If United States were to go to war against these countries who would win?

Question

1. North Korea 2. Vietnam 3. Mexico 4. Russia 5. Iran 6. China

Please don't be bias and be truthful.

Answer 1

1/ As a nuclear state, neither side would win.
2/ US in the short term, but would be unable to maintain peace.
3/ Probably the US, though I think most South Americans would join against you, so could end badly.
4/ Russia, Putin and his generals are too wily, your generals wouldn't know a strategy if it punched them on the nose.
5/ The whole Islamic world would rise against you and at best there'd be mutually assured destruction.
6/ China, because for once you'd be up against an army which has more cannon fodder than you do, and that's how the US wins wars.

Europe would also kick your butts, though I might actually be biased about that one.

Answer 2

North Korea doesn't have the resources that the US has as far as military power and technology goes, same goes for Vietnam. North Korea is in the process of making nukes, but it would take them a very long time to reach the US's aresnal level.

Mexico doesn't have the power, but their close proximity to us and how easy it has been to jump the border is definately a concern, especially if they reach an agreement with another country to help them. (ie "the Bay of Pigs" where Russia wanted to "set up shop" in Cuba back in the 60s)

Russia, Iran, and China. This is very interesting because I strongly feel that if the US invades Iran, it will be WW III and Russia and China will back Iran and other than Brittian, I'm not sure which countries would stand with the US. I think that all three of these countries should be carefully crutinized. I read somewhere a few months ago that Russia surpassed Saudi Arabia as the #1 oil producing country. We import 5 times the amount of goods from China that we export to them. I hate to say it, but eventually I forsee that Russia and China will be the richest countries in the world, and the US will fall in their shadows. Russia and China definately have the resources to be a huge threat...and don't forget that Russia's Eastern most point is only 50 some miles away from Alaska and that Putin was former KGB.

Answer 3

The United States can defeat any other country if the war is fought ruthlessly and relentlessly.

The better question to ask is how much it will cost in terms of military deaths, civilian deaths from homeland attack (which would surely happen except for cases 1,2 and 5). Attacks on allies, which would occur in all cases.
Direct expenses. Disruption of economy.

For example, an attack on N. Korea would be very costly and involve devasting attacks on S. Korea and probably Japan. Invlovement of China (as happened in the Korean war) would be nasty. Vietnam was tried before, also.
Iran would attack Israel.

Seems like it would be hard to completely get around the potential of an enemy smuggling equipment into the US and detonating a nuke.

The US experiences in Korea, Vietnam, the embassy rescue attempt in Teheran, Iraq I and II should be a lesson in how difficult and costly war is.

The military plans all these scenarios for readiness, but they would be the first ones to tell you how hardcore it would be.

Answer 4

While I agree with the emotional stance of previous posters who have decried any talk of "winning" a war, the fact is that wars are won, all the time. That doesn't make them a good idea, or desirable. But imagining that no one wins just makes you less likely to expect other people to attack you.

Accordingly, I am going to answer the question straightforwardly, without worrying about who "should" win or whether the wars would be good policy.

In brief, it would largely depend on the type of war and the degree of engagement. The United States has a lousy track record with limited wars involving occupation (witness Vietnam and Iraq). In large part, this is -- as terrorists and U.S. defense hawks ironically agree -- due to the fact that we tend to second-guess our own behavior, and we're inclined to back down if things don't go well immediately, or if it looks like people don't like us. Countries with our capabilities but no scruples about using them would do much better in these sorts of conflicts than we do. This is not to say that the U.S. should throw away its scruples -- that's one of the things that makes it worth saving. But it does mean it can't handle certain types of conflict very well. The public doesn't have the stomach for them.

So, in an Iraq-style war, I'd predict we'd lose every one of those wars.

Conversely, in an all-out war, the United States would probably crush any one of those countries, particularly if it seized the initiative.

Of course, full-scale conflict with China or Russia isn't something I'd look forward to. Those would very likely be Pyrrhic victories, with the U.S. as a very battered and unfortunate winner.

Edit (3:20 p.m.): It is possible to win a nuclear war. That doesn't make it pleasant, or a good idea, and it's certainly not anything I'm recommending or looking forward to, but it's possible -- particularly if you're willing to make a first strike and you're backed up by ABM systems and civil defenses. In part, the fact that it's winnable makes it all the more dangerous, as much of liberal America's reliance on deterrence (i.e. Mutual Assured Destruction) is likely to fail in the long run, since the destruction is neither mutual nor assured.

Answer 5

An all out war with China will end the world as we know it. So will one with Russia. The other countries will not have a chance against the US. The initial thrust will end and then they will be reduced to nothing. Vietnam and Mexico are not going to threaten us but Iran and N. Korea like to talk bit when there is nothing to back them up.

Answer 6

1. North Korea - Yes, it would be easy with just them but we all know China would eventually step in and make it more difficult.

2. Vietnam - Our technology and weapon systems have grown since the last time. Theres have not.

3. Mexico - They are beating us in the US right now through immigration...haha...no seriously though they wouldnt stand a chance.

4. Russia - Would be a tough fight. It could go either way..

5. Iran - We would be stuck in the same spot we are in now. They are like cockroaches. Once we clear them from one area and move on to the next area they fill back up in the previous area. I dont think we could do it while fighing Iraq and Afghan at the same time.

6. China - This one will be close cause if we are fighting China then we are basically fighting N Korea as well. I would have to give this one to us though due to our Air Power...

Answer 7

North Korea, Russia, and China would be a problem, they have nukes.
We can kick Mexico's, Iran's, and Vietnam's *** any day of the week.

Answer 8

North Korea

Answer 9

1. north Korea because of the weaponry- US migth win if they were backed up by other countries.

2. not sure- US now has the knowledge from the Vietnam war and learned from it.

6. China because they have a Bigger army- plus their troops arent all over in different countries like the US

Answer 10

We could win against any of those nations but China if and only if we actually fought a war, A real war does not have rules and you fight to win

That is the reason we are not winning in Iraq and did not win in Vietnam.

So unless all the people in the US come together to totally destroy an ememy we don't need to go to war,

I think it will take a major attack on US soil to make those that don't support the US and its military to change thier minds.