is the US at least still strong when it comes to military might?

[Felya]

Even the Covid -19 is nothing compared to what the US has had to endure in the past.

Sorry, this is just irksome. Covid will occupy more text in history books, than Cuban Missile crisis. The difference is leadership... When you had JFK, he United people and showed a possible threat. Trump considers the dead a threat to his re-election and would rather pile on the bodies, while telling people it’s nothing. That’s shit leadership... that’s Trump... but, I bet you take covid a lot more serious, than you act here. Would be par for the course...

- - - Updated - - -

I'm pretty old, but I don't remember anything killing off 130k+ Americans in less than a year. I think you have it backwards. Nothing in my lifetime comes even close to measuring up to how dangerous the virus has been to the US. If my memory is correct, 911 was about 3k deaths, and all of the middle east disasters from then until now is on the order of 10k deaths. Combined that would be somewhere around 13k, or a tenth of what the virus has done. And the virus is far from over.

Images show mass graves being dug in New York to bury victims of the COVID-19 coronavirus disease pandemic in 2020.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/ma...vid-19-deaths/

The ruling on Snopes... True...

[draynay]

I missed that... that is pretty bad... when would you even place the first warning sign of WW2? Germany rebuking League of Nations limits on a standing army and munitions? But, rhetoric was brewing before than... that’s an interesting topic... when was the first sign of WW2? Heck... was it even the aftermath of WW1 that made it inevitable? Interesting topic, born out of an absurd statement... Excelsior!!! lol

I wrote a paper on it as an undergrad, long since lost and barely remembered, thesis was that the World Wars were too interlinked to be considered anything but another Thirty Years War.

[Zan15]

A lot of those existed back in the cold war. Actually a much worse threat. I was alive when the Cuba missile crises was taking place. There is no grave immediate threat of a attack from China or Russia on the US at the present. They are not that stupid.

Even the Covid -19 is nothing compared to what the US has had to endure in the past.

I sometimes wonder if history is really being taught in the schools.

wow I've never seen such apologetic deflective behavior just to support your guy.

So during the cold war did 130k people die because of it?
I guess because really bad things happened in the past, Covid19 is "nothing" really huh?

Must be nice to be able to sit in your retirement away from risk while collecting your socialist benefits huh while the majority of the country has to work and be at risk for this "nothing".

[JohnBrown1917]

A lot of those existed back in the cold war. Actually a much worse threat. I was alive when the Cuba missile crises was taking place. There is no grave immediate threat of a attack from China or Russia on the US at the present. They are not that stupid.

Even the Covid -19 is nothing compared to what the US has had to endure in the past.

I sometimes wonder if history is really being taught in the schools.

The only history your schools ignore is about all the people the US has killed in wars.

[Slant]

Sorry, this is just irksome. Covid will occupy more text in history books, than Cuban Missile crisis. The difference is leadership... When you had JFK, he United people and showed a possible threat. Trump considers the dead a threat to his re-election and would rather pile on the bodies, while telling people it’s nothing. That’s shit leadership... that’s Trump... but, I bet you take covid a lot more serious, than you act here. Would be par for the course...

It won't. Nobody gave a shit about the Spanish Flu until this thing happened, but everyone loved talking about the Cuban missile crisis. There's thousands of books on it, even a couple Hollywood movies. Get some perspective. This flu is certainly serious, but not in a historical context. I agree with your assessment about Trump, though. Heck, I think you're being too friendly. It's not just "shit leadership", his actions are most likely still dictated by Putin.

The funny thing is when Americans tell me it's fine, cos they are the only ones on the planet that have the science and the medical system to deal with it. I'm not even kidding, I was told exactly that. I guess I'm too Europeanist to get the joke. The amount of brainwashing in that country is actually somewhat depressing.

[Zan15]

It won't. Nobody gave a shit about the Spanish Flu until this thing happened, but everyone loved talking about the Cuban missile crisis. There's thousands of books on it, even a couple Hollywood movies. Get some perspective. This flu is certainly serious, but not in a historical context. I agree with your assessment about Trump, though. Heck, I think you're being too friendly. It's not just "shit leadership", his actions are most likely still dictated by Putin.

The funny thing is when Americans tell me it's fine, cos they are the only ones on the planet that have the science and the medical system to deal with it. I'm not even kidding, I was told exactly that. I guess I'm too Europeanist to get the joke.

to be fair there has been a couple hundred movies about pandemics too...one that almost nailed this one to the tee.

[Slant]

True, I still maintain that people suffer from immediate focus disorder. Whatever is happening right now is the most important thing in their life and thus it must be, forever. Until the next thing is happening right now. In a year, when we have the vaccine, this will fade into the background as a really curious and bad episode while being almost instantaneously overshadowed by the economical fallout and a huge conflict with people wanting to protect the environment. That is, if the Presidential election doesn't blow all of this out of the water anyway, which it absolutely will for a couple weeks at least.

