Russia, US and China Vs. The Rest of the World

[Skroe]

Wrong. China is a superpower also and US since financial crisis is not a world's hegemony. When you think of it from 1989 to 2008 is like 19 years. US' reign was short lived.

Dead wrong.

[Nadiru]

No chance, not even with all 3.

Bruh, the US + China + Russia comprises 55% of all military spending on the planet. And people don't really seem to grok this, but America isn't even trying at this point; manufacturing and heavy industry comprises a resounding 3% of American GDP. Despite this, the USA has the third largest total exports on the planet. If things ever got dire enough for the US to need to produce a bunch of ships or airplanes, it has the capacity to do that. But nobody poses a threat, not even China, for all its bluster and swaggering.

[Deleted]

Bruh, the US + China + Russia comprises 55% of all military spending on the planet. And people don't really seem to grok this, but America isn't even trying at this point; manufacturing and heavy industry comprises a resounding 3% of American GDP. Despite this, the USA has the third largest total exports on the planet. If things ever got dire enough for the US to need to produce a bunch of ships or airplanes, it has the capacity to do that. But nobody poses a threat, not even China, for all its bluster and swaggering.

Doesn't matter how much they spend, they wouldn't hold a candle against 220+ combined countries, especially when Israel is on Our side.

We are over 4000 millions, India, Pakistan and Japan could take on China on their own. Europe would solo Russia. Israel and the entire rest of the world would overrun the USA.

[Goradan]

Except Finland, because nobody invades Finland. Right?

No one because the Snipers will take care of you.

[heroim]

ok as a note the Paris piece accords of 1973 signed buy the US, north Vietnam, south Vietnam and the Vietcong was the thing that ended the war and gave the US victory over the north. However a year later the north broke the treaty and started attacking the south again after the us had pulled out its troops.

[SodiumChloride]

Nazi Germany was defeated too fast to really experience a war of attrition vs. local populations. You think killing random people deters resistance fighters? It actually creates more, if not to fight for freedom but to take revenge, and resistance fighters are never from the same village/region and they don't care the new authorities kill some random strangers.

This is why you don't kill random people. You kill them all. Fucking noobs.

[Nadiru]

Doesn't matter how much they spend, they wouldn't hold a candle against 220+ combined countries, especially when Israel is on Our side.

We are over 4000 millions, India, Pakistan and Japan could take on China on their own. Europe would solo Russia. Israel and the entire rest of the world would overrun the USA.

India and Pakistan have no way to get to China. What're gonna do, march 4 billion Southeast Asians through Tibet to take a dump on Uncle Xi's lawn? Good fucking luck with that, friend. The alternative is a nuclear bombardment of China which is not a viable alternative because...well, good bye the rest of the world. But at the same time, India and Pakistan and Japan are thoroughly outmatched by China and the US, who, if they are working together, will absolutely dominate the oceans. Which means they get to attack you, and you don't get to attack them.

[Deleted]

gave the US victory over the north.

It didn't.

- - - Updated - - -

India and Pakistan have no way to get to China. What're gonna do, march 4 billion Southeast Asians through Tibet to take a dump on Uncle Xi's lawn? Good fucking luck with that, friend. The alternative is a nuclear bombardment of China which is not a viable alternative because...well, good bye the rest of the world. But at the same time, India and Pakistan and Japan are thoroughly outmatched by China and the US, who, if they are working together, will absolutely dominate the oceans. Which means they get to attack you, and you don't get to attack them.

You act as if India, Pakistan and Japan had no navy lol. The US has their hands full with the rest of the world, they will have no time to help China.

[Deletedaccount1]

Wrong. China is a superpower also and US since financial crisis is not a world's hegemony. When you think of it from 1989 to 2008 is like 19 years. US' reign was short lived.

I hope you're joking.

[Auxora]

These theoretical what if China/Russia/US tried to take over the world threads are a bit silly. To start, the size of the major/superpower militaries are definitely built around nukes, or they would be far larger. In WW2 the US military had over 12M active service members, now there are only 1.2M active personnel. The reason the military doesn't need to be bigger than that is because of nukes. The whole strategy is built around nuking a country that would invade, so keeping a standing 5 or 10M person military isn't required. Second, it's unrealistic to worry about any of those countries taking over the world with conventional force, it's not something that would succeed militarily or even that any of them politically want to do. Plus, China and Russia have smaller militaries than the US. For all the panic about Russia taking over the world on here, they're much smaller in reality than people realize. They are only #8 in the world and basically the same size by active personnel head count as Turkey and Vietnam. In fact South Korea, Pakistan, India, etc. all have larger militaries by active personnel. Granted Iraq showed why head count doesn't matter that much though.

We could start talking but what if one of them armed every able body, didn't use nukes, and then tried to take over the world...but that's so fantasy land that it's a waste of time to even ponder. About 20 other countries in the world other than those big 3 have nukes (and many more with bio, chemical, etc.) and would probably use them before being taken over.

