2007-02-23 03:22:20 · 12 answers · asked by epbr123 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Europe. Our armed forces are worn too thin right now.
In a war between US and European citizens, Europeans would definitely win. Most Americans are too fat to even stand up without rolling their fat asses to one side first.
2007-02-23 03:57:03 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
It depends. If England isn't involved on Europe's side, then the USA has it easy. Reasoning: France will surrender after token resistance and a threat to the wine/cheese industry develops. The Italian government will fall (several times) and their tanks will go the wrong way. The Germans will get bogged down in existential thought and not fight.
The reason England would help Europe win is because they can only win when they are outnumbered and outgunned (a situation easily helped by having Continental Europeans as "allies").
2007-02-23 03:36:57 · answer #2 · answered by Crusader1189 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
European countries have a long history of fighting each other and twice in the last century America has had to save them from themselves. The USA would win because we wouldn't even have to fight Europe. All we have to do to see Europe defeated is leave Europe alone and not save them next time.
2007-02-24 02:56:52 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
USA hands down. when was the last time they one a war without the USA's help? The French wouldn't even fight, the italians are becoming like the french. The Spaniards haven't even fought a war since the early 20th century. Swiss, they don't have an army...etc.etc.
2007-02-23 03:28:29 · answer #4 · answered by tobcol 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
US has higher and badder military? you actually favor to finish a touch homework. France per chance a quiet united states of america yet theyre armed to the tooth with a really great army and nuclear arsenal with different delivery strategies. Americas journey of warfare isn't some thing and also you may hardly ever say they were successfull? uk and France have 5-7x extra military journey than u . s . and as Canada is a commonwealth united states of america its likely they'd decrease back Britain so u.s. would even ought to guard its land borders plus wide hate South u.s. has for u . s . its likely Theyd ought to guard Southern borders too. it is going to ensue yet will be over in months both with u . s . unconditional renounce it really is unlike or them launching chemical first they nevertheless have worlds best stockpile which makes their Syria argument extra pathetic, then organic and organic and finally nuclear strikes wiping actually everyone out truly than admit finished defeat. Itll ensue at the same time as American admits their GM infested foodstuff is poisonous.
2016-12-04 20:28:32 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
One nation against many... Statistically, it would be Europe. But, you also need to address venue of combat, and circumstances. Being that we are allied via NATO, this is more than a little far-fetched.
2007-02-23 03:29:05 · answer #6 · answered by sjsosullivan 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Lets not even go there.... i don't think Bush has infuriated Europe to that point yet... they just don't like us much.. but not enough to go to war with us....or did I miss the morning news????
2007-02-23 03:27:33 · answer #7 · answered by Debra H 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The believer's because it will eventually get worse & worse anyway. Look into the prisons here in US profiting off inmates working.
2007-02-23 03:28:34 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Well, France being in Europe, they would push for a quick surrendur!
2007-02-23 03:28:42 · answer #9 · answered by Scott B 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
There are really no winners in the war now a days.
2007-02-23 03:27:43 · answer #10 · answered by Iqbal 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