I'd even argue that the Presidential election is more important to the global political situation than Covid. If Trump continues to be President, well... that's 4 more years for Putin to fuck shit up and destabilize the West. If, against my more realistic expectations, Trump gets replaced, well, we could get back to business within 6 months and start dealing with these regional powers that think they can do whatever they want.

[Deletedaccount1]

i kind of feel like the news articles and headlines these days are always about Trump's incompetence or how America gets bullied around by China and Russia.

But when it comes to normal military strength, would the US still hold its own against either at the very least? Just comparing Russia and China since they're the scariest out there. It just gives me peace of mind to at least be assured where I live is prepared to fight a standard war since the COVID thing has proven we're not ready for biological terrorism and warfare

Yes, the US would "hold its own". In fact, those two countries wouldn't stand a chance against the United States in a conventional war given the technological advantage of the US, our unarguably unmatched navy (which is the world's second largest air force after our Air Force), and our key allies all over the world including NATO, Japan, South Korea, Australia, Saudi Arabia (third highest funded military in the world), among others. In reality, there is good reason to be skeptical that nuclear powers that trade heavily with one another would actually ever go to war. The little things we hear about on the news are not even pawns moving on the chess board. They are just slight demonstrations of soft/hard power i.e. actions that influence the global perceptions of force.

[Kellhound]

Depends where your drawing the line on good record of modern warfair, I'll admit everything post 1990 has gone better than from 1945 to 1990.

On the nukes thing, you don't really need all that many to achieve mad, the US has alot of land mass but let's face it economically you only need to nuke a handful of cities to bring americas economy down.

China currently has a stock pile of around 290 warheads though that's not anywhere near what Russia and the US have its sufficient to mean a nuclear war between the US and China would leave no winners, they do also have the capacity to rapidly ramp that up if needed.

Pretty much every major conventional combat operation the US has conducted since 1980 has been successful militarily.

You need about 1000 warheads to ensure MAD, 290 would hurt the US (China does not have enough long range delivery systems to actually hit the US with that many, btw) but not destroy it.

- - - Updated - - -

This is a major misunderstanding. Your fear during the Cuban Missile, was manufactured. I learned about it in USSR and it was the same. There was no threat of either one attacking each other. It was all bravado and nothing, but propaganda. Covid has now killed over 130000 American. In just a couple of months... How many Americans died during the Cuban Missile crisis? Yet, as currently someone that is in the high demographic of death due to covid, why did you think Cuban Missile crisis was a bigger threat?

I’ll give you a hint... it’s because god lord Trump deems it not a problem. That’s why you refuse to take it seriously...



They do not know da way... click click click click...

Edit: I think Ugandan Knuckles is my favorite meme of all time... Prove me wrong... ooh, there might be a close second.

The fear, and the danger, of the Cuban Missile Crises was real, if for no other reason than you had a significant amount of firepower from both sides interacting on a daily basis in a very tense standoff. One mistake by either side, and by time it was known to be a mistake, WWIII would have been over....

Covid is not going to destroy the US (we survived the Great Flu Pandemic), WWIII would have. It has nothing to do with Trump.

- - - Updated - - -

I missed that... that is pretty bad... when would you even place the first warning sign of WW2? Germany rebuking League of Nations limits on a standing army and munitions? But, rhetoric was brewing before than... that’s an interesting topic... when was the first sign of WW2? Heck... was it even the aftermath of WW1 that made it inevitable? Interesting topic, born out of an absurd statement... Excelsior!!! lol

Its pretty clear given the end of WWII that it was the way Germany was treated after WWI that directly lead to the European part of WWII.

- - - Updated - - -

I'm pretty old, but I don't remember anything killing off 130k+ Americans in less than a year. I think you have it backwards. Nothing in my lifetime comes even close to measuring up to how dangerous the virus has been to the US. If my memory is correct, 911 was about 3k deaths, and all of the middle east disasters from then until now is on the order of 10k deaths. Combined that would be somewhere around 13k, or a tenth of what the virus has done. And the virus is far from over.

1918 flu killed about 675,000 people in the US, out of 103 million people. Covid has killed 130,000 out of 331 million. That puts the deaths from the flu ahead about 15:1.

- - - Updated - - -

I wrote a paper on it as an undergrad, long since lost and barely remembered, thesis was that the World Wars were too interlinked to be considered anything but another Thirty Years War.

Only if you look at the European portion, and WWI was in many ways just a continuation of the Franco-Prussian War.

[draynay]

Only if you look at the European portion

That was the scope of the paper.

[Kellhound]

wow I've never seen such apologetic deflective behavior just to support your guy.

So during the cold war did 130k people die because of it?
I guess because really bad things happened in the past, Covid19 is "nothing" really huh?

Must be nice to be able to sit in your retirement away from risk while collecting your socialist benefits huh while the majority of the country has to work and be at risk for this "nothing".

The Cold War and its proxies killed over 80,000 US soldiers, a low death count because all fighting took place outside the US. It was well known that a hot war with the USSR would cause far more US deaths than even WWII.

Actually, the majority of the US labor force is working from home (42%) or not working at all (33%).

