Each State is also allowed its own naval force. Like the National Guard, it has the same everything as the main military. Although, I think only Texas actually uses this and I don't know if it still does.
Coast guard is actually pretty scary especially in states that focus on import and international trade like Florida and California. They pack pretty fucking heavy but their experience is lacking in actual combat
Only if they were retired in full working order. But they're not - decommissioned ships are almost useless for warfare as they've been stripped of weapons, ammunition, electronics, communications, etc. But I do get your point, that even our recently retired naval vessels would make a formidable force.
Yeah, they have used it to painted the whole world crimson with it for hundreds of years. Is it something to be proud of? Is murdering or kidnapping your way across the world a point of pride?
Your fleet can have any size of air force. But if it cannot approach the target closer than 1000 km because of the Russian hypersonic missiles of the Zircon and Dagger type (speed 9 M or 10739.3 km / h), this fleet turns into floating scrap metal along with its air force. By the way, a russian S 500 Prometheus is capable of intercepting hypersonic missiles of this class because the speed of his anti-missile is 8 km / s. And the A-235 Nudol complex is capable of intercepting Minuteman3 even during takeoff over US territory ruclips.net/video/Z3jW_AGsNvo/видео.html
It's crazy to think the US did all the damage without using its Air Force, which was kept home to protect the homeland just in case Canada and Mexico had any crazy ideas.
The video never said the US Air Force wasn't involved in the scenario. Quite the opposite in fact. There would still be some units that would never leave the US such as the Air National Guard. Some States still have their own official Militias although it rarely gets discussed.
@@Seastallion National Guard forces can be federalized during war, though. Only if Congress declares war. So, where what units will be and in what numbers has nothing to do with whether they're National or Federal.
@@midgetydeath In terms of National Guard, sure. State ran militaries are another matter entirely. The Federal government literally has NO jurisdiction over them, at least unless the State agreed to it. There are in fact 22 States, plus Puerto Rico, with active Defense Forces that are solely under the authority of the State Governor.
I'm not an American but I love USA. not because of their power, actually because of their culture, value and people. Just believe it or not, American people are the friendliest people in average. Some people tend to hate USA without no valid reason. Guess what..haters gonna hate!
Thanks Kellan, we really do try, for the most part. Our government has evolved into something that the founding fathers would never have countenanced, and does things that are not the will of the people. I think that this is where 'The great reset' needs to begin. Things will change, the choice of how is theirs to make.
@WallaWoo Wee As entertaining as your squabble was becoming, I shall clarify. The Vietnam War was a political defeat for the United States. Thousands of Americans died in a war they did not want to fight. But this hides an important message. Most Americans did not want to be there any more than the Vietnamese wanted them to. The US military regularly inflicted defeats and high casualties on the Vietcong. Even the Guerilla tactics became less effective when Americans started burning forests and employing Agent Orange. While America suffered humiliation on the world stage and politicians began losing their jobs over their support of it, America was no less powerful after the conflict, whereas Vietnam was set back decades. America was in Vietnam to "Prevent the Spread of Communism", with no clear way of doing that. Had America chosen to engage North Vietnam and even China do accomplish that goal, chances are they would have been able to. Ignorance around the Vietnam War goes both ways. Americans often deny they lost, yet most people ignore the fact that no country could have done a whole lot better. Guerilla warfare is difficult to fight short of war crimes. America is best equipped to take on and destroy armies, infrastructure, and destroying regimes. But their democratic nature handicaps them from occupying and controlling captured territory. That is Europe's area of expertise, and Vietnam was actually a result of European Imperialism more than American aggression.
You already should know this quote from your fiancé/boyfriend : "There is no better friend... and no worse enemy than a United States Marine." and there is not a finer fighting organization in the world." - General Douglas MacArthur, US Army, outskirts of Seoul, 21 September 1950.
The United States proved during World War 2 that it could out produce anyone AND everyone when it comes to the war effort. Not to mention we've got graveyards full of aircraft and ships that are ready to go with just a short amount of time to retrofit them and fix any nominal damage done to them while in storage. We're twenty to thirty years ahead of everyone else as far as technology goes and our individual soldiers are by far the best equipped. I always hear horror stories about countries that can't even provide proper weapons and equipment for all of their soldiers, or provide enough food and nutrition. Not to mention most countries don't have the experience in war that America has, who has been at war for most of it's history in one fashion or another. And when it comes to the actual war, the fighting, America's ability to reach out and touch someone is unrivalled. The shock and awe that we've adopted as a battle plan would shake a lot of people to the core. Most the world's populace will not want to go to war with us - much less stay in a war with us when we are wrecking their militaries and destroying infrastructure and government/military targets. There will definitley be a psychological aspect to the war that shouldn't be underestimated.
Serious question..Other than the kickbacks/$$ laundering of "It's better to fight Them(who ever the Them of convenience is at the time)..Has anyone stopped to wonder if the Establishment Pollies/Uni-Party want our troops to Stay over there ,to make sure They aren't HERE?.."Enemies foreign and DOMESTIC"...I would hazard to say the most dangerous "enemies" are not foreign..
@@pinstripe4254 .." our capital was attacked by “protestors”..One of the things I personally found interesting " is that all the Democrat side already had the same speeches/talking points about it ,and the "remedies" for it to "not happen again"as if they were reading from a script..Odd question,and you don't need to reply,Have you ever heard of the Reichstag Fire? It's worth looking into..Remember for those in Power to Keep that Power,or Gain More ,there ALWAYS needs to be an "OTHER"..Race/Gender/Left/Right...History doesn't always repeat,but it Does Often Rhyme...Just say'n. www.smithsonianmag.com/history/true-story-reichstag-fire-and-nazis-rise-power-180962240/
I'm a proud American who believes in having an extremely strong military. That said, the vast majority of Americans hate war on a fundamental level. We are a peaceful people who love to help our neighbors & lift up others. I honestly don't see in my life time, the American people EVER being okay with this. Hell, the vast majority of us hate that every new President seems to get us into some kind of conflict. On a different note, great reaction, keep on growing.
@@humbunger9379 you're not but okay and the only reason you think you are is because you spend billions of dollars on the military instead of actually helping your people
I mean.. that sums up a lot of problems. Everyone hates America until there is a terrorist organization or something in their country and most of the time they try to get America to help.
Not only that, but we give the world all our inventions. We give the world the internet, movies, music, RUclips, Google, Instagram, Facebook, Twitter, Apple, Microsoft, Netflix, Nike, UFC, Disney, Marvel, etc. Basically EVERYTHING lol All entertainment, social media, culture, and technology. They couldn't live without us and our technology/inventions. Couldn't go ONE day without these things. Yet we're "a joke" and/or they all "hate" us 😂
Not to mention that in the event of a ground invasion onto American soil, that most Americans own guns. I personally own many including AR 15's, Glock 10mm, Mossberg 12 gauge shotgun with thousands of rounds of ammo as well as 3 1/2 years worth of food rations.
The United States spends twice as much on its military than the rest of the world combined.... in an all out fight with no rules of engagement I'd put my money on the United States
You sir, are wrong. The european part of NATO combined already reaches half, china is near to half. Just combining those would already be just about equal
This was actually one of the better ones they did. Because this is almost exactly what would likely happen. As in these would be the tactics they would take, and their assessment of what some countries would do (the Gulf countries, and especially Japan) is probably correct as well. The United States would destroy their infrastructure and try to starve them out.... If they were effective at doing this early on, it would "win". But that depends on a lot of factors, with a lot of initial American successes.
Thank you for reacting to this... I've requested it and I know others have as well, so again thank you for listening to your viewers! I hope your channel explodes in 2021! Oh and Marines were in NZ in WW2 in an effort to roll back a Japanese invasion!
In reality, in an all out war, it would go nuclear rather quickly and there wouldn't be a winner - and there would no longer be a USA or rest of the world. The relative size of air-forces, navies, and armed citizenry are just quaint tangential details.
Just one thing folks, I'm a US citizen and I've been watching our military trend toward digital than good old manual. This makes the US military insanely vulnerable to hackers from a variety of nations governments that, may I remind you, hate our guts. Combine forces long enough to shut us down and they wouldn't have to send a single pair of boots to defeat us. First, hit the utilities, most of the US would be brought to its knees in a matter of hours, not even days or weeks. Just to remind folks, many companies have found countless backdoors created in utilities computer systems that would enable a hacker to shut them down, even if a fraction of a percent of the world hackers worked to end us, we'd be done before a single F-35 or F/A-18 could take off. US military projection is second to none, but our reliance on digitalization of everything except our rifles, will be the end of us in a world vs USA. Just a thought. Stay safe, stay alert, stay alive.
