Most powerful military in the known world? (Today)

[Calimera II]

US, by far.

[Imperializt Russia]

Invading the US is, like said before, a logistical nightmare.
No one is stupid enough to attempt an invasion.

Logistical nightmare? Yes, Feasible?

Well if you gathered the right people to the cause, perhaps it wouldn't be an absurd notion but...You would either need to land forces in South America, or in the Gulf to avoid OHR detection to merely gain the crucial element of surprise. Not to mention the insane amount of forces required to merely hold a beachhead, while operational fronts are established and theater control made.

It's possible, but so unlikely because it would likely require China, Russia, Turkey, India, Iran, France and Germany all working together, and even then it isn't a sure thing if they could push far enough inland before forces could be gathered to repel them, The United States isn't a soft target by any means, it has Military facilities in every state of its territories, it maintains one of the largest garrisons of forces of any Nation in the world, has the largest navy in the world and well...Just combating sheer numbers because an issue if you cannot secure victory in immediacy.

Not impossible, just unlikely.

Very unlikely.

Any "invasion" of the US would (have to) be preceded by an all-out nuclear assault.

Significantly more likely, Russia nukes the US into incapability, then rolls over Europe.

[Lubyak]

And every other ship currently at sea: ignored.

Oh, and how would an invasion force manage to actually beat the most powerful blue-water navy to maintain a supply chain to the U.S, might I add?

No Every ship currently at sea doesn't magically have intelligence that puts them out of their predesignated area of operation.

It's called, Establish a beachhead before a cordon can go down, Then it goes down to who makes the first mistake and enters engagement, As i said posts ago it all depends how the landing goes. If they can get far enough inland? Their Naval forces become Redundant, As does the United States naval strength, After all military operation doctrine on this is quite simple.

You cannot break an Invasion without crippling logistical basis, That means the United States has to go engage, That knowledge in and of it self is crucial, The invaders do not need to overextend and act as Aggressors on the naval front, likewise the United States has no choice but to deploy in that manner. When you can dictate enemy moves before they even make them? You control the battlefield, Its a simple rigging of the field.

This is where your plan falls apart. How will these invading troops be supplied? Carry everything they will ever use ever in the inevitable weeks upon weeks of combat? Unlikely and improbable. Even assuming everything goes according to plan and you successfully land in the Gulf and successfully capture ports in the Gulf, you will NEED resupply from somewhere. Your invading troops need ammo, spare parts, fuel, and replacement personnel. Don't say that you'll 'loot this from the US' because then all that needs to happen is for the US to destroy/evac any such stores and watch as you slowly attrit away.

Simply achieving a succesful landing does not meant that naval strength will become irrelevant. In fact, a successful invasion means naval strength becomes more important as now you have to defend a supply line stretching across thousands of miles of ocean. It doesn't matter if the US Navy doesn't intercept your fleet first or even has any bases in the area. Once you invade, you have to commit your navy to defend the supply lines to your army, and the US Navy can respond in strength to start cutting your convoys. You might win some early battles but you will lose the war.

This is the reason everyone says Operation Sealion would have failed. In a best, best, best case scenario, the Germans would succeed in landing troops on Great Britain...but they would not be able to maintain the supply lines needed to keep those troops open. Getting yourself some boots on the ground makes your naval situation more vulnerable, not less. Even if everything else went exactly as you claim with perfect stealth and perfect surprise, you would not be able to 'eliminate' the US Navy as a massive threat to your landing operation. Yes, there may not be any ships in position to respond immediately, but give it some time...you won't defeat the United States in the time it takes for the US Navy to marshall its forces and cut your supply lines.

[Kouralia]

...Russia nukes the US into incapability...

At which point the US nukes Russia into incapability and everyone lives happily ever after.

Wait...

[Sturmtiger]

The US obviously. This isn't even a contest.

Holy balls, you're a mobile siege cannon!

I know right?

Dat 380mm rocket

[Lubyak]

...Russia nukes the US into incapability...

At which point the US nukes Russia into incapability and everyone lives happily ever after.

Wait...

But I am le tired.

[Roski]

Logistical nightmare? Yes, Feasible?

