English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

A millitary offensive of course! The world does not know it until the first strike.. Im thinking of Stealth Bombers dropping nukes on other super power countries simultaneously to cripple its facilities, and finish of puny countries at the end like my country (Philippines)
*lol*

I just want to know how "Super" U.S.A is..

:-)

2006-07-31 16:52:36 · 31 answers · asked by itsyouitsme 2 in Politics & Government Military

based on the answers i see that nuclear is not best option, if the US did that even thou they succeed the earth will no longer be inhabitable... make your own theory instead. if it's really impossible a simple NO + reason will do thanks!! nice answers so far!

2006-07-31 17:01:52 · update #1

by the way i saw it on "The West Wing" (if i am not mistaken) a general said to the president that "you can conquer the world"..

so far nice answers keep em comming!

2006-07-31 17:07:47 · update #2

31 answers

Reality check. We DO control the world. We do what we want in the world, militarily, in business, in regards to how we deal with other countries in regards to diplomacy. The U.S. is the only existing "Superpower". The EU is attempting to come together to at least keep us in check and to prevent Europe from wasting away, China is far behind us in a lot of ways, but way ahead of us in population. So Bush waking up and saying it? He already knows we control the world and so do the rest of the worlds leaders. Until we self destruct or get annihilated, we will rule for a long time yet.

2006-08-07 13:48:43 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

We dont need to nuke them. With 200 stealth aircraft, we can destroy every oil refinery in the world in under 6 hours from first bomb to last. That would completely immobilized every country on earth for at least a few years, since there would not even be enough gas to run the consrtuction equipment.
Russian and chinese nukes are not really threats because they are decades old and have never actually been tested. outside the US, only about 5 types of nukes have been tested in about 40 seperate tests. The US has had over 1000 nuke tests. After the monster bomb, we set off 100 nukes in 24 hours. there has never been a nuke set off on the surface of the earth since that day.
Also, They use gyroscopic guidance, not gps, so since every pilot knows that gyros are pretty innacurrate over even short periods, sitting for 20 years would render them completely useless.
Then you need to factor this in: The US has anounced the development of a cloth that can solidify when hit by any fast moving object including bullets and knife strikes. that means that a hummer can drape a cloth over it to stop bullets and shrapnel. a soldier wearing the cloth will be bulletproof and shrapnelproof. only an extremely large weapon would be able to kill the person from brute force alone.
I have seen the videos, which are amazing. Its not classified, so look it up. It was on discovery channel,too.
Ok, so then if that isnt enough, if we took over mexico and canada, we would be able to maintain 2/3 of our oil consumption, or just use it to move a massive army.
The only thing left would be finding and killing the enemy.
Which could be carried out at night since we would have complete superiority at night, and we can come and go as we like by using helicopters.

2006-08-01 00:54:54 · answer #2 · answered by Doggzilla 6 · 0 0

Absolutely not.
There are 6.5 billion people on Earth. only 300 million are American. Less than 5% of the total population. Assume that the armies of the world had a similar ratio. Every American soldier Sailor and airman would have to have a kill ratio of 20:1. That seems pretty rough even with technology on your side.

Imagine that the same ratio applied to military vehicles as well–One American tank vs. 20? 1 F-15 vs. 20 Mig 21s? Doesn't sound too good. Heck 20 vs 1 would be ugly if you were talking one adult vs 20 first graders.

Then there is the whole question of the logistics of fighting every where all at the same time. Keeping all the troops supplied on all four corners of the earth at the same time!

Plus you would have to gear industry toward building weapons, and growing food (the Army moves on it's stomach). Not to mentionprotecting the homeland.

Just not realistic.

2006-08-01 00:45:45 · answer #3 · answered by thermion7 2 · 0 0

Nobody really knows. The US hasn't announced any radically new weapons in over 20 years. So either the US has been sitting on its haunches doing nothing or it has a whole bunch of super secret weaponry waiting for when it is really needed. The only reason to announce new weapons is as a deterrent and since the nukes are already a huge deterrent there is no strategic value in announcing anything else at this point.

2006-08-01 00:03:46 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Yeah right. First the United States cannot pacify a relatively small country like Iraq how could they occupy the whole world.
Just destroying life on a continent or a country would also destroy the reason for doing it. There are better ways to plunder the resources and wealth of other nations and these are being done now. Without a shot being fired.

2006-07-31 23:59:26 · answer #5 · answered by Kenneth H 5 · 0 0

No. The United Nations would never allow such a thing. Our own government would never allow such a thing either.Militarily speaking we have superiority, but the Chinese alone have more man power than the next 10 greatest armies put together. Everything has checks and balances. No President in his right mind would use nukes on every country at the same time. The fallout would kill everthing on the planet including him.

2006-08-01 00:04:54 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

USA would just want to finish off China and Russia. Then others like Cuba, Iran, South Korea, Venizuala would be too easy...
Don't worry they wouldn't worry about Philippines or other Asian countries becoz (if) china and russia is gone it would be better(just my opinion) to become a vassle state and save the nation than to get a few nukes...I heard the nuclear Arsenel of USA is enough to destroy everything on earth twice

2006-08-01 00:00:31 · answer #7 · answered by FL 2 · 0 0

No, it is not possible because a president needs the congress to get permission to declare war if I'm not mistaken. Some countries like Canada, a Prime Minister does have this power to declare war on his own, but then again, he has no nukes ;)

2006-07-31 23:59:45 · answer #8 · answered by Rockford 7 · 0 0

Depending upon how many countries are for sale and how many have a majority who are unhappy with things and are looking for a little push, it has some possibilities.

The only obstacle is our own Congress with people like Hillary and Kerry who won't join until we offer them a top seat. The rest will go anywhere providing we don't interfere with their expected retirement.

2006-08-07 15:38:05 · answer #9 · answered by Mr. Been there 4 · 0 0

IF(notice emphasis on if because this will never happen unless the world collectively attacks us first) the USA did decide to blow up the world it would definetly be possible if they got around all of the early warning systems of the more developed countries.

2006-07-31 23:56:34 · answer #10 · answered by super_eagle_08 1 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers