USA vs China who would win in a war?

  • 123 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for blaznwiipspman1
blaznwiipspman1

16059

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#1 blaznwiipspman1
Member since 2007 • 16059 Posts

i think a war like this would result in hundreds of millions of people dieing, maybe even billions. USA has the better technology but china is catching up fast. The one thing going in USA's favor is its allies. Im pretty sure all of the european union would join in as well as canada, australia japan and India. Im not sure about Russia though, they might join up with China. North Korea would also be on China's side as well as Iran. In the end USA would win but I wouldn't be suprised if half of the country was wiped out. Not to mention the huge cost of a war like that.

Avatar image for deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51
deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51

57548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 19

User Lists: 0

#2 deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51
Member since 2004 • 57548 Posts

Depends where the war is fought. Logistics would play a huge role.

Avatar image for T_P_O
T_P_O

5388

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#3 T_P_O
Member since 2008 • 5388 Posts
Im pretty sure all of the european union would join in blaznwiipspman1
Why should they if America and China start a silly war that's got nothing to do with them?
Avatar image for deactivated-5901ac91d8e33
deactivated-5901ac91d8e33

17092

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#4 deactivated-5901ac91d8e33
Member since 2004 • 17092 Posts
If the EU somehow decides to ally with the US, then there would be no-contest whatsoever. They make up 75 % of the world's total military budget together.
Avatar image for Holy_Xbox
Holy_Xbox

489

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5 Holy_Xbox
Member since 2008 • 489 Posts

Depends where the war is fought. Logistics would play a huge role.

sonicare
Logistics ? What the use of Logistic when you are facing the "horde".
Avatar image for KHfanboy2
KHfanboy2

42258

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6 KHfanboy2
Member since 2007 • 42258 Posts

America!

*salutes*

Avatar image for shadowprince92
shadowprince92

1420

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 23

User Lists: 0

#7 shadowprince92
Member since 2005 • 1420 Posts

The Chinese could conscript a rediculous number of people, so in terms of manpower, advantage China. On the sea, America is practically untouchable. Twice the number of aircraft carriers than all the countires in the world combined. You can look at stats all day, but my opinion is that if it actually did come to war, it would most likely end up in stalemate. China and the US are just way too big to be "conquered" by one country alone.

Avatar image for Dark__Link
Dark__Link

32653

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#8 Dark__Link
Member since 2003 • 32653 Posts
If the EU somehow decides to ally with the US, then there would be no-contest whatsoever. They make up 75 % of the world's total military budget together.jointed
The EU? Or the EU and the US combined? The US's expenditure is more than double the entire EU's...
Avatar image for Gallion-Beast
Gallion-Beast

35803

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#9 Gallion-Beast
Member since 2005 • 35803 Posts
I'm pretty sure full scale war would just be mutually assured destruction. Though I'm actually not too knowledgeable on the extentof China's nuclear capabilities so it could just end up China destroyed and the US taking too much damage to maintain position as the dominant superpower. People really think this would be fought with anything but nukes?
Avatar image for RazerBlade13
RazerBlade13

3822

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#10 RazerBlade13
Member since 2008 • 3822 Posts

China. Without them, we would DIE. Almost everything we have either comes from them or Japan. I would think Japan would side with China anyway, so we'd be internationally screwed!

Avatar image for Schnauzerz
Schnauzerz

1437

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#11 Schnauzerz
Member since 2007 • 1437 Posts

China and the US are just way too big to be "conquered" by one country alone.

shadowprince92

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_war_2


Avatar image for deactivated-5901ac91d8e33
deactivated-5901ac91d8e33

17092

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#12 deactivated-5901ac91d8e33
Member since 2004 • 17092 Posts
[QUOTE="jointed"]If the EU somehow decides to ally with the US, then there would be no-contest whatsoever. They make up 75 % of the world's total military budget together.Dark__Link
The EU? Or the EU and the US combined? The US's expenditure is more than double the entire EU's...

Combined of course. EU countries only spend 2 % of their GDP on their military on average whilst the US spends considerably more, so yeah, that would make sense.
Avatar image for Trooperdx3117
Trooperdx3117

974

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#13 Trooperdx3117
Member since 2005 • 974 Posts
I imagine everything would just end up like Fallout.
Avatar image for Holy_Xbox
Holy_Xbox

489

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#14 Holy_Xbox
Member since 2008 • 489 Posts
You all do realize that most countries(especially muslim countries) in the world hate America right ? if China goes to war with America Iran would volunteer to join China, Russia would, North Korea also, and don't forget Irak,Afganistan,Egypt. Yea, maybe you would say, Hey we have much more power arms and money in the world. But guess what ? You need oil so that that Raptor could fly, America supplied it's oil needs on the middle East oils. So those who have the middle east as their ally is totally gonna win. Oh yeah, the only option for america not to lose is go boom boom with all their nukes (FALL OUT ?) But again Russia have the world largest supply of weapons and nukes. So It's total victory for commie. Oh 1 more crucial factor, America and it's allies are in recession. So that's it.
Avatar image for T_P_O
T_P_O

5388

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#15 T_P_O
Member since 2008 • 5388 Posts
But again Russia have the world largest supply of weapons and nukes. So It's total victory for commie.Holy_Xbox
Yes, because Russia are still communist, of course. :roll:
Avatar image for deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51
deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51

57548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 19

User Lists: 0

#16 deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51
Member since 2004 • 57548 Posts
[QUOTE="Dark__Link"][QUOTE="jointed"]If the EU somehow decides to ally with the US, then there would be no-contest whatsoever. They make up 75 % of the world's total military budget together.jointed
The EU? Or the EU and the US combined? The US's expenditure is more than double the entire EU's...

Combined of course. EU countries only spend 2 % of their GDP on their military on average whilst the US spends considerably more, so yeah, that would make sense.

Just the US, the UK, and France would be enough.
Avatar image for shadowprince92
shadowprince92

1420

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 23

User Lists: 0

#17 shadowprince92
Member since 2005 • 1420 Posts

[QUOTE="shadowprince92"]

China and the US are just way too big to be "conquered" by one country alone.

Schnauzerz

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_war_2


um china is 25 times bigger than japan. they never subdued the enitre country

Avatar image for Rocky32189
Rocky32189

8995

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#18 Rocky32189
Member since 2007 • 8995 Posts
Neither of them would win. Each would nuke the other off the face of the earth.
Avatar image for blaznwiipspman1
blaznwiipspman1

16059

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#19 blaznwiipspman1
Member since 2007 • 16059 Posts

[QUOTE="blaznwiipspman1"]Im pretty sure all of the european union would join in T_P_O
Why should they if America and China start a silly war that's got nothing to do with them?

It has alot to do with them. The world is linked by globalization, people have families there, economies are tied together. Even if they didn't want to join in, they'd get dragged in.

Avatar image for Gallion-Beast
Gallion-Beast

35803

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#21 Gallion-Beast
Member since 2005 • 35803 Posts
[QUOTE="jointed"][QUOTE="Dark__Link"] The EU? Or the EU and the US combined? The US's expenditure is more than double the entire EU's...sonicare
Combined of course. EU countries only spend 2 % of their GDP on their military on average whilst the US spends considerably more, so yeah, that would make sense.

Just the US, the UK, and France would be enough.

France? Help the US? Considering how America's treated them since they refused to go to war on evidence which later turned out to be nonexistant? Not likely.
Avatar image for deactivated-5901ac91d8e33
deactivated-5901ac91d8e33

17092

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#22 deactivated-5901ac91d8e33
Member since 2004 • 17092 Posts
[QUOTE="sonicare"][QUOTE="jointed"] Combined of course. EU countries only spend 2 % of their GDP on their military on average whilst the US spends considerably more, so yeah, that would make sense.Gallion-Beast
Just the US, the UK, and France would be enough.

France? Help the US? Considering how America's treated them since they refused to go to war on evidence which later turned out to be nonexistant? Not likely.

Extremely likely considering Sarkozy's pro-American policies.
Avatar image for T_P_O
T_P_O

5388

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#23 T_P_O
Member since 2008 • 5388 Posts

[QUOTE="T_P_O"][QUOTE="blaznwiipspman1"]Im pretty sure all of the european union would join in blaznwiipspman1

Why should they if America and China start a silly war that's got nothing to do with them?

It has alot to do with them. The world is linked by globalization, people have families there, economies are tied together. Even if they didn't want to join in, they'd get dragged in.

