Europe Vs America. Who wins?

Great Debates
1

Scraps are cool right? And what would the Grandaddy of all fights? You got it - The States versus The European Union would be the ultimate in intercontinental warfare. Unlikely? Well yes, lets hope so, but with The new Euro army coming online soon, who knows what could happen in the future.

So, here’s the scenario;

Its 20 years in the future and relations between Europe and America have been deteriorating fast. A flashpoint occurs over some inconsequential event, and both sides declare war.
Russia, China and all other major powers remain neutral, and so a level playing field is set for battle…So who wins?

My money’s on Europe (headed by Britain of course!) But I wanna know what you guys think. No sad patriotic ramblings please - and you Americans know I’m talking to you.

2

Oaf.

3

We did it before and we can do it again! Yes! We can do it again…
Marc

4

What’s the end goal? Occupation? I’m guess your scenario envisions no nukes. So what counts as a win? The European Union simply doesn’t have the logistics to pull off an invasion of the US. European navel power isn’t really comparable to the US. So it comes down to can Europe thwart off an invasion or not?

Europe’s best advantage in this is that the US would have really long supply lines and an ocean to cross. But the US already has bases in Europe so your scenario needs a little more defining. Are those bases taken out early in a surprise attack or does the US launch a surprise attack from those bases.

The US has a huge numerical and technological advantage over many European armies. The US military is also geared towards strategic campaigns while many European militaries can only handle regional conflicts. Europe does have some of the best trained troops in the world though and defenders often have a given advantage. But the US has trained in Europe for years, so it’s troops know the territory.

Given the vague assumptions we have to make, I think the US could take Europe but never secure it.

5

China.

6

Well… there are several US bases in Europe, but no European bases in the US. Talk about a huge advantage right there. Plus, we have Rambo.

7

In war, nobody really wins. Some just avoid losing too much. US vs. Europe in a war would cause several million dead and both sides’ economy ruined by “strategic” bombing raids. The result would be the domination of the world by Asia.

8

Yet another thread suffering from Outrageously Silly Premise syndrome.

I am interested by this from Blackclaw though:

What makes you say this? Informed opinion or Hollywood films? Numerically I’m pretty sure that Britain, France, Germany and Spain alone must have pretty much an equal population to the US (250m vs 60m+70m+70m+40m-ish AFAIK). Technologically to what are you referring? Does the US have some new superweapon that Europe lacks?

Not that it matters. As others have basically said - there is no answer to this one. OSPS.

pan

9

too many super rich economic ties between US and Europe.

how about China, India and Arabs against Europe and US in bio-cyber war. No nukes.

Dal Timgar

10

Kabbes,

Population size doesn’t always have an impact on military size. The US simply has more military units in terms of tanks, aircraft, and ships. I can look up actual numbers if you like, but this is kind of a casual thread.

The US technological advantage lies mostly in electronic warefare, avionics, and precision weapons. Tank for tank, aircraft verses aircraft the Europeans have some excellent weapon platforms, but in the recent Kosovo crisis they had to rely heavily on US aircraft to hit targets in sensitive areas and in bad weather. When it came to evaluating the mission capability of the combined forces, Europe lagged far behind the US. Europe is currently undergoing a push to change this in the future so that it will have less reliance on US forces.

The circumstances that the OP asks us to consider would never come about, and I think the OP easily recognizes that. The population of the US is heavily of European origin. It would be like attacking extended family. Wars in Europe have always been hard for the US to accept in the past because of such family ties and one in which all European ties are under attack would simply be too much to swallow. Additionally it would take the extrodinary circumstances for the US to accept the kind of casualties it would cost to invade Europe.

11

We have balls, and they have…
The French. That practically gaurantees us the win.:slight_smile:
BTW…

In 20 years I would put China Vs. The US as the grandaddy of all fights. I don’t even want to think about the damage a war like that would cause to the world, so I’m not even going to throw out a winner.

12

I think the two toughest contries to conquer in Europe would be Germany and the UK. The US has alot of bases in both countries which would simplify our task. I think the only way Europe wins is with a sneak attack. If they could capture the US bases in Europe it would cripple the US military for a period in which they might be able to catch up in terms of number of weapons and they could use the captured weapons against the US. They would then have to form an alliance with either Canada or Mexico so they could have a base nearby since an amphibious assault on the US mainland from Europe would take too long and would be vulnerable to the US’s large submarine fleet.
However if the US launched a suprise attack the war could be over relatively quickly. The US would know where the European weapons systems are and would have planes stationed in Europe which could take them out in a matter of days. The US could establish air superiority early on since they have so many more planes and it would take a long time for the EU to build more. Once air superiority is established an invasion of either the UK or the Iberian penninsula could be done to establish a staging area for the conquest of the rest of Europe.
I think the more feasible scenario is the US would win.

13

And the winner of this week’s “Best Bon Mot” Award is Dylan73!

:smiley:

14

How long before Italy surrenders this time?

15

Jeez, some of you guys really need to chill out. I’m not actually expecting, or hoping for a war between Europe and America - It was a bit of FUN! New concept? Learn it.