To quote admiral yamamoto "I fear we have awaken a sleeping giant and filled him with a terrible resolve" and since then the navy has only gotten bigger and stronger
Which doesn't mean shit since most nations with a salt water coast has babies as well. Many nations are just as populated and rich as the US. The US doesn't have the biggest army and India and China alone would be enough they have equipment just as good as what the US has more farmland and they haven't made every other nation their enemy in this scenario.
@@hainleysimpson1507 were you even listening? They said the US Submarines are 20 years ahead of China and 10 years ahead of Russia and India had the same problems as China, for even Japan boasts a better and larger submarine force then that. The only place the US doesn't reign supreme is ground forces which it doesn't really need for it has good relations with everybody in the Americas and even if it didn't it boasts better ground forces and coastguard than Brazil, Canada, and Argentina combined and Argentina and Brazil hat each other so that would never happen. Even without the best ground forces it still has the second best and that's enough if you reign supreme in the Air and Oceans which the US does. And it did make every other country its enemy in this scenario but because of lack of naval power those countries didn't do much other than economical help which still does A LOT.
I am a former member of the US Air Force. While stationed in Europe we knew we were not much more than a speed bump to slow the enemy's advances on the US Bases in their nations.
James and the USA would be divided up among the nations of the world. Doesn't matter how many weapons you have you are going to lose due to sheer numbers and the amount of geniuses leaders and warriors just as bright as any leader or scientist the US has the US doesn't even have the best weapons or training. The US has nothing that would make them a world threat in an upfront fight. Most big nations have nukes and bombs and satellites and hackers. The USA has no chance of winning but can make everyone else not win, but that's risky the dirtier the US fights the nastier everyone else gets.
@@hainleysimpson1507 That "nastiness" has a cap in terms of the scenario; no nukes allowed. Not to mention, the level of nastiness implied by the entire world fighting against the US would give it the motivation needed to remain in existence. "Dividing" would be difficult if the US consolidates most of its power behind its borders, shielded by thousands of miles of open water. The land force outside of the US would only need to utterly destroy the Middle East's oil infrastructure. The hackers you speak of would be countered by hackers in the US; look at how many individual RUclipsrs are able to pinpoint the location of Indian call centers, and in some cases shut them down. That's without the resources of the US government. Now imagine the desperation and change in US policy regarding this scenario. Individuals would be sanctioned to do this on a large scale, and what couldn't be handled by hackers, _could_ be handled by saturation bombing or precision strikes. The US has the third largest population, and 4th largest land area. That land rests between two massive oceans. It also holds almost every type of biome; huge rivers, many mountain chains of varying consistency, dense forests, hot deserts as well as frigid regions. It also holds not only an incredibly large and advanced, but highly redundant infrastructure. Massive cities, and even larger suburbs. It would be a nightmare for the world to even try....
Great video Courtney just like all the others. One thing he didn't have in there was the 10's of millions that are armed in the US as well. In some cases better armed then foreign countries.
This doesn’t take into account the hundreds of outdated ships the US keeps in their mothball fleet that would be reactivated and back in the fight within 6 months including old carriers that would make great helicopter carriers and troop carriers.
It would be like that scene in the movie battle ship ripping dust covers off opening old hangers plus if the world came at us we would definitely unveil the top secret weapons I mean in 2022 they showed to our Civilian population that they put laser weapons on the ss.Georgia
The range of Japan's F-15's is pretty accurate. They can travel further but their combat capability is about 750 miles from base otherwise they won't have the fuel to fight and return to base. This is pretty easy information to know because the things that would allow them to extend that distance are impossible to hide. Things like large mid-air refueling planes, and air bases can't really be hidden, so we know what they're capable of. Plus the USA has 22 military installations in Japan. Honestly, South Korea, Japan, and Germany should be considered US territory at the beginning of a war because of how many autonomous facilities we have in each country. Germany holds the largest concentration of American military forces outside of the USA, and that's including Afghanistan and Iraq. The thing you're talking about with Japan not being allowed to have much of a military is true. The same is true of Germany. After WW1 we put a bunch of rules in place that would allow them to still have a military to defend themselves and it didn't turn out so well so when WW2 was over we said fuck it and just put a ton of bases in Germany and Japan and basically said, "You're not allowed a military. Your enemies are now our enemies and we will defend you at our own expense." No one ever thanks us for it, either.
Japan's Defense forces are pretty robust and are technologically superior to many regional competitors. And they have been investing in building up a marine force that would be able to fight away from the Japanese homeland. But they still lack the naval and air transport capabilities to be a serious threat. Their primary concerns are potential territorial disputes with China and Russia.
Re Japan until just recently (2015) they had no military. They were, and still are, a "protected" nation. The U.S. provides most of their defensive needs and Japan is still not supposed to have any offensive troops.
I dont think they take into account how fast militarys can ramp up production in war when its their sole effort, he acts as if america use their full force in every fight and the world dont do anything while america act
@@jameshunt9208 his point is extremely valid. WWII began in 1939. We did not enter the war until two years later. One major reason was our need to ramp up for the war. Another reason was american distaste for war, which would only increase, once US soil was being attacked.
@@davidgoldstein1526 distaste for war wouldn't increase if American soil was attacked. You are nuts if you think Americans would pull away with US soil being attacked.
During WW2 the Japanese were looking at New Zeeland and Australia as possible land conquests. The big fight over the Solomon island chain was the U.S. keeping the Japanese from expanding further in that direction.
@@kingdra-winston3500 We would spend billions to wage this war, but since most of the world's infrastructure collapsed with the oil starvation, none of the losers could pay reparations. Millions of gallons of oil would be burned, and we'd have nothing but destroyed machinery to show for it. And within months, the US would have to devote even MORE money to suppress local rebellions across the globe. The US would bankrupt itself trying to hold on to its conquests and new political parties opposed to the global stranglehold would gain power.
@@CourtneyCoulston if you go to Texas you have to go to Drive Tanks at the Ox Ranch.... Yes we can own functional tanks and artillery privately here as well as guns if you're willing to pay for the permit. 😈
Before we start patting ourselves on the back for winning this scenario, remember that the major players have nukes, meaning this war game scenario would never play out like this
Nukes would fly early in the conflict and once the first one flies, all the rest follow. The earth becomes a scorched, lifeless, radioactive hellscape.
And just for good measure, do some research on the AFRL and DARPA when you have time. The tech is crazy! Of course, it’s a little outdated due to classification, but it will give you an idea.
I am a USAF (ret). Do you have a Sister ? I won’t disrespect your American husband. I have been in three wars in the Middle East. I had 11 years in when the Gulf Wars started. Even I was shocked at how fast we moved troops and supplies. We had 750,000 troops and so much equipment. Most people don’t know that when the USA goes to war, we simply take over 40% of private Aircraft (Delta, etc.) so within 3 days we had so many soldiers in country it was shocking.
The best thing about Courtney compared to other reactors is how much she thinks about what she saw and comes to an articulate conclusion, whereas most reactors just react in the moment without trying to give something more cohesive.
That would just be for homeland defense though, a single group of Chinese carriers armed with ICMBs would render our 394 million weapons obsolete, that number is only effective against attacking infantry
We were down there, to keep the Japanese from going there, as you guys down there were up fighting them much further north, plus they’d cycle our guys to there and Australia for R&R at times.
Now that the world knows what the Suez Canal is, Being able to cut it off would have massive impacts on the world. One stuck ship made a mess, imagine if it was intentional.
Although the narration was scholarly it cannot take into account the vagaries inherent during war. The biggest problem with this conclusion is that US victory would have to come by water and air, and not by ground forces, which the World would easily overwhelm the US with. A US victory would be based on a naval and air stranglehold on shipping lanes which should eventually destroy World economies. As a veteran US Marine who saw combat during the Vietnam War (mostly in a rifle platoon) I quickly discovered how much the.people of a country can endure. The Vietnamese absorbed US air and naval power, and made this a ground war, that they won. So, before we say that the US can beat the World, let’s not forget that the US lost to the tiny nation of Vietnam. We had the power to destroy the entire island, but the US people were against the war. Ironically, we lost the war in Vietnam back in the states. The absolute key to a US victory against the world would only come from the people being fully behind the action, as they were in WWII. Because of this the US would be fighting against each other at home (we are such a divided nation that cannot agree on anything, and are about to impeach again our Commander-in-Chief) the fight would be lost at home. All the World has to do is wait for us to implode...
@@beautifulbliss5883 : Stalin said something very similar. Or, was it Lenin? Anyway, they were certain that the greed created by the hated capitalism would cause so much infighting that America would destroy itself from within. When a nation is suffering through a pandemic, and has to turn to Socialist principles by demanding that the “state” bail them out (which is exactly what the stimulus checks were for); then go into a trillions of dollar national debt; and instead of working tirelessly to solve our problems, the legislative branch goes against the will of over 70 million people and spend their time impeaching their chosen leader; and, when the new power structure runs on socialist principles and angers even further those millions who supported their disgraced leader that they impeached....well, you can see that Lenin and Stalin and lets throw in Karl Marx...had a valid point.
