Despite all its arrogance is the US really invincible?

Question

Strength is not just resources it also requires balls and brains. Given the US could quite easily lose Iraq and Afghanistan if the UK withdraws under brown and is alone. Given the drew in Korea at a great cost, lost in Cambodia and Vietnam (again hugely costly). They also never even tried to protect Tibet yet cry they support freedom so where were they? It is clear that the US firepower and gear is enormous so how come 2-bit governments can win like Vietnam? Or cause such trouble like Iraq? So if you consider a real power like China or Russia could America show true strength of will or simply break like they have in the past. Even economically sanctioned states have done OK against the US and UN. Do they really have what it takes? Or is it just a big, bully that will fall flat on its belly? What do you think?

Note: No talk of nuclear weapons. China and Russia can throw them back. That is an all lose situation.

Answer 1

us is not strong at all. the army is streatched to breaking point and if china and russia coordinate, i believe they can conquer the US. and US is a coward. they can talk the talk but they cannot walk the walk.

Answer 2

Great question. They are strong in some respects - they have a large intelligence operation able to topple governments at will (the CIA toppled regimes in Indonesia, Chile, Iraq, Iran, Nicauragua, Afganistan in the 80's/90's etc but ultimately backed the wrong candidate each time) but the same organisation keeps screwing up - look at how they missed the boat on 9/11, how they got caught out with Iran contra, how they completely missed the uprising of the Shias in Iran leading to the Shah being toppled and dozens of hostages being held at their Embassy in Tehran for over a year incuding many CIA staff (and the resulting death of about 16 soldiers sent to rescue them). This is my first point - they have the best intelligence assets but are way off on how to deploy those assets. Then look at sheer military power - lots of it but they are fighting a war on multiple fronts and both of the main wars (Afganistan and Iraq) are basically guerilla wars which history shows cannot be won. They are financially stretched and isolated in the world politically. China and Russia are expanding financially and militarily all the time and the real threats (like Iran) cannot be dealt with while the other battles are being fought. World War 3 could all be started by taking on Iran as Russia and China would come to their aid, Pakistan would take the opportunity to Nuke India, their would be a global Jihad against US and UK and chaos would ensue in a war without tangible fronts. The future is quite scary because we need a strong America but have instead got a currently weak America with a shrinking economy, few allies and a total loony at the helm pursuing far right policies and suffering from having no exit strategy in his ill devised Iraq venture and decreasing public and world support. China is the new superpower I'm afraid.

Answer 3

If it were a straight 'army' vs 'army' and 'navy' vs 'navy' then the US is likely to win against most nations, exceptions being Russia, China and the UK.
Trouble is, the wars that the US gets into they are not fighting a defined enemy, the enemy doesnt have radar stations, or bunkers or airfields or ships or aircraft to drop JDAMS or Paveways on or shoot 9 limas at.
Their enemies are civvies with guns, dont even wear uniforms. They cant use the firepower without pissing off the rest of the world by killing millions of innocent people.
This is what happened in Vietnam, This is what happened in Korea and this is what is going to happen in Iraq and Afghanistan.
So to answer your question, a million megatons of bombs, bullets and missiles can be rendered as useful as an inflatable dartboard by a few men, hidden in a civilian population. BLOODY HILARIOUS!!!! lol

Answer 4

The United States is going to be in deep trouble once we have to fight a real enemy like North Korea or Iran. This is because we've been fighiting wars against third world countries for the last 25 years. Grenada, Libya, Panama, Iraq (twice), Somalia, Haiti, Bosnia, Kosovo, and Afghanistan. On top of that, the United States has supported a lot of factions around the world in the last fifty years that have either collapsed or have become our enemies 10 or 20 years after we stood behind them. South Vietnam collapsed. Providing aid to Saddam Hussein led to him trying to take 20% of middle eastern oil that sparked the first Iraq war. The United States radicalized the muslims in the 1980's to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan, and now they're fighting us. We supported the Shah in Iran until he died of cancer, and the Ayotollah revolted and took over our embassy in Tehran taking hostages. I think that if we don't change our foreign policy soon to where we use diplomacy over military force 100% at all times, we are going to end up in a war 10 times worse than the Iraq War we're fighting now.

Answer 5

The United States has all the elements that great powers of history have to ensure their long term hegemony - military power, technological power, industrial capabilities, commercial power, large population to draw strength from, access to resources, a system of government which is stable and can justify military dominance, and world wide support.

The problem is that if you take away one or more elements of its national power, this can lead to the United States global hegemony eroding.

Fortunately for the United States, is that there is no other leading contender or rival for global hegemony. Some people see China as a rival - but while China will exert influence regionally in the Asia-Pacific region, China does not have the same elements of national power that the United States has.

For example, China has a large population from which it draws its increasing workforce - however this workforce is disunited and the political system of China is highly dependant on the use of force and threats. Its work force are not happy with low pay and poor conditions making China potential volatile in the future.

China also lacks immediate access to natural resources, having to rely on shipping petrol from the Middle East. While China aims to build piplelines to give it direct access to resources, this has raised concerns about China's role in the region, and its support of dictatorships such as Myanmar.

China is also not trusted by regional powers such as Australia, which see's Chinese hegemony in the region as dangerous to democracy. The question for China in the future will be converting its soft power into hard power to give it a true voice in global affairs.

Answer 6

There is no other military on the planet that can even come close to the US military, complete and utter anihilation. You have become confused due to the trainwreck that is Iraq. The American military wasnt made for such operations. Do you remember how fast the country was taken over? The problem started when the US tried to push their politcs onto Iraq, and tried to "Democratize" them. Now it is a no win situation, and its not helping that they have a complete wanker in office.

Answer 7

The americans are all bluff when it comes down to real fighting,they think that to win any conflict all the have to do is throw men and weapons at it.
Although they have got the resourses they have not got the patience and pure impulsion to use them.
I think another thing that the americans have got wrong in all the wars that they have stuck their noses into is that the people they are fighting are willing to be martyrs to their cause and litterally fight to the death whereas the americans faith doesn't teach this.

Answer 8

All things are subject to change. All empires fail. The US will be checked by its people and fall back in line. This will happen cause they are free to do so. I hope so anyway. Great Country though, did an awful lot of good for this world! Helped us europeans out many times. Can't ever forget that.

Answer 9

The political will to destroy the enemy as was done in Tokyo and Berlin without benefit of atomic weapons is currently lacking in the government. It still exists here out in the sticks, but as you can see while both parties are trying to ram through this abominable Illegal Alien Amnesty Bill against 80% opposition among the citizens, the sticks are pretty much ignored.

The rumblings of discontent grow louder. This SHOULD be celebrated: after all, "dissent is the highest form of patriotism," I keep hearing....

Answer 10

It is said that the Americans in Vietnam won the battles but lost the war..this is because to win any war you must win hearts and minds.. In the case Of Iraq and Afghanistan it is a similar situation, when face to face with the enemy.,The Americans win the battles.....please note that the Russians failed miserably in Afghanistan,and had very little control over territory. The Americans took the country in a matter of weeks !

Answer 11

Nothing is invincible. In the words of Gandhi,

"When I despair, I remember that all through history the ways of truth and love have always won. There have been tyrants, and murderers, and for a time they can seem invincible, but in the end they always fall. Think of it--always."

I am sorry to bust anyone's bubble but America's days of glory are long gone. Soon, as did Atlantis and Rome before it, it shall crumble. I, personally, don't want to have to deal with it yet again because this time is the dirtiest of all.

We will all have to pay heavily for the party.