Assuming nobody uses the literal nuclear option or any other WMDs, The U.S. wins. It has mostly to do with the specific military doctrine we use in combat. Further, in a scenario where some force manages to decimate our entire enlisted military, the existence of our Second Amendment means that over half our own population defaults to being the world's largest irregular military. More importantly, just because certain weapons have been made illegal 40 years ago doesnt mean that all those weapons were surrendered or otherwise left private ownership - and that force, in particular, would have the advantage of literal "home turf" and the motivation of defending their families. Nothing is as dangerous as a well-armed, well-disciplined person protecting their family without the restrictions of the Geneva Convention limiting their actions. I'm about as peaceful as it gets, and I'm just an average guy who owns a few guns of my own; even just by myself I'm one of the most dangerous people to ever exist (given what i know how to do) given the correct motivation. And there are millions more just like me.
We literally have more guns than the entire rest of the world combined, including all militaries (even our own). I don't care how much the rest of the world hates us, they're not stupid enough to try anything serious.
no one would win.... the ocean is too big the us has enough boats eu does not... but at same time eu has enough land based missiles that us could never land any force of significant size. so it would be air war for few years until new president and then peace...
Let Us Never Want to use Our 1st amendment against any Fellow Citizen unless for protection only, if any Nation decimates Our Military, Then Yes, They would Rue the day their Grandparents ever gave birth to their Parents. Americans Come together Frighteningly fast.
Someone once made an interesting observation. After WW2, the USA had a period of time where they had a monopoly on nuclear weapons. Instead of going around the world and saying "we'll take the following countries as ours", they helped rebuild nations and secure peace in hotspots like Germany and Japan. The USA may have its flaws, but that act alone says a lot about what the USA is as s nation.
Yeah help them build and people out people in top to run the country for our own benefit like resource. USA never really help any one. Name one place where the USA go that have peace I wait. Any place we touch turn in to chaos and a mess. Mid east usa Australia. Should I need more?
@@R2W419 why leave when it free money here. Leave when u get enough. Your ancestor came here for the same reason. Money no one want them here why they still here
@@kentuckybluegrass8695 make me. Just like how y’all came here to take shit. We doing the same. The only people that can ask me to leave are the native of this country. Typical red neck reply leave my country. It not even your to begin with. Can’t claim something that is not your. Where are u from do u even know ??
They actually set up an empire this way without it being a direct empire. The majority of countries are allies of the US or Near US ally which has US bases on it as deterrent to both ally countries and enemy countries looking to incite conflict. It’s not exactly a secret we instill our own political leaders and interfere with elections ourselves. That on top of the fact the majority of the world uses the US dollars and tariffs and sanctions can keep a poor country poor and make a prosperous country struggle. It was a smart move idk about being better natured
We Learned that Lesson During WW2 against the Germans .. "During World War II, the German Autobahn network played a crucial role in facilitating the rapid movement of troops and military supplies, particularly during the early stages of the war when Germany employed the "Blitzkrieg" tactic, thanks to its wide, well-maintained roads that allowed for swift military maneuvers across Europe" .... "Gen. Eisenhower was impressed with the autobahn and during his later Presidency ordered a copy of it made, the USA’s Interstate system, mostly for military reasons including for US Air Force bombers to use when their bases got taken out by Soviet ICBMs - and one mile of every five is straight and level for this reason."
They can also be used as landing strips, if anyone has noticed on level ground 2 of every 3 miles is practically straight. So there is that sue as well for the interstate system in America.
Jeesh! I just posted the same thing then scrolled and ya beat me to it. Eisenhower memorial? Five star?( I forget the ignored over looked designation) but US 70 is one. It's clear when looking at any map,and thinking straigically .
We did a neighborhood watch and emergency drill in my suburban area. We did a tally for an emergency situation. Of the 27 homes, there were 58 AR-15s and over 40,000 rounds of ammo. Within that group there were 8 military veterans who had fought in wars and most of the family members(even children) could shoot rifles and hunt. Some had already killed large deer by a very young age. There wasn't a single person over the age of 15 that hadn't fire a gun at least once.
As long as you don’t allow movement through your country to ours we won’t take you out. Unless you want us to get rid of your commie leader that is Castro’s son, and join us for good. And we know the French are already quitting.
Canada would just become a part of America so would Mexico it's already being discussed as a new union. It'd be a benefactor in the end. France on the other hand,
Deer Canada what are you talking about? Come on War criminal you can fight without tanks planes almost vehicles come on show me the Canadian that fight in world War I and two.
dont forget the museum fleets as well (they arent easily available, but a redneck with a dream could certainly get a lot of those moving with a bit of motivation)
The Air Force has the world's largest air force, with roughly 5,300 aircraft. The Air Force is known for its advanced technology and large fleet of aircraft.
United States Navy The Navy has the world's second largest air force, with approximately 3,700 aircraft. The Navy's aircraft are used for a variety of missions, including maritime patrol, anti-submarine warfare, and search and rescue.
One thing this video forgets to point out is coordination of forces. If the rest of the world had to combine forces, they would take a LONG time to get to the point of understanding each other (i.e. Tactics, equipment, communications, etc) vs the US is such a well oiled military machine it would be immediately tipped in the US favor which could grant enough time to gain control of the canals & islands it would need and would keep any country from trying to attack because they'd be on the defensive immediately
It also doesn't exactly talk about the US logistical capacity and organization. It's not something a lot of people think about, but America's ability to produce/train and transport military equipment and personnel to any location in the world at a moment's notice has actually been an unintended weapon of psychological warfare in the past. In World War II we had entire barges in the Pacific dedicated to making 10 gallons of ice cream every seven minutes, 500 gallons every shift, and approximately five *tons* every day... per barge. In modern times there's a joke that the US can deploy a military base with a fully operational Burger King to any location in the world within 48 hours. Imagine how demoralizing that is for America's enemies that you're busy digging trenches and worrying about supply lines while the US is trying to decide what fast food chain should serve their mess hall.
translation: "mostly rural farmland" = largest standing military in the world, armed and ready 24 hours a day 365 days a year, and they've been stockpiling bunkers for decades in the exuberant hopes that one day someone would be stupid enough to try. This was the point of the original Red Dawn movie. Rural U.S. is not unprotected lands, it just seems that way.
@baneblackguard584 for any invading army it would be basically the American experience in Vietnam, just in a different setting. Our wildlife is no joke for those who aren't experienced with it, either; we've more or less learned how to deal with the native animals and live beside them without infringing on their territory, but any foreign army wouldn't have any idea what they were walking into.
As most militia groups are heavily monitored by Intel in the US as they are all on watch lists. Over 500 militias in America many are not reported for security purposes. Estimates of over billions in stockpile of weapons and ammunition. From military grade and even tanks and rockets hidden from the government. It is the largest mitary in the world outside the U.S. military. Thats why globalist are trying to criminalize and disarm the so they can take power and why the US is the main focus of these international imperialist.
@Tijuanabill I see your point, but they also made gratuitous use of the land itself and used it to their advantage. Also, you're slightly incorrect: the VC might have been using sub-par weapons, but the NVA (being backed by Russia) had things like AK-47s, mortars, and RPGs. Study the battle of Ia Drang Valley to see what I mean. Further, a weapon is only as useful as long as it has ammunition, and in this scenario, there would be many issues with citizens getting any sort of resupply from anyone. The National Guard enlisted wouldn't be there anymore, either, as they would have been called up for service and nationalized prior to this scenario, meaning that there wouldn't be anything left in the armories either. Even the people with (by the average person's standards) disturbingly large ammunition reserves would run dry on a long enough timeline, at which point you're scavenging the enemy you've defeated for weapons and ammo. Largely, a citizen-soldier defense effort would look a lot like total guerilla warfare, with conservation of resources taking highest priority. You see where I'm going with this.
Another fact not mentioned here is that we have 16 million veterans that are still of age to affect some resistance and are trained with equipment that is here and is still functuonal.
To add to this, a massive portion of the US(millions of people), even if they're not in the army or veterans, have some experience or knowledge about warfare or firearms. Guns and warfare are a massive piece of American culture.
Yup, plus any competent drill sergeant that mustered out would be able to train an irregular force to military standards, add in the gun owners who know how to make gunpowder and you have a small but well supplied military in just a few months to a year. Now take that capability and multiply it by a thousand (conservatively the number of drills that would be able to do this on an appreciable scale) and suddenly America looks even scarier.
4 дня назад+7
Not counting the massive amount of ex military equipment in private ownership or skill sets.
US has not once won a Military exercise whit any of their friendly nations and Americans dont seem to understand how vulnerable America is it self so if you ignore all records we have on the combat efficiency of the American military and home defense then yes they would win but then you might as well say you know if we disarm every other nation in the world the US would win
I live in Alaska, it would be difficult to invade through here. Major mountain ranges in the North and South, and along the South East coast. Tundra dominates in the region where a ground invasion may be possible, and slowing movement makes invaders sitting ducks. Alaska is a states full of hunters and gatherers. Essentially a state with 700,000 guerilla warfare snipers.
LOL and the abundance of roads. It's not like there are any choke points. Now add in the mild winters. Abundance of supplies to confiscate. Oops my sarcasm ran away with me. Alaska would be worse than Switzerland. Switzerland at least would have short supply lines. Alaska? LoL Id bet on all dozen of ya .
Japanese Admiral Yamamoto is claimed by some to have said, “You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass.” It isn't known if this was really said, but it's the thought that counts.
Not true but lol we do have the worlds largest armed and trained civilian population. China would collapse if the USA stopped buying its goods. We would hurt to but not near as much. Russia? Well , Ukraine? Not a concern. Im more worried about the cartels
I'm sorry but I love watching reactions from someone outside of the U.S watching them start to realize the reality of the outcome amuses that patriotic pride in me.
Its not pride, Its stupidity, America vs the planet would be the end of the USA, How is your economy going to work with no trading partners? How are you going to keep up with demand for munitions? How are you going to keep up with the war of attrition vs Europeans, China Russia and Japan invading Through Alaska and Canada. How you going to keep up with China, India, Korea Australia and NZ and the rest of Asia invading through Mexico and south America. If you think the US would win vs the world you're delusional lol
People forget we actually are the only super power and we keep the peace. That's not ego its fact. Bringing sht to our door? Yeah about that. It won't go,well. A fury and viciousness will be unleash like the world has never seen.
@@nunyalastname-ej8vlI’d have to disagree with being the peace keepers. Invading other countries in order to destabilize and strip them of resources to force them to bend the knee, isn’t exactly peace keeping. I know many veterans that have come back from war with this realization.
@black_hand78 who when? Name names . Who enabled the Ukraine? We do. That ends when we say so. This admin just loves war. China holds back from Taiwan. Not out of fear of Taiwan but fear of the US. MiddleEast? Israel likes us thier actions take us into,consideration. Or thier neighbors wouldn't be a concern of thiers. Nothing happens in the world without the USA seriously concidered. We are very kind and tolerant. World politics abhors a vacume.
@black_hand78 damn another post poof lol mine often disappear. Anyway don't say things like that without examples. You think,China China stays out of Taiwan because of Taiwan? LoL Ukraine yeah our weak admin allowed it.
I found it really funny that you commented on the idea of the US Fighting in two oceans because that has literally been US Navy policy for almost a century now. The congressional act that authorized the buildup of the US Navy leading up to World War 2 was called the Two Ocean Navy Act, and that philosophy has remained ever since. The standard that our fleet is built and trained to is the ability to control the Atlantic and the Pacific simultaneously.
which is not new the brittish navy at one point had to have a 2 front or perhaps 3. If you include atlantic, indian and pacific navy for the brittish. russia at one point also had two navy front policy atlantic, pacific, plus a balkan fleet. For the brittish after giving up on india and letting canada and australia rule their own nation has back away from that.
@@Marveryn The British Navy had the Two Power Standard, where they aimed to maintain a naval strength equal to the combined strength of the next two largest navies.
That's a tall order, but in the end, nobody would win. So many Americans are very well armed. The gorilla warfare would cause massive casualties to any invading army.
that's if we weren't divided and starting killing each other. But yeah i was trying to explain that to my liberal friends that was worried when Russia invaded Ukraine.
Its actually pretty easy to cripple America. Our power grid alone is compromised. One litle trojan virus from china and boom....90% of US population gone within couple months.
Just so everyone knows, the US civilian arsenal is larger than all militaries (including the US military), police forces, and other nations civilian arsenals COMBINED. We literally have more guns than people.
And that’s why we stress every day we send our kids to school bc America is awash in guns that are too easy to get ahold of and commit a mass murder. Do you consider that a bragging point for the US?
@@sbuckle1171 yup. 2nd amendment makes it clear that ALL guns are to be available to US citizens, consider yourself lucky that several state governments have found loopholes. Founding fathers wouldve never let that happen.