[Skroe]

I just want to point something out.

It is widely considered by international experts today that the "Bosnia/Kosovo" standard is desirably when looking at numbers of troops involve in peace keeping/occupation. Those campaigns saw 1 peacekeeper for 50 civilians. In Iraq, it was about 1:160 to 1:255. We see the results that got.

If you wanted to use the Bosnia/Kosovo standard for planet Earth, you'd need an occupying force of 150 million troops to police 7.5 billion people. Oh and they'd need replacements every 9-14 months. Asumming you have one third deployed, one third training to deploy and one third on cooldown, your global occupying army is now the world's third largest country, with a population of 450 million. To put this in perspective, every man, woman and child in the EU is 502 million people.

Suddenly makes every alien invasion movie look all the more ridiculous, and robots look all the more desirable.

Scale problems... they are truly cunts.

[Deleted]

I just want to point something out.

It is widely considered by international experts today that the "Bosnia/Kosovo" standard is desirably when looking at numbers of troops involve in peace keeping/occupation. Those campaigns saw 1 peacekeeper for 50 civilians. In Iraq, it was about 1:160 to 1:255. We see the results that got.

If you wanted to use the Bosnia/Kosovo standard for planet Earth, you'd need an occupying force of 150 million troops to police 7.5 billion people. Oh and they'd need replacements every 9-14 months. Asumming you have one third deployed, one third training to deploy and one third on cooldown, your global occupying army is now the world's third largest country, with a population of 450 million. To put this in perspective, every man, woman and child in the EU is 502 million people.

China has plenty to spare, before India and Japan decimates them that is.

[Nadiru]

You act as if India, Pakistan and Japan had no navy lol. The US has their hands full with the rest of the world, they will have no time to help China.

You are seriously overestimating the amount of military resistance the rest of the world is capable of putting out.

Carriers (Each US Carrier also comes with, at minimum, one cruiser, two destroyers or frigates, and 70 or so aircraft)


The US could lose a carrier for each carrier it sinks and still come out with enough carriers to dominate the Pacific.

[Deleted]

You are seriously overestimating the amount of military resistance the rest of the world is capable of putting out.

The US could lose a carrier for each carrier it sinks and still come out with enough carriers to dominate the Pacific.

They have no time to send any carriers out considering there are over 170 countries right at their borders and shores.

[SodiumChloride]

You are seriously overestimating the amount of military resistance the rest of the world is capable of putting out.

Carriers (Each US Carrier also comes with, at minimum, one cruiser, two destroyers or frigates, and 70 or so aircraft)


The US could lose a carrier for each carrier it sinks and still come out with enough carriers to dominate the Pacific.

Is there any benefit to the plain rectangle design?

[Gorgodeus]

They have no time to send any carriers out considering there are over 170 countries right at their borders and shores.

And how exactly are these countries getting there?

[TheFirstOnes]

No one, we'd be assaulting each other like no other end. Remember the korean war, it's still going...but..it's not as bad. The mexican/american war is still going on a bit with the drug lords. Racism is still active, sexism, everything. How can we take over a world if we cannot solve these minor/major threats already? We cannot.

However, I have an idea. What if someone was able to create an army (Kind of like sargeras's), and threaten to destroy the entire universe. This new "Unstoppable" threat is lead by a former human that made himself into a flaming fel metalic being (Hotter and more effective than the big bang itself). He states that we're "pathetic", "Greedy", "Corrupt", and has given up on us to bring the future towards the universe, as he has seen chaos in a near future, and humans were the beings to stop the chaos.

However, due to our state of being, he has given up. He thinks that, because of our conflicts between so little, we're too late...and it is his turn...to end it...in chaos. He thinks that the universe would be better off if he destroyed it...and took down chaos at his own hands...with disorder..and chaos, than have the shadows do it..in a near...horrific future...

This would be an amazing cool thing. Think about it, a Galactic war between Light vs Shadow, Order vs Disorder, Life vs Destruction.

[Deleted]

However, I have an idea. What if someone was able to create an army (Kind of like sargeras's), and threaten to destroy the entire universe. This new "Unstoppable" threat is lead by a former human that made himself into a flaming fel metalic being (Hotter and more effective than the big bang itself). He states that we're "pathetic", "Greedy", "Corrupt", and has given up on us to bring the future towards the universe, as he has seen chaos in a near future, and humans were the beings to stop the chaos.

However, due to our state of being, he has given up. He thinks that, because of our conflicts between so little, we're too late...and it is his turn...to end it...in chaos. He thinks that the universe would be better off if he destroyed it...and took down chaos at his own hands...with disorder..and chaos, than have the shadows do it..in a near...horrific future...