I hope you realize we didn't lose in Vietnam. We decided to with draw as it was costing us money for zero gain. Literally Vietnam has nothing of value to the USA. They had 3 million casualties we had 58 thousand, it was not even close in terms of actual combat. Had the USA actually invaded we would've conquered them in a few months. How is it I know this as a civilian who was borne after Vietnam ended but you don't?
Thank you for your service. I'm a vet too. US Army 1/4 CAV Scouts (LRRP), 1st INF DIV. I was in Panama. I think that in this hypothetical video, the support of the people on each side is a given.
I'm not sure how you count Vietnam as a loss. North Vietnam lost over one million troops. We lost just over 47,000. And that was while playing defence. We didn't even cross over into the North with our troops.
I think it was 47000. Not 58000. I could be wrong. But yeah either way we totally spanked the hell out of the North Vietnamese period. not quite sure what that guy is talking about
Even in World War II, they waited for the USSR to bring the Germans to their knees.USSR would defeat Germany and Italy on its own in another year because it had already caused them 95 percent of all casualties. As a result, the USSR had almost 100 times more casualties than the United States. The US would rather wait with the attacks than just have to sacrifice so many people because with a little military equipment they would have to sacrifice more soldiers, in a similar way as the USSR. There were also mass killings of civilians in the USSR, which would have spared the United States because of the distance, and racial theories against the Slavs.
@nope nope This means that the power of the United States is overestimated, because it has not yet been proven how it behaves in a fight where it should suffer huge casualties, even ten times percent higher than in the civil war. On the Western Front where the Germans fought with a much smaller number of soldiers as on the Eastern Front,who preferred to surrender to the Americans because they were afraid of falling into the hands of the Red Army.Because of the crimes they had committed on their territory. And everyone at the top of the military knows that, and they wouldn't even think of such a thing with China alone. China has a proportionately larger economy and a more disciplined larger population in a large national charge especially in these times when their standard has risen as high as it was in the US 30 years ago. On the one hand, the oceans protect it, but on the other hand, they prevent it from attacking with as much force as it would need. And there are many other factors.
@@celticlord88 well I mean didnt the americans win more battles? I'm not good at history but I'm pretty sure if the US wanted it probably couldve won but there was a lot of things going on with people pressuring the army to get the fuck outta there
My uncle Winfred was a Marine in World War II. They left New Zealand for their first battle at Tarawa. Australia and New Zealand were forward supply and staging areas against the Japanese, as England was in Europe. That's not because we all spoke English, it's because the enemy had everything else. The need for supply and staging areas was not addressed in this video except for a little bit about Guam. You can't launch everything from New York and California; your supplies begin there, but you need someplace close to the Front to actually operate from: you can't fly all the way back to California every time the plane needs to be gassed up and you need to have food, ammunition, and medical supplies a couple of days away instead of a couple of months away. Both Australia and New Zealand had much of their forces in Europe/North Africa. The Americans stationed there defended them from the Japanese.
Hi Claude!! Thank you for this super informative comment! Really enjoyed reading through this! I learned a lot, thank you! And big blessings to your Uncle Winfred and your family!
@@CourtneyCoulston United States troops arrived in New Zealand 3 years in to World War II. They had been sent to protect the country and wider Pacific from the Japanese.
The US Army and Marine Corps was in both Australia and New Zealand to protect against the threat Japan posed in the region. Both branches operated airplanes and the two countries made for great places to launch aerial operations from.
My dad served in the Marine Corps. He watched part of this with me and all he said was that we would mostly win because our military has focused on being able to respond globally for 100 years while no one else has. So everyone else would be struggling to build the tech needed to do what the U.S. has been doing for a lifetime.
Courtney, you need to spend a little time admiring one of your natives from New Zealand. Charlisse Leger-Walker has taken the PAC-12 Women's Basketball Conference by storm. She plays for Washington State University. She not only made the All Conference team she is the consensus Freshman of the year in the PAC-12. Washington State has been a doormat for years in the conference. This year she has turned them into a winning program and they are in the NCAA playoffs for the first time in decades. Her older sister plays alongside her at Washington State.
@@runrafarunthebestintheworld yes that is true and that is how they make money keep us in wars and the money keeps rolling in had I known what I do now I may have given more thought before joining the military but I love my country and still to this day I would fight for it or die for it.
Or you can look at like we're the Modern day Roman Empire. They ruled by Superior Tech Training & Tactics the only Actual Professional Army at the time. & In ww2 the US had a 10+ Million man Military our Population has 🚀 since then.
Americans also have a giggle every time anyone mentions foreign troops in US soil, since there are more guns here than people. Our military would not be their biggest problem, it would be Bubba with his gun safe full of Glocks, ARs, shotguns and ammo.
Gorilla warfare like you never seen before. Supressors, Scopes, Cooling Kits, we got all that. And lets not even talk about the crazy illegal stuff that we "don't have"
Yeah. I'm sure Bubba and his glocks will do wonders against foreign soldiers back in the 80s. In the modern world, we have satellite guided drones so accurate that we can give a mosquito a rectal exam with a ballistic missile.
I've noticed you like a lot of Infographics videos and they did an awesome one on the largest naval battle in history called the battle of Leyte Gulf. It was towards the end of WW2 between the US and Japan and its definitely worth the watch if you have time.
He did. He mentioned quite a few times how they aren’t equipped to effectively leave their own borders via naval or air transportation so the only ground offensive would be in the Middle East, which the US would eventually lose, but by that point we could rely on blocking trade routes and keeping the oil plants shut down with the navy, which no one else could really even bother with. And either way, this video isn’t fact that the US would “win” v the world, it’s just a hypothetical that’s fun to think about.
@@i_almighty8250 Yeah, the win conditions are different. Keep in mind, even in this scenario where America "wins", no one actually wins. It cripples the global economy.
A few comments: 1) It wouldn't be difficult for the world's major powers to reconfigure tankers and cargo ships into helicopter/F-35B/Harrier carriers. Britain did this very thing in the leadup to the Falklands War and it was quite effective. The US would therefor target major shipyards early in the conflict. 2) The Global Coalition would use commercial planes and ships to send hundreds of thousands of troops to the Canada and Central America, adding to local forces and threatening a ground invasion of the US mainland. 3) The Coalition would doubtless block the Panama Canal, reducing the ability of the US to move cargo and warships between the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. 4) The US would doubtless kick British forces out of the huge naval and air base on Diego Garcia, giving them the perfect spot to base bombers and ships to control the entire Indian Ocean. 5) At least three countries (US, China, Russia) have been working on lasers to blind satellites, making it more difficult to complete the kill chain and transmit orders.
USA also enjoys a GEOGRAPHICAL advantage, that they are FAR from every major worlds power and separated by SEA, if they were connected by land, EU🇪🇺 could have made them loose
Not likely as our air force is the largest in the world and is calculated in itself where our navy is the second largest airforce. Combine the two and it would be overwhelming for any power on the planet.
The south Pacific up the island chain from Australia. New Zealand Malaysia the Philippines was Japan's source of oil during the war. Their Navy was split . The southern forces had fuel oil the home forces had ammunition and repair parts. Towards the end of hostilities Yamato sailed from Japan with full magazines but only enough fuel to reach Okinawa . Oil is a key objective in current warfare. Either access or denying access
@@konather8065 yea but USSR wasn’t even strong enough before to take down USA but it could’ve damaged it tho so imagine now? Wouldn’t stand a chance against the USA
Technological edge can be explained by iraqi tank losses and zero American tank losses. They could fire pinpoint accurately over a mile out of the Iraqi tanks firing range, the tech difference made it like shooting fish in a barrel.
@@BlackEgypt its definetly not divided on any race, religion or belief. It is the people vs the establishment. Free speech vs censorship. It has literally ripped apart families with the political divide. It is only going to get worse from here. So in her video she could actually make a prediction who will win and in 5 years come back to see who is standing hahaha It is literally us vs us lol
Have you read Sun Tzu's Art of War? It's a Classic, from 500 B.C. China, and no one has written anything better since. And the sorts of things that go into doing War well can also help in other areas of life, like the world of business. Anyways, I enjoyed the video. Thanks again.
I can see possibly one major flaw in this scenario. It assumes that all sides will adhere to a non-nuclear pact. Even the so-called conventional warfare of World War 2 ended with a nuclear resolution.
If public libraries weren't already a thing and people tried to introduce it in the modern day, a weird amount of people would likely call it a socialist plot. We already have aspects of socialism deeply integrated into our society whether or not you're comfortable with that idea. No one needs to "bring it here", the revelant discussion is "how much".