You can evacuate nationals from the said countries. And that's a really bad way for us in the EU, dragged into a war that will cause more social unrest and revolutions than you could imagine. It won't happen unless one side threatens the EU.
Avatar image for Holy_Xbox
Holy_Xbox

489

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#24 Holy_Xbox
Member since 2008 • 489 Posts
[QUOTE="Holy_Xbox"]But again Russia have the world largest supply of weapons and nukes. So It's total victory for commie.T_P_O
Yes, because Russia are still communist, of course. :roll:

(giggle) Exactly...
Avatar image for McJugga
McJugga

9453

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#25 McJugga
Member since 2007 • 9453 Posts

America would win because Canada would help them. :P

Avatar image for Artekus
Artekus

15700

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#26 Artekus
Member since 2008 • 15700 Posts
There are no winners in war.
Avatar image for 12345678ew
12345678ew

2353

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#28 12345678ew
Member since 2008 • 2353 Posts

The Chinese could conscript a rediculous number of people, so in terms of manpower, advantage China. On the sea, America is practically untouchable. Twice the number of aircraft carriers than all the countires in the world combined. You can look at stats all day, but my opinion is that if it actually did come to war, it would most likely end up in stalemate. China and the US are just way too big to be "conquered" by one country alone.

shadowprince92
no actually, china and korea couldn't do to well in a war. many people know about communism and now dislike their government there, putting them in the army with guns would be like putting prisoners in your army, they start shooting you, not enemies. morale is a huge part of war, and if a whole army hates it's officers, then when it comes to a fight the whole army is gonna stop fighting.
Avatar image for 12345678ew
12345678ew

2353

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#29 12345678ew
Member since 2008 • 2353 Posts
[QUOTE="sonicare"]

Depends where the war is fought. Logistics would play a huge role.

Holy_Xbox
Logistics ? What the use of Logistic when you are facing the "horde".

standing on a mountain with heavy machine guns compared to a level plain with m4s? big difference. besides, china would lose simply because they don't have a lot of their bulldogs. they have maybe 200,000 good guns, and everybody else in their army would get ak-47s.
Avatar image for BiancaDK
BiancaDK

19092

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 35

User Lists: 0

#30 BiancaDK
Member since 2008 • 19092 Posts
The Chinese would win. Prove me wrong. =|
Avatar image for T_P_O
T_P_O

5388

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#31 T_P_O
Member since 2008 • 5388 Posts
[QUOTE="shadowprince92"]

The Chinese could conscript a rediculous number of people, so in terms of manpower, advantage China. On the sea, America is practically untouchable. Twice the number of aircraft carriers than all the countires in the world combined. You can look at stats all day, but my opinion is that if it actually did come to war, it would most likely end up in stalemate. China and the US are just way too big to be "conquered" by one country alone.

12345678ew
no actually, china and korea couldn't do to well in a war. many people know about communism and now dislike their government there,

What makes you so sure that the people in China and NK hate their government? Have you asked them all yourself?
Avatar image for fidosim
fidosim

12901

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 15

User Lists: 0

#32 fidosim
Member since 2003 • 12901 Posts
There are so many variables to such a situation its impossible to tell.
Avatar image for Kamekazi_69
Kamekazi_69

4704

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#33 Kamekazi_69
Member since 2006 • 4704 Posts
[QUOTE="sonicare"][QUOTE="jointed"] Combined of course. EU countries only spend 2 % of their GDP on their military on average whilst the US spends considerably more, so yeah, that would make sense.Gallion-Beast
Just the US, the UK, and France would be enough.

France? Help the US? Considering how America's treated them since they refused to go to war on evidence which later turned out to be nonexistant? Not likely.

Yes? Considering that the US aided france to liberation with the storming of Normandy, Aided French power in Vietnam, and enforced military aid? I think there is no questioning in that since France and the US have a long history of aiding one another. Either way, both are a part of NATO, in fact, Europe itself would be involed. But it it was just the US, the USA would win easily
Avatar image for Kamekazi_69
Kamekazi_69

4704

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#34 Kamekazi_69
Member since 2006 • 4704 Posts
The Chinese would win. Prove me wrong. =|BiancaDK
Prove yourself right
Avatar image for Holy_Xbox
Holy_Xbox

489

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#35 Holy_Xbox
Member since 2008 • 489 Posts
[QUOTE="Holy_Xbox"][QUOTE="sonicare"]

Depends where the war is fought. Logistics would play a huge role.

12345678ew
Logistics ? What the use of Logistic when you are facing the "horde".

standing on a mountain with heavy machine guns compared to a level plain with m4s? big difference. besides, china would lose simply because they don't have a lot of their bulldogs. they have maybe 200,000 good guns, and everybody else in their army would get ak-47s.