Well if you gathered the right people to the cause, perhaps it wouldn't be an absurd notion but...You would either need to land forces in South America, or in the Gulf to avoid OHR detection to merely gain the crucial element of surprise. Not to mention the insane amount of forces required to merely hold a beachhead, while operational fronts are established and theater control made.

It's possible, but so unlikely because it would likely require China, Russia, Turkey, India, Iran, France and Germany all working together, and even then it isn't a sure thing if they could push far enough inland before forces could be gathered to repel them, The United States isn't a soft target by any means, it has Military facilities in every state of its territories, it maintains one of the largest garrisons of forces of any Nation in the world, has the largest navy in the world and well...Just combating sheer numbers because an issue if you cannot secure victory in immediacy.

Not impossible, just unlikely.

Very unlikely.

Any "invasion" of the US would (have to) be preceded by an all-out nuclear assault.

Significantly more likely, Russia nukes the US into incapability, then rolls over Europe.

Or takes the chance, rolls over Europe, and stops American Trade lines.

[Imperializt Russia]

...Russia nukes the US into incapability...

At which point the US nukes Russia into incapability and everyone lives happily ever after.

Wait...

Well, the Cold War would be over.

[Lubyak]

At which point the US nukes Russia into incapability and everyone lives happily ever after.

Wait...

Well, the Cold War would be over.

Or it'll continue with the mineshaft gap which we cannot allow replacing the missile and bomber gap.

[Sturmtiger]

Russia nukes the US into incapability, then rolls over Europe.

>Russia nukes US
>US immediately retaliates and nukes Russia
>No one wins

[Roski]

No Every ship currently at sea doesn't magically have intelligence that puts them out of their predesignated area of operation.

It's called, Establish a beachhead before a cordon can go down, Then it goes down to who makes the first mistake and enters engagement, As i said posts ago it all depends how the landing goes. If they can get far enough inland? Their Naval forces become Redundant, As does the United States naval strength, After all military operation doctrine on this is quite simple.

You cannot break an Invasion without crippling logistical basis, That means the United States has to go engage, That knowledge in and of it self is crucial, The invaders do not need to overextend and act as Aggressors on the naval front, likewise the United States has no choice but to deploy in that manner. When you can dictate enemy moves before they even make them? You control the battlefield, Its a simple rigging of the field.

This is where your plan falls apart. How will these invading troops be supplied? Carry everything they will ever use ever in the inevitable weeks upon weeks of combat? Unlikely and improbable. Even assuming everything goes according to plan and you successfully land in the Gulf and successfully capture ports in the Gulf, you will NEED resupply from somewhere. Your invading troops need ammo, spare parts, fuel, and replacement personnel. Don't say that you'll 'loot this from the US' because then all that needs to happen is for the US to destroy/evac any such stores and watch as you slowly attrit away.

Simply achieving a succesful landing does not meant that naval strength will become irrelevant. In fact, a successful invasion means naval strength becomes more important as now you have to defend a supply line stretching across thousands of miles of ocean. It doesn't matter if the US Navy doesn't intercept your fleet first or even has any bases in the area. Once you invade, you have to commit your navy to defend the supply lines to your army, and the US Navy can respond in strength to start cutting your convoys. You might win some early battles but you will lose the war.

This is the reason everyone says Operation Sealion would have failed. In a best, best, best case scenario, the Germans would succeed in landing troops on Great Britain...but they would not be able to maintain the supply lines needed to keep those troops open. Getting yourself some boots on the ground makes your naval situation more vulnerable, not less. Even if everything else went exactly as you claim with perfect stealth and perfect surprise, you would not be able to 'eliminate' the US Navy as a massive threat to your landing operation. Yes, there may not be any ships in position to respond immediately, but give it some time...you won't defeat the United States in the time it takes for the US Navy to marshall its forces and cut your supply lines.

Germany could beat the United Kingdom. The Royal Navy was on the verge of defeat, after suffering heavy casualties in the ballsy rescue of 338,000 French Soldiers.
The Royal Navy could not hold out much longer, but the declaration of war by the United States would mean almost absolute doom for Germany.

[Kouralia]

Russia nukes the US into incapability, then rolls over Europe.