@@sbuckle1171 Sad thing is, the vast majority of the weapons used in all the incidents you are complaining about were stolen or otherwise illegally obtained for that purpose. Legal gun owners are among the least likely to use their weapons to commit crimes or be a danger to the public. Criminals, by definition, do not care about laws, and they acquire firearms as they will. Additionally, the US is not even the worst country for gun crime, with the US being around number 25, we just put it in the news more. If we remove the top 5 worst cities for gun crime, the US drops down to around number 160. Four of those cities have some of the strictest gun control laws in the country, and one is in a state that is in what could be construed as an active war with criminal cartels dealing not only in human trafficking and drugs, but also illegal firearms brought into the country by them. The countries with the worst gun crime have FAR stricter controls than the US. World events are also proving disarmed populaces are vulnerable to criminal attacks by persons who come to your country and don't share your values. Even countries that would otherwise be exemplars of low crime, are now having violent crime spikes. The US has been battling the problem for decades, Europe is now getting a taste of the problem, and from recent election results, they are getting tired of it too. Something else other countries, and most citizens of the US for that matter, don't realize is that the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) has ruled that the police, and any other state/governmental agents, do not have a duty to protect you, even if there is a writ of protection/restraining order in place against the person threatening you (Castle Rock v Gonzales (2005)). At least 1 state has ruled the officer can be standing nearby and doesn't have to lift a finger to aid you, even if they know your attacker has already killed and injured other people in the last few hours (Lozito v NYC (2013), which referred to the previously mentioned SCOTUS case). With that in mind, US citizens are the own primary line of defense. So, keep in mind that, when you advocate for disarming the public, you are also advocating for making persons seeking to defend themselves from stalkers and/or violent exes.
I must take this opportunity to thank all of our active Service Members, Veterans and their incredible families for the hard work and sacrifices made on my behalf. I am so sorry that words are not enough to express my gratitude and admiration; but thank you all so very much! God Bless America!
As somebody who lives in South Dakota (midland USA) I can say I myself own several firearms built to the standard of our forces. My rifles are camo, with solar backup power on my sights. Thousands of rounds of ammo, extra military surplus gear and more. My friends often do camping expeditions running training exercises with night vision or thermal vision. If you attacked central US you would be met with extreme and lethal force from master hunters, ex military, armed citizens and people of all walks of life. "Behind every blade of grass, is a rifle" one leader once classicly spoke of when considering a mainland invasion of the USA. I can speak from experience, at least in the Midwest, this is 100% true. Some friends groups are already more armed than some small nations, and often trained to operate at a higher level than some base military factions. Fun fact: out highways systems are designed to be used as backup runways. We can mobilize any base in nearly any location, at any time. There will always be a runway.
We'll go from "Its never a war crime the first time" to "Its not a war crime if we're the only country left" which, I'm laughing while typing it, but thats fucking scary as shit.
US has not once won a Military exercise whit any of their friendly nations and Americans dont seem to understand how vulnerable America is it self so if you ignore all records we have on the combat efficiency of the American military and home defense then yes they would win but then you might as well say you know if we disarm every other nation in the world the US would win
I liked his reaction, when he realized that our economy changes in times of war, and production is focused on military spending. The military we have now, is just the military we have, while we're waiting for something big to happen. We can actually become much larger.
In WWII, Japan was arming its citizens with guns to defend to the last if the mainland got invaded. These guns were basically a single use pipe on a piece of wood. USA meanwhile, is full of semi automatic handguns as well as basically every other kind of gun imaginable, some citizens in some states even own tanks. Like, tanks. Some are just APCs that could protect people from small arms, but some are proper tanks with cannons and everything. Some might have decomissioned guns, but that could potentially be rectified in global war. Yeah, imagine a civilian militia where everyone is armed with at least something and some even have their own tanks to fight back with. Don't underestimate how effective the citizens could be. I myself have used old lever action rifles to land x4 shots in just 5 seconds on a 9 inch by 9 inch piece of metal at close to 100 meters away and I go shooting roughly once every two years. To note, due to the stability issues of working the lever, you can have some difficulty getting your aim on target after each shot, and I did this with just Iron sights. Not necessarily the most crazy distance shot or anything, but that target was roughly the size of a person's head and I could hit it reliably. Willing to bet I'm not the best shot out here either. Meanwhile, some of the conscript troops that would likely be part of this invasion would barely have held a gun before in their lives.
Exactly, e.g. there are 1400 WMDs yet that is only the currently active and armed WMDs, that is not counting any number of "disarmed" and inactive WMDs that might take a week to ready.
Yeah remember when Trump got in trouble for showing off spy satellite data for an Iranian missile site that was way better than anything the rest of the world had to offer and it was from a satellite launched in the 90's.
I stopped the video at 2:21 seconds, to answer your question and as a military veteran, ( USMC ) I will go out on a limb and state the United States would win. We also have an armed citizenry, and roughly 24 million Military Veterans still alive and well, any invasion of the continental U.S. would not go real well for the invader. Okay, let us watch your video.
OOH RAH!!! Semper Fi Marine! At 62 I may not have the stamina I once had, but I'm still a Marine and the added benefit of being a WM. Women are always underestimated, but when it comes to making due, we have the edge. If your aim is not what it used to be, try a shot gun; buck shot will slow them down. Better yet, add a bit of salt. We raised two girls and their dates were always afraid of my husband. My girls always told them they should be afraid, but they had better be more afraid of Mom. Dad will give them a head start; Mom won't. I'll wrap this up by asking a question. Do you really believe all our weapons and tricks are plastered all over RUclips???
Americans are usually pretty easy going unless crossed, then the gloves come off. Even the Japanese Admiral in WWII wrote in his diary after Pearl Harbor something to the effect of :"I fear all we have done is woken a sleeping giant and filled him with a terrible resolve.". We waste a lot, but if the world went to war, rationing would happen, as it has before, and we become fairly self sufficient and anyone trying a ground war inside the US would find it difficult. We sometimes joke that if an enemy tried to invade the South, the Hillbillies and good ole boys would pull out the hunting rifles and by the time our own military got to the spot, the guys would be sitting down, drinking beer, having it all under control. This is one of the reasons why some of us remain steadfast on the 2nd Amendment.
Don’t touch our ship, don’t touch our planes, don’t touch our buildings, don’t spit in our face. This is all that is necessary to be a friend. But it is very easy to become our enemy.
One of. The first and primary reason for the 2nd Amendment is protection from our own government. A shame so many hive minded, commie loving leftists in a handful of major cities are so absurdly blind. And the Bill of Rights aside, guns are a huge part of our culture in the South.
The Tulsa Race Riots of the 1920s was put down by members of my American Legion Post, Tulsa Post 1, and working to help rebuild North Tulsa before the national guards got there. Although the other group wants to lie about all of it now.
47 carriers currently in the pacific. The us held off the Japanese navy with only 2 carriers until they rebuilt their navy. Modern carriers are also escorted by very lethal destroyers and cruisers and subs
I’d like to compare America to an English mastiff. It seems like a derby dog that trips over its own feet until it’s defending its family. Then the goofy looking giant dog becomes one of the scariest things you’ve ever seen.
Too many comments to scroll through to see if someone else mentioned it lol. But, on the whole "control" of Mid-Eastern oil thing. Even if, by chance, America couldn't maintain control of the oil there, what do you think they would do? Being able to maintain itself, America would destroy any/all oil production facilities in the Mid-East... denying the entire rest of the world the biggest majority of their oil. Win... by attrition.
Lots of ppl dont know our military did coordinated training and small missions. That's why we only lost 4k troops after 20 yrs of so called war, that shit over there was defense contractors paradise. Not to say it was a right or good thing to be there in the first place.
People forget we can deploy a fully functional Burger King anywhere in the world within 24 hours with working ice cream machines. This is less close than anyone thinks because currently we fight with 2 hands tied behind our backs. In case anyone forgets, We're still 2 time World War Champs.
I have heard there are Americans that have rifles with night vision scopes, long range rifles, and they are always practicing. Those are just your average rural Americans. There are also millions of veterans who stay active. Definition of F around and find out.
You may enjoy this story. After Hurricane Andrew in 1992 a curfew was placed on citizens after sunset due to all the looting. At the time I was working at a state prison and my shift ended at midnight. I had taken my entire “arsenal” and had it in the back of my SUV since my home was destroyed and couldn’t be secured. The first night I was stopped by National Guardsmen they asked why I was out during curfew, I showed my prison credentials and explained that my shift ends at midnight. Then they asked if I had weapons in the truck, I replied my entire arsenal was in the back. They requested to see it and one of the guardsmen said “damn he’s better armed than we are”. Every night I would encounter the same check point and the same group, they didn’t stop me any further after night number 2. So yes us civilians are pretty well armed.
Yep. Many of us grew up with a rifle in our hands. Most men in the SE U.S. live like this. Most of us do not have true night vision scopes due to the absurd price, but some do. Long range is subjective. I can consistently and accurately shoot 500 meters, but I've never had a range or line of sight beyond that to test my full capability There are citizens though that can consistently bullseye 900+ meters. Now realistically, the ammo to make those shots is expensive, so it's not going to be too many citizens that can afford to stockpile many thousands of rounds for those sniper shots. A skilled hunter/shooter, most of us it's just 1 shot, 1 kill for a 500M shot and the ammo is affordable. The average hunter without much experience can still pop you at 300 meters.
@@Swearengen1980there is more hunting north than you think. I bet northerners have more fund per capita than SE. I lived in Michigan for years then moved to South Carolina.
I'm a city boy that never held a gun until I was 19. Live in Florida. I can hit a human shaped target center mass at 300 yards with iron sights, using a beat up old rental AR platform at the range. I can hit a human shaped target at up to 100 yards with a snub nose as well, bullseye 5/6 times. I only own 1 weapon, but what I own I'm good with. Night vision is great but it's expensive AF. You don't have to have all the fancy equipment although it can help, but you just need to be good with what you have available.
The USA has about 11 million deer hunters. The hunters have the supplies and local knowledge of land. There are tens of millions of other firearm owners.
A lot of hunters also have certain sites prepped whenever they go to these hunting sites, so some they likely have a backup supply in certain regions away from people’s hands. With that, we have a deep prepper community that if things go sideways, there’s going to be a group prepared throughout the country. There’s also the veteran community who have the experience to think about logistics, as well as strategies, all while being familiar with the land than a foreigner who might have a little knowledge but not as much as the locals.
Even without the US military or veterans or hunters, millions of US citizens have knowledge or experience with warfare or guns. Guns and warfare are just a massive part of American culture.
My Grand Parents Came from the Philippines after WW2 .. My Grand Parents Lives were saved by US Soldiers in Manila during WW2.. My GrandPa told me if you ever see a Soldier in a Bar or Restaurant pay for their Meal... My Family are very Patriotic to USA.. And every single one of us Own Firearms , Well Trained in Shooting and Safety.. GOD Bless the USA !!!
So consider this, the armed civilian population is roughly 100 x that of the standing military. If someone were able to defeat the entire US military, they would still have to go through a far larger one behind that
The F22 ridiculously outclasses every other fighter jet in the sky. In every wargame, it achieved it onjective before it was ever detected. It is also one peice of wargear that it has been made illigal to sell to any other country, even allies.
Tough to enforce if literally *the whole world* is against us, but it's still a good point to know. That said, it's not like Panama would last even a couple hours if we dropped a couple Ranger battalions into the Canal's AOO. And by the time they *could* do something about it (or, more likely, one of their larger neighbors), we'd have an air craft carrier battle group down there to tell em to piss off.
The scariest but possibly most reassuring aspect of this Andre is that the United States could do all of this right now if it really wanted to, but we don't.
Let's be honest, 2 countries, China and Russia will be enough for the USA. The United States has no experience in fighting an equal opponent and no experience in wars, in real wars. To understand this, you need to get out of the echo chamber for a week.
@dankerxd4108 China and Russia aren't anywhere near equal to the US. Even combined neither would be a serious threat in conventional warfare. Russia can barely handle itself against a defending neighboring country let alone the might of the entire US military. China is the only real "threat" and if you want to talk about a military that doesn't have any fighting experience China would be the epitome of that.
@@dankerxd4108 You have to realize, the USA wargames with a majority of other close opponents, They have to handicap themselves in order to make it challenging and helpful to all involved. Look at the Reports and do a deep dive, its scary.
@dankerxd4108 This is an interesting video, but let's be real. Russia and China would be the most challenging but that is hypothetical if they are full strength. At this time during the Ukraine war, there would be no way they could stand a chance.
21:10 yes, everything domestic that wasn't necessary for survival of those still at home went to the war effort. Toy manufacturers started making military equipment. It was insane.
The thing about the oil in the Middle East in a situation like this is not so much that we would need it for ourselves (the U.S.) but rather we would have to control it so that the other nations don't have access to it, cutting off their supply. The U.S. is the largest oil producer in the world. We produce almost as much oil per year as Saudi Arabia and Russia combined. we have plenty within our own borders so it's not so much a matter of use, but a matter of control. That coupled with the fact that the only nation in the world with the logistical means to carry out an overseas war on multiple fronts, is the U.S. so it's not likely that the U.S. would lose. not saying we would win, but we wouldn't lose or be invaded.
I agree with this take. While I don't think we could conquer the entire world, but I think we'd definitely be safe from a mainland invasion indefinitely. I guess you could call it stalemate. It's just so much easier to defend than attack.
Food for thought No other country in history has had such a great economic and military advantage. Yet doesn't use it for conquest. Does the U.S have influence? Yes but not by conquest.
This is a great point. If we wanted to "conquer" other people, we would. Instead, we opt to build economic partnerships and to build military alliances in other regions instead of militarily controlling those regions ourselves. A great example of this is the fact that various shipping lane trade routes are protected and ships are escorted by US military (Navy) ships. If we really had world domination on our minds, we would be the only ones transporting anything instead of protecting every goods transport ships with trade. Full marks for your comment!
Only open and free markets that America allows affords the technology. No one would work that hard developing tech if they couldn't make money on it. Open and free Markets.
your faces as you saw the naval capabilities and funding was hilarious :) not making fun it's just awesome to see a reaction to it all. I didn't realize a lot of it but I'm just proud not horrified hahaha!
