Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

---

as long as no one used nukes we would be out of it in a few years cause alot of people in america will fight back even with a lack of experence. if we used nukes well the world would be gone in a few seconds america is a nuclear superpower. we have more nukes then anyone else in the world but everyone together sure as hell has more nukes then us. one way or another we would lose becuase of a lack of man power it would be like 33 billion people vs like 1 billion. spardas 300 soilders could not beat 1 million roman troops. there is no possible way we would win.

---

At 1/16/07 02:40 PM, TheDarkOne287 wrote: as long as no one used nukes we would be out of it in a few years cause alot of people in america will fight back even with a lack of experence. if we used nukes well the world would be gone in a few seconds america is a nuclear superpower. we have more nukes then anyone else in the world but everyone together sure as hell has more nukes then us. one way or another we would lose becuase of a lack of man power it would be like 33 billion people vs like 1 billion. spardas 300 soilders could not beat 1 million roman troops. there is no possible way we would win.

Actually Russia has more Nuclear weapons, America has more advanced nuclear weapons.

Not that it matters. Britain doesn't have nearly as many nukes as America or Russia But still has the capability to destroy any opponent.

And it wouldn't be 33 Billion vs 1 Billion. The world population is about 6.5 Billion.

But your right there's no possible way america could win, let alone if america was attacking.

---

At 1/16/07 01:11 PM, zzzzd wrote:

At 1/16/07 11:18 AM, sdhonda wrote: To the topic title: Yes, it is.

Currently, the US is still the worlds dominant military, economic and soft power, and will probably be for at least another 30 years. For better or worse, that is an undeniable fact.

Although the world is growing more multi polar, the US will still be a large power for quite some time.

It's only the domininant Military power. the EU has a slightly higher Economy and as much if not more influence on the world.

First of all, there is absolutely no way the EU is even close to equalling the influence on the world that the US has, that is a fucking joke and for you to even say that shows you're either uninformed or making a misguided claim to boost your argument.

But yes, the EU has a higher GDP... however, the economic growth rate of the US is higher than the EU, so the US GDP will be higher at the end of 2007 than the EU GDP. That is of course, unless the EU incorporates another country. The US growth rate is 3.5%, the EU growth rate is less than 1%. And the US growth rate is expected to hit 5% by 2008, while the forecasts for the EU are expected to see a recession due to the oil dilemma with Russia.

As for Military the EU doesn't need a paticulaly big military, allthough it is starting to go towards a unified military.

Yes thats because since the dawn of the Cold War the US has been the one to be responsible for defending Europe. Even after the collapse of the Soviet Union, Europe still relies on the US for not only protection, but for support in overseas operations. Look at Afghanistan, the 4 most powerful EU nations (UK, France, Germany, Italy) can't even transport their troops to Afghanistan without the US, they can't supply their troops, command their troops, or even conduct independent operations. They all rely on the US to coordinate the operation in Afghanistan, so how would they be able to operate a war against the US when EU countries can't even use GPS, communicate, or supply their troops without use of American-provided systems?

Did you know that no EU country even has its own military satellites? Europe relies on the US military satellites for all their GPS. How the fuck would they be able to defend their countries from the US, when they can't even operate their military independent of the US?

Get a clue buddy, the US would defeat Europe quit easily if no nukes were involved on both sides.

At the moment the EU only spends about 1% of it's Budget on military where as the US spends 3% howether the EU spends only half as much on military as america does, So the EU could easily take over in the next 30years.

Um no, because in 30 years the US GDP will be MUCH higher than the EU GDP if you look at the current growth rate. Then if the US maintains a 3% GDP, the military budget will still be higher if EU decides to slash its social programs and start giving more money to military projects.

And they probably will with the rise of China.

And Cellardoor America couldn't Attack European mainland succesfully you fuckin dick, theres an Ocean in the way,

Um have you never heard of something called AN AIRCRAFT CARRIER? Cause the US has 12 super carriers that are the envy of every military in the world. The US also has 30 amphibious assault ships (that are basically little carriers) that are larger, and more advanced than the puny 3 aircraft carriers that Europe has. The US also has over 600 missile ships that can strike targets from over 1000 miles away with cruise missiles.