Anyway - rant over. Some interesting ideas by Blackclaw and Puddleglum, but I think both of you guys missed some fundamentals about the European Armies -

    • Technologically the playing field between the two sides is even, not unbalanced and numerically Europe would far have the edge on the ground. Taking the combined sizes of the Britain, France, Germany and Italys armed forces would not give any indication of the total size; The Scandinavian armies are elite and the balkan armies while poorly led, equiped etc are vast, numbering hundreds of thousands. In the air, the numbers weight differently with the long range bombers belonging to the USA, but again, in terms of overall firepower probably equal.
    • The US bases in Europe would constitute only an intelligence advantage to the US (and lets face it, US commanders still are not going to know the location of all tactically installations). If the onslaught of war had been forseen then they would have been evacuated - possibly destroying important US equipment. If not, then the hardware would have been seized by the country where the base was situated. For example how could one American base in Britain hope to put up a sustained defense? More importantly, Americam troops in Germany, France or whatever would be completely surrounded.
    • A surprise attack by either side over the Atlantic would be next to Impossible. Any assault would have to be built up and co-ordinated slowly with complex preparations of seabourne invasions - possibly a disadvantage for Europes language barriers. For the Americans, Britain would make the ideal staging point for an attack on the continent.

To me, this shows that might for might a joint European army would have a greater chance in a battle of attrition. But, as pointed out, America’s Navy is her strongest asset, and the destruction of the Atlantic fleet might prove almost impossible for Europe to achieve, especially considering the ranger of modern bombers.

Conclusion - Ok, it was a pointless debate, such a war would probably become bogged down to stalemate. However I still think all of you guys underestimate the potential strength of such a Euro alliance.

Finally, I challenge that W*nker who called me an oaf to write an intelligent comment (see blackclaw) rather than insulting me. Can’t do it? Didn’t think so…

16

Couldn’t resist could you? I knew it! :wink:

17

No sad patriotic ramblings please - and you Americans know I’m talking to you.
**
[/QUOTE]

We did it before and we can do it again! Yes! We can do it again…
Marc
**
[/QUOTE]

Couldn’t resist could you? I knew it… :wink:

18

This seems more IMHO, but oh well…

The U.S. has several tactical advantages over Europe:

  1. We have stealth.
  2. We know where to strike them to cripple their logistics and production capacities, and have the capability to do so.

Europe may have more infantry and armor, but what good are they if they can’t invade the US? They are equally useless if the US doesn’t invade right away and decides to just bomb the crap out of everything (which we seem to do all the time, anwyays).

Anyways, just my patriotic American standpoint.

19

Well, I honestly think the U.S. would win, but it would be ugly. The atlantic is a whole lotta blue to cross and it would be a logistical nightmare.

Of course, with the U.S. fielding the largest, most powerful, and most advanced Navy that has ever existed, I think the Atlantic would be a much bigger problem for European forces than it would for ours. Once air and sea superiority have been established, the biggest problem would be to capture a staging point from which to base the attacks on the continent (what Hawaii would have been for the Japanese if they had hit the fuel stores and the carriers).

Of course, deciding factors would be technology and total materials. The U.S. currently has the largest military in the world (possible exception: China) and without question the most technologically advanced. As I posted in this thread, the U.S. accounts for nearly twice as much of total spending as all the rest of NATO combined. Since NATO makes up the majority of EU member nations, and since any combat has to cross an ocean first, it looks like the U.S. would have a pretty heavy advantage.

20

Another problem with the scenario listed is that in such a situation, it wouldn’t be one-on-one. A nation’s allies are extremely important in war, and people would be lining up to pick sides. We have to take that into account.

On our side of the Atlantic, we would definitely have Mexico as our allies. Canada is iffy…though there is a good chance they would consider allying with the EU, the populace probably would not get behind it, it could definitely lead to Canada splitting up. 90% of Canada’s population lives within 100 miles of the longest undefended border in the world, and we outnumber them 10 to 1. Unless the EU has been building bases and stationing armies in Canada prior to this hypothetical war, Canada is not a threat.

South America will be divided probably, some countries favoring one side or the other, some neutral, it would even itself out and have no major influence on the actual conflict.

The most of the Middle East is probably going to ally with Europe, Israel with the U.S. This could be a problem if we divert forces to defend Israel, is not that important if we are only looking out for ourselves in the conflict.

I think Russia is going to side with the U.S. They did in the last one and got a lot out of it, they will sacrifice a few million of our guys to avoid getting into it with us and to have a say in how Europe is carved up after we win. Japan will as well. China will probably remain neutral (especially since there is still animosity towards the Russians), though they might side with us more openly if Russia doesn’t side with us, or if some of their other, weaker neighbors side against us, hoping to occupy our enemies land during the war and hopefully hang on to it otherwise - a lot depends on who Indochina and India side with, which is a toss-up in my opinion.

I think the U.S. will win. If we don’t trash Canada after conquering it and if the EU has pressure on the Eastern front, the UK will probably drop out of the EU and side with us. If we are to invade we will probably be coming across the Channel. I think the French would cave, not so much because of a somewhat ill-deserved reputation as cowards, but because they know that we would bomb the shit out of them before attempting another D-Day. With the UK our allies, France occupied, and Russians and possibly Americans hitting from the east, they would crumble.