The US is #1 in oil production, producing 1.3x as much as the #2 producer Russia. The US uses a lot of that petroleum domestically, so the US is only the world’s #4 exporter of crude oil, but if you consider exports of refined petroleum products and natural gas liquids into the equation, the US jumps up to the world’s #2 net exporter of liquid hydrocarbons. The main reason the US imports oil is because the US has excess refinery capacity. It makes economic sense to import oil (mostly from Canada and Mexico) to prevent those extra refineries from sitting idle. (The extra refined product is then exported.) The secondary reason the US imports oil is because in some places (e.g., Hawaii), it’s easier/cheaper to get a tanker load from the Persian Gulf than to get one from Houston due to the combination of the price of transit through the Panama Canal and the restrictions of the Jones Act.
That's true. The shale revolution really expanded our oil and gas capabilities. This is not even to mention the new food technologies that have passed the prototype stage and are now moving into production stage. Those techs will cause the USA to produce at LEAST 3 times more plant foods with at minimum half of the resources required to grow them within the next 10 years. We doing good.
You should react to The Fat Electricians "22 vs 500 America's defiant stand at Lazeranth Ridge" I think you'd like it and the men of that story deserve to be remembered
Yes because they never got involved in it. Only the British were involved (they had 2 ships in the Pacific that sailed with the American fleets but America kept them back to protect transpot guard duty. They repeatedly asked America to allow them into the main combat but were denied because they couldn't incorporate them into American tactic and comunication.
@ that would explain the “Russia fought half of WW2, and the US just helped Britain” bs. Them not covering the Pacific front would explain a lot of mind boggling conversations that I’ve had about WW2.
considering the entire education on that war is strictly focused on perpetuating a proven false victimhood, and a proven false plan of world domination, yea. The education is 100% pure propaganda and brainwashing with nearly zero historical fact focused on. So if it doesnt further these points, they dont even bother mentioning it.
I am one lone woman in Texas. I have 1 pistol, 1 judge (shoots bullets and shotgun shells), one rifle, one shotgun, and a few knives. I have 4 close families of friends (and they have extended families). My friends have hundreds (maybe more) guns, rifles, shotguns, military knives, large caches of munitions, and they are just collectors. They are not part of a militia. But I can surely count on them to protect me and all their neighbors.
@@jarredeckman1976 I have been through two elections here; saw 1 Biden/Harris sign in 2019 and no signs for Harris/Waltz this year. So... no sign of Tampon voters here.
One man here in Oregon, 5 pistols (.40,.45, and 9mm) 2 rifles (.308, and .300 blk out) 3 shot guns, and thousands of rounds of ammo. I can arm my neighbors and half of them own their own too. So F A F O lol
@@jerkyz they also didn't really mention the second largest navy in the world, our museum ships, many of which are either still functional or could be if we needed to get them up and out
I don't find that quote to be accurate. We're not so petty that we start nuking rivals over a difference of opinion, for example. More like, don't attack us, don't invade us. If you want to criticize us, especially constructively criticize, that's OK and we might share our opinions about you as well but that's free speech which we encourage even when it's difficult.
The states surrounding the Canada border alone could keep Canada at bay. Which would be police, sheriffs, veterans, gang members, NRA members, private militias and national reserve army. So we wouldn't need an army to keep Canada's military at bay.
The entire Canadian navy has about 8000 people, about as many as a single American carrier strike group (and lacking the equipment). Canada is not a threat, at least partly because they haven't bothered to have much of a military since they know no one would dare attack them while we have their back. Keep in mind this is also true of many other first world countries who have been relying on our military strength to keep them safe.
@@147salsaCanada's biggest defense would be its weather. Just like Russia. That would be mitigated somewhat by superior equipment and deploying people from the northern states who have a little bit more affinity towards that type of weather.
@@aaronburdon221 America has many tens of millions living in cold climates. We would not be unprepared for cold weather and Alaska is more extreme than most anywhere.
We can absolutely go through the arctic ocean too from alaska.. and we do. People sleep on that cup, nobody expects us to go around the northpole take out Santa and hit the tops of europe and Asia while hitting the sides too
Too bad you don't have constitutional rights there can't carry them, and they have to be on the safe firearm roster meaning the least possible efficient platforms for defense. But something better than nothing I guess.
@@danacramer9311 Imagine if you needed government permission to exercise any other -conditionally- Constitutionally-guaranteed right. (Edit: I hate autocorrect.)
I mean, yeah you'd lose, but we can make sure you're extracted to Texas so you can enjoy some BBQ and pecan pie until it's all over. lol "Man, they aren't defending, they are attacking now." Yeah, that's basically our doctrine for most defensive situations. 🤣
"Not a lot of people live there" is another way to say, "not habitable" or "difficult terrain." It should also be noted that the USA can destroy or hijack satellites at will. So the rest of the world would have to communicate and find US forces the old fashioned way, like they did in WW2. Other countries might be capable of doing this, like Russia and China, but have not been shown to be coordinated enough, or perceptively capable of hitting satellites. Also, that means there would be no cyber attacks.
As a God fearing United States citizen, I am boastful and saddened by the power/wealth we have. Sure I love knowing that my country can defend itself. We also have well armed citizens with the stand-your-ground mentality that is a part of our culture. What makes me sad is that all of the weapons and resources are considered needed. You said it perfectly when there is no winner when it comes to nuclear war. In my perfect world, we would all maintain the life and culture we all love so much. That is what makes this blue planet such a great place to live.
The fact that we as Americans are well armed and very patriotic civilian militia would be hard to overcome and would be a significant turning point in any invasion. For example I got my first gun when I was 12 and learned to shoot and hunt. My son around the same age.
Very common in the u.s for us to have guns very young, its like another 200million+ troops they would have to go through, we would just overwhelm anyone setting foot here.
During World War II The US population was 125 million and they put 11 million men into military service. Today the US population is about 325 million or so and by automating industry each worker in war production factories can be much more productive than in WWII and this combined with the fact that the US now allows women to also take combat roles in its military means that the US could probably support a military of 25-30 million in a total war today. The rest of the world should be able to exceed this number but would not be likely to equip their forces as well as the Americans would and it would likely take them some decades to be able to deploy a large enough force across the ocean to really challenge the Americans on their own soil.
80% of America's young men today fail the military's standard of health. They couldn't join if they wanted to. Obesity and mental illness alone disqualify that useless generation.
@@Makoto417I think the only issue is getting them from India to allied countries where they would be able to engage American forces. For the entire world this is the major problem is how do we engage the Americans outside our own countries.
@Makoto417 I've seen videos of Indian soldiers carrying sticks to fight against the Chinese at border disputes. Not too worried about 150 million stick bearers.
You got to figure too that any ground force would naturally be met with our military but you’ve got a country if armed citizens many own more than one gun. So if the neighbor doesn’t have one they will before long. There have been kids as young as 11 that have defended their home against an intruder. Link below to my favorite interview of a kid that did this. There was another kid that saved his sister by using a slingshot from his upstairs bedroom to hit a man trying to kidnap his little sister from the yard. Most Americans would fight back, even the elderly vets would want to take up a position… they’re tough old SOBs.
And why does that matter against an air raid, missile or artillery strike? America has never been attacked on it's home soil in a real war. The closest it ever got was Pearl Harbour, a military base. And the people have no idea what would really be coming for them! Europe and a lot of the rest of the world does!
I think a lot of citizens are honestly waiting for the day the US gets invaded. Would be and honest to god dream come true for some people. “You see those guys landing on our beaches? I don’t like them, do whatever you want”
I hope this video shows how America is a peaceful nation that brings stability and peace to the rest of the world...look at what we could do if we weren't...
@@14FrensAnd88Eagles No, he's not. And it's a very valid point. America really could demolish... everyone. Do recall that following WW2, it was America that was better off than ever, and we had such an economy that we completely rebuilt and restarted the absolutely demolished countries ravaged by war, to the point that Germany and Japan are now some of the US' closest allies due to this support. But, we didn't HAVE to assist. The US could've left everyone else in ashes. The US is, unironically, an absolutely horrible, terrifying military power that is held at bay by the most progressive society in the world- itself. The gloves stay on, even during our last few wars. America really, genuinely is a peaceful nation, because it'd be laughably easy to take on other nations. I believe a report released by the DoD a couple years ago explored the effectiveness of a single US aircraft carrier group (one of nearly a dozen) versus China should China declare war. 1 of many groups away from home, versus China with homefield advantage. The verdict: it would be a standstill. The entire nation, versus just one of our supercarrier fleets far from home.
@@14FrensAnd88Eagles y'all foreign nations run your mouth, but who comes to save you every time your enemies come at you? We have zero interest in world domination, that's why the world isn't under our boot. We want you to be self sufficient because it's better for us anyway. We want you developed so you can help advance technology. We want you able so we don't have to come running to save you. We want more nations closer to our level just in case an alien species wants to FAFO cause then it's less weight on our shoulders to save the world. If Americans wanted to enslave the world, you would be enslaved already, especially since you've all let your own defensive abilities fall so far. Not one of you even has the logistical capabilities to play that game. You would be fighting just to get supplies to the front line and you can't fight without supplies. You're welcome, much love, 'Merica.
@@williamturner7131 I mean, it took that the japanese attacked the US and Hitler declared war to get the US out of their slumber and there is no doubt that will happen again, but sadly, United States must get back to isolationism so the rest of the world realizes how much they've lost after decades of shatting at the USº
@@williamturner7131 This. Yes. We could annihilate any other country if we wanted to and claim it as territory and no one would have the ability to do anything about it. But we don't because that isn't the type of world and philosophy we ascribe to. We actually want to dissuade countries from that type of mind set.
@@european-reacts still think it would be silly a US vs the world, but alot of the points for wining would go to the US, if it did win. what would it gain? Because I do not think the US would want a crown or be president of the world. Way to much work. But that is how a empire or planet unification would start.
American veteran here. I’d bet that people vastly over estimate the populations ability to fight. It’s a serious myth that deludes most of us here. That isn’t to say it wouldn’t be a fight, but most guns and ammo aren’t spread equally across the population. In addition, just having them doesn’t mean people are proficient with them.
Theres definitely some people that overestimate it. But you may be underselling it. Sure the guns arent distributed evenly, but they are everywhere. Its not like theyre all concentrated in a singls reagion. Theyre concenfrated to (relatively) few households in basically every region. Meaning that they just need to get passed around. But its not like they need to get shipped hundreds of miles. As far as proficiency, youre right, but generally peoples arguments about rhe guns in america arent about how skilled americans are, some people talk about that. But generally its about the actual number of people that can have them. Dont need to aim good if youre firing at a crowded convoy.
Just the American hunter (licensed) is the largest standing army in the world. Civilians aren't nearly as trained as military personnel but we are talking about a possible militia of 218,028,300 million people between the ages of 15-64. To add to that the government wouldn't even need to supply guns or ammo to them.
The US is the only country since WWII that has needed to have a Blue Water Navy. European and Asian countries are almost completely concerned with land power projection (except for Chinese-Taiwan issues).
@@reliantncc1864 I will grant you that, but for the US a Blue Water Navy is essential for projecting power ANYWHERE or otherwise being irrelevant. Unless we're talking Canada or Mexico, of course. What we HAD to do for WWII left the US in a position to dominate the oceans for the better part of the next century.
The biggest issue the "Rest of the World" has in this hypothetical scenario is that they've been too reliant on US Military Power since the 1940s. So most countries in good standing with the US have built up enough military power to defend their own land, and help do what they might have to "with US Support". Pretty much no other countries' armies is actually built to the point of being able to "leave home", but in the US' case we have more power stockpiled "away from home" than most anyone else has "at home". Unless a lot of other countries start building up their militaries to be useful on a global scale, the main metric of this hypothetical scenario is "how long can the rest hold out?" as opposed to "what could the rest do to enact a win?". And one of the scariest things to consider for the formerly US friendly "rest of the world" is how much of their technology is derived from multiple generations old US giveaways. Take for example the F-15s mentioned in the video... they haven't been in production for almost 30 years, and we still have more of them than any other country. Just think about it, most people in the world didn't have internet access or cell phones when the US STOPPED making them. Yet they are still considered a threatening part of the fighting force against "the rest of the world". The deeper you think about it the worse it gets. Biggest silver lining really only helps SE Asia and a bit of South America, the means of production for everyday things that would be more likely to cause civil unrest during a World War scenario, is relatively weak in the US per capita as opposed to the major production countries. But also relatively weak in most current 1st World Countries, so while the US would take a hit from such things, the EU would be just about equally affected, thus the 1st and 3rd greatest powers in the hypothetical war would be brought down equivalently.
The problem is that if other countries started building up for a war like this their economies would utterly collapse. They spend all the money we do on military on social issues. And even IF they could muster the fire power, they still cant get to us. America is the only country on the planet with blue ocean lift capability. (aka ability to move troops across oceans/seas with numbers that would matter)
@@dalehammers4425 And on top of that, those bitches all gave up their firearms to their governments. Small militaries and no citizenry that knows how to shoot? The rednecks alone could handle a foreign invader that managed to get past our Navy or Air Force (hypothetically, obviously they couldn't).
The real problem is every person living in every other country puts WAY too much reliance into their government to protect their best interests. No. Governments can become corrupt. People will act in their OWN self interests and string you along if you are going to help them. American ideology is based on the idea that I AM MY OWN MAN. I don't need a government to take care of me I can do it myself. Hence then 2nd amendment, we are not going to rely on the government to protect us. I am going to take up arms and do it myself if I have to. All of you trust and rely on your governments way too much. When comes the day when they decide to turn on you, will you still follow like sheep? Or will you fight like a wolf?