I as an American know that we are by no means perfect, but we always try to be better... Knowing the history of the world, is there a nation that you would feel better with the military power of America? Is there a country we could give all our strength to, and you would sleep better? I am biased but after learning just some of the worlds history, I am glad its not another nation, and am proud of what we have not done. I think we get measured by the mistakes we have made, but when you are capable of world ending mistakes maybe we should be measured by the mistakes we have not made, the abuses of power we are capable but not guilty of.
This was an interesting scenario, NZ Girl, although there would be other possibilities. Hard to believe the Air Force wouldn't be involved a good deal more. As I mentioned in a reply to one of our Russian friends here, we no doubt have an equal, or superior version of any weapons of theirs, hypersonic or what-have-you. Even we Americans have only a rough idea of what has NOT been revealed to the world, and that's being generous. In short, the world should be glad we are who were are, if you will.
The real challenge would be getting all those countries to agree with each other (An India/China team up would be unlikely considering how much they hate each other), especially vs the US who would be able to mobilize a large Military from one central point
Just remember , the Gotenburg class submarine of Sweden has sunken the US aircraft carrier 3 times on 3 separate occasions in mock drills practice with the US . So,..... don't underestimate your opponent since its a war .
The crazy thing is our fighter jets are able to take multiple foreign jets without ever being shot at. They are hard to detect and can track many targets at once. They have the ability to take out other jets from such a far distance that they never stand a chance. The Abrahams tanks are the same. They can and have out maneuver and out gun most other tanks in a man vs 1 scenario. There has only been one of them lost in combat ever. I required someone literally running behind it and firing and RPG up the exhaust pipe.
as an American and a vet. i have always been so proud of our citizens , who have always been much more willing to spend dollars instead of blood. we want All our men and women to come home.
I doubt you will see this because it's been a little while since this was posted but Japan was about 3 or for battles from invading Australia. They had the plans somewhat worked out but us naval actions and the allied forces on Papua new Guinea turned them back. Japan held a huge amount of land and in the grand scheme of things were kinda close to new Zealand and could have gotten very close very quickly.
The tech is one thing , knowing how to use it is much more important. The US spends lots of time training and training against the oppisition equipment. Also remember the US tries to minimize collateral damage and civillian death. Just think about what would happen if that wasn't needed.
Lady, do you want to know about the super technologies of the USA? I'll tell you. 1. Destroyer Zumwalt - recognized as a failed project. Initially, it was planned to build 32, then the number was reduced to 29. In the end, they built 3 and still didn’t know why they were built in the first place - they don’t know how to fight. They were written off for storage - in the trash. 2. The ships of the "Freedom" project, in reality, the characteristics of the ships would be half less than on paper - a complete failure. 3. Hypersonic missiles are a complete failure. 4. F-35 aircraft - more than 700 problem points on the aircraft are officially recognized. Of these, more than 50 are critically dangerous for the pilot - a complete failure. 5. F-22 aircraft. The only REAL fight is against the Chinese balloon. The ball was shot down ONLY on the 3rd attempt with an expensive rocket. The first 2 missiles flew away to nowhere. Efficiency - 30%. This is a failure. That is why neither the F-35 nor the F-22 are transferred to Ukraine. 6. The Abrams reputation can no longer be saved. Proven in Ukraine. Demonstrated at an exhibition of military trophies in Russia. 7. The reputation of the Javellin can no longer be saved. Proven in Ukraine. Demonstrated at an exhibition of military trophies in Russia. 8. The reputation of "Petriot" can no longer be saved. Proven in Ukraine. 9. A Russian plane peed on the Reaper (an expensive American drone). The Reaper drowned himself in shame. And this is just the beginning...
When I watch these videos I can't help but think about how countries would fight a modern war without satellites. The space weapon aspect would be huge. The US government has a black budget of over 50 billion dollars a year they are spending on something....just saying
![[#2024MAMA] G-DRAGON - 무제(Untitled, 2014)+POWER+HOME SWEET HOME+뱅뱅뱅+FANTASTIC BABY | Mnet 241123 방송](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Ox29z5Nf1Uk/mqdefault.jpg)
Lotta people forget about the
Coast Guard! You have a whole other Navy protecting your borders!
Each State is also allowed its own naval force. Like the National Guard, it has the same everything as the main military. Although, I think only Texas actually uses this and I don't know if it still does.
@@midgetydeath True. The Colorado Navy is one of the strongest in the world. Colorado has never, and will never, be invaded from the seas.
It's True Ohio has a Naval Militia ya know incase Canada does something on Lake Erie I guess xD.
Coast guard is actually pretty scary especially in states that focus on import and international trade like Florida and California. They pack pretty fucking heavy but their experience is lacking in actual combat
The Coast Guard was originally a part of the Navy.
The ships America has in its museums would be the worlds second most powerful navy.
Only if they were retired in full working order. But they're not - decommissioned ships are almost useless for warfare as they've been stripped of weapons, ammunition, electronics, communications, etc.
But I do get your point, that even our recently retired naval vessels would make a formidable force.
i slept on one
i slept with one
Yeah, they have used it to painted the whole world crimson with it for hundreds of years. Is it something to be proud of? Is murdering or kidnapping your way across the world a point of pride?
@@MrCarlBackhausen Yes, sort-of.
When your navy has the second largest Air Force
lmao insane eh
When your cost guard is one of the largest navies in the world
That count is only airplanes, if you count helicopters the U.S. Army comes in at #3.
We not gonna talk about how the Coast Guard ranks #12 out of the world’s navies?
Your fleet can have any size of air force. But if it cannot approach the target closer than 1000 km because of the Russian hypersonic missiles of the Zircon and Dagger type (speed 9 M or 10739.3 km / h), this fleet turns into floating scrap metal along with its air force.
By the way, a russian S 500 Prometheus is capable of intercepting hypersonic missiles of this class because the speed of his anti-missile is 8 km / s. And the A-235 Nudol complex is capable of intercepting Minuteman3 even during takeoff over US territory ruclips.net/video/Z3jW_AGsNvo/видео.html
We just want Australia and New Zealand. We like the filming locations. 😅
I like the people more over
It's crazy to think the US did all the damage without using its Air Force, which was kept home to protect the homeland just in case Canada and Mexico had any crazy ideas.
The video never said the US Air Force wasn't involved in the scenario. Quite the opposite in fact. There would still be some units that would never leave the US such as the Air National Guard. Some States still have their own official Militias although it rarely gets discussed.
@@Seastallion The videos states that the US used its Navy/Marine aircraft launched from aircraft carriers.
B-2 bombers are USAF.
@@Seastallion National Guard forces can be federalized during war, though. Only if Congress declares war. So, where what units will be and in what numbers has nothing to do with whether they're National or Federal.
@@midgetydeath
In terms of National Guard, sure. State ran militaries are another matter entirely. The Federal government literally has NO jurisdiction over them, at least unless the State agreed to it. There are in fact 22 States, plus Puerto Rico, with active Defense Forces that are solely under the authority of the State Governor.
I'm not an American but I love USA. not because of their power, actually because of their culture, value and people. Just believe it or not, American people are the friendliest people in average. Some people tend to hate USA without no valid reason. Guess what..haters gonna hate!
Thanks Kellan, we really do try, for the most part. Our government has evolved into something that the founding fathers would never have countenanced, and does things that are not the will of the people. I think that this is where 'The great reset' needs to begin. Things will change, the choice of how is theirs to make.
Appreciate you.
🇺🇲🇺🇲🇺🇲🇺🇲🇺🇲🇺🇲🇺🇲
Except McDonald's, what culture does USA have?😂😂
Thank you sir, I'm among those that would befriend and help you
As an American, I just enjoy the fact that this hypothetical wouldn't even be worth discussing if it were any other country vs. the rest of the world.
@WallaWoo Wee - by you and which "army,? LOL
@WallaWoo Wee
Americans have more weaponry than both countries combined -- and more to spare.
@WallaWoo Wee - Talk to thehand. Talk to your hand. I'm sure you're ... intimately ... acquainted with it.
Its bcs usa is one of most agresive country
@WallaWoo Wee As entertaining as your squabble was becoming, I shall clarify. The Vietnam War was a political defeat for the United States. Thousands of Americans died in a war they did not want to fight. But this hides an important message. Most Americans did not want to be there any more than the Vietnamese wanted them to. The US military regularly inflicted defeats and high casualties on the Vietcong. Even the Guerilla tactics became less effective when Americans started burning forests and employing Agent Orange. While America suffered humiliation on the world stage and politicians began losing their jobs over their support of it, America was no less powerful after the conflict, whereas Vietnam was set back decades. America was in Vietnam to "Prevent the Spread of Communism", with no clear way of doing that. Had America chosen to engage North Vietnam and even China do accomplish that goal, chances are they would have been able to. Ignorance around the Vietnam War goes both ways. Americans often deny they lost, yet most people ignore the fact that no country could have done a whole lot better. Guerilla warfare is difficult to fight short of war crimes. America is best equipped to take on and destroy armies, infrastructure, and destroying regimes. But their democratic nature handicaps them from occupying and controlling captured territory. That is Europe's area of expertise, and Vietnam was actually a result of European Imperialism more than American aggression.
