Posted on Feb 6, 2015
If our world powers went head-to-head, who would win?
21.1K
65
60
12
12
0
If militaries around the world went head-to-head, these power houses would come out on top. Are you surprised to see any of the countries included?
Infographic
Command Post
Foreign Forces
Posted 11 y ago
Responses: 37
0
0
0
Two other points I think need to be considered: Technological superiority, and Innovative superiority: Both of these are things that the U.S.A excels at.
Yes, Japan and S. Korea are tech power houses, however, that technological advantage is only there because the US developed it initially. China is perhaps a close 3rd or 4th. N. Korea, well - their tech is all borrowed or stolen - so they have no ability in that realm if China doesn't allow it to happen.
Innovation is America's biggest and best feature though - During WWII, America came up with more innovations than any other country except perhaps Germany... This is what made our opponents fear us so much.
I think, in a knock-down, drag out fight, with no nukes, N. Korea would quickly fall to S. Korea until China gets involved. Other countries in the Asian hemisphere would probably quickly fall to China - with exception of Australia.
America would hold it's own, and probably over the long run, eventually prevail.
Most of Europe would initially fall to Russia, but eventually would stabilize along the Franco-German border until America was fully engaged in all aspects, at which time Russia would start getting it's ass handed back, and would retreat to WWII lines at which point they would sue for peace along the Polish-German border.
If China and Russia went to war with each other at any point during their engagement in Europe, they would lose Europe, and much of their eastern territory to China.
The mid-east would degenerate into tribal warfare, with Israel being the only stabilizing force, but without American help/intervention, would eventually fall after great loss of life - to the last man. Israel would be more likely to use nukes against Iran and would do so immediately if Iran launched even one nuke at Israel.
N. Korea is the most likely country, along with Iran, to use nukes if they are losing or even as the initial strike. America would only do so as an absolute last resort, or as a response to someone else using nukes.
China would use nukes as an initial strike, or as a counter-strike, but is less likely to do so unless they are desperate.
Similar to the US, Russia would also only use nukes as an absolute last resort, UNLESS they thought they could do a "limited" attack - with only one or two nukes on strategic targets that they thought the US would not react to... which would be a mistake, because I do think we would launch nukes - though that is also dependent on the resolve of the sitting president to do so.
It's all hypothetical - so I may be completely wrong - but I do have some analysis background - so maybe not... :)
Yes, Japan and S. Korea are tech power houses, however, that technological advantage is only there because the US developed it initially. China is perhaps a close 3rd or 4th. N. Korea, well - their tech is all borrowed or stolen - so they have no ability in that realm if China doesn't allow it to happen.
Innovation is America's biggest and best feature though - During WWII, America came up with more innovations than any other country except perhaps Germany... This is what made our opponents fear us so much.
I think, in a knock-down, drag out fight, with no nukes, N. Korea would quickly fall to S. Korea until China gets involved. Other countries in the Asian hemisphere would probably quickly fall to China - with exception of Australia.
America would hold it's own, and probably over the long run, eventually prevail.
Most of Europe would initially fall to Russia, but eventually would stabilize along the Franco-German border until America was fully engaged in all aspects, at which time Russia would start getting it's ass handed back, and would retreat to WWII lines at which point they would sue for peace along the Polish-German border.
If China and Russia went to war with each other at any point during their engagement in Europe, they would lose Europe, and much of their eastern territory to China.
The mid-east would degenerate into tribal warfare, with Israel being the only stabilizing force, but without American help/intervention, would eventually fall after great loss of life - to the last man. Israel would be more likely to use nukes against Iran and would do so immediately if Iran launched even one nuke at Israel.
N. Korea is the most likely country, along with Iran, to use nukes if they are losing or even as the initial strike. America would only do so as an absolute last resort, or as a response to someone else using nukes.
China would use nukes as an initial strike, or as a counter-strike, but is less likely to do so unless they are desperate.
Similar to the US, Russia would also only use nukes as an absolute last resort, UNLESS they thought they could do a "limited" attack - with only one or two nukes on strategic targets that they thought the US would not react to... which would be a mistake, because I do think we would launch nukes - though that is also dependent on the resolve of the sitting president to do so.
It's all hypothetical - so I may be completely wrong - but I do have some analysis background - so maybe not... :)
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
This infographic is hilarious. Does the Nork's rowboats really count as a fleet?
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Yeah north Korea... They can't roll out a missle truck and not get bitched at, one of their border guards sneezes and interest peaks, how the hell could over 1,000ships move unnoticed, and really make an impact since silent sneek is reason to have them.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Missing an important one. Who dominates space. Meaning satellites. How effective is the modern millitary force without satellite communication, gps, etc.
I've heard China is really working on satellite killers.
I've heard China is really working on satellite killers.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
0
0
0
No one. We'd all lose. That's the point. War is a Racket. http://warisaracket.com/
Read the book, by 2-time Medal of Honor recipient Maj. Gen. Smedley Butler, USMC. YES, I did write TWO-Time.
Read the book, by 2-time Medal of Honor recipient Maj. Gen. Smedley Butler, USMC. YES, I did write TWO-Time.
(0)
(0)
TSgt Joshua Copeland
CDR Michael Goldschmidt, then take a look a when the book was written an see how true it still is!
(0)
(0)
CDR Michael Goldschmidt
I invite you to do the same. I read the book, which you can read free online. Nothing has changed. It's still the bankers and the arms manufacturers and the government contractors who get rich, and it's still the soldiers and their families who suffer and the solders who get dead.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
I'd put our Navy against the N Korean Navy any day of the week regardless of their numbers. Excluding Air Power and ground troops too. Navy on Navy.
Ground war I agree with if its head to head. I had a Drill Sergeant in basic back in 1999 that said joking that China could create a human bridge across the ocean, invade one by one in California and we'd run out of ammo before they ran out of people.
Ground war I agree with if its head to head. I had a Drill Sergeant in basic back in 1999 that said joking that China could create a human bridge across the ocean, invade one by one in California and we'd run out of ammo before they ran out of people.
(0)
(0)
MCPO Roger Collins
The statement in the 50s, was they could put up 300 million troops, let us wipe them out and another reserve army of 300 million could be fielded. The running out of ammo was a consideration then too. The second time Nuclear weapons were considered since WWII, but McArthur was fired and we didn't bomb mainland China as Mac wanted to. We now are seeing the results of the so-called Armistice.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google