So if all those US outposts, with limited defences, are overrun. The rest of the world are now in charge of those armaments. The US is stretched thin across the globe... But as a hypothetical I think it would be just as globally disastrous as a nuclear war. I don't agree with your take on an embargo affecting Europe as much as the US though. Remember we are talking about 'the rest of the world' here so Europe would not stop getting resources, only the US. What is rather concerning is the perceived attitude from Americans that it would be an easy walkover. This from a population that, in general, admits it doesn't know much about the rest of the world. And generally thinks it is all decades behind America. Some of it is, much of it is not. Some technology is ahead of the US. Shock horror... by why do most Americans think they are ahead in all technology? Most of the technologies they have were developed in other countries. And yes that is ture!
@@GarryGri There is not a single resource we need that we cant get domestically. We dont remotely need outside oil, and we have the manufacturing capability to more than supply what we need as well. And no, its not "ture" that most technologies were developed elsewhere lol. Try actually looking at patents on the items you think were invented elsewhere. Some sure, but most things are from here. We can grow more food than any other country on the planet, easily. Our oil reserves in Alaska alone would last us decades. We have the factories already built, we'd just have to reopen them. Outside of silicone chips which is mentioned here we have literally every single resource we need right here in the states.
I'm posting this at the very beginning, and am an American. I've seen enough to know even the smartest AI cannot predict a war's outcome. People are inventive, always looking for a way to survive. Sometimes that in itself can beat the most hi tech, or be enough to keep it at bay.
Problem is that tech is only a small part of why attacking us at home is basically impossible to win. Hell even if they get past the navy and air force and get on land the same argument you made, ingenuity, would bite them in the ass via guerilla warfare by the gun owners of America.
@generalgarchomp333 there's also one other detail that I'm rarely allowed to share on this platform, and for the sake of argument I'm hoping I can this time: Our own DOD has wargamed the scenario of the military being used to actively oppress the citizens of the United States. They've done this fairly regularly as an exercise in preparedness and for other reasons. Every time they've done this, the citizens win - and that's against the most powerful military in existence. If a hostile force gets past the border, even if air-dropped into the Midwest, they lose. It's not even a question.
@@RighteousJ I have participated in war game exercises at Leavenworth and elsewhere. We always lose. Wargaming puts us at disadvantage everytime. Makes us get creative to try to win.
~ @8:00 Re: Size vs Population of western States (Wyoming, Montana, etc.) Wyoming and Montana are both very low population density, Washington, Oregon, and even California are also very sparsely populated except for the coastal metropolitan areas. (It's surprising even close to the coast how many pockets there are of low population density, too, but that's another story.) The Dakotas are a little bit more dense, at least as you go eastward, but largely the same. The more I think about it, the crazier it seems, but that really would give us such a huge advantage with regards to a Canadian-border invasion.
15:11 One thing this doesn't cover is that we don't have *just* 11 Supercarriers, we have 9 "Amphibious Assault Ships" as well (7 Wasp class and 2 America class with plans to build 9 more of the latter) That can each carry 20 VTOL capable jets as well, effectively making them mini carriers that are about 50-75% the carrying capacity (And of equivalent tonnage and displacement) of the flagship carriers of the French and Indian fleet. Essentially our non-carrier carriers are equivalent to the carriers of other nations lmao.
Canada turned the tides of WW1 and WW2... so which wars you talking about? On D-Day canada was the ONLY country to make it to their end goal and made vital push's that allowed everyone else to push inland. Plus the Germans are on record of saying they feared Canada the most and usually put their BEST units to fight the canadians.
The United States are strong because its people love it and ARE proud of it, and to serve it and guard its way of life to the last breath. There are 5 generations of the like in my family alone, including my son and I, uncles grandaddies and great grandaddies. We can not be broken but from within... and it seems, we have for the moment, put a stop to that as well.
At the beginning of the US entry into WWII we were the 17th largest military in the world. At the end of the war we were number 1. We may quarrel amongst ourselves, but we stand together if anyone else comes at us.
Another thing that wasn't mentioned is our manufacturing capabilities. In a time of war it all becomes military manufacturing. And we can out produce every other country by a large margin. At the start of WW2 we barely had a military or military vehicles.... we were the 2nd strongest with a massive fleet of vehicles across all branches by the end.
Sir while I want your statement to be true. I ask you this. where you getting all your steel and aluiminum from. We only have 4 or 5 steel plants left in this country. Where is the comp chips coming from? Not from here in the USA. Not trashing your statement , just seeing it from a different aspect.
“The Canadian Armed Forces expand and contract with peace and war, as one might naturally expect. During peacetime, Canada prefers a small military as it allows for greater expenditure on healthcare, the economy and economic development.” I’m guessing we don’t have as much of need for strength when our neighbours are a superpower that wouldn’t allow an invasion. Canada also doesn’t have to spend as much on defences largely in part cause of its terrain and being the consensus #1 hardest country to invade.
The HUGE factor is the US armies can work with each other. Moreover, we have plenty of ex military who could be appointed as sergeants in command of 30 militia each. That would be 30,000 insurgent platoons overnight. In a couple months maybe these platoons could be made ready for some "offensive" operations. In the mean time they could move Ammo, food, water, bring up and guard vehicles dig trench corners and shelters.
at roughly the 8:50 mark, talking about not just the military, but the civilian population also, an additional point to take into account is the percentage of civilian pop that is also prior military. Take the number of active duty, reservists, and national guard and at least double it. Most of us that have been out for 10+ years wouldn't even make the B-team at this point, but we wouldn't need to.
That sea task force at the 19min mark is a single carrier strike group (that one is based in japan aka CSG we have 10 more of those in the usa and by January 2025 will get another carrier completing the the 12th CSG.. Also a single ford class carrier hold 90 fighters at peek but most are setup with around 55-60 using the space for larger recon, troupe and heli operation support
We have millions of ex military personnel as well. Those people have trained a lot of their civilian friends to be competent in arms. Some of us have also purchased a lot of military surplus vehicles, tools and weapons.
Plus about 1 million local and state police officers, plus a few thousand federal officers. A couple million security guards as well. Not all of them will be trained in weaponry and tactics very well, but a large enough percentage of them would be to an adequate degree.
You ask about Canada. Canada is a large country geographically, but not really militarily. Most of the countries population sits in relatively narrow band, and borders the U.S. The further north you go, the less populous the country is.
Canada's tiny military is extremely capable at special operations, so they could do enormous damage for their size... but that's akin to saying 'this ant is enormously strong for its size' it is true, but it means nothing in context of scale.
@@Sorain1I think it has to do with them not needing a large military when outside of fictional events the US and Canada are brothers forever. No one will ever invade Canada and the US won’t ever invade it either. They can instead focus on hyper specialized warriors that help the US in foreign affairs. Truly the frightening brother when everyone in the US military knows those Canadians will willingly do the most batshit insane things on the battlefield and win
The vastly different geographies in the US mean no nation can properly train a military to occupy it, meanwhile domestic soldiers are able to train and get acclimated to any type of geography except for maybe tropical/jungle. For an infantry to march across the land... good luck. It's VERY wide and the terrain changes tremendously between different states. You wouldn't even be able to equip a soldier with all the tools needed to march across the States. They would both die of extreme heat or extreme cold among other things. Each time facing civilians populations that are geographically acclimated and armed. That would really suck for any army.
Heck, there are like 5 different terrains just in Texas. I think there actually is jungle at the very southern tip of Texas, but we have jungle/rain forest in Hawaii.
The world would shoot themselves in the foot without hope of a medical professional giving them antibiotics for an infection. No one wins in a scenario like that.
Actually the last 20-30 years we've been called the world's nanny and it's why most of the world hates us. And most Americans want us to mind our own damn business. Don't do stupid shit like instigate a war with Russia and use Ukraine as a scapegoat.
Andre, I'm American and its great we are strong, but we are made of many people. My family is french, and we have many Portugeuse like yourself in it. My father is British. America is everyone. We would never fight everyone, everyone is us.
That’s wishful thinking. Sounds like your family is made up of fairly recent immigrants? The rest of us are born and raised from a very long ancestral family of Americans and we see us as Americans and not “everyone.”
tell that to the american japanese :| if you're a potential threat to the US you will be put aside so you don't worry them, in the best of scenarios, at least the japanese didn't got the treatment that innocent germans living in the Soviet Union when Barbarrosa kicked
@@JF-fx2qvI have ancestry leading back to the Mayflower. My family still holds strong to its German, Irish, English, Dutch, and Scottish roots. America is an idea, not a bloodline. That’s what makes us so strong.
Assuming nobody uses the literal nuclear option or any other WMDs, The U.S. wins.
It has mostly to do with the specific military doctrine we use in combat.
Further, in a scenario where some force manages to decimate our entire enlisted military, the existence of our Second Amendment means that over half our own population defaults to being the world's largest irregular military.
More importantly, just because certain weapons have been made illegal 40 years ago doesnt mean that all those weapons were surrendered or otherwise left private ownership - and that force, in particular, would have the advantage of literal "home turf" and the motivation of defending their families.
Nothing is as dangerous as a well-armed, well-disciplined person protecting their family without the restrictions of the Geneva Convention limiting their actions.
I'm about as peaceful as it gets, and I'm just an average guy who owns a few guns of my own; even just by myself I'm one of the most dangerous people to ever exist (given what i know how to do) given the correct motivation. And there are millions more just like me.
No, just no, the rest of the world combined outnumbers the US in everything by a lot
We literally have more guns than the entire rest of the world combined, including all militaries (even our own). I don't care how much the rest of the world hates us, they're not stupid enough to try anything serious.
You know it!
no one would win.... the ocean is too big the us has enough boats eu does not... but at same time eu has enough land based missiles that us could never land any force of significant size. so it would be air war for few years until new president and then peace...
Let Us Never Want to use Our 1st amendment against any Fellow Citizen unless for protection only, if any Nation decimates Our Military, Then Yes, They would Rue the day their Grandparents ever gave birth to their Parents. Americans Come together Frighteningly fast.
Someone once made an interesting observation. After WW2, the USA had a period of time where they had a monopoly on nuclear weapons. Instead of going around the world and saying "we'll take the following countries as ours", they helped rebuild nations and secure peace in hotspots like Germany and Japan. The USA may have its flaws, but that act alone says a lot about what the USA is as s nation.
Yeah help them build and people out people in top to run the country for our own benefit like resource. USA never really help any one. Name one place where the USA go that have peace I wait. Any place we touch turn in to chaos and a mess. Mid east usa Australia. Should I need more?
@@johnwu2012 If that’s how you feel leave the US we would be happy to see you go
@@R2W419 why leave when it free money here. Leave when u get enough. Your ancestor came here for the same reason. Money no one want them here why they still here
@@kentuckybluegrass8695 make me. Just like how y’all came here to take shit. We doing the same. The only people that can ask me to leave are the native of this country. Typical red neck reply leave my country. It not even your to begin with. Can’t claim something that is not your. Where are u from do u even know ??
They actually set up an empire this way without it being a direct empire. The majority of countries are allies of the US or Near US ally which has US bases on it as deterrent to both ally countries and enemy countries looking to incite conflict. It’s not exactly a secret we instill our own political leaders and interfere with elections ourselves. That on top of the fact the majority of the world uses the US dollars and tariffs and sanctions can keep a poor country poor and make a prosperous country struggle. It was a smart move idk about being better natured
A not so common fact is that the United States highway system was developed with troop movement being a primary function.
We Learned that Lesson During WW2 against the Germans .. "During World War II, the German Autobahn network played a crucial role in facilitating the rapid movement of troops and military supplies, particularly during the early stages of the war when Germany employed the "Blitzkrieg" tactic, thanks to its wide, well-maintained roads that allowed for swift military maneuvers across Europe" .... "Gen. Eisenhower was impressed with the autobahn and during his later Presidency ordered a copy of it made, the USA’s Interstate system, mostly for military reasons including for US Air Force bombers to use when their bases got taken out by Soviet ICBMs - and one mile of every five is straight and level for this reason."
armor as well, why would they be so wide otherwise.
They can also be used as landing strips, if anyone has noticed on level ground 2 of every 3 miles is practically straight. So there is that sue as well for the interstate system in America.
Just fixed 2 highways this summer up in Michigan. We can land aircraft easy if needed
Jeesh! I just posted the same thing then scrolled and ya beat me to it.
Eisenhower memorial? Five star?( I forget the ignored over looked designation) but US 70 is one. It's clear when looking at any map,and thinking straigically .
We did a neighborhood watch and emergency drill in my suburban area. We did a tally for an emergency situation. Of the 27 homes, there were 58 AR-15s and over 40,000 rounds of ammo. Within that group there were 8 military veterans who had fought in wars and most of the family members(even children) could shoot rifles and hunt. Some had already killed large deer by a very young age. There wasn't a single person over the age of 15 that hadn't fire a gun at least once.
And by that you think you would wan a war on the rest of the World??? You really think that other country aren't using weapons??? Seriously??? Moron.
deer dont shoot back, flank or take cover.
@@spiritualmoout of all of that that’s all you took away? 😂 Fucking goofball.
@@spiritualmoTrue, also very unlikely some s-hole suburban town probably in the deep south would make a valuable strategic target in a land invasion
@@slugeater1938really. Where are the major ports in the US? Where can you get boats and ships close enough to shore to land?
Dear USA, Canada cannot come to war today. Our tank is in the shop. Maybe in a few weeks. Signed, Canada
Dear America, France cannot help either, our tank is still stuck in reverse. Good Luck
As long as you don’t allow movement through your country to ours we won’t take you out. Unless you want us to get rid of your commie leader that is Castro’s son, and join us for good.