>Russia nukes US
>US immediately retaliates and nukes Russia
>No one wins

Switzerland.

Germany could beat the United Kingdom. The Royal Navy was on the verge of defeat, after suffering heavy casualties in the ballsy rescue of 338,000 French Soldiers.
The Royal Navy could not hold out much longer, but the declaration of war by the United States would mean almost absolute doom for Germany.

[Justin States]

1. UK
2. China
3. India
4. USA
5. Germany
6. South Korea
7. Russia
8. Turkey
9. Japan
10. Pakistan
11. Israel
12. Egypt
13. Brazil
14. Ukraine
15. Indonesia

Your list is all kind of fucked up.

Yea thats just fucked up

[Imperializt Russia]

Well, the Cold War would be over.

Or it'll continue with the mineshaft gap which we cannot allow replacing the missile and bomber gap.

Too late.

Metro 2, post losses 'murrica.

[Kouralia]

Or it'll continue with the mineshaft gap which we cannot allow replacing the missile and bomber gap.

Too late.

Metro 2, post losses 'murrica.

Fallout New Vegas, h4xx0rz

[Port Charlotte]

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IS THE GREATEST NATION GOD HAS PLACED ON THIS EARTH. WE FIGHT FOR THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE AND ANSWER THE CALL OF JUSTICE WHEREVER TYRANNY REIGNS.

[Kouralia]

wat

[Imperializt Russia]

I'm impressed you decided to delete the post, switch accounts and repost it.

[Roski]

>Russia nukes US
>US immediately retaliates and nukes Russia
>No one wins

Switzerland.

Germany could beat the United Kingdom. The Royal Navy was on the verge of defeat, after suffering heavy casualties in the ballsy rescue of 338,000 French Soldiers.
The Royal Navy could not hold out much longer, but the declaration of war by the United States would mean almost absolute doom for Germany.

They obviously didn't because the Soviet Union pulled out its hacks and started fucking everything in sight.

[Gyrenaica]

Ether way, America can win a lot of wars. Even if they get invaded, the American can take their nation back,no matter what.

No one will invade the US, don't be a coldwarrior.

This^

[Mormak]

No Every ship currently at sea doesn't magically have intelligence that puts them out of their predesignated area of operation.

It's called, Establish a beachhead before a cordon can go down, Then it goes down to who makes the first mistake and enters engagement, As i said posts ago it all depends how the landing goes. If they can get far enough inland? Their Naval forces become Redundant, As does the United States naval strength, After all military operation doctrine on this is quite simple.

You cannot break an Invasion without crippling logistical basis, That means the United States has to go engage, That knowledge in and of it self is crucial, The invaders do not need to overextend and act as Aggressors on the naval front, likewise the United States has no choice but to deploy in that manner. When you can dictate enemy moves before they even make them? You control the battlefield, Its a simple rigging of the field.

This is where your plan falls apart. How will these invading troops be supplied? Carry everything they will ever use ever in the inevitable weeks upon weeks of combat? Unlikely and improbable. Even assuming everything goes according to plan and you successfully land in the Gulf and successfully capture ports in the Gulf, you will NEED resupply from somewhere. Your invading troops need ammo, spare parts, fuel, and replacement personnel. Don't say that you'll 'loot this from the US' because then all that needs to happen is for the US to destroy/evac any such stores and watch as you slowly attrit away.

Of course, That's why its all about pushing as far inland as possible as soon as possible. Because once the navy comes into play, its up to whom engages who first to determine which why it will go, my notion is based upon the logical deduction that many Theater woulds think about this matter as i do you do, You cannot support an invasion without a basis. But i never said anything about them not being properly equipped, obviously there would be resupply and aid to be deployed, anything beyond what came with the fleet however is what i assume you mean? Because surely you think, that a fleet would have a logistical train yes?

Well that wanders into the realm of speculation, It depends upon whom ultimately wins the surface naval struggle, If the invaders can maintain their beachhead and their exit out of the gulf? they can be resupplied for a push north, As for when they reach further inland then it becomes feasible for such measures? I'd assume the campaign would drift with them. You do not go to war without a solid logistical basis if you wish to win.

[Kouralia]

Switzerland.