Also, have you never heard of the B-52, F117, B-1, and B-2 long range bombers?

The EU couldn't strike the US, but the US would be able to strike Europe with near invulnerability due to stealth aircraft that Europe lacks the ability to detect and shoot down. Europe doesn't even have long range bombers of any sort, and their missile defense systems themsev;es

and if a war was brewing between the EU an the US any bases loaned to america would be secured extremmely quickly.

Thats completely untrue. The US bases in Europe wouldn't be able to be 'secured' by European forces because the US forces there are VASTLY superior than the domestic forces, and the US controls the defense systems of the host countries in the first place! The US forces in Europe are designed, organized, and positioned to defeat the SOVIET UNION, and you think they couldn't easily defeat the shitty European military forces?

You're out of your mind.

Did you not know that the US CONTROLS the air defense system in Germany, and controls many air defense systems and bases in Italy, UK, Spain, Portugal, and many other EU countries? Did you know that the all the nuclear missiles the UK has are controlled by the US??

Stealth planes are becoming easier an easier to detect, America wouldn't be able to win air superiority over europe. And the Navy would be sitting ducks, being the only secure bases for the US.

Dude you honestly have NO FUCKING CLUE what you're talking about. I suggest you actually read a little before you make up nonsense as you go to salvage the tiny shred of dignity you have left.

The US would have air SUPREMACY over Europe within weeks. Then the US would absolutely annhilate the pathetic European navies (that RELY ON US GPS systems IN THE FIRST PLACE).

Even so america has immense power projection it still wouldn't be possible for america to overwelm the European air forces with out nearby secure bases.

Um the US has hundreds of airbases in and around Europe, that are defended with missile systems and airplanes that are VASTLY superior to the European counter-parts. How the fuck would Europe be able to protect itself when the US is ALREADY IN EUROPE, has the ability to send more force into Europe that is superior to the European forces, and when Europe has NO ability to do the same to the US?

Think about it.

Also give me a source on how america controls britains air defense you fuckin dick. Stop talkin out of your arse.

Not only that, but even Britain's nuclear deterrent is reliant on the US as well.

But read this and this if you're in the mood to have your pathetic European pride squashed.

---

God damnit people doesn't anyone respond to my threads.

I dont think monarchy is compatable with today's western system, besides, trying to squeeze democracy out of america is like trying to squeeze water out of a stone.

---

Hahahaha, Cellardoor just opened a nice can of whoopass on "zzzzd."

---

At 1/16/07 10:54 PM, BanditByte wrote: Hahahaha, Cellardoor just opened a nice can of whoopass on "zzzzd."

Yes, for probably the 20th time too. Its not as rewarding as it once was though, now its just a given.

---

If america an the EU went to war both economies would collapse and China would instantly be the worlds largest economy.

---

At 1/13/07 07:57 PM, fireball6283 wrote: America fucking rules the entire world. We can kill anyone at any time, strike and destroy an entire country for fun. We rule. BOW DOWN!!!

People in the Middle East see us a threat right now. That probably explains why the "Iraq situation" has become more chaotic than it should have been.

What I'm trying to say is, maybe we should negotiate things instead of just resorting to war all the time.

---

At 1/16/07 09:40 PM, cellardoor6 wrote: First of all, there is absolutely no way the EU is even close to equalling the influence on the world that the US has, that is a fucking joke and for you to even say that shows you're either uninformed or making a misguided claim to boost your argument.

Amen to that.

Yes thats because since the dawn of the Cold War the US has been the one to be responsible for defending Europe. Even after the collapse of the Soviet Union, Europe still relies on the US for not only protection, but for support in overseas operations. Look at Afghanistan, the 4 most powerful EU nations (UK, France, Germany, Italy) can't even transport their troops to Afghanistan without the US, they can't supply their troops, command their troops, or even conduct independent operations. They all rely on the US to coordinate the operation in Afghanistan, so how would they be able to operate a war against the US when EU countries can't even use GPS, communicate, or supply their troops without use of American-provided systems?