And we know the French are already quitting.
lol did you get the 1 Canadian tank joke from kill Tony?
Canada would just become a part of America so would Mexico it's already being discussed as a new union. It'd be a benefactor in the end. France on the other hand,
Deer Canada what are you talking about? Come on War criminal you can fight without tanks planes almost vehicles come on show me the Canadian that fight in world War I and two.
@15:33 keep in mind. The first largest air force in the world is the USAF, the 2nd is the us Navy. We’re competing for a high score against ourself 🤷
US Army is 4th or so. They're just all helicopters. And the US Marine Air Corps is number 9ish.
dont forget the museum fleets as well (they arent easily available, but a redneck with a dream could certainly get a lot of those moving with a bit of motivation)
Everyone wants to be #1... but for the USA thats not enough...
we want to be #1, #2, #3, and #4
And it's REALLY close between them and REALLY not close behind them.
The Air Force has the world's largest air force, with roughly 5,300 aircraft. The Air Force is known for its advanced technology and large fleet of aircraft.
United States Navy
The Navy has the world's second largest air force, with approximately 3,700 aircraft. The Navy's aircraft are used for a variety of missions, including maritime patrol, anti-submarine warfare, and search and rescue.
One thing this video forgets to point out is coordination of forces. If the rest of the world had to combine forces, they would take a LONG time to get to the point of understanding each other (i.e. Tactics, equipment, communications, etc) vs the US is such a well oiled military machine it would be immediately tipped in the US favor which could grant enough time to gain control of the canals & islands it would need and would keep any country from trying to attack because they'd be on the defensive immediately
It also doesn't exactly talk about the US logistical capacity and organization. It's not something a lot of people think about, but America's ability to produce/train and transport military equipment and personnel to any location in the world at a moment's notice has actually been an unintended weapon of psychological warfare in the past. In World War II we had entire barges in the Pacific dedicated to making 10 gallons of ice cream every seven minutes, 500 gallons every shift, and approximately five *tons* every day... per barge. In modern times there's a joke that the US can deploy a military base with a fully operational Burger King to any location in the world within 48 hours.
Imagine how demoralizing that is for America's enemies that you're busy digging trenches and worrying about supply lines while the US is trying to decide what fast food chain should serve their mess hall.
translation: "mostly rural farmland" = largest standing military in the world, armed and ready 24 hours a day 365 days a year, and they've been stockpiling bunkers for decades in the exuberant hopes that one day someone would be stupid enough to try. This was the point of the original Red Dawn movie. Rural U.S. is not unprotected lands, it just seems that way.
@baneblackguard584 for any invading army it would be basically the American experience in Vietnam, just in a different setting.
Our wildlife is no joke for those who aren't experienced with it, either; we've more or less learned how to deal with the native animals and live beside them without infringing on their territory, but any foreign army wouldn't have any idea what they were walking into.
So, so true n that's the way WE THE PEOPLE LIKE N LOOOOOVE IT!!!
BRING IT ON, IF YOU DARE, WHY DON'T YOU???!!!😂🤗
As most militia groups are heavily monitored by Intel in the US as they are all on watch lists. Over 500 militias in America many are not reported for security purposes. Estimates of over billions in stockpile of weapons and ammunition. From military grade and even tanks and rockets hidden from the government. It is the largest mitary in the world outside the U.S. military. Thats why globalist are trying to criminalize and disarm the so they can take power and why the US is the main focus of these international imperialist.
@@RighteousJ No it would be very different than Vietnam. They were fighting with bombs, booby traps, and French muskets, not AR-15s.
@Tijuanabill I see your point, but they also made gratuitous use of the land itself and used it to their advantage. Also, you're slightly incorrect: the VC might have been using sub-par weapons, but the NVA (being backed by Russia) had things like AK-47s, mortars, and RPGs. Study the battle of Ia Drang Valley to see what I mean.
Further, a weapon is only as useful as long as it has ammunition, and in this scenario, there would be many issues with citizens getting any sort of resupply from anyone. The National Guard enlisted wouldn't be there anymore, either, as they would have been called up for service and nationalized prior to this scenario, meaning that there wouldn't be anything left in the armories either.
Even the people with (by the average person's standards) disturbingly large ammunition reserves would run dry on a long enough timeline, at which point you're scavenging the enemy you've defeated for weapons and ammo. Largely, a citizen-soldier defense effort would look a lot like total guerilla warfare, with conservation of resources taking highest priority.
You see where I'm going with this.
Another fact not mentioned here is that we have 16 million veterans that are still of age to affect some resistance and are trained with equipment that is here and is still functuonal.
To add to this, a massive portion of the US(millions of people), even if they're not in the army or veterans, have some experience or knowledge about warfare or firearms. Guns and warfare are a massive piece of American culture.
Yup, plus any competent drill sergeant that mustered out would be able to train an irregular force to military standards, add in the gun owners who know how to make gunpowder and you have a small but well supplied military in just a few months to a year. Now take that capability and multiply it by a thousand (conservatively the number of drills that would be able to do this on an appreciable scale) and suddenly America looks even scarier.
Not counting the massive amount of ex military equipment in private ownership or skill sets.
US has not once won a Military exercise whit any of their friendly nations and Americans dont seem to understand how vulnerable America is it self so if you ignore all records we have on the combat efficiency of the American military and home defense then yes they would win but then you might as well say you know if we disarm every other nation in the world the US would win
@viktorgabriel2554 lmao
“America can fight in 2 oceans!?”
Yeah 80 years ago they did it with a nearly annihilated navy in the pacific at first.
I live in Alaska, it would be difficult to invade through here. Major mountain ranges in the North and South, and along the South East coast. Tundra dominates in the region where a ground invasion may be possible, and slowing movement makes invaders sitting ducks.
Alaska is a states full of hunters and gatherers. Essentially a state with 700,000 guerilla warfare snipers.
I heard of guerilla warfare, but using gorillas is next level.
@Tijuanabill LoL, my bad. The Silverbacks are fierce in the Arctic. Thanks, I'll fix that
LOL and the abundance of roads. It's not like there are any choke points. Now add in the mild winters. Abundance of supplies to confiscate.
Oops my sarcasm ran away with me.
Alaska would be worse than Switzerland. Switzerland at least would have short supply lines. Alaska? LoL
Id bet on all dozen of ya .
@nunyalastname-ej8vl The cold is ruthless. It makes it easier to travel across Tundra and water, but it's deadly cold.
Japan took island territory during WWII in Alaska. It is easy to invade because there are hardly any people that also makes it not very strategic.
Japanese Admiral Yamamoto is claimed by some to have said, “You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass.”
It isn't known if this was really said, but it's the thought that counts.
he was wrong. U.S. has more guns than grass
We have 450000000 guns in civilian hands.
Not true but lol we do have the worlds largest armed and trained civilian population.
China would collapse if the USA stopped buying its goods. We would hurt to but not near as much. Russia? Well , Ukraine? Not a concern. Im more worried about the cartels
America! Fuck yeah!!!! 🇺🇲🦅🇺🇸🦅🇺🇸🦅🇺🇸🦅🇺🇲🦅
@@captainnemo5379 on record and there are many not on record for an example home made guns don’t get counted . 😂 god bless America 🇺🇸
Him saying Wyoming is a big state with few people. Me in Alaska
Wyoming=lowest population
Alaska= lowest density
Both of us have the same “leave us alone” mentality.
I'm sorry but I love watching reactions from someone outside of the U.S watching them start to realize the reality of the outcome amuses that patriotic pride in me.
Its not pride, Its stupidity, America vs the planet would be the end of the USA, How is your economy going to work with no trading partners? How are you going to keep up with demand for munitions? How are you going to keep up with the war of attrition vs Europeans, China Russia and Japan invading Through Alaska and Canada.
How you going to keep up with China, India, Korea Australia and NZ and the rest of Asia invading through Mexico and south America. If you think the US would win vs the world you're delusional lol
People forget we actually are the only super power and we keep the peace. That's not ego its fact.
Bringing sht to our door? Yeah about that. It won't go,well. A fury and viciousness will be unleash like the world has never seen.
@@nunyalastname-ej8vlI’d have to disagree with being the peace keepers. Invading other countries in order to destabilize and strip them of resources to force them to bend the knee, isn’t exactly peace keeping. I know many veterans that have come back from war with this realization.
@black_hand78 who when? Name names .
Who enabled the Ukraine? We do. That ends when we say so. This admin just loves war. China holds back from Taiwan. Not out of fear of Taiwan but fear of the US.
MiddleEast? Israel likes us thier actions take us into,consideration. Or thier neighbors wouldn't be a concern of thiers.
Nothing happens in the world without the USA seriously concidered. We are very kind and tolerant.
World politics abhors a vacume.
@black_hand78 damn another post poof lol mine often disappear.
Anyway don't say things like that without examples.
You think,China China stays out of Taiwan because of Taiwan? LoL
Ukraine yeah our weak admin allowed it.
I found it really funny that you commented on the idea of the US Fighting in two oceans because that has literally been US Navy policy for almost a century now. The congressional act that authorized the buildup of the US Navy leading up to World War 2 was called the Two Ocean Navy Act, and that philosophy has remained ever since. The standard that our fleet is built and trained to is the ability to control the Atlantic and the Pacific simultaneously.
which is not new the brittish navy at one point had to have a 2 front or perhaps 3. If you include atlantic, indian and pacific navy for the brittish. russia at one point also had two navy front policy atlantic, pacific, plus a balkan fleet.
For the brittish after giving up on india and letting canada and australia rule their own nation has back away from that.
@@Marveryn The British Navy had the Two Power Standard, where they aimed to maintain a naval strength equal to the combined strength of the next two largest navies.
That's a tall order, but in the end, nobody would win. So many Americans are very well armed. The gorilla warfare would cause massive casualties to any invading army.
that's if we weren't divided and starting killing each other.
But yeah i was trying to explain that to my liberal friends that was worried when Russia invaded Ukraine.
Its actually pretty easy to cripple America. Our power grid alone is compromised. One litle trojan virus from china and boom....90% of US population gone within couple months.
Just so everyone knows, the US civilian arsenal is larger than all militaries (including the US military), police forces, and other nations civilian arsenals COMBINED. We literally have more guns than people.
And that’s why we stress every day we send our kids to school bc America is awash in guns that are too easy to get ahold of and commit a mass murder. Do you consider that a bragging point for the US?
@@sbuckle1171 yup. 2nd amendment makes it clear that ALL guns are to be available to US citizens, consider yourself lucky that several state governments have found loopholes. Founding fathers wouldve never let that happen.
@@sbuckle1171
Oh boo fn hoo. Get a grip.
AMERICA F YEAH!!!
@@sbuckle1171 "He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither."
- Ben Franklin
@@sbuckle1171 Sad thing is, the vast majority of the weapons used in all the incidents you are complaining about were stolen or otherwise illegally obtained for that purpose. Legal gun owners are among the least likely to use their weapons to commit crimes or be a danger to the public. Criminals, by definition, do not care about laws, and they acquire firearms as they will.
Additionally, the US is not even the worst country for gun crime, with the US being around number 25, we just put it in the news more. If we remove the top 5 worst cities for gun crime, the US drops down to around number 160. Four of those cities have some of the strictest gun control laws in the country, and one is in a state that is in what could be construed as an active war with criminal cartels dealing not only in human trafficking and drugs, but also illegal firearms brought into the country by them. The countries with the worst gun crime have FAR stricter controls than the US.
World events are also proving disarmed populaces are vulnerable to criminal attacks by persons who come to your country and don't share your values. Even countries that would otherwise be exemplars of low crime, are now having violent crime spikes. The US has been battling the problem for decades, Europe is now getting a taste of the problem, and from recent election results, they are getting tired of it too.
Something else other countries, and most citizens of the US for that matter, don't realize is that the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) has ruled that the police, and any other state/governmental agents, do not have a duty to protect you, even if there is a writ of protection/restraining order in place against the person threatening you (Castle Rock v Gonzales (2005)). At least 1 state has ruled the officer can be standing nearby and doesn't have to lift a finger to aid you, even if they know your attacker has already killed and injured other people in the last few hours (Lozito v NYC (2013), which referred to the previously mentioned SCOTUS case). With that in mind, US citizens are the own primary line of defense. So, keep in mind that, when you advocate for disarming the public, you are also advocating for making persons seeking to defend themselves from stalkers and/or violent exes.
I must take this opportunity to thank all of our active Service Members, Veterans and their incredible families for the hard work and sacrifices made on my behalf. I am so sorry that words are not enough to express my gratitude and admiration; but thank you all so very much! God Bless America!
As somebody who lives in South Dakota (midland USA) I can say I myself own several firearms built to the standard of our forces. My rifles are camo, with solar backup power on my sights. Thousands of rounds of ammo, extra military surplus gear and more. My friends often do camping expeditions running training exercises with night vision or thermal vision.
If you attacked central US you would be met with extreme and lethal force from master hunters, ex military, armed citizens and people of all walks of life.
"Behind every blade of grass, is a rifle" one leader once classicly spoke of when considering a mainland invasion of the USA. I can speak from experience, at least in the Midwest, this is 100% true. Some friends groups are already more armed than some small nations, and often trained to operate at a higher level than some base military factions.
Fun fact: out highways systems are designed to be used as backup runways. We can mobilize any base in nearly any location, at any time. There will always be a runway.
The US with no allies? No rules? That's a scary ass thought. For everybody else lol
The most dangerous thing on the battlefield is a grunt without an officer telling them No to avoid Geneva Convention checklists.
@@SilvaDreamsif there's any witnesses heh...