11:15 I wanted to point out he's correctly using the word "littoral" to designate coastal (or shore). He didn't use the word "literal".
He misplaced the accent, but it was obvious by the context.
You are literally correct.
You already should know this quote from your fiancé/boyfriend : "There is no better friend... and no worse enemy than a United States Marine." and there is not a finer fighting organization in the world." - General Douglas MacArthur, US Army, outskirts of Seoul, 21 September 1950.
A marine.🤣🤣🤣🤣
Good one.
Yet, N Korea stands as a sovereign nation, Vietnam is doing well, we gained nothing in Afghanistan, after two decades, etc....
The United States proved during World War 2 that it could out produce anyone AND everyone when it comes to the war effort. Not to mention we've got graveyards full of aircraft and ships that are ready to go with just a short amount of time to retrofit them and fix any nominal damage done to them while in storage. We're twenty to thirty years ahead of everyone else as far as technology goes and our individual soldiers are by far the best equipped.
I always hear horror stories about countries that can't even provide proper weapons and equipment for all of their soldiers, or provide enough food and nutrition. Not to mention most countries don't have the experience in war that America has, who has been at war for most of it's history in one fashion or another.
And when it comes to the actual war, the fighting, America's ability to reach out and touch someone is unrivalled. The shock and awe that we've adopted as a battle plan would shake a lot of people to the core. Most the world's populace will not want to go to war with us - much less stay in a war with us when we are wrecking their militaries and destroying infrastructure and government/military targets. There will definitley be a psychological aspect to the war that shouldn't be underestimated.
Amen 🤣🤣🤣
Forget other countries, America’s internal problems pose the biggest threat.
Specifically democrats 😢
"I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic"
And the military did not defend the Constitution
Serious question..Other than the kickbacks/$$ laundering of "It's better to fight Them(who ever the Them of convenience is at the time)..Has anyone stopped to wonder if the Establishment Pollies/Uni-Party want our troops to Stay over there ,to make sure They aren't HERE?.."Enemies foreign and DOMESTIC"...I would hazard to say the most dangerous "enemies" are not foreign..
@@pinstripe4254 .." our capital was attacked by “protestors”..One of the things I personally found interesting " is that all the Democrat side already had the same speeches/talking points about it ,and the "remedies" for it to "not happen again"as if they were reading from a script..Odd question,and you don't need to reply,Have you ever heard of the Reichstag Fire? It's worth looking into..Remember for those in Power to Keep that Power,or Gain More ,there ALWAYS needs to be an "OTHER"..Race/Gender/Left/Right...History doesn't always repeat,but it Does Often Rhyme...Just say'n.
www.smithsonianmag.com/history/true-story-reichstag-fire-and-nazis-rise-power-180962240/
I'm a proud American who believes in having an extremely strong military. That said, the vast majority of Americans hate war on a fundamental level. We are a peaceful people who love to help our neighbors & lift up others. I honestly don't see in my life time, the American people EVER being okay with this. Hell, the vast majority of us hate that every new President seems to get us into some kind of conflict.
On a different note, great reaction, keep on growing.
America has never won a war on their own. Your military isnt good its just big.
@@samjones-xg4go and that's why we are the sole superpower?
@@humbunger9379 you're not but okay and the only reason you think you are is because you spend billions of dollars on the military instead of actually helping your people
@Urusovite during WW2 the American war machine was incredible but that was in WW2 not now
The majority of your people are against war. Your people are week and your military is weak
The world: America is a joke lol
The world in this hypothetical scenario: We love Americans, we love their people
I mean.. that sums up a lot of problems. Everyone hates America until there is a terrorist organization or something in their country and most of the time they try to get America to help.
@@reasonableq419 well they are the 'world police'
LMAO exactly.
Not only that, but we give the world all our inventions. We give the world the internet, movies, music, RUclips, Google, Instagram, Facebook, Twitter, Apple, Microsoft, Netflix, Nike, UFC, Disney, Marvel, etc. Basically EVERYTHING lol All entertainment, social media, culture, and technology.
They couldn't live without us and our technology/inventions. Couldn't go ONE day without these things.
Yet we're "a joke" and/or they all "hate" us 😂
@@reasonableq419 no they still hate America, because most of the time those terrorist organizations came there because of the US in the first place.
Honestly this is America taking it really easy on everyone.
59 Cruise missiles one day, and the MOAB the next... so easy, that everyone’s already forgot.🐸☕️
Are you actually dumb enough to think the USA can feasibly take on the whole planet? Are you even aware of what every other nation has?
@@hainleysimpson1507 just watched a whole video about it, soooo… yeah
@@hainleysimpson1507 More like what every nation _doesn't_ have. No high-tech deep water navy, for one. You don't have that, you don't defeat the US.
Not to mention that in the event of a ground invasion onto American soil, that most Americans own guns. I personally own many including AR 15's, Glock 10mm, Mossberg 12 gauge shotgun with thousands of rounds of ammo as well as 3 1/2 years worth of food rations.
The United States spends twice as much on its military than the rest of the world combined.... in an all out fight with no rules of engagement I'd put my money on the United States
That's the thing. The US makes rules for war, that pretty much only they follow
Money isnt all. They would be spread out to thin around the world.
You sir, are wrong. The european part of NATO combined already reaches half, china is near to half. Just combining those would already be just about equal
@@eruiluvatar7155 Just our Navy could take on and defeat the rest of the world
@@Echo4Sierra4160 Nope. Not even close
While this channels assessments aren't always the best, they do make some decently valid points.
This was actually one of the better ones they did. Because this is almost exactly what would likely happen. As in these would be the tactics they would take, and their assessment of what some countries would do (the Gulf countries, and especially Japan) is probably correct as well. The United States would destroy their infrastructure and try to starve them out.... If they were effective at doing this early on, it would "win". But that depends on a lot of factors, with a lot of initial American successes.
I feel like even if you don't agree america could do it, you have to admit that america would be the only country fit for the job to begin with
Was waiting for this one
I fear this lady is becoming an expert on military operations and will soon rule over all of us.
If that happens, I would not hesitate to invade her ports with Seamen!
She can rule me anytime!
Lol, NZUSA, got a nice ring to it
She is to sweet of a person to ever want to rule the world
No 1 Air Force:Us Air Force
No 2 Air Force: Us Navy
No 3 Air Force: Us land forces
Thank you for reacting to this... I've requested it and I know others have as well, so again thank you for listening to your viewers! I hope your channel explodes in 2021! Oh and Marines were in NZ in WW2 in an effort to roll back a Japanese invasion!
You're welcome! Thank you for your well wishes! Ahhh okay I see, that makes sense! Thanks for sharing that😊
@@CourtneyCoulston thank you for being you!
In reality, in an all out war, it would go nuclear rather quickly and there wouldn't be a winner - and there would no longer be a USA or rest of the world. The relative size of air-forces, navies, and armed citizenry are just quaint tangential details.
Just one thing folks, I'm a US citizen and I've been watching our military trend toward digital than good old manual. This makes the US military insanely vulnerable to hackers from a variety of nations governments that, may I remind you, hate our guts. Combine forces long enough to shut us down and they wouldn't have to send a single pair of boots to defeat us. First, hit the utilities, most of the US would be brought to its knees in a matter of hours, not even days or weeks. Just to remind folks, many companies have found countless backdoors created in utilities computer systems that would enable a hacker to shut them down, even if a fraction of a percent of the world hackers worked to end us, we'd be done before a single F-35 or F/A-18 could take off. US military projection is second to none, but our reliance on digitalization of everything except our rifles, will be the end of us in a world vs USA. Just a thought. Stay safe, stay alert, stay alive.
To quote admiral yamamoto "I fear we have awaken a sleeping giant and filled him with a terrible resolve" and since then the navy has only gotten bigger and stronger
Which doesn't mean shit since most nations with a salt water coast has babies as well. Many nations are just as populated and rich as the US. The US doesn't have the biggest army and India and China alone would be enough they have equipment just as good as what the US has more farmland and they haven't made every other nation their enemy in this scenario.
@@hainleysimpson1507 🤣🤣🤣 oh boy. Misguided and ignorant...
@@hainleysimpson1507 were you even listening? They said the US Submarines are 20 years ahead of China and 10 years ahead of Russia and India had the same problems as China, for even Japan boasts a better and larger submarine force then that. The only place the US doesn't reign supreme is ground forces which it doesn't really need for it has good relations with everybody in the Americas and even if it didn't it boasts better ground forces and coastguard than Brazil, Canada, and Argentina combined and Argentina and Brazil hat each other so that would never happen. Even without the best ground forces it still has the second best and that's enough if you reign supreme in the Air and Oceans which the US does. And it did make every other country its enemy in this scenario but because of lack of naval power those countries didn't do much other than economical help which still does A LOT.
