles and artillery is not amazing. America successfully beat Britain twice so what does that say about us? Im much more impressed with Empires like the mongols or Romans. Sure they fought tribal people too but at least they didn’t have weapons a thousand years ahead of the people they were fighting. Sure the British empire was impressive but not hardly the most impressive.
you have never beat us military wise , you made the war expensive for us by targeting our unguarded logistical lines , so much so it wasnt worth our time to fight you , easier to just let you have half of what you were fighting for and for us to carry on taking india where the money was , during the war of 1776 we won more battles than we lost and it ended with us keeping Canada which was worth way more than the land we gave up . you also had the help from both france and spain , you by no means kicked ours arses . you used the same tactics as terrorists . the war of 1812 we again came out on top its one you americans like to refer to as a draw but considering we landed and set fire to the white house i would say we proved our point . had we ever gone full blown at you we would have crushed you .
[quote=“SirWarriant, post:278, topic:21032”]
10 fold our troops train together you yourself said you trained with the U.S airborne. If your training was 10 fold above ours what gain would you have coming over here?
[/quote] US troops are not well trained its a fact that the british army has the best training on the planet like it or not our training is harder and longer , the training sessions we do with the americans are for the purpose of us understanding how we operate , that way we can work together better during war’s .
[quote=“SirWarriant, post:278, topic:21032”]
Lol what cmon thats not even close to true. Conquering people in grass skirts when you have rifles and artillery is not amazing. America successfully beat Britain twice so what does that say about us? Im much more impressed with Empires like the mongols or Romans. Sure they fought tribal people too but at least they didn’t have weapons a thousand years ahead of the people they were fighting. Sure the British empire was impressive but not hardly the most impressive.
[/quote] we have beat nearly every nation on the planet in a war of some description
while this man is a comedian he is also a historian he goes through a few
1 Like
we also forged the largest empire ever i think its fair to say and actually a fact that we are the most successful nation at waging war…now look at us ! such a shame
hahahha
There was some Guerilla activity in the south which did help keep Cornwallis occupied but Guerilla tactics were not what won the Revolutionary war. The Continental army won plenty of battles going head to head with British army’s out numbering them 3-1 that is impressive for a bunch of farmers with no training go up against what was considered the best military in the world at the time.
Canada was not worth more than the 13 colonies. It was a treasure trove that England fought very hard to keep despite what many people try to claim. Canada was not hardly worth more than the 13 colonies. England lost many sea trade routes and valuable ports that Canada simply did not have. In addition the 13 colonies were much more developed than Canada was so saying Canada was worth more is not true.
Spain not really. France helped by sending some officers over although the Prussian officer was of way more help during valley forge at training the Continentals. Spain was not also not directly fighting you. I believe they fought you in one battle during the war in one of their territory’s in the west but they lost. The guns France gave us were horrible. So bad in fact it was a popular idea to arm the army with bows. As for military assistance France didn’t show up until the battle of York town which was the last battle of the war.
I wasn’t aware using Guerilla tactics qualified you as a terrorist. After all they weren’t trying to incite fear and panic but to stop British supply lines. But as i said above Guerilla tactics were not a part of the war in the north but they played a decent sized role in the south.
When James Madison declared war on England the American army was made up of 7,000 regulars and had next to no navy. Yes you burned down the White House and we burned down the Canadian parliament building as well. It was a draw despite America being even weaker than they were during the Revolution they still managed to scrape a draw together. Now we get to the battle of New Orleans 11,000 British troops went to take New Orleans not knowing the war was over. General Andrew Jackson commanded the much smaller force of 4,500 troops. Both sides were not aware the war was over. The result? The British force was completely decimated 2,500 men being killed including a general and many other commanding officers while the Americans lost only 300 men. There was also the siege of fort Phillips which was a failed British attack a few days later. Hey but now our countries the best of friends but at the end of the day we can say we beat you in a war but you cant say the same about us 
Most of the people you defeated were living in the stone age. The mongol empire was almost the same size as yours and they didn’t have fancy ships, rifles, and cannons. They did it all from horse back and the people they fought weren’t people squatting in mud huts with poison darts and spears.
I’m ready for an update.
3 Likes
I really hope it will be hunting im curious to see their animal AI.