@@SilvaDreamswe become the old timey brutal Canadians.
We'll go from "Its never a war crime the first time" to "Its not a war crime if we're the only country left" which, I'm laughing while typing it, but thats fucking scary as shit.
US has not once won a Military exercise whit any of their friendly nations and Americans dont seem to understand how vulnerable America is it self so if you ignore all records we have on the combat efficiency of the American military and home defense then yes they would win but then you might as well say you know if we disarm every other nation in the world the US would win
I liked his reaction, when he realized that our economy changes in times of war, and production is focused on military spending. The military we have now, is just the military we have, while we're waiting for something big to happen. We can actually become much larger.
The fact is our peace time standing army is nothing compared to our mobilized total war army
Exactly. And we actually have a historical example of that by way of World War II.
Exactly ..
Keep in mind WWII was not a total war situation, just lady liberty pissed off.
@@damonberry2212if by “pissed off” you mean bribed, then yes.
In WWII, Japan was arming its citizens with guns to defend to the last if the mainland got invaded. These guns were basically a single use pipe on a piece of wood. USA meanwhile, is full of semi automatic handguns as well as basically every other kind of gun imaginable, some citizens in some states even own tanks. Like, tanks. Some are just APCs that could protect people from small arms, but some are proper tanks with cannons and everything. Some might have decomissioned guns, but that could potentially be rectified in global war. Yeah, imagine a civilian militia where everyone is armed with at least something and some even have their own tanks to fight back with. Don't underestimate how effective the citizens could be. I myself have used old lever action rifles to land x4 shots in just 5 seconds on a 9 inch by 9 inch piece of metal at close to 100 meters away and I go shooting roughly once every two years. To note, due to the stability issues of working the lever, you can have some difficulty getting your aim on target after each shot, and I did this with just Iron sights. Not necessarily the most crazy distance shot or anything, but that target was roughly the size of a person's head and I could hit it reliably. Willing to bet I'm not the best shot out here either. Meanwhile, some of the conscript troops that would likely be part of this invasion would barely have held a gun before in their lives.
Do keep in mind this only includes the Tech the Public is allowed to know of.
Exactly, e.g. there are 1400 WMDs yet that is only the currently active and armed WMDs, that is not counting any number of "disarmed" and inactive WMDs that might take a week to ready.
And what they say our capabilities are, living not to make the rest of the world shit their pants when the mechs hit the battlefield
Wait till Elon activates our Terminators in Ironman suits... 😎
Google, Microsoft, Amazon all in America
Yeah remember when Trump got in trouble for showing off spy satellite data for an Iranian missile site that was way better than anything the rest of the world had to offer and it was from a satellite launched in the 90's.
"We've been looking for the enemy for some time now. We've finally found him. We're surrounded. That simplifies things."
-Chesty
"We're surrounded." "Good. They won't get away now."
"that's just a target rich environment" - The Fat Electrician
@@phoahseilah😂 welcome 150 million well armed rednecks! Good luck!!
WEAPONS FREE!
I stopped the video at 2:21 seconds, to answer your question and as a military veteran, ( USMC ) I will go out on a limb and state the United States would win. We also have an armed citizenry, and roughly 24 million Military Veterans still alive and well, any invasion of the continental U.S. would not go real well for the invader. Okay, let us watch your video.
OOH RAH!!! Semper Fi Marine! At 62 I may not have the stamina I once had, but I'm still a Marine and the added benefit of being a WM. Women are always underestimated, but when it comes to making due, we have the edge. If your aim is not what it used to be, try a shot gun; buck shot will slow them down. Better yet, add a bit of salt.
We raised two girls and their dates were always afraid of my husband. My girls always told them they should be afraid, but they had better be more afraid of Mom. Dad will give them a head start; Mom won't.
I'll wrap this up by asking a question. Do you really believe all our weapons and tricks are plastered all over RUclips???
@@marydickerson6111 Rah! " Semper Fi!" Just another old 0311.
Americans are usually pretty easy going unless crossed, then the gloves come off. Even the Japanese Admiral in WWII wrote in his diary after Pearl Harbor something to the effect of :"I fear all we have done is woken a sleeping giant and filled him with a terrible resolve.". We waste a lot, but if the world went to war, rationing would happen, as it has before, and we become fairly self sufficient and anyone trying a ground war inside the US would find it difficult. We sometimes joke that if an enemy tried to invade the South, the Hillbillies and good ole boys would pull out the hunting rifles and by the time our own military got to the spot, the guys would be sitting down, drinking beer, having it all under control. This is one of the reasons why some of us remain steadfast on the 2nd Amendment.
Were not the same people we used to be. Now, i feel many would just try to help the invaders
Don’t touch our ship, don’t touch our planes, don’t touch our buildings, don’t spit in our face.
This is all that is necessary to be a friend. But it is very easy to become our enemy.
One of. The first and primary reason for the 2nd Amendment is protection from our own government. A shame so many hive minded, commie loving leftists in a handful of major cities are so absurdly blind. And the Bill of Rights aside, guns are a huge part of our culture in the South.
The Tulsa Race Riots of the 1920s was put down by members of my American Legion Post, Tulsa Post 1, and working to help rebuild North Tulsa before the national guards got there. Although the other group wants to lie about all of it now.
look up operation praying mantis
The fact that this question can even be legitimately asked is crazy.
47 carriers currently in the pacific.
The us held off the Japanese navy with only 2 carriers until they rebuilt their navy.
Modern carriers are also escorted by very lethal destroyers and cruisers and subs
I’d like to compare America to an English mastiff. It seems like a derby dog that trips over its own feet until it’s defending its family. Then the goofy looking giant dog becomes one of the scariest things you’ve ever seen.
Yeah that's pretty accurate.
Too many comments to scroll through to see if someone else mentioned it lol. But, on the whole "control" of Mid-Eastern oil thing. Even if, by chance, America couldn't maintain control of the oil there, what do you think they would do? Being able to maintain itself, America would destroy any/all oil production facilities in the Mid-East... denying the entire rest of the world the biggest majority of their oil. Win... by attrition.
As Christopher Titus said in a comedic skit, "We build $300,000 monster trucks for FUN...phuck with us and see what we build for you!" LOL
Lots of ppl dont know our military did coordinated training and small missions. That's why we only lost 4k troops after 20 yrs of so called war, that shit over there was defense contractors paradise. Not to say it was a right or good thing to be there in the first place.
Just like with Nam some stupid crap that wasn't our business
The same with Taiwan. The scenario of losing Taiwan to China right now has already generated strategies to crater the island in a losing situation.
there's more untapped oil in the niobara basin (north dakota area) than in the middle east. just fyi.
People forget we can deploy a fully functional Burger King anywhere in the world within 24 hours with working ice cream machines. This is less close than anyone thinks because currently we fight with 2 hands tied behind our backs. In case anyone forgets, We're still 2 time World War Champs.
I have heard there are Americans that have rifles with night vision scopes, long range rifles, and they are always practicing. Those are just your average rural Americans. There are also millions of veterans who stay active. Definition of F around and find out.
You may enjoy this story. After Hurricane Andrew in 1992 a curfew was placed on citizens after sunset due to all the looting. At the time I was working at a state prison and my shift ended at midnight. I had taken my entire “arsenal” and had it in the back of my SUV since my home was destroyed and couldn’t be secured. The first night I was stopped by National Guardsmen they asked why I was out during curfew, I showed my prison credentials and explained that my shift ends at midnight. Then they asked if I had weapons in the truck, I replied my entire arsenal was in the back. They requested to see it and one of the guardsmen said “damn he’s better armed than we are”. Every night I would encounter the same check point and the same group, they didn’t stop me any further after night number 2. So yes us civilians are pretty well armed.
Yep. Many of us grew up with a rifle in our hands. Most men in the SE U.S. live like this. Most of us do not have true night vision scopes due to the absurd price, but some do. Long range is subjective. I can consistently and accurately shoot 500 meters, but I've never had a range or line of sight beyond that to test my full capability There are citizens though that can consistently bullseye 900+ meters. Now realistically, the ammo to make those shots is expensive, so it's not going to be too many citizens that can afford to stockpile many thousands of rounds for those sniper shots. A skilled hunter/shooter, most of us it's just 1 shot, 1 kill for a 500M shot and the ammo is affordable. The average hunter without much experience can still pop you at 300 meters.
@@Swearengen1980there is more hunting north than you think. I bet northerners have more fund per capita than SE. I lived in Michigan for years then moved to South Carolina.
@@joecuster6926 I know there's plenty of hunting up north, but funds per capita mean nothing.
I'm a city boy that never held a gun until I was 19. Live in Florida. I can hit a human shaped target center mass at 300 yards with iron sights, using a beat up old rental AR platform at the range.
I can hit a human shaped target at up to 100 yards with a snub nose as well, bullseye 5/6 times.
I only own 1 weapon, but what I own I'm good with. Night vision is great but it's expensive AF. You don't have to have all the fancy equipment although it can help, but you just need to be good with what you have available.
The US military can have boots on the ground with a burger king to feed the troops in 24hrs.
If not Burger King then a Coyote Burger from the chuck wagons.
@@macbolan8566 I really mean they did that a burger king to feed the troops they set up a whole ass burger king.
You got that right and a pizza hut balad Iraq anaconda
And a Green Beans for good measure.... it was green beans right? It's been 15 years and brain damage has ruined some memories lol
Ramirez protect the burger town!!
Blue collar American here. The vast majority of the people here do NOT want war, but we ARE and ALWAYS will be prepared for it.🇺🇸🇺🇸
You mentioned how crazy it was that America was fighting in 2 oceans and still doing well. We had that figured out back in WW2, lol
Ex. Military here, what you think you know about the us military is 20 years old. You don't know what we are capable of.
Yeah we've become soft and filled with incompetent DEI hired leadership.
The USA has about 11 million deer hunters. The hunters have the supplies and local knowledge of land. There are tens of millions of other firearm owners.
100 million gun owner but there 350 million people with over 450 million firearms in the united states
A lot of hunters also have certain sites prepped whenever they go to these hunting sites, so some they likely have a backup supply in certain regions away from people’s hands.
With that, we have a deep prepper community that if things go sideways, there’s going to be a group prepared throughout the country. There’s also the veteran community who have the experience to think about logistics, as well as strategies, all while being familiar with the land than a foreigner who might have a little knowledge but not as much as the locals.
Even without the US military or veterans or hunters, millions of US citizens have knowledge or experience with warfare or guns. Guns and warfare are just a massive part of American culture.
We literally have more guns than people. Lol.
My Grand Parents Came from the Philippines after WW2 .. My Grand Parents Lives were saved by US Soldiers in Manila during WW2.. My GrandPa told me if you ever see a Soldier in a Bar or Restaurant pay for their Meal... My Family are very Patriotic to USA.. And every single one of us Own Firearms , Well Trained in Shooting and Safety.. GOD Bless the USA !!!
So consider this, the armed civilian population is roughly 100 x that of the standing military. If someone were able to defeat the entire US military, they would still have to go through a far larger one behind that
And if the world pissed us off enough for everyone to declare war… well, do you remember the movie Inglorious Basterds?
The F22 ridiculously outclasses every other fighter jet in the sky. In every wargame, it achieved it onjective before it was ever detected. It is also one peice of wargear that it has been made illigal to sell to any other country, even allies.
When we gave up control of the Panama canal it was wrote in that we would take it over in a major conflict
Tough to enforce if literally *the whole world* is against us, but it's still a good point to know.
That said, it's not like Panama would last even a couple hours if we dropped a couple Ranger battalions into the Canal's AOO. And by the time they *could* do something about it (or, more likely, one of their larger neighbors), we'd have an air craft carrier battle group down there to tell em to piss off.
The scariest but possibly most reassuring aspect of this Andre is that the United States could do all of this right now if it really wanted to, but we don't.
Let's be honest, 2 countries, China and Russia will be enough for the USA. The United States has no experience in fighting an equal opponent and no experience in wars, in real wars. To understand this, you need to get out of the echo chamber for a week.
@dankerxd4108 China and Russia aren't anywhere near equal to the US. Even combined neither would be a serious threat in conventional warfare. Russia can barely handle itself against a defending neighboring country let alone the might of the entire US military. China is the only real "threat" and if you want to talk about a military that doesn't have any fighting experience China would be the epitome of that.
@@dankerxd4108lol. Russia can’t even take Ukraine.
@@dankerxd4108 You have to realize, the USA wargames with a majority of other close opponents, They have to handicap themselves in order to make it challenging and helpful to all involved. Look at the Reports and do a deep dive, its scary.
@dankerxd4108 This is an interesting video, but let's be real. Russia and China would be the most challenging but that is hypothetical if they are full strength. At this time during the Ukraine war, there would be no way they could stand a chance.
21:10 yes, everything domestic that wasn't necessary for survival of those still at home went to the war effort. Toy manufacturers started making military equipment. It was insane.
The thing about the oil in the Middle East in a situation like this is not so much that we would need it for ourselves (the U.S.) but rather we would have to control it so that the other nations don't have access to it, cutting off their supply. The U.S. is the largest oil producer in the world. We produce almost as much oil per year as Saudi Arabia and Russia combined. we have plenty within our own borders so it's not so much a matter of use, but a matter of control.
That coupled with the fact that the only nation in the world with the logistical means to carry out an overseas war on multiple fronts, is the U.S. so it's not likely that the U.S. would lose. not saying we would win, but we wouldn't lose or be invaded.
I agree with this take. While I don't think we could conquer the entire world, but I think we'd definitely be safe from a mainland invasion indefinitely. I guess you could call it stalemate. It's just so much easier to defend than attack.