This would be an amazing cool thing. Think about it, a Galactic war between Light vs Shadow, Order vs Disorder, Life vs Destruction.

He would get lured into the Netherlands and gets killed there.

[TheFirstOnes]

He would get lured into the Netherlands and gets killed there.

I'd imagine the way we'd ever kill him is if we gain galactic knowledge, gain allies from other worlds, have an armada, gain more power, and take care of badass threats....only to lead into these 2 threats. Disorder, and chaos.

[Skroe]

Is there any benefit to the plain rectangle design?

The angled deck emerged in the 1950s and 1960s as a way of catapult launching and recovering at the same time. Such carrier can launch 2 and recover 1 at the same time, or launch 4 and recover 0.

The "rectangle" shape of US Amphibious Assault Ships is due to the fact that they take off via short take-off rolling starts and land vertically. It's a different approach. The compromise is of course, the Harriers that operate off of Amphibious Assault Ships are much less capable than F/A-18s off carriers, or F-16s /F-15s from air fields. The one winner of the F-35 program will be the marines, because they're replacing the harrier with the F-35B, which will turn AAS into more-carrier like platforms than they've ever been.

If you're interested in carrier shape, you should read about Navy carrier history starting with the end of World War II and the Essex class, some of which were modified into Angled-Deck carriers post war. While the US has had angled-deck carriers for over 60 years, it's experimented with size, positioning of the tower and elevators, ship displacement, and so forth to arrive at today's design.

Here is a GREAT picture.


In the middle is the the Midway class. That's actally CV-41, the USS Midway. From wikipedia:

USS Midway (CVB/CVA/CV-41) was an aircraft carrier of the United States Navy, the lead ship of its class. Commissioned a week after the end of World War II, Midway was the largest ship in the world until 1955, as well as the first U.S. aircraft carrier too big to transit the Panama Canal. A revolutionary hull design, based on the planned Montana-class battleship, gave it better maneuverability than previous carriers.[verification needed] It operated for an unprecedented 47 years, during which time it saw action in the Vietnam War and served as the Persian Gulf flagship in 1991's Operation Desert Storm. Decommissioned in 1992, it is now a museum ship at the USS Midway Museum, in San Diego, California, and the only remaining U.S. aircraft carrier of the World War II era that is not an Essex-class aircraft carrier.

At left is the USS Kitty Hawk, CV-63.

The Kitty Hawk-class supercarriers of the United States Navy were an incremental improvement on the Forrestal-class vessels. Three were built, all in the 1960s, Kitty Hawk (CV-63) (1961–2009), Constellation (CV-64) (1961–2003), America (CV-66) (1965–1996), as well as the variant John F. Kennedy (CV-67) (1967–2007).

The Forrestal-class aircraft carriers were a four-ship class designed and built for the United States Navy in the 1950s. It was the first class of so-called supercarriers, combining high tonnage, deck-edge elevators and an angled deck. The first ship was commissioned in 1955, the last decommissioned in 1998.

At right is the USS Nimitz, the first of the Nimitz class. Nimitiz's make up all of the US carrier fleet at the present, except for the first-in-class Gerald R Ford, which is new. Nimitizs were build from 1971-2009. They were, until the Ford class, the culmination of decades of carrier experimentation.

The Nimitz-class supercarriers are a class of ten nuclear-powered aircraft carriers in service with the United States Navy. The lead ship of the class is named for World War II United States Pacific Fleet commander Fleet Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, the U.S. Navy's last fleet admiral. With an overall length of 1,092 ft (333 m) and full-load displacement of over 100,000 long tons,[1] they have been the largest warships built and in service,[4] although they are being eclipsed by the upcoming Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carriers. Instead of the gas turbines or diesel-electric systems used for propulsion on many modern warships, the carriers use two A4W pressurized water reactors which drive four propeller shafts and can produce a maximum speed of over 30 knots (56 km/h) and maximum power of around 260,000 shp (190 MW). As a result of the use of nuclear power, the ships are capable of operating for over 20 years without refueling and are predicted to have a service life of over 50 years. They are categorized as nuclear-powered aircraft carriers and are numbered with consecutive hull numbers between CVN-68 and CVN-77.[Note 1]

All ten carriers were constructed by Newport News Shipbuilding Company in Virginia. USS Nimitz, the lead ship of the class, was commissioned on 3 May 1975, and USS George H.W. Bush, the tenth and last of the class, was commissioned on 10 January 2009. Since the 1970s, Nimitz-class carriers have participated in many conflicts and operations across the world, including Operation Eagle Claw in Iran, the Gulf War, and more recently in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Missing in these pictures are the Enterprise and other "mini-classes" that allowed the Navy to experiment further.

The Ford class is different yet again. It's larger, yet faster than the Nimitz with a high degree of automation, a powerful new nuclear reactor design and a redesigned deck, including a smaller tower.