I am a former member of the US Air Force. While stationed in Europe we knew we were not much more than a speed bump to slow the enemy's advances on the US Bases in their nations.
Yes, but in this scenario the US wouldn't be babysitting Europe but protecting it's own territory.
James and the USA would be divided up among the nations of the world. Doesn't matter how many weapons you have you are going to lose due to sheer numbers and the amount of geniuses leaders and warriors just as bright as any leader or scientist the US has the US doesn't even have the best weapons or training. The US has nothing that would make them a world threat in an upfront fight. Most big nations have nukes and bombs and satellites and hackers. The USA has no chance of winning but can make everyone else not win, but that's risky the dirtier the US fights the nastier everyone else gets.
@@hainleysimpson1507 That "nastiness" has a cap in terms of the scenario; no nukes allowed. Not to mention, the level of nastiness implied by the entire world fighting against the US would give it the motivation needed to remain in existence.
"Dividing" would be difficult if the US consolidates most of its power behind its borders, shielded by thousands of miles of open water. The land force outside of the US would only need to utterly destroy the Middle East's oil infrastructure.
The hackers you speak of would be countered by hackers in the US; look at how many individual RUclipsrs are able to pinpoint the location of Indian call centers, and in some cases shut them down. That's without the resources of the US government. Now imagine the desperation and change in US policy regarding this scenario. Individuals would be sanctioned to do this on a large scale, and what couldn't be handled by hackers, _could_ be handled by saturation bombing or precision strikes.
The US has the third largest population, and 4th largest land area. That land rests between two massive oceans. It also holds almost every type of biome; huge rivers, many mountain chains of varying consistency, dense forests, hot deserts as well as frigid regions. It also holds not only an incredibly large and advanced, but highly redundant infrastructure. Massive cities, and even larger suburbs. It would be a nightmare for the world to even try....
The Fulda Gap, for example.
@@davidgoldstein1526 Precisely!
Great video Courtney just like all the others. One thing he didn't have in there was the 10's of millions that are armed in the US as well. In some cases better armed then foreign countries.
Don’t forget a possible civil war at the same time. I know it’s not in the scenario in the video, but consider what would happen.
This doesn’t take into account the hundreds of outdated ships the US keeps in their mothball fleet that would be reactivated and back in the fight within 6 months including old carriers that would make great helicopter carriers and troop carriers.
It would be like that scene in the movie battle ship ripping dust covers off opening old hangers plus if the world came at us we would definitely unveil the top secret weapons I mean in 2022 they showed to our Civilian population that they put laser weapons on the ss.Georgia
The range of Japan's F-15's is pretty accurate. They can travel further but their combat capability is about 750 miles from base otherwise they won't have the fuel to fight and return to base. This is pretty easy information to know because the things that would allow them to extend that distance are impossible to hide. Things like large mid-air refueling planes, and air bases can't really be hidden, so we know what they're capable of. Plus the USA has 22 military installations in Japan.
Honestly, South Korea, Japan, and Germany should be considered US territory at the beginning of a war because of how many autonomous facilities we have in each country. Germany holds the largest concentration of American military forces outside of the USA, and that's including Afghanistan and Iraq.
The thing you're talking about with Japan not being allowed to have much of a military is true. The same is true of Germany. After WW1 we put a bunch of rules in place that would allow them to still have a military to defend themselves and it didn't turn out so well so when WW2 was over we said fuck it and just put a ton of bases in Germany and Japan and basically said, "You're not allowed a military. Your enemies are now our enemies and we will defend you at our own expense." No one ever thanks us for it, either.
Japan's Defense forces are pretty robust and are technologically superior to many regional competitors. And they have been investing in building up a marine force that would be able to fight away from the Japanese homeland. But they still lack the naval and air transport capabilities to be a serious threat. Their primary concerns are potential territorial disputes with China and Russia.
The fact that the United States Versus the World is even a debatable topic is a scary thought in itself.
Re Japan until just recently (2015) they had no military. They were, and still are, a "protected" nation. The U.S. provides most of their defensive needs and Japan is still not supposed to have any offensive troops.
Check out the battle of Midway.
I dont think they take into account how fast militarys can ramp up production in war when its their sole effort, he acts as if america use their full force in every fight and the world dont do anything while america act
Okay, but U.S. would ramp up their already massive production too, so what's your point?
@@jameshunt9208 his point is extremely valid. WWII began in 1939. We did not enter the war until two years later.
One major reason was our need to ramp up for the war. Another reason was american distaste for war, which would only increase, once US soil was being attacked.
@@davidgoldstein1526 distaste for war wouldn't increase if American soil was attacked. You are nuts if you think Americans would pull away with US soil being attacked.
@@davidgoldstein1526 You think people would quit.
During WW2 the Japanese were looking at New Zeeland and Australia as possible land conquests. The big fight over the Solomon island chain was the U.S. keeping the Japanese from expanding further in that direction.
Love watching you. Never realized how much people from other nations were interested in the US
Sweetie, you missed the point. Nobody wins, not even the U.S.
how
The US wins but at a cost but winners nonetheless...
@@eateroftoast4665 A Pyrrhic victory at best. Granted we do make 1/3 of the World's food, so we have that going for us.
@@kingdra-winston3500 We would spend billions to wage this war, but since most of the world's infrastructure collapsed with the oil starvation, none of the losers could pay reparations. Millions of gallons of oil would be burned, and we'd have nothing but destroyed machinery to show for it. And within months, the US would have to devote even MORE money to suppress local rebellions across the globe. The US would bankrupt itself trying to hold on to its conquests and new political parties opposed to the global stranglehold would gain power.
@@Metrion77 billions? You're talking about a war that would cost trillions of dollars.
Courtney - You need to come to United States, TEXAS I think, you'll do well and you'll be safe.
Hi Jeff! Yes I wanna come to Texas sooo bad!!
@@CourtneyCoulston We would love to have you here.
@@CourtneyCoulston come to Houston
@@CourtneyCoulston if you go to Texas you have to go to Drive Tanks at the Ox Ranch.... Yes we can own functional tanks and artillery privately here as well as guns if you're willing to pay for the permit. 😈
Oh Yes! Y'all come on down to Texas and see a Texas Aggie game.
Before we start patting ourselves on the back for winning this scenario, remember that the major players have nukes, meaning this war game scenario would never play out like this
There is no winner in a nuclear war-
Nukes would fly early in the conflict and once the first one flies, all the rest follow. The earth becomes a scorched, lifeless, radioactive hellscape.
ahhh D;
And just for good measure, do some research on the AFRL and DARPA when you have time. The tech is crazy! Of course, it’s a little outdated due to classification, but it will give you an idea.
It's one thing to have these weapons but someone has to operate them. God bless our military.
Just like in the movie "War Games" the only winning move is.....Not To Play....great movie from the 80s.
If you haven't reacted to Dimash Kudaibergen yet,you wont be disappointed. All who see him are completely blown away,trust me.
I am a USAF (ret). Do you have a Sister ? I won’t disrespect your American husband. I have been in three wars in the Middle East. I had 11 years in when the Gulf Wars started. Even I was shocked at how fast we moved troops and supplies. We had 750,000 troops and so much equipment. Most people don’t know that when the USA goes to war, we simply take over 40% of private Aircraft (Delta, etc.) so within 3 days we had so many soldiers in country it was shocking.
The best thing about Courtney compared to other reactors is how much she thinks about what she saw and comes to an articulate conclusion, whereas most reactors just react in the moment without trying to give something more cohesive.
Nice video!
my thoughts before watching is that everybody loses including the US.
Dont forget the A10 Warthogs I mean their close support roles will even lessen the casualties of US ground troops even more
This doesn't even cover the est. 394 million weapons owned by American civilians.
American militias alone could defeat Canada and Mexico.
That would just be for homeland defense though, a single group of Chinese carriers armed with ICMBs would render our 394 million weapons obsolete, that number is only effective against attacking infantry
@@gravytube4099
People own private plans and anti-plane. Love America.
10-25 years behind the U.S. in sub technology. A lot of huge changes have happened in the past 10 years!
We were down there, to keep the Japanese from going there, as you guys down there were up fighting them much further north, plus they’d cycle our guys to there and Australia for R&R at times.
Just dementia
Now that the world knows what the Suez Canal is, Being able to cut it off would have massive impacts on the world. One stuck ship made a mess, imagine if it was intentional.
Although the narration was scholarly it cannot take into account the vagaries inherent during war. The biggest problem with this conclusion is that US victory would have to come by water and air, and not by ground forces, which the World would easily overwhelm the US with. A US victory would be based on a naval and air stranglehold on shipping lanes which should eventually destroy World economies.