Yeah, good luck surviving fighting a country that have 5 times the population of America and numerous tanks. And god forbid, a secret nuclear warhead, and a hara-kiri satellite.
Avatar image for BiancaDK
BiancaDK

19092

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 35

User Lists: 0

#36 BiancaDK
Member since 2008 • 19092 Posts

[QUOTE="BiancaDK"]The Chinese would win. Prove me wrong. =|Kamekazi_69
Prove yourself right

There is no burden of proof here, i don´t have to prove myself right, just like you don´t have to prove me wrong.

This situation is entirely hypothetical, and i am not contesting any scientific data. Given the absurd amount of variables, we can all claim pretty much whatever we want to.

I just pointed that out in my own way.

Avatar image for MentatAssassin
MentatAssassin

3007

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 0

#37 MentatAssassin
Member since 2005 • 3007 Posts

I dont know who would win but it would be one hellava fight.:twisted:

Avatar image for Kamekazi_69
Kamekazi_69

4704

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#38 Kamekazi_69
Member since 2006 • 4704 Posts

[QUOTE="Kamekazi_69"][QUOTE="BiancaDK"]The Chinese would win. Prove me wrong. =|BiancaDK

Prove yourself right

There is no burden of proof here, i don´t have to prove myself right, just like you don´t have to prove me wrong.

This situation is entirely hypothetical, and i am not contesting any scientific data. Given the absurd amount of variables, we can all claim pretty much whatever we want to.

I just pointed that out in my own way.

Indeed you have, but you stating action to be taken symoblizes provocation and that is what you have done. Generalizing that China would win is simply and merely your opinion with no supporting data, but encouraging debate with your other statement becomes tempting to another. Telling another to prove you right is what I mean by provoking another to take a stance. I was merely doing the same, delivering your response right back meaning that no explanation is needed since I believe the USA would win. Which ofcours, is my opinion
Avatar image for Stevo_the_gamer
Stevo_the_gamer

49411

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 49

User Lists: 0

#39 Stevo_the_gamer  Moderator
Member since 2004 • 49411 Posts

Uhh, United States could kill six Chinese every single second... and continue to do that, umm... yeah, forever. :P

But jokes aside, United States has the superior technoloy, China has the numbers. Technology > Numbers. :)

Avatar image for Holy_Xbox
Holy_Xbox

489

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#40 Holy_Xbox
Member since 2008 • 489 Posts

Uhh, United States could kill six Chinese every single second... and continue to do that, umm... yeah, forever. :P

But jokes aside, United States has the superior technoloy, China has the numbers. Technology > Numbers. :)

Stevo_the_gamer
USA needs oil to fight, the middle east(especially Iran) definitely would join china, why waste a golden chance to cleanse America ?
Avatar image for BiancaDK
BiancaDK

19092

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 35

User Lists: 0

#41 BiancaDK
Member since 2008 • 19092 Posts
Indeed you have, but you stating action to be taken symoblizes provocation and that is what you have done. Generalizing that China would win is simply and merely your opinion with no supporting data, but encouraging debate with your other statement becomes tempting to another. Telling another to prove you right is what I mean by provoking another to take a stance. I was merely doing the same, delivering your response right back meaning that no explanation is needed since I believe the USA would win. Which ofcours, is my opinionKamekazi_69
Yes, encouraging debate over how silly it is trying to have a rational discussion over which country would win, certainly takes the biscuit compared to actually trying to rationalize which one would win. I made a provoking statement, and someone got provoked by it. Goodies! You delivered my own response right back at me, but it was entirely irrelevant, since the point of my comment was not to support a belief of china winning, it was, as you pointed out yourself, to provoke. =]
Avatar image for savebattery
savebattery

3626

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#42 savebattery
Member since 2009 • 3626 Posts
The United States. The various oppressed peoples of China would see a war with the United States as an opportunity to attain freedom, and would thus revolt. For those saying that Russia would side with China, no, they wouldn't. Russia NEEDS the United States, because we consume far more than any other nation on earth. If North Korea sided with China, then South Korea and Japan would instantly side with the United States. Australia would definitely side with the US, in addition for many European nations. But what it all comes down to in the end is technology. There's no way the Chinese would ever reach the American mainland, and that's the difference maker.
Avatar image for Kamekazi_69
Kamekazi_69