Indeed. Though part of that is more due to US pressure than anything else. Keeping other countries dependant on them is a valid strategy.

Did you know that no EU country even has its own military satellites? Europe relies on the US military satellites for all their GPS. How the fuck would they be able to defend their countries from the US, when they can't even operate their military independent of the US?

But that's about to change in the next couple of years. The US has opposed it for quite some time, but eventually Galileo has entered the testing phase. Quite funny really, in the beginning nobody really cared for a European standalone GPS network, when they could use the American one just as easily. But I guess the US hit a sensitive spot when they tried to pressure :).

Get a clue buddy, the US would defeat Europe quit easily if no nukes were involved on both sides.

Of course. All that military spending has to go SOMEWHERE :) There's no doubt about it that the US military is vastly superior.

At the moment the EU only spends about 1% of it's Budget on military where as the US spends 3% howether the EU spends only half as much on military as america does, So the EU could easily take over in the next 30years.

Um no, because in 30 years the US GDP will be MUCH higher than the EU GDP if you look at the current growth rate. Then if the US maintains a 3% GDP, the military budget will still be higher if EU decides to slash its social programs and start giving more money to military projects.

That's pure speculation. In any case, I think it's not very likely that the EU will start spending even close to America's budget. What would the point be?

And they probably will with the rise of China.

It's not like China is an enemy of the EU... China is even involved in the Galileo project.

And Cellardoor America couldn't Attack European mainland succesfully you fuckin dick, theres an Ocean in the way,

Um have you never heard of something called AN AIRCRAFT CARRIER? Cause the US has 12 super carriers that are the envy of every military in the world. The US also has 30 amphibious assault ships (that are basically little carriers) that are larger, and more advanced than the puny 3 aircraft carriers that Europe has. The US also has over 600 missile ships that can strike targets from over 1000 miles away with cruise missiles.

Also, have you never heard of the B-52, F117, B-1, and B-2 long range bombers?

The EU couldn't strike the US, but the US would be able to strike Europe with near invulnerability due to stealth aircraft that Europe lacks the ability to detect and shoot down. Europe doesn't even have long range bombers of any sort, and their missile defense systems themsev;es

We have the same Patriot missile defense system as the US does. It's licensed US technology. I.e. worth jack shit is America is the agressor :)

There's the upcoming Eurofighter for the airforce, but the F-22 beats it into a bloody pulp on every front except for bombing capabilities. But the US has other specialized aircraft for that purpose. The only upside is that the Eurofighter costs about 3 times less.

Did you not know that the US CONTROLS the air defense system in Germany, and controls many air defense systems and bases in Italy, UK, Spain, Portugal, and many other EU countries? Did you know that the all the nuclear missiles the UK has are controlled by the US??

Almost all nuclear missiles in Europe actually, to dodge the non-proliferation treaty. France at least has one or two ancient nukes in a cellar somewhere.

Stealth planes are becoming easier an easier to detect, America wouldn't be able to win air superiority over europe. And the Navy would be sitting ducks, being the only secure bases for the US.

Dude you honestly have NO FUCKING CLUE what you're talking about. I suggest you actually read a little before you make up nonsense as you go to salvage the tiny shred of dignity you have left.

The US would have air SUPREMACY over Europe within weeks. Then the US would absolutely annhilate the pathetic European navies (that RELY ON US GPS systems IN THE FIRST PLACE).

Even so america has immense power projection it still wouldn't be possible for america to overwelm the European air forces with out nearby secure bases.

Um the US has hundreds of airbases in and around Europe, that are defended with missile systems and airplanes that are VASTLY superior to the European counter-parts. How the fuck would Europe be able to protect itself when the US is ALREADY IN EUROPE, has the ability to send more force into Europe that is superior to the European forces, and when Europe has NO ability to do the same to the US?