As a veteran US Marine who saw combat during the Vietnam War (mostly in a rifle platoon) I quickly discovered how much the.people of a country can endure. The Vietnamese absorbed US air and naval power, and made this a ground war, that they won.
So, before we say that the US can beat the World, let’s not forget that the US lost to the tiny nation of Vietnam. We had the power to destroy the entire island, but the US people were against the war. Ironically, we lost the war in Vietnam back in the states.
The absolute key to a US victory against the world would only come from the people being fully behind the action, as they were in WWII. Because of this the US would be fighting against each other at home (we are such a divided nation that cannot agree on anything, and are about to impeach again our Commander-in-Chief) the fight would be lost at home. All the World has to do is wait for us to implode...
@@beautifulbliss5883 : Stalin said something very similar. Or, was it Lenin? Anyway, they were certain that the greed created by the hated capitalism would cause so much infighting that America would destroy itself from within.
When a nation is suffering through a pandemic, and has to turn to Socialist principles by demanding that the “state” bail them out (which is exactly what the stimulus checks were for); then go into a trillions of dollar national debt; and instead of working tirelessly to solve our problems, the legislative branch goes against the will of over 70 million people and spend their time impeaching their chosen leader; and, when the new power structure runs on socialist principles and angers even further those millions who supported their disgraced leader that they impeached....well, you can see that Lenin and Stalin and lets throw in Karl Marx...had a valid point.
I hope you realize we didn't lose in Vietnam. We decided to with draw as it was costing us money for zero gain. Literally Vietnam has nothing of value to the USA. They had 3 million casualties we had 58 thousand, it was not even close in terms of actual combat. Had the USA actually invaded we would've conquered them in a few months. How is it I know this as a civilian who was borne after Vietnam ended but you don't?
Thank you for your service. I'm a vet too. US Army 1/4 CAV Scouts (LRRP), 1st INF DIV. I was in Panama. I think that in this hypothetical video, the support of the people on each side is a given.
I'm not sure how you count Vietnam as a loss. North Vietnam lost over one million troops. We lost just over 47,000. And that was while playing defence. We didn't even cross over into the North with our troops.
I think it was 47000. Not 58000. I could be wrong. But yeah either way we totally spanked the hell out of the North Vietnamese period. not quite sure what that guy is talking about
Even in World War II, they waited for the USSR to bring the Germans to their knees.USSR would defeat Germany and Italy on its own in another year because it had already caused them 95 percent of all casualties. As a result, the USSR had almost 100 times more casualties than the United States. The US would rather wait with the attacks than just have to sacrifice so many people because with a little military equipment they would have to sacrifice more soldiers, in a similar way as the USSR. There were also mass killings of civilians in the USSR, which would have spared the United States because of the distance, and racial theories against the Slavs.
@nope nope 24 million citizens of the USSR died in World War II.
@nope nope This means that the power of the United States is overestimated, because it has not yet been proven how it behaves in a fight where it should suffer huge casualties, even ten times percent higher than in the civil war. On the Western Front where the Germans fought with a much smaller number of soldiers as on the Eastern Front,who preferred to surrender to the Americans because they were afraid of falling into the hands of the Red Army.Because of the crimes they had committed on their territory. And everyone at the top of the military knows that, and they wouldn't even think of such a thing with China alone. China has a proportionately larger economy and a more disciplined larger population in a large national charge especially in these times when their standard has risen as high as it was in the US 30 years ago. On the one hand, the oceans protect it, but on the other hand, they prevent it from attacking with as much force as it would need. And there are many other factors.
Yes, because it's that simple.
*laughs in vietnamese*
Vietnam had the home advantage. America is horrible with invasions
@@celticlord88 well I mean didnt the americans win more battles? I'm not good at history but I'm pretty sure if the US wanted it probably couldve won but there was a lot of things going on with people pressuring the army to get the fuck outta there
@@celticlord88 the country being invaded always has the home advantage.
@@cookiesnugglez7318 you mean, the same way we, and the Russians, successfully waged war in Afghanistan?
My uncle Winfred was a Marine in World War II. They left New Zealand for their first battle at Tarawa. Australia and New Zealand were forward supply and staging areas against the Japanese, as England was in Europe. That's not because we all spoke English, it's because the enemy had everything else. The need for supply and staging areas was not addressed in this video except for a little bit about Guam. You can't launch everything from New York and California; your supplies begin there, but you need someplace close to the Front to actually operate from: you can't fly all the way back to California every time the plane needs to be gassed up and you need to have food, ammunition, and medical supplies a couple of days away instead of a couple of months away. Both Australia and New Zealand had much of their forces in Europe/North Africa. The Americans stationed there defended them from the Japanese.
Hi Claude!! Thank you for this super informative comment! Really enjoyed reading through this! I learned a lot, thank you! And big blessings to your Uncle Winfred and your family!
Hey! I recommended this one!
Yayyy great recommendation Brian!!!
@@CourtneyCoulston United States troops arrived in New Zealand 3 years in to World War II. They had been sent to protect the country and wider Pacific from the Japanese.
The US Army and Marine Corps was in both Australia and New Zealand to protect against the threat Japan posed in the region. Both branches operated airplanes and the two countries made for great places to launch aerial operations from.
ahhh okay that definitely makes sense! Thanks for explaining that!
My dad served in the Marine Corps. He watched part of this with me and all he said was that we would mostly win because our military has focused on being able to respond globally for 100 years while no one else has. So everyone else would be struggling to build the tech needed to do what the U.S. has been doing for a lifetime.
What would he do if a civil war broke out at the same time as a world war?
@@taoist32 a civil war happening at the same time the United States was being attacked would NEVER happen.
Ooh-fucking-RAH! Semper fi to your old man!
Courtney, you need to spend a little time admiring one of your natives from New Zealand. Charlisse Leger-Walker has taken the PAC-12 Women's Basketball Conference by storm. She plays for Washington State University. She not only made the All Conference team she is the consensus Freshman of the year in the PAC-12. Washington State has been a doormat for years in the conference. This year she has turned them into a winning program and they are in the NCAA playoffs for the first time in decades. Her older sister plays alongside her at Washington State.
Our incredible military strength is crucial for keeping world peace
Yet we are in illegal wars still...
@@runrafarunthebestintheworld yes that is true and that is how they make money keep us in wars and the money keeps rolling in had I known what I do now I may have given more thought before joining the military but I love my country and still to this day I would fight for it or die for it.
war not win by equipments... but by the perosn who is fighting with them
Or you can look at like we're the Modern day Roman Empire. They ruled by Superior Tech Training & Tactics the only Actual Professional Army at the time. & In ww2 the US had a 10+ Million man Military our Population has 🚀 since then.
Only comparison i see between Roman Empire and USA is that both eventually collapse under their own perceived superiority.
@@Pajdas610 YEP ur exactly right. There's no one left to fight but ourselves but we haven't collapsed yet... just on the verge
"A single sunk oil tanker..." We just had a container ship not sink but run aground and that shut up the canal for 3 or 4 whole days...!
Americans also have a giggle every time anyone mentions foreign troops in US soil, since there are more guns here than people. Our military would not be their biggest problem, it would be Bubba with his gun safe full of Glocks, ARs, shotguns and ammo.
Gorilla warfare like you never seen before. Supressors, Scopes, Cooling Kits, we got all that. And lets not even talk about the crazy illegal stuff that we "don't have"
@@K-TRAIN_MUSIC not to mention two major mountain ranges on both sides of the country.
Yeah. I'm sure Bubba and his glocks will do wonders against foreign soldiers back in the 80s. In the modern world, we have satellite guided drones so accurate that we can give a mosquito a rectal exam with a ballistic missile.
@@Metrion77 So i guess you didn't watch the video. and wtf are you even talking about.
@@Metrion77 I get WHY you are trying to flex, I think you just read everything too fast. Try slowing down mans.
They should make a video like this, but if it were a space war between nations
I've noticed you like a lot of Infographics videos and they did an awesome one on the largest naval battle in history called the battle of Leyte Gulf. It was towards the end of WW2 between the US and Japan and its definitely worth the watch if you have time.
The captain and crew of the USS Johnston are true heroes.
@@patr10t762 As were the other small escort ships. Why no one has ever made a movie of that part of the battle is beyond me.
This guy never mentioned when the rest of the world fighting back lol
Love the reaction btw
He did. They get destroyed.
He did. He mentioned quite a few times how they aren’t equipped to effectively leave their own borders via naval or air transportation so the only ground offensive would be in the Middle East, which the US would eventually lose, but by that point we could rely on blocking trade routes and keeping the oil plants shut down with the navy, which no one else could really even bother with.
And either way, this video isn’t fact that the US would “win” v the world, it’s just a hypothetical that’s fun to think about.