Food for thought
No other country in history has had such a great economic and military advantage. Yet doesn't use it for conquest. Does the U.S have influence? Yes but not by conquest.
This is a great point. If we wanted to "conquer" other people, we would. Instead, we opt to build economic partnerships and to build military alliances in other regions instead of militarily controlling those regions ourselves. A great example of this is the fact that various shipping lane trade routes are protected and ships are escorted by US military (Navy) ships. If we really had world domination on our minds, we would be the only ones transporting anything instead of protecting every goods transport ships with trade. Full marks for your comment!
I mean to be fair we did kind of do “Manifest Destiny” and we have quite a few “rebuilt” countries that are essentially puppets
@@lenardstarks5891 This is fair, but if we word it a certain way it doesn't count.
@@t0mahawkj0nes neocolonialism sure is a thing
Only open and free markets that America allows affords the technology. No one would work that hard developing tech if they couldn't make money on it. Open and free Markets.
your faces as you saw the naval capabilities and funding was hilarious :) not making fun it's just awesome to see a reaction to it all. I didn't realize a lot of it but I'm just proud not horrified hahaha!
The US is #1 in oil production, producing 1.3x as much as the #2 producer Russia.
The US uses a lot of that petroleum domestically, so the US is only the world’s #4 exporter of crude oil, but if you consider exports of refined petroleum products and natural gas liquids into the equation, the US jumps up to the world’s #2 net exporter of liquid hydrocarbons.
The main reason the US imports oil is because the US has excess refinery capacity. It makes economic sense to import oil (mostly from Canada and Mexico) to prevent those extra refineries from sitting idle. (The extra refined product is then exported.) The secondary reason the US imports oil is because in some places (e.g., Hawaii), it’s easier/cheaper to get a tanker load from the Persian Gulf than to get one from Houston due to the combination of the price of transit through the Panama Canal and the restrictions of the Jones Act.
That's true. The shale revolution really expanded our oil and gas capabilities. This is not even to mention the new food technologies that have passed the prototype stage and are now moving into production stage. Those techs will cause the USA to produce at LEAST 3 times more plant foods with at minimum half of the resources required to grow them within the next 10 years.
We doing good.
You should react to The Fat Electricians "22 vs 500 America's defiant stand at Lazeranth Ridge" I think you'd like it and the men of that story deserve to be remembered
If it comes to the US then 100% we win! Our terrains and amount of people knowing their ways through certain areas would be a big beneficial factor.
“What? they can fight a war in two oceans?” When WW2 is taught in European schools, is the entire Pacific theater skipped?
Yes because they never got involved in it. Only the British were involved (they had 2 ships in the Pacific that sailed with the American fleets but America kept them back to protect transpot guard duty. They repeatedly asked America to allow them into the main combat but were denied because they couldn't incorporate them into American tactic and comunication.
@ that would explain the “Russia fought half of WW2, and the US just helped Britain” bs. Them not covering the Pacific front would explain a lot of mind boggling conversations that I’ve had about WW2.
considering the entire education on that war is strictly focused on perpetuating a proven false victimhood, and a proven false plan of world domination, yea. The education is 100% pure propaganda and brainwashing with nearly zero historical fact focused on. So if it doesnt further these points, they dont even bother mentioning it.
Yeah, they pretty much skip over it like Japan wasn't part of the Axis
I was born and raised on Guam. We know.
I am one lone woman in Texas. I have 1 pistol, 1 judge (shoots bullets and shotgun shells), one rifle, one shotgun, and a few knives. I have 4 close families of friends (and they have extended families). My friends have hundreds (maybe more) guns, rifles, shotguns, military knives, large caches of munitions, and they are just collectors. They are not part of a militia. But I can surely count on them to protect me and all their neighbors.
Yes, It would take a small army to take my house.
The Harris supporters next door may not fair as well.
@@jarredeckman1976 I have been through two elections here; saw 1 Biden/Harris sign in 2019 and no signs for Harris/Waltz this year. So... no sign of Tampon voters here.
@@stinky60096 LOL
One man here in Oregon, 5 pistols (.40,.45, and 9mm) 2 rifles (.308, and .300 blk out) 3 shot guns, and thousands of rounds of ammo. I can arm my neighbors and half of them own their own too. So F A F O lol
I know we shit on the chair force a lot but they're wizards of logistics
There is a saying, "You can get mad at America, but DON'T piss her off!" You grab the bull, you get the horns.
Also don't touch the boats
@@LockkraKenI came here to say the same exact thing!
@@jerkyz they also didn't really mention the second largest navy in the world, our museum ships, many of which are either still functional or could be if we needed to get them up and out
@@LockkraKen and God help you if you touch their buildings
I don't find that quote to be accurate. We're not so petty that we start nuking rivals over a difference of opinion, for example. More like, don't attack us, don't invade us. If you want to criticize us, especially constructively criticize, that's OK and we might share our opinions about you as well but that's free speech which we encourage even when it's difficult.
The states surrounding the Canada border alone could keep Canada at bay. Which would be police, sheriffs, veterans, gang members, NRA members, private militias and national reserve army. So we wouldn't need an army to keep Canada's military at bay.
Canadas defense is a joke lol
They would be much threat
The entire Canadian navy has about 8000 people, about as many as a single American carrier strike group (and lacking the equipment). Canada is not a threat, at least partly because they haven't bothered to have much of a military since they know no one would dare attack them while we have their back. Keep in mind this is also true of many other first world countries who have been relying on our military strength to keep them safe.
Canada is NOTHING to the US, so yeah, northern citizens ALONE should be enough to stop them.
@@147salsaCanada's biggest defense would be its weather. Just like Russia. That would be mitigated somewhat by superior equipment and deploying people from the northern states who have a little bit more affinity towards that type of weather.
@@aaronburdon221
America has many tens of millions living in cold climates. We would not be unprepared for cold weather and Alaska is more extreme than most anywhere.
Props for that Hulk issue in the background.
There's one country on earth with the transport capability to move an army across an ocean. It's the USA.
Two oceans.
@@kate2create7383 oceans.
We can absolutely go through the arctic ocean too from alaska.. and we do. People sleep on that cup, nobody expects us to go around the northpole take out Santa and hit the tops of europe and Asia while hitting the sides too
"Deploy the tactical Burger King"
USA would lose against the world
I live in Southern California. Almost every one I know owns at least one gun but usually they have several or more.
Your State Government hates you and wants to change that.
Our government will never allow people to use their stockpiles. They would arrest the civilian and let the enemy go free!!!
Too bad you don't have constitutional rights there can't carry them, and they have to be on the safe firearm roster meaning the least possible efficient platforms for defense. But something better than nothing I guess.
@ you can carry here with a permit
@@danacramer9311 Imagine if you needed government permission to exercise any other -conditionally- Constitutionally-guaranteed right. (Edit: I hate autocorrect.)
The kid would finally get that interception he salivating for.
I mean, yeah you'd lose, but we can make sure you're extracted to Texas so you can enjoy some BBQ and pecan pie until it's all over. lol
"Man, they aren't defending, they are attacking now." Yeah, that's basically our doctrine for most defensive situations. 🤣
"The best defense is a good offense."
"Not a lot of people live there" is another way to say, "not habitable" or "difficult terrain."
It should also be noted that the USA can destroy or hijack satellites at will. So the rest of the world would have to communicate and find US forces the old fashioned way, like they did in WW2. Other countries might be capable of doing this, like Russia and China, but have not been shown to be coordinated enough, or perceptively capable of hitting satellites.
Also, that means there would be no cyber attacks.
As a God fearing United States citizen, I am boastful and saddened by the power/wealth we have. Sure I love knowing that my country can defend itself. We also have well armed citizens with the stand-your-ground mentality that is a part of our culture. What makes me sad is that all of the weapons and resources are considered needed.
You said it perfectly when there is no winner when it comes to nuclear war. In my perfect world, we would all maintain the life and culture we all love so much. That is what makes this blue planet such a great place to live.
The fact that we as Americans are well armed and very patriotic civilian militia would be hard to overcome and would be a significant turning point in any invasion. For example I got my first gun when I was 12 and learned to shoot and hunt. My son around the same age.
Very common in the u.s for us to have guns very young, its like another 200million+ troops they would have to go through, we would just overwhelm anyone setting foot here.
During World War II The US population was 125 million and they put 11 million men into military service. Today the US population is about 325 million or so and by automating industry each worker in war production factories can be much more productive than in WWII and this combined with the fact that the US now allows women to also take combat roles in its military means that the US could probably support a military of 25-30 million in a total war today. The rest of the world should be able to exceed this number but would not be likely to equip their forces as well as the Americans would and it would likely take them some decades to be able to deploy a large enough force across the ocean to really challenge the Americans on their own soil.
Our national guard and reserve forces have almost as many people as active duty forces
Behind them we have 18 million combat veterans.
India alone can pull 150 to 200 million troops easily we have many men who wants to join military but government limits it.
80% of America's young men today fail the military's standard of health. They couldn't join if they wanted to. Obesity and mental illness alone disqualify that useless generation.
@@Makoto417I think the only issue is getting them from India to allied countries where they would be able to engage American forces. For the entire world this is the major problem is how do we engage the Americans outside our own countries.
@Makoto417 I've seen videos of Indian soldiers carrying sticks to fight against the Chinese at border disputes. Not too worried about 150 million stick bearers.
That is insane how power full they are
You got to figure too that any ground force would naturally be met with our military but you’ve got a country if armed citizens many own more than one gun. So if the neighbor doesn’t have one they will before long. There have been kids as young as 11 that have defended their home against an intruder. Link below to my favorite interview of a kid that did this.
There was another kid that saved his sister by using a slingshot from his upstairs bedroom to hit a man trying to kidnap his little sister from the yard. Most Americans would fight back, even the elderly vets would want to take up a position… they’re tough old SOBs.
And why does that matter against an air raid, missile or artillery strike?
America has never been attacked on it's home soil in a real war. The closest it ever got was Pearl Harbour, a military base. And the people have no idea what would really be coming for them!
Europe and a lot of the rest of the world does!
I think a lot of citizens are honestly waiting for the day the US gets invaded.
Would be and honest to god dream come true for some people.
“You see those guys landing on our beaches? I don’t like them, do whatever you want”
I hope this video shows how America is a peaceful nation that brings stability and peace to the rest of the world...look at what we could do if we weren't...
You're joking right?
@@14FrensAnd88Eagles No, he's not. And it's a very valid point. America really could demolish... everyone. Do recall that following WW2, it was America that was better off than ever, and we had such an economy that we completely rebuilt and restarted the absolutely demolished countries ravaged by war, to the point that Germany and Japan are now some of the US' closest allies due to this support. But, we didn't HAVE to assist. The US could've left everyone else in ashes.
The US is, unironically, an absolutely horrible, terrifying military power that is held at bay by the most progressive society in the world- itself. The gloves stay on, even during our last few wars.
America really, genuinely is a peaceful nation, because it'd be laughably easy to take on other nations. I believe a report released by the DoD a couple years ago explored the effectiveness of a single US aircraft carrier group (one of nearly a dozen) versus China should China declare war. 1 of many groups away from home, versus China with homefield advantage. The verdict: it would be a standstill. The entire nation, versus just one of our supercarrier fleets far from home.
@@14FrensAnd88Eagles y'all foreign nations run your mouth, but who comes to save you every time your enemies come at you? We have zero interest in world domination, that's why the world isn't under our boot. We want you to be self sufficient because it's better for us anyway. We want you developed so you can help advance technology. We want you able so we don't have to come running to save you. We want more nations closer to our level just in case an alien species wants to FAFO cause then it's less weight on our shoulders to save the world. If Americans wanted to enslave the world, you would be enslaved already, especially since you've all let your own defensive abilities fall so far. Not one of you even has the logistical capabilities to play that game. You would be fighting just to get supplies to the front line and you can't fight without supplies. You're welcome, much love, 'Merica.
@@williamturner7131 I mean, it took that the japanese attacked the US and Hitler declared war to get the US out of their slumber
and there is no doubt that will happen again, but sadly, United States must get back to isolationism so the rest of the world realizes how much they've lost after decades of shatting at the USº
@@williamturner7131 This. Yes. We could annihilate any other country if we wanted to and claim it as territory and no one would have the ability to do anything about it. But we don't because that isn't the type of world and philosophy we ascribe to. We actually want to dissuade countries from that type of mind set.
The fact that you can even posit the question says loads.
More than that huge supplies of oil have been found in North and South Dakota. Supposedly larger thsn Saudi Arabia.
I love your videos. I am American but I learn a lot from these. Thank you.
Oh Ty 🙏
@@european-reacts still think it would be silly a US vs the world, but alot of the points for wining would go to the US, if it did win. what would it gain? Because I do not think the US would want a crown or be president of the world. Way to much work. But that is how a empire or planet unification would start.
American veteran here. I’d bet that people vastly over estimate the populations ability to fight.
It’s a serious myth that deludes most of us here.
That isn’t to say it wouldn’t be a fight, but most guns and ammo aren’t spread equally across the population. In addition, just having them doesn’t mean people are proficient with them.
Theres definitely some people that overestimate it. But you may be underselling it.
Sure the guns arent distributed evenly, but they are everywhere. Its not like theyre all concentrated in a singls reagion. Theyre concenfrated to (relatively) few households in basically every region. Meaning that they just need to get passed around. But its not like they need to get shipped hundreds of miles. As far as proficiency, youre right, but generally peoples arguments about rhe guns in america arent about how skilled americans are, some people talk about that. But generally its about the actual number of people that can have them. Dont need to aim good if youre firing at a crowded convoy.