Think about it.

Also give me a source on how america controls britains air defense you fuckin dick. Stop talkin out of your arse.

Not only that, but even Britain's nuclear deterrent is reliant on the US as well.

But read this and this if you're in the mood to have your pathetic European pride squashed.

Hehe. In any case, the entire debate on "who'd win" is useless. The US and Europe are military allies, and many European countries are actually dependant on the US. This is of course not a coincidence. Besides, there is no "European military". (Yet?)

Second, there's no way there would ever be a war US vs Europe. Attacking Europe would be contrary to American economic interests. And if there ever WOULD be a war, then other countries would be very eager to take the US' place in economic dominance over Europe. Russia and China would not just sit idly by. If there's ever a war between the EU and the US, it will be in a worldwar.

You've got to face it, militarily, stand alone, Europe isn't worth a lot, and probably never will be. The US will never allow the EU to develop a standalone army that rivals its own. It's not going to happen.

---

At 1/17/07 06:15 AM, tawc wrote: If america an the EU went to war both economies would collapse and China would instantly be the worlds largest economy.

But it wouldn't have anyone to sell its shitty products to.

---

At 1/16/07 10:54 PM, BanditByte wrote: Hahahaha, Cellardoor just opened a nice can of whoopass on "zzzzd."

Ya. I dont always agree with his veiws, but he has a tendency to own in many arguements.

---

At 1/17/07 06:15 AM, tawc wrote: If america an the EU went to war both economies would collapse and China would instantly be the worlds largest economy.

Ok so now you're changing your tune huh? First you said that the US would be destroyed and the EU would be victorious. Then when the facts come out that the EU is far too dependent on the US to defend against it, (let alone fight ANYONE without US support) you pretend that it would only destroy the economies of both countries...

Give me a break.

And by the way, the US economy actually tends to grow stronger during wars. This is mostly because our economy remains unscathed, but the thing is, our economy would remain undamaged in a war against the EU. Because I hate to break it to you, the EU doesn't have the ability to strike the mainland US except with nuclear missiles (that would be an act of suicide). In a conventional war, the US could strike mainland Europe with near impunity with many different methods. And Europe would lack the ability to defend by sea, by land and by air.

But if the US and the EU got into a war. China would just sit back and watch. And even if they didn't, the US military is designed to fight multiple large scale wars simultaneously. The US has been the only country in history to due such a thing, and the only country capable of doing it now. China doesn't have the ability to strike the mainland US either. Their navy is absolute shit, and their airforce and army is very defensive in nature.

And in the meantime, the US would only get stronger from a war with the EU, thats what happens when the US is engaged in a large war. New military systems get invented and procured much more rapidly due to a sense of urgency, and the economy grows incredibly rapidly due to the civilian industries being moderated by the government for maximum output.

So the bottom line is that the US would win, the EU would lose. Theres no way around it really, other than if nukes were involved. But if that happened, the world would likely be destroyed.

---

At 1/17/07 07:37 PM, sdhonda wrote:

At 1/16/07 10:54 PM, BanditByte wrote: Hahahaha, Cellardoor just opened a nice can of whoopass on "zzzzd."

Ya. I dont always agree with his veiws, but he has a tendency to own in many arguements.

Yeah its true. I was actually hoping zzzzd or tawc would try to counter my argument. Guess they pussed out, had enough of being owned.

---

The only point I didnt agree with is that the one about the US having always been virtuous, which isnt quite true. The wars and westward expansion during the 19th century were little better than european imperialism in africa and asia at the time. The war in vietnam is also suspect.

But otherwise ya, compared to most super powers, the US isnt half bad.

---

Ok... um... im probably gonna get hate mail for this but, was america ever in any power? I thought we lived in the confederacy.

---

At 1/17/07 11:35 PM, mrpiex wrote: Ok... um... im probably gonna get hate mail for this but, was america ever in any power? I thought we lived in the confederacy.

You know, you're going to have to clarify that...