4704

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#43 Kamekazi_69
Member since 2006 • 4704 Posts
[QUOTE="Kamekazi_69"]Indeed you have, but you stating action to be taken symoblizes provocation and that is what you have done. Generalizing that China would win is simply and merely your opinion with no supporting data, but encouraging debate with your other statement becomes tempting to another. Telling another to prove you right is what I mean by provoking another to take a stance. I was merely doing the same, delivering your response right back meaning that no explanation is needed since I believe the USA would win. Which ofcours, is my opinionBiancaDK
Yes, encouraging debate over how silly it is trying to have a rational discussion over which country would win, certainly takes the biscuit compared to actually trying to rationalize which one would win. I made a provoking statement, and someone got provoked by it. Goodies! You delivered my own response right back at me, but it was entirely irrelevant, since the point of my comment was not to support a belief of china winning, it was, as you pointed out yourself, to provoke. =]

So you lied. You said you were just pointing out your opinion, but you indeed wanted to provoke someone, Ofcourse debating about it would be silly since no solid evidence laid out can not really support anything unless in an actual scenario. So now hypocrisy is involved. Not only have you lied, but you have tempted with someone >=3 Your trial briefing will be on the 15th.
Avatar image for Holy_Xbox
Holy_Xbox

489

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#44 Holy_Xbox
Member since 2008 • 489 Posts
[QUOTE="savebattery"]The United States. The various oppressed peoples of China would see a war with the United States as an opportunity to attain freedom, and would thus revolt. For those saying that Russia would side with China, no, they wouldn't. Russia NEEDS the United States, because we consume far more than any other nation on earth. If North Korea sided with China, then South Korea and Japan would instantly side with the United States. Australia would definitely side with the US, in addition for many European nations. USA needs oil to fight, a Raptor without fuel is useless. Those who have the middle east as their ally boost their chance of winning by 80%. Thus China have more chances. But what it all comes down to in the end is technology. There's no way the Chinese would ever reach the American mainland, and that's the difference maker.

Avatar image for BayAreaX
BayAreaX

1809

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#45 BayAreaX
Member since 2009 • 1809 Posts
china
Avatar image for BiancaDK
BiancaDK

19092

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 35

User Lists: 0

#46 BiancaDK
Member since 2008 • 19092 Posts

So you lied. You said you were just pointing out your opinion, but you indeed wanted to provoke someone, Ofcourse debating about it would be silly since no solid evidence laid out can not really support anything unless in an actual scenario. So now hypocrisy is involved. Not only have you lied, but you have tempted with someone >=3 Your trial briefing will be on the 15th. Kamekazi_69

You´ll never take me alive, doughnut!

freedom!

Avatar image for Holy_Xbox
Holy_Xbox

489

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#47 Holy_Xbox
Member since 2008 • 489 Posts
USA needs oil to fight, a Raptor without fuel is useless. Those who have the middle east as their ally boost their chance of winning by 80%. Thus China have more chances. But what it all comes down to in the end is technology. There's no way the Chinese would ever reach the American mainland, and that's the difference maker.
Avatar image for T_P_O
T_P_O

5388

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#48 T_P_O
Member since 2008 • 5388 Posts

I like how people are actually making predicitions that one side would definetly win. I lol'd.

Avatar image for TheFlush
TheFlush

5965

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#49 TheFlush
Member since 2002 • 5965 Posts

Why would they start a war in the first place? You'd think that both parties would know that such a war would cripple the world's economics and social system beyond belief.

Also, I don't believe that the Chinese are as extreme anymore like they were during the Mao Zedong period. They have a rising economy, they're restoring their social bonds with other countries and they're catching up. I don't believe they want to destroy all that with a war.

They're not like North Korea, that country is just mentally insane. With a leader that thinks he's like the son of god and a population brainwashed with tightly controlled media. The population hates the west with a passion, because they don't know any better, being brought up with misinformation. Luckily their economy is nonexistent, their cities are empty, the population is poor. However, the scary part is that all their money goes to the Kim Yong-Il propaganda/western hate parade and their military. I think that they are crazy enough to use nuclear weapons without reason, just out of prestige and megalomania.

Avatar image for savebattery
savebattery

3626

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#50 savebattery
Member since 2009 • 3626 Posts
USA needs oil to fight, a Raptor without fuel is useless. Those who have the middle east as their ally boost their chance of winning by 80%. Thus China have more chances. But what it all comes down to in the end is technology. There's no way the Chinese would ever reach the American mainland, and that's the difference maker.Holy_Xbox
The United States has huge oil reserves that are completely untapped for that very reason. Not to mention Mexico and Russia.