Just the American hunter (licensed) is the largest standing army in the world. Civilians aren't nearly as trained as military personnel but we are talking about a possible militia of 218,028,300 million people between the ages of 15-64. To add to that the government wouldn't even need to supply guns or ammo to them.
The US is the only country since WWII that has needed to have a Blue Water Navy. European and Asian countries are almost completely concerned with land power projection (except for Chinese-Taiwan issues).
The UK has one. Not large, but highly capable for its size.
@@reliantncc1864 I will grant you that, but for the US a Blue Water Navy is essential for projecting power ANYWHERE or otherwise being irrelevant. Unless we're talking Canada or Mexico, of course. What we HAD to do for WWII left the US in a position to dominate the oceans for the better part of the next century.
The biggest issue the "Rest of the World" has in this hypothetical scenario is that they've been too reliant on US Military Power since the 1940s. So most countries in good standing with the US have built up enough military power to defend their own land, and help do what they might have to "with US Support". Pretty much no other countries' armies is actually built to the point of being able to "leave home", but in the US' case we have more power stockpiled "away from home" than most anyone else has "at home". Unless a lot of other countries start building up their militaries to be useful on a global scale, the main metric of this hypothetical scenario is "how long can the rest hold out?" as opposed to "what could the rest do to enact a win?".
And one of the scariest things to consider for the formerly US friendly "rest of the world" is how much of their technology is derived from multiple generations old US giveaways. Take for example the F-15s mentioned in the video... they haven't been in production for almost 30 years, and we still have more of them than any other country. Just think about it, most people in the world didn't have internet access or cell phones when the US STOPPED making them. Yet they are still considered a threatening part of the fighting force against "the rest of the world".
The deeper you think about it the worse it gets. Biggest silver lining really only helps SE Asia and a bit of South America, the means of production for everyday things that would be more likely to cause civil unrest during a World War scenario, is relatively weak in the US per capita as opposed to the major production countries. But also relatively weak in most current 1st World Countries, so while the US would take a hit from such things, the EU would be just about equally affected, thus the 1st and 3rd greatest powers in the hypothetical war would be brought down equivalently.
The problem is that if other countries started building up for a war like this their economies would utterly collapse. They spend all the money we do on military on social issues. And even IF they could muster the fire power, they still cant get to us. America is the only country on the planet with blue ocean lift capability. (aka ability to move troops across oceans/seas with numbers that would matter)
@@dalehammers4425 And on top of that, those bitches all gave up their firearms to their governments. Small militaries and no citizenry that knows how to shoot? The rednecks alone could handle a foreign invader that managed to get past our Navy or Air Force (hypothetically, obviously they couldn't).
The real problem is every person living in every other country puts WAY too much reliance into their government to protect their best interests. No. Governments can become corrupt. People will act in their OWN self interests and string you along if you are going to help them. American ideology is based on the idea that I AM MY OWN MAN. I don't need a government to take care of me I can do it myself. Hence then 2nd amendment, we are not going to rely on the government to protect us. I am going to take up arms and do it myself if I have to. All of you trust and rely on your governments way too much. When comes the day when they decide to turn on you, will you still follow like sheep? Or will you fight like a wolf?
So if all those US outposts, with limited defences, are overrun. The rest of the world are now in charge of those armaments. The US is stretched thin across the globe...
But as a hypothetical I think it would be just as globally disastrous as a nuclear war.
I don't agree with your take on an embargo affecting Europe as much as the US though. Remember we are talking about 'the rest of the world' here so Europe would not stop getting resources, only the US.
What is rather concerning is the perceived attitude from Americans that it would be an easy walkover. This from a population that, in general, admits it doesn't know much about the rest of the world. And generally thinks it is all decades behind America. Some of it is, much of it is not. Some technology is ahead of the US. Shock horror... by why do most Americans think they are ahead in all technology? Most of the technologies they have were developed in other countries. And yes that is ture!
@@GarryGri There is not a single resource we need that we cant get domestically. We dont remotely need outside oil, and we have the manufacturing capability to more than supply what we need as well. And no, its not "ture" that most technologies were developed elsewhere lol. Try actually looking at patents on the items you think were invented elsewhere. Some sure, but most things are from here. We can grow more food than any other country on the planet, easily. Our oil reserves in Alaska alone would last us decades. We have the factories already built, we'd just have to reopen them. Outside of silicone chips which is mentioned here we have literally every single resource we need right here in the states.
Has anyone told him civilians in America also have tanks and unarmed jets? 😂
Some mf in Texas owns a fully operational air fleet larger than most countries.
I'm posting this at the very beginning, and am an American. I've seen enough to know even the smartest AI cannot predict a war's outcome. People are inventive, always looking for a way to survive. Sometimes that in itself can beat the most hi tech, or be enough to keep it at bay.
Problem is that tech is only a small part of why attacking us at home is basically impossible to win. Hell even if they get past the navy and air force and get on land the same argument you made, ingenuity, would bite them in the ass via guerilla warfare by the gun owners of America.
@generalgarchomp333 there's also one other detail that I'm rarely allowed to share on this platform, and for the sake of argument I'm hoping I can this time:
Our own DOD has wargamed the scenario of the military being used to actively oppress the citizens of the United States. They've done this fairly regularly as an exercise in preparedness and for other reasons.
Every time they've done this, the citizens win - and that's against the most powerful military in existence.
If a hostile force gets past the border, even if air-dropped into the Midwest, they lose. It's not even a question.
@@RighteousJ I have participated in war game exercises at Leavenworth and elsewhere. We always lose. Wargaming puts us at disadvantage everytime. Makes us get creative to try to win.
@@stevemadison6092 just remember that you are ALSO a citizen of this nation,even if your' officers swear allegiance to another
Behind every blade of grass would be a rifle. Welcome to America.
~ @8:00 Re: Size vs Population of western States (Wyoming, Montana, etc.)
Wyoming and Montana are both very low population density, Washington, Oregon, and even California are also very sparsely populated except for the coastal metropolitan areas. (It's surprising even close to the coast how many pockets there are of low population density, too, but that's another story.) The Dakotas are a little bit more dense, at least as you go eastward, but largely the same.
The more I think about it, the crazier it seems, but that really would give us such a huge advantage with regards to a Canadian-border invasion.
15:11 One thing this doesn't cover is that we don't have *just* 11 Supercarriers, we have 9 "Amphibious Assault Ships" as well (7 Wasp class and 2 America class with plans to build 9 more of the latter) That can each carry 20 VTOL capable jets as well, effectively making them mini carriers that are about 50-75% the carrying capacity (And of equivalent tonnage and displacement) of the flagship carriers of the French and Indian fleet. Essentially our non-carrier carriers are equivalent to the carriers of other nations lmao.
Those amphibious assault ships the first time I saw them was straight out of sci fi for me like wtf they are insane
The United States has turned the tides of two world conflicts SO FAR. And we can do it again! 😂
Undefeated world war champions?
Canada turned the tides of WW1 and WW2... so which wars you talking about? On D-Day canada was the ONLY country to make it to their end goal and made vital push's that allowed everyone else to push inland. Plus the Germans are on record of saying they feared Canada the most and usually put their BEST units to fight the canadians.
Is all fun and games when the trees start playing “dueling banjos”
The United States are strong because its people love it and ARE proud of it, and to serve it and guard its way of life to the last breath. There are 5 generations of the like in my family alone, including my son and I, uncles grandaddies and great grandaddies. We can not be broken but from within... and it seems, we have for the moment, put a stop to that as well.
Or have we? We’ll see.
Sometimes i wonder... I live in soCal and some of my neighbors have some not very bright ideas...
At the beginning of the US entry into WWII we were the 17th largest military in the world. At the end of the war we were number 1. We may quarrel amongst ourselves, but we stand together if anyone else comes at us.
We American Citizens are an Army in itself. Most of us in the south own guns and grew up hunting for our food.
I enjoy all your reaction videos my friend.
Another thing that wasn't mentioned is our manufacturing capabilities. In a time of war it all becomes military manufacturing. And we can out produce every other country by a large margin. At the start of WW2 we barely had a military or military vehicles.... we were the 2nd strongest with a massive fleet of vehicles across all branches by the end.
Sir while I want your statement to be true. I ask you this. where you getting all your steel and aluiminum from. We only have 4 or 5 steel plants left in this country. Where is the comp chips coming from? Not from here in the USA. Not trashing your statement , just seeing it from a different aspect.
“The Canadian Armed Forces expand and contract with peace and war, as one might naturally expect. During peacetime, Canada prefers a small military as it allows for greater expenditure on healthcare, the economy and economic development.” I’m guessing we don’t have as much of need for strength when our neighbours are a superpower that wouldn’t allow an invasion. Canada also doesn’t have to spend as much on defences largely in part cause of its terrain and being the consensus #1 hardest country to invade.
The HUGE factor is the US armies can work with each other. Moreover, we have plenty of ex military who could be appointed as sergeants in command of 30 militia each. That would be 30,000 insurgent platoons overnight. In a couple months maybe these platoons could be made ready for some "offensive" operations. In the mean time they could move Ammo, food, water, bring up and guard vehicles dig trench corners and shelters.
at roughly the 8:50 mark, talking about not just the military, but the civilian population also, an additional point to take into account is the percentage of civilian pop that is also prior military. Take the number of active duty, reservists, and national guard and at least double it. Most of us that have been out for 10+ years wouldn't even make the B-team at this point, but we wouldn't need to.
13:46 Hahahahahaha LETS GO BABY!
That sea task force at the 19min mark is a single carrier strike group (that one is based in japan aka CSG we have 10 more of those in the usa and by January 2025 will get another carrier completing the the 12th CSG..
Also a single ford class carrier hold 90 fighters at peek but most are setup with around 55-60 using the space for larger recon, troupe and heli operation support
We have millions of ex military personnel as well. Those people have trained a lot of their civilian friends to be competent in arms. Some of us have also purchased a lot of military surplus vehicles, tools and weapons.
Plus about 1 million local and state police officers, plus a few thousand federal officers. A couple million security guards as well.
Not all of them will be trained in weaponry and tactics very well, but a large enough percentage of them would be to an adequate degree.
It would be like Rorschach from The Watchmen, "I'm not locked in here with you! you're locked in here with me!" 😅
You ask about Canada. Canada is a large country geographically, but not really militarily. Most of the countries population sits in relatively narrow band, and borders the U.S. The further north you go, the less populous the country is.
Canada's tiny military is extremely capable at special operations, so they could do enormous damage for their size... but that's akin to saying 'this ant is enormously strong for its size' it is true, but it means nothing in context of scale.
@@Sorain1I think it has to do with them not needing a large military when outside of fictional events the US and Canada are brothers forever. No one will ever invade Canada and the US won’t ever invade it either. They can instead focus on hyper specialized warriors that help the US in foreign affairs. Truly the frightening brother when everyone in the US military knows those Canadians will willingly do the most batshit insane things on the battlefield and win
I LOVE your enthusiasm!
The video didn't even mention the oil reserves in Alaska. They're as big as the middle east, they just haven't been tapped into yet.
The vastly different geographies in the US mean no nation can properly train a military to occupy it, meanwhile domestic soldiers are able to train and get acclimated to any type of geography except for maybe tropical/jungle. For an infantry to march across the land... good luck. It's VERY wide and the terrain changes tremendously between different states. You wouldn't even be able to equip a soldier with all the tools needed to march across the States. They would both die of extreme heat or extreme cold among other things. Each time facing civilians populations that are geographically acclimated and armed. That would really suck for any army.
Iirc we do have a jungle in some carribean islands
Heck, there are like 5 different terrains just in Texas. I think there actually is jungle at the very southern tip of Texas, but we have jungle/rain forest in Hawaii.
The world would shoot themselves in the foot without hope of a medical professional giving them antibiotics for an infection. No one wins in a scenario like that.
"War does not determine who is right it only determines whose left"
That is why we have military bases all around the world. America has been called the watch dogs of the world. You don't mess with us or our allies.
Actually the last 20-30 years we've been called the world's nanny and it's why most of the world hates us. And most Americans want us to mind our own damn business. Don't do stupid shit like instigate a war with Russia and use Ukraine as a scapegoat.
Ah, now you stumbled upon why the US has bases throughout Dixie.
Like the Romans kept bases in Wales.
@@cinaedmacseamas2978 Ignoring the access to the Gulf and Atlantic, sure.
Andre, I'm American and its great we are strong, but we are made of many people. My family is french, and we have many Portugeuse like yourself in it. My father is British. America is everyone. We would never fight everyone, everyone is us.
That’s wishful thinking. Sounds like your family is made up of fairly recent immigrants? The rest of us are born and raised from a very long ancestral family of Americans and we see us as Americans and not “everyone.”
@@JF-fx2qv So you're someone who ignores your ancestors from before America existed, I pity them for having you for a descendant.
tell that to the american japanese :|
if you're a potential threat to the US you will be put aside so you don't worry them, in the best of scenarios, at least the japanese didn't got the treatment that innocent germans living in the Soviet Union when Barbarrosa kicked
@@JF-fx2qvI have ancestry leading back to the Mayflower. My family still holds strong to its German, Irish, English, Dutch, and Scottish roots.
America is an idea, not a bloodline. That’s what makes us so strong.
@@Neo-Bladewing Your American ancestors are actual. While an “idea” is a suggestion. Suggestions don’t win wars.
Montana... Over the Rockies, through Glacier National Park?
Or perhaps over the Northern Cascades down through Idaho?
Yes, we are all strapped!