---

I Still don't belive America could win air superiority, as America couldn't get enough aircraft over to europe to counter eurpean air forces. Bombers won't be as succesfull as they were in iraq or many other countries america has bombed. Due to much more advanced radar and airforce.

Both the US and EU have the ability to carry out large scale attacks on each others mainland with cruise missiles, allthough americas air-defense is superior.

The american bases in europe would be secured probably before the war even broke out.

Theres Not a huge amount of american bases in europe anymore anyway. And theres no were near as much US personal as the actuall countries military. The bases would be quite easily taken. Britains probably got the most American forces in europe. And There mostly in RAF Mildenhall an RAF Lakenheath near were I live. If worst comes to worse both bases could just be bombed to shit. But they would most likely be taken very swiftly.

The US navy would have alot of trouble from air attacks and Submarine.
US ships would be extremmely vunrable from anti-ship missiles, Americas navy would be sitting ducks if they could not get a secure base on land.

Also Theres no way america could deal with europe and another at the same time. Yes america can deal with two large conflicts at the same time, But not something as big as a war with Europe.

America most probably would not win an assault on Europe.

---

At 1/18/07 08:29 AM, zzzzd wrote: America most probably would not win an assault on Europe.

You list all of these setbacks assuming that they just magically won't happen to both sides...

---

At 1/18/07 08:48 AM, Camarohusky wrote:

At 1/18/07 08:29 AM, zzzzd wrote: America most probably would not win an assault on Europe.

You list all of these setbacks assuming that they just magically won't happen to both sides...

what??

---

Yeah... the US is strong.

But China will inevitably be the worlds strongest military power. WIth both superior numbers and advancing technology, also with the begining of a space program and a much stronger economy, China will overtake the US.

America spends 3% on military, which is alot, but China spends over 9% which is better.

http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/editorials/ar chives/2007/01/16/2003345026

China for teh winz.

---

At 1/16/07 09:40 PM, cellardoor6 wrote: Did you know that the all the nuclear missiles the UK has are controlled by the US??

It doesnt say that at all. The UK has over 200 nuclear missles. We, in addition, have 100 of our missles stationed in the UK under our NATO sharing plan. Dont make shit up.

---

I agree with cellardoor mostly, but I this is not true:

At 1/13/07 08:17 PM, cellardoor6 wrote: Every single country in the world that the US doesn't have a close economic partnership is in poverty.

Every single country in the world that the US DOES have a close economic partnership is successful.

The closer the trade ties are with the US, the better off the country is.

Brazil has a strong economic part nership with the US , but I wouldn't call it succesful, and Finland happens exactly the opposite.

---

zzzzd, before I absolutely rip you to shreds. I'm going to compel you to study Military Science if/when you go to college. Because you absolutely have no clue what you're talking about, period.

At 1/18/07 08:29 AM, zzzzd wrote: I Still don't belive America could win air superiority, as America couldn't get enough aircraft over to europe to counter eurpean air forces.

The US has HUNDREDS of Airbases around the world. As well as thousands of airplanes that could reach Europe FROM MAINLAND US. The US also has something called mid-air refueling.

The US can send a mass of aircraft anywhere in the world easily. That is why the US is the worlds most powerful military. Its called force projecition, the ability to send power anywhere in the world. The US has this ability, no other country does.

-The US has 12 supercarriers that have 85 aircraft each (about 4 squadrons) so about 1000 aircraft (larger than the entire British airforce) and these are made up of mostly F/A-18 super hornets (the most advanced strike fighter in the world).

-The US has 21 B-2 Stealth long range bombers that could reach Europe from the US (let alone the hundreds of air bases all around Europe and within Europe). And no B-2 has ever been shot down, and its virtually invisible to radar

-The US has about 60 F-117 steal fighters (that are actually bombers) that have stealth as well and could attack Europe if refueled over the pacific or from the middle east. Only one has ever been shot down and was done so inadvertently.

-The US has 100 B-1 bombers that are by far the fastest, most advanced conventional bombers in the world.