- - - Updated - - -

That was the scope of the paper.

Fair enough. I did an undergrad paper on why France was responsible for WWI becoming a world war and not just the German-Russo War. The level of nationalism at the time was staggering.....

[Zan15]

The Cold War and its proxies killed over 80,000 US soldiers, a low death count because all fighting took place outside the US. It was well known that a hot war with the USSR would cause far more US deaths than even WWII.

even of 80,000 was accurate that is over 44 years or 1900 a year.

Actually, the majority of the US labor force is working from home (42%) or not working at all (33%).

.

not sure what that has to do with anything? He's retired, on SS/Medicare/VA/Etc

[Powerogue]

It's hard to tell. I know our military budget is used insanely inefficiently, and if we're talking WWIII free for all with nukes just about anything else becomes nearly irrelevant.

We certainly don't seem prepared for soft war tactics that undermine our democracy with foreign influences. We actually have real people insane enough to go "well why should that be a problem?" If they can destroy us without firing a shot, they will.

[Kellhound]

even of 80,000 was accurate that is over 44 years or 1900 a year.



not sure what that has to do with anything? He's retired, on SS/Medicare/VA/Etc

80,000 is a low estimate, and as I pointed out, things never got hot between NATO and the Warsaw Pact. If it had, the death toll would have dwarfed WWII.

It means the majority of the US is NOT at risk because of work, and many people on unemployment are making more money than they did before they lost their job.

[Monster Hunter]

Pretty much every major conventional combat operation the US has conducted since 1980 has been successful militarily.

You need about 1000 warheads to ensure MAD, 290 would hurt the US (China does not have enough long range delivery systems to actually hit the US with that many, btw) but not destroy it.

- - - Updated - - -



The fear, and the danger, of the Cuban Missile Crises was real, if for no other reason than you had a significant amount of firepower from both sides interacting on a daily basis in a very tense standoff. One mistake by either side, and by time it was known to be a mistake, WWIII would have been over....

Covid is not going to destroy the US (we survived the Great Flu Pandemic), WWIII would have. It has nothing to do with Trump.

- - - Updated - - -



Its pretty clear given the end of WWII that it was the way Germany was treated after WWI that directly lead to the European part of WWII.

- - - Updated - - -



1918 flu killed about 675,000 people in the US, out of 103 million people. Covid has killed 130,000 out of 331 million. That puts the deaths from the flu ahead about 15:1.

- - - Updated - - -



Only if you look at the European portion, and WWI was in many ways just a continuation of the Franco-Prussian War.

Your having a laugh right, aside from the big faliurs like Vietnam, Korea, bay of pigs. There's all Te smaller ones like americas intervention in Cambodians civil war and the Laotian intervention.

I'm sorry if it upsets you, but americas military track record and reputation is embarrassing

[Kellhound]

Your having a laugh right, aside from the big faliurs like Vietnam, Korea, bay of pigs. There's all Te smaller ones like americas intervention in Cambodians civil war and the Laotian intervention.

I'm sorry if it upsets you, but americas military track record and reputation is embarrassing

1: Those all predate 1980.
2: You are confusing guerrilla warfare and peacekeeping/occupation with conventional warfare anyway. The US did not lose in Korea (even with the massive restrictions against attacking China proper), Vietnam was a US military victory but political defeat, and the Bay of Pigs was not a US military operation.

When you look at conventional conflict, US military v adversary military, the US has come out on top, despite the logistical issues it has had to face.

[trapmaster]

My Friends and I were in long huge debate talking about what if "USA VS WORLD" as in war, who would win and why? Funded armies and superior weapons, vehicles, transportation and etc! Can USA HOLD ON IT OWN against the entire world army?

[Kellhound]

My Friends and I were in long huge debate talking about what if "USA VS WORLD" as in war, who would win and why? Funded armies and superior weapons, vehicles, transportation and etc! Can USA HOLD ON IT OWN against the entire world army?

That depends if you are talking about defending the US or invading the rest of the world. The US can easily defend itself against a conventional attack by pretty much the entire world combined, but it would not be able to attack Russia or China and win a ground war within either's border.

[ParanoiD84]

Very much so.

[Slant]

Its pretty clear given the end of WWII that it was the way Germany was treated after WWI that directly lead to the European part of WWII.

Careful, you're following nazi dogma there. The financial crisis of '28 and the economic fallout afterwards contributed more to WW2 than "the way Germany was treated". That's just the propaganda piece the nazi party used to get everyone feel like a victim and justify their nationalism. It also paved the way for the whole annexation series, you know, taking back what should be German, nevermind previous agreements.

Not saying it's outrageously wrong, but it helps to have some context.

- - - Updated - - -

My Friends and I were in long huge debate talking about what if "USA VS WORLD" as in war, who would win and why? Funded armies and superior weapons, vehicles, transportation and etc! Can USA HOLD ON IT OWN against the entire world army?

No. But that scenario is quite pointless and extreme. It'll never happen. Before a scenario like that happens, the US would burn itself in another civil war.