@@BardJusik He made a comparison
USA vs China And Russia,where they win.Now USA vs The World and now they loses,sound legit.
@@i_almighty8250 Yeah, the win conditions are different. Keep in mind, even in this scenario where America "wins", no one actually wins. It cripples the global economy.
@@BardJusik looking at it this yea,you might be right.
A few comments:
1) It wouldn't be difficult for the world's major powers to reconfigure tankers and cargo ships into helicopter/F-35B/Harrier carriers. Britain did this very thing in the leadup to the Falklands War and it was quite effective. The US would therefor target major shipyards early in the conflict.
2) The Global Coalition would use commercial planes and ships to send hundreds of thousands of troops to the Canada and Central America, adding to local forces and threatening a ground invasion of the US mainland.
3) The Coalition would doubtless block the Panama Canal, reducing the ability of the US to move cargo and warships between the Atlantic and Pacific oceans.
4) The US would doubtless kick British forces out of the huge naval and air base on Diego Garcia, giving them the perfect spot to base bombers and ships to control the entire Indian Ocean.
5) At least three countries (US, China, Russia) have been working on lasers to blind satellites, making it more difficult to complete the kill chain and transmit orders.
USA also enjoys a GEOGRAPHICAL advantage, that they are FAR from every major worlds power and separated by SEA, if they were connected by land, EU🇪🇺 could have made them loose
Not likely as our air force is the largest in the world and is calculated in itself where our navy is the second largest airforce. Combine the two and it would be overwhelming for any power on the planet.
Never
The south Pacific up the island chain from Australia. New Zealand Malaysia the Philippines was Japan's source of oil during the war. Their Navy was split . The southern forces had fuel oil the home forces had ammunition and repair parts. Towards the end of hostilities Yamato sailed from Japan with full magazines but only enough fuel to reach Okinawa . Oil is a key objective in current warfare. Either access or denying access
We're so far ahead because of the ufo that crashed in Roswell. Been stealing technology from it ever since. 😂
There have been at least four crashes in the US where debris was gathered. The acorn shaped ufo in Virginia was especially helpful
Exactly. I gotta go fire up the bubbly bong man.
LoL 😅😅
#Truth
We were down there due to the war in the Pacific ocean, plus we were helping Great Britain with Australia.
Forget the world. Vietnam would be enough to win against the us.
We don't fear anything. We defend everyone. Dont mistake our kindness for weakness. We can crush everyone
Do realize the scenario of "the USA against the rest of the world" could never happen.
The fact that you would have to CONSIDER the ENTIRE WORLD just to fight us says alot about how powerful we are win or lose🤷🏾♂️.
soviet union reforms and takes over everything, then it's USA vs USSR 2.0
@@konather8065 yea but USSR wasn’t even strong enough before to take down USA but it could’ve damaged it tho so imagine now? Wouldn’t stand a chance against the USA
Yes we do Barry
@@infamous_richard8732 Neither was US to take down USSR
Technological edge can be explained by iraqi tank losses and zero American tank losses. They could fire pinpoint accurately over a mile out of the Iraqi tanks firing range, the tech difference made it like shooting fish in a barrel.
It’s USA vs USA now
Do a video on that please
Good one. It ain't even black vs white it's just us vs them 🤷🏾♂️😂🤦🏾♂️ Damn
@@BlackEgypt its definetly not divided on any race, religion or belief. It is the people vs the establishment. Free speech vs censorship. It has literally ripped apart families with the political divide. It is only going to get worse from here.
So in her video she could actually make a prediction who will win and in 5 years come back to see who is standing hahaha It is literally us vs us lol
Have you read Sun Tzu's Art of War? It's a Classic, from 500 B.C. China, and no one has written anything better since. And the sorts of things that go into doing War well can also help in other areas of life, like the world of business.
Anyways, I enjoyed the video. Thanks again.
Unfortunately this is why the rest of the world wonders why we don't have universal health care.
I can see possibly one major flaw in this scenario. It assumes that all sides will adhere to a non-nuclear pact. Even the so-called conventional warfare of World War 2 ended with a nuclear resolution.
Game of thrones is more logical than this bs
300 - F35's and 1800 on order... This is why the pubic library charges late fees...
Were 20 years ahead of everyone because of our lack of socialism, so it's weird why everyone wants to bring it here.
If public libraries weren't already a thing and people tried to introduce it in the modern day, a weird amount of people would likely call it a socialist plot. We already have aspects of socialism deeply integrated into our society whether or not you're comfortable with that idea. No one needs to "bring it here", the revelant discussion is "how much".
Having a publicly owned Army force funded by tax is literally a socialist concept.
A capitalist army force would consist of corporate mercenaries.
18:27 I think that would be a rather short video!
Unless you have been in a conflict, you are not prepared.
We still do have a base down there in Australia we have like two actually and like three blackout sides
I as an American know that we are by no means perfect, but we always try to be better... Knowing the history of the world, is there a nation that you would feel better with the military power of America? Is there a country we could give all our strength to, and you would sleep better? I am biased but after learning just some of the worlds history, I am glad its not another nation, and am proud of what we have not done. I think we get measured by the mistakes we have made, but when you are capable of world ending mistakes maybe we should be measured by the mistakes we have not made, the abuses of power we are capable but not guilty of.
You should watch the World War 2 Oversimplified video's next
This was an interesting scenario, NZ Girl, although there would be other possibilities. Hard to believe the Air Force wouldn't be involved a good deal more. As I mentioned in a reply to
one of our Russian friends here, we no doubt have an equal, or superior version of any weapons of theirs, hypersonic or what-have-you. Even we Americans have only a rough idea of what has NOT been revealed to the world, and that's being generous. In short, the world should be glad we are who were are, if you will.
21:42 Maybe its that pillow talk accent? Good a reason as any to build a beachhead in NZ!
The real challenge would be getting all those countries to agree with each other (An India/China team up would be unlikely considering how much they hate each other), especially vs the US who would be able to mobilize a large Military from one central point
Just remember , the Gotenburg class submarine of Sweden has sunken the US aircraft carrier 3 times on 3 separate occasions in mock drills practice with the US . So,..... don't underestimate your opponent since its a war .
The crazy thing is our fighter jets are able to take multiple foreign jets without ever being shot at. They are hard to detect and can track many targets at once. They have the ability to take out other jets from such a far distance that they never stand a chance.
The Abrahams tanks are the same. They can and have out maneuver and out gun most other tanks in a man vs 1 scenario. There has only been one of them lost in combat ever. I required someone literally running behind it and firing and RPG up the exhaust pipe.
as an American and a vet. i have always been so proud of our citizens , who have always been much more willing to spend dollars instead of blood. we want All our men and women to come home.
Don't worry, our savior Biden is taking care of it. Oh wait, you mean we left people and equipment behind?
I doubt you will see this because it's been a little while since this was posted but Japan was about 3 or for battles from invading Australia. They had the plans somewhat worked out but us naval actions and the allied forces on Papua new Guinea turned them back. Japan held a huge amount of land and in the grand scheme of things were kinda close to new Zealand and could have gotten very close very quickly.
America Always Gangsta Until the war Starts.😂😂😂😂
The tech is one thing , knowing how to use it is much more important. The US spends lots of time training and training against the oppisition equipment. Also remember the US tries to minimize collateral damage and civillian death. Just think about what would happen if that wasn't needed.
Lady, do you want to know about the super technologies of the USA? I'll tell you.
1. Destroyer Zumwalt - recognized as a failed project. Initially, it was planned to build 32, then the number was reduced to 29. In the end, they built 3 and still didn’t know why they were built in the first place - they don’t know how to fight. They were written off for storage - in the trash.
2. The ships of the "Freedom" project, in reality, the characteristics of the ships would be half less than on paper - a complete failure.
3. Hypersonic missiles are a complete failure.
4. F-35 aircraft - more than 700 problem points on the aircraft are officially recognized. Of these, more than 50 are critically dangerous for the pilot - a complete failure.
5. F-22 aircraft. The only REAL fight is against the Chinese balloon. The ball was shot down ONLY on the 3rd attempt with an expensive rocket. The first 2 missiles flew away to nowhere. Efficiency - 30%. This is a failure. That is why neither the F-35 nor the F-22 are transferred to Ukraine.
6. The Abrams reputation can no longer be saved. Proven in Ukraine. Demonstrated at an exhibition of military trophies in Russia.
7. The reputation of the Javellin can no longer be saved. Proven in Ukraine. Demonstrated at an exhibition of military trophies in Russia.
8. The reputation of "Petriot" can no longer be saved. Proven in Ukraine.
9. A Russian plane peed on the Reaper (an expensive American drone). The Reaper drowned himself in shame.
And this is just the beginning...
When I watch these videos I can't help but think about how countries would fight a modern war without satellites. The space weapon aspect would be huge. The US government has a black budget of over 50 billion dollars a year they are spending on something....just saying