-The US has 1,458 F-18 attack/fighter aircraft between the US Navy and US Marine Corps (most are carrier-born as previously stated)

The US has about 20 active duty F-22 Raptors stealth fighters, and will have 283 by 2013 (and the F-22 are by far the most advanced and powerful air dominance fighters to fly)

The US has 2,216 F16s (Which in and of themselves are more powerful and more numerous than the European airforces combined)

The US has 874 F-15 air dominance fighters (most of which are in Europe).

After the US would completely obliterate the European air defenses and air forces, the resulting air supremacy would allow the use of the many conventional bombers the US has that would annihilate not only European infrastructure but government and military facilities.

These bombers consist of 744 MASSIVE B-52 bombers, and all the previously mentioned aircraft that can be used for bombing as well.

And what does Europe have to defend itself against this? A few hundred inferior aircraft that would lack GPS due to the fact that Europes GPS is provided by the US.

Bombers won't be as succesfull as they were in iraq or many other countries america has bombed. Due to much more advanced radar and airforce.

Um, Europes radar systems themselves are American and the US knows how to counter them. And even then, radar means basically jackshit. Because the US would send in unmanned aerial vehicles first, which would be locked on by active European radar, then these unmanned planes would be followed by thousands of aircraft armed with anti-radiation missiles that would obliterate the radar stations.

Both the US and EU have the ability to carry out large scale attacks on each others mainland with cruise missiles, allthough americas air-defense is superior.

Um no, Europe wouldn't be able to bring ships or airplanes in range of the US to launch a cruise missile because Europe's navies would get raped in the atlantic, and Europe has NO long range bombers to reach the US by air either.

The american bases in europe would be secured probably before the war even broke out.

No they wouldn't be. American forces in Europe are so vastly superior to the military of their host nations that bases would be very effective forward-operating bases. How can European forces 'secure' US forces in Europe when the US forces are the only forces capable of fending off the former Soviet Union and are organized and equipped to do so?

Theres Not a huge amount of american bases in europe anymore anyway. And theres no were near as much US personal as the actuall countries military.

Um actually... the total number of US Army and US Airforce bases outside of the US is 725, with about 500 in Europe (theres hundreds in Germany alone)

And that list doesn't even include US Marine Corps bases either.

The bases would be quite easily taken.

How can that be done when US forces that are there have more power and influence over the defense in the first place, and are vastly superior in every aspect?

Britains probably got the most American forces in europe.

Actually Germany does. And the US has vast control over Germany's defense.

And There mostly in RAF Mildenhall an RAF Lakenheath near were I live. If worst comes to worse both bases could just be bombed to shit. But they would most likely be taken very swiftly.

There you making up bullshit as you go along. How would they be bombed to shit when the US has vastly superior air defense systems, and Europe has vastly inferior aircraft?

The US navy would have alot of trouble from air attacks and Submarine.

Hahahahahahahahaha.

Now its official, you're a fucking retard. How would these 'air attacks and submarines' reach US forces when they can't even navigate because Europe's only access to GPS is through AMERICAN SATELLITES!

European air attacks and submarine attacks couldn't even work because they wouldn't be able to know WHERE they were, let alone where Americans were. Meanwhile they'd be getting bombed to shit.

US ships would be extremmely vunrable from anti-ship missiles, Americas navy would be sitting ducks if they could not get a secure base on land.

Dude you don't know WHAT THE FUCK you're talking about. The US has the AEGIS battle network system that tracks incoming missiles, and can track ships and aircraft via airborne radar, and SATELLITE systems LONG before they even come close to US Navy Battlegroups.

European ships and aircraft would never even come close enough to strike with their inferior weapons. And long before then, they would already have been targeted and destroyed by either long range ship-born missiles, VASTLY superior American aircraft, or the much more advanced and numerous American attack submarines.

Also Theres no way america could deal with europe and another at the same time. Yes america can deal with two large conflicts at the same time, But not something as big as a war with Europe.