They obviously didn't because the Soviet Union pulled out its hacks and started fucking everything in sight.

As I said, cool story bro. Needs more dragons and shit.

[Lubyak]

This is where your plan falls apart. How will these invading troops be supplied? Carry everything they will ever use ever in the inevitable weeks upon weeks of combat? Unlikely and improbable. Even assuming everything goes according to plan and you successfully land in the Gulf and successfully capture ports in the Gulf, you will NEED resupply from somewhere. Your invading troops need ammo, spare parts, fuel, and replacement personnel. Don't say that you'll 'loot this from the US' because then all that needs to happen is for the US to destroy/evac any such stores and watch as you slowly attrit away.

Simply achieving a succesful landing does not meant that naval strength will become irrelevant. In fact, a successful invasion means naval strength becomes more important as now you have to defend a supply line stretching across thousands of miles of ocean. It doesn't matter if the US Navy doesn't intercept your fleet first or even has any bases in the area. Once you invade, you have to commit your navy to defend the supply lines to your army, and the US Navy can respond in strength to start cutting your convoys. You might win some early battles but you will lose the war.

This is the reason everyone says Operation Sealion would have failed. In a best, best, best case scenario, the Germans would succeed in landing troops on Great Britain...but they would not be able to maintain the supply lines needed to keep those troops open. Getting yourself some boots on the ground makes your naval situation more vulnerable, not less. Even if everything else went exactly as you claim with perfect stealth and perfect surprise, you would not be able to 'eliminate' the US Navy as a massive threat to your landing operation. Yes, there may not be any ships in position to respond immediately, but give it some time...you won't defeat the United States in the time it takes for the US Navy to marshall its forces and cut your supply lines.

Germany could beat the United Kingdom. The Royal Navy was on the verge of defeat, after suffering heavy casualties in the ballsy rescue of 338,000 French Soldiers.
The Royal Navy could not hold out much longer, but the declaration of war by the United States would mean almost absolute doom for Germany.

Not one of the three sentences is fully true. By Dunkirk the Royal Navy--while it had suffered some losses--was mostly intact and more than capable of defeating any german attempt to ferry troops over the Channel. At Dunkirk, the Royal Navy lost six destroyers. Painful losses sure, but hardly crippling. Also, the soldiers rescued were a large mix of British and French troops, but you got the number right. Finally, yes Germany was doomed when war broke out with the US, but it was Germany who declared war on the US, not the other way around.

[Kouralia]

Of course, That's why its all about pushing as far inland as possible as soon as possible. Because once the navy comes into play, its up to whom engages who first to determine which why it will go, my notion is based upon the logical deduction that many Theater woulds think about this matter as i do you do, You cannot support an invasion without a basis. But i never said anything about them not being properly equipped, obviously there would be resupply and aid to be deployed, anything beyond what came with the fleet however is what i assume you mean? Because surely you think, that a fleet would have a logistical train yes?

Well that wanders into the realm of speculation, It depends upon whom ultimately wins the surface naval struggle, If the invaders can maintain their beachhead and their exit out of the gulf? they can be resupplied for a push north, As for when they reach further inland then it becomes feasible for such measures? I'd assume the campaign would drift with them. You do not go to war without a solid logistical basis if you wish to win.

I'm confused, and slightly scared...

;_;

[Roski]

Germany could beat the United Kingdom. The Royal Navy was on the verge of defeat, after suffering heavy casualties in the ballsy rescue of 338,000 French Soldiers.
The Royal Navy could not hold out much longer, but the declaration of war by the United States would mean almost absolute doom for Germany.

Not one of the three sentences is fully true. By Dunkirk the Royal Navy--while it had suffered some losses--was mostly intact and more than capable of defeating any german attempt to ferry troops over the Channel. At Dunkirk, the Royal Navy lost six destroyers. Painful losses sure, but hardly crippling. Also, the soldiers rescued were a large mix of British and French troops, but you got the number right. Finally, yes Germany was doomed when war broke out with the US, but it was Germany who declared war on the US, not the other way around.

It could have varied with the fall of the United Kingdom.
More over, the morale was crippled, and German morale was soaring through the roof.
It would have been a long and bloody attempt, but eventually the United Kingdom would fall.