1 Like
Have you ever seen anything more glorious?
of course you won a number of battles but you lost more than you won , you also very rarely faced the proper might of the british army , you could argue it was a civil war between separatists and loyalist , much like ukraine today with both sides backed by world powers
[quote=“SirWarriant, post:282, topic:21032”]
Canada was not worth more than the 13 colonies. It was a treasure trove that England fought very hard to keep despite what many people try to claim. Canada was not hardly worth more than the 13 colonies. England lost many sea trade routes and valuable ports that Canada simply did not have. In addition the 13 colonies were much more developed than Canada was so saying Canada was worth more is not true.
[/quote] produce one piece of evidence that we tried hard to keep it , we left 4th rate troops defending it , most of the proper troops were stationed in canada , in places like qubec where we lost 5 men , killed 50 and captured 431 .
at the time we had a very small army as we always have which makes our empire all the more impressive , we would use the actual 1st rate troops to invade then raise militias to occupy and defend land , we couldnt fight multiple wars around the globe as much , we simply didnt have the troops to defend the entire 13 colonies so made a decision to pull out and keep canada which was rich in pine and many woods that were absolutely vital to the building and maintenance of the royal navy , far greater than any sum of money that you’re measuring the value in
[quote=“SirWarriant, post:282, topic:21032”]
Spain not really. France helped by sending some officers over although the Prussian officer was of way more help during valley forge at training the Continentals. Spain was not also not directly fighting you. I believe they fought you in one battle during the war in one of their territory’s in the west but they lost. The guns France gave us were horrible. So bad in fact it was a popular idea to arm the army with bows. As for military assistance France didn’t show up until the battle of York town which was the last battle of the war.
[/quote] while they rarely got involved in the rebellion in the colonies they kept us busy else where , trianined , supplied and advised the entire revolution , much like russia in ukraine with the separatists
[quote=“SirWarriant, post:282, topic:21032”]
I wasn’t aware using Guerilla tactics qualified you as a terrorist. After all they weren’t trying to incite fear and panic but to stop British supply lines. But as i said above Guerilla tactics were not a part of the war in the north but they played a decent sized role in the south.
[/quote] your founding fathers are terrorists , if Texas trying to separate from the rest of the USA by an armed uprising using such tactics the US government would brand them terrorists and traitors , so yes you were terrorists
[quote=“SirWarriant, post:282, topic:21032”]
When James Madison declared war on England the American army was made up of 7,000 regulars and had next to no navy. Yes you burned down the White House and we burned down the Canadian parliament building as well. It was a draw despite America being even weaker than they were during the Revolution they still managed to scrape a draw together. Now we get to the battle of New Orleans 11,000 British troops went to take New Orleans not knowing the war was over. General Andrew Jackson commanded the much smaller force of 4,500 troops. Both sides were not aware the war was over. The result? The British force was completely decimated 2,500 men being killed including a general and many other commanding officers while the Americans lost only 300 men. There was also the siege of fort Phillips which was a failed British attack a few days later. Hey but now our countries the best of friends but at the end of the day we can say we beat you in a war but you cant say the same about us
[/quote] you lost the war of 1812 , of course you won battles but you did not succeed in a single war objective and gained nothing , you attempted to invade canada and failed , the white house and other government building were stormed and captured by royal marines and set a light i thing you will find thats a defeat in any ones book .
[quote=“SirWarriant, post:282, topic:21032”]
Most of the people you defeated were living in the stone age. The mongol empire was almost the same size as yours and they didn’t have fancy ships, rifles, and cannons. They did it all from horse back and the people they fought weren’t people squatting in mud huts with poison darts and spears.
[/quote] i think you may need to reconsider that alot of the land we took was taken from spain , france and other European countries , we defeated every major power that opposed us and dominated the globe for hundreds of years , of course we attacked tribes that had nothing but spears because 90% of the worlds most valuable goods came from these areas . we conquered the world for tea , spices and Olympic grade athletes
The reason we started Losing against Great Brittan was because we got fancy with our army, just like Great Brittan. We got nice blue uniforms and shiny brass belt buckles. The British army was good at what was called Formal Warfare, they were trained well in this type of combat, and could defeat most standing “formal” armies in the world at the time. The Revolutionary war was won by squirrel hunters who didnt have to rely on high concentrations of shot to actually fucking hit something. It is when we had a lapse in judgement and decided the way we were winning wasnt good so we adapted to the “formal” way of combat, which the british force was obviously superior in.