Funny, Europe combined only has slightly more military personnel than the US while the US is VASTLY superior in every aspect. Meanwhile, the US is organized to defeat the SOVIET UNION, which Europe would have been invaded by if the US didn't protect Europe.

Therefore Europe, and anyone else who fucked with the US in a conventional war would get raped.

America most probably would not win an assault on Europe.

Actually America WOULD win, and would win rapidly and decisively by dominating Europe in every single aspect. Europe can't even operate their militaries independent of the US, how the hell would they defend against the US you sad little imbecile?

---

lol, its funny reading this.

Celler puts soooo much effort into his arguements and sources and everyone else seems to just assume.

Clearly theres only one patriotic person in this thread.

---

-The US has 12 supercarriers that have 85 aircraft each (about 4 squadrons) so about 1000 aircraft (larger than the entire British airforce) and these are made up of mostly F/A-18 super hornets (the most advanced strike fighter in the world).

We upgrade em too. The Enterprise is gonna retire and make way for the USS Gerald Ford!

---

At 1/13/07 07:57 PM, fireball6283 wrote: America fucking rules the entire world. We can kill anyone at any time, strike and destroy an entire country for fun. We rule. BOW DOWN!!!

fuck off, if it weren't for us (the british :P) your country wouldn't exist.

---

At 1/19/07 12:22 AM, DJ-Jerakai wrote: lol, its funny reading this.

Celler puts soooo much effort into his arguements and sources and everyone else seems to just assume.

As correct as you are, his performance is pretty much contained to this thread alone. He does his share of assuming and creating bullshit like the rest. He's a military baby, what do you expect?

---

Cellardoor6 most US bases have closed down in recent years, your getting sources which are 4-6 years old. In fact alot of the bases listed were used in the fuckin cold war.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Ai r_Forces_in_Europe#Current_Operating_Units

So in actuall fact there is no were as near as many US military in Europe as you think. And Most of them Are in Europe. And there are more at the moment because of the war on terrorism and war in Iraq.

Britain and france are are at the same levels as the US in technology. You seem to think it would be as easy as iraq.

American aircraft carriers would be sitting ducks without secure land bases. Ships are so vunerable to air attacks, Even with the most advanced technology.
And Even the most basic of radar can pick up huge great fuckin aircraft carriers.

And Theres a number of european bases in and around the americas so it would be possible to attack the US mainland. As well as the fact that this was originally the US v the world which would mean there would be a huge number of allie bases around america.

The EU is an emerging super power, It has as much influence on the world as america with soft power. It has an Economy as large and It's working towards a Unified Military. The Gallelio project allthough it does have flaws will Come operational in the next few years, many NATO countries are Working towards changing from GPS to Galleilo.
Having a military expenditure at about half that of the US But only spending 1% of Buget compared to the US's 3%. The EU is a potentiol super power. There is no way america and europe would go to war, It would cripple both economies immensly And it would be such a huge war and would also probably escalate into a world war.

Europe may well have a military equal to america in the next 20years. Hopefully howether Both countries will remain strong allies. As China Emerges as superior to both the EU and the US.

---

Exactly!

They would never go to war and China is on the rise.

China poses the greatest threat to both the US and EU combined. With the launching of its own Satelite network in the cards and the ability to already use America's own Satelite networks against them with the employment of advanced coded messages (see http://www.fas.org/news/china/1998/h980618-pr c12.htm ) and a VASTLY superior population(over 1, 6th the population of the world) to call on for inscription (when they already blindly follow the communist propaganda) and with 50 million Chinese people already IN AMERICA and more than that IN EUROPE both sides would be in A LOT of trouble.

Its true that their Military capabilities are defensive in nature. This is because of the invasion that Japan staged from province of Manchuria in the second world war. Its made Chinese paranoid ever since.
However now they are taking steps to create a force capable of attacking abroad. BIG STEPS.
See :
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m12 72/is_2715_133/ai_n8549458

We're looking at the China being the worlds most dominate military super power within the next 50 years at the longest.

---

And as for all your GPS claims, google Galileo. American GPS dominance will end in about 3 years...