Who would win in a war between the USA and a China/Russia/North Korea coalition

[Robertclive]

USA of course because NATO would get in involved. The EU would be fighting the Russians on the European front while since the USA is at war with China, China loses it's number one reliable trading partner. China is already economically destroyed while all the USA has to do is block the coast and China is pretty much on life alert. We use our superior air force to bomb the internal infrastructure of China to make things worse. China's forces are initially spread out because they are probably fighting two fronts in Korea and South East Asia. We slowly push back their invading forces until we've reached Han China, the heart and we just kick in through there. No need to invade far western China, Manchuria, or Inner Mongolia because they're mainly buffer states. Once China is out, the EU forces are probably fighting in European Russia right now, so the USA invades through Siberia and bam. Also, lol North Korea.

Or the USA could lose because we lose 200 troops and the home front is already wanting to end the war lol.

[JP226]

B/C the US is so utterly superior to any other military or militaires, the US of course. Why is this even a poll honestly? I like how the "little people" like to pretend they are as good as Americans.

[Miroslav Klose]

Probably Germany.

[Dramatic Cat]

but but... why is north korea there?? as far as i know north korea's only trump card is nukes... and this is a no-nuke warfare scenario rite??

So USA has liek the most uber-navy in the world and the technology but the chinese and russians have that gargantuan manpower, for the USA to effectively take the war to those guys land it would be a nightmare i believe.

but as the guys above said, if the EU come into play id have to say the USA might (with capital M) prevail...

[Mortality]

USA of course because NATO would get in involved. The EU would be fighting the Russians on the European front while since the USA is at war with China, China loses it's number one reliable trading partner. China is already economically destroyed while all the USA has to do is block the coast and China is pretty much on life alert. We use our superior air force to bomb the internal infrastructure of China to make things worse. China's forces are initially spread out because they are probably fighting two fronts in Korea and South East Asia. We slowly push back their invading forces until we've reached Han China, the heart and we just kick in through there. No need to invade far western China, Manchuria, or Inner Mongolia because they're mainly buffer states. Once China is out, the EU forces are probably fighting in European Russia right now, so the USA invades through Siberia and bam. Also, lol North Korea.

Or the USA could lose because we lose 200 troops and the home front is already wanting to end the war lol.

Can you point to Korea on a map, sir?

All China has to do is ask for the US's debt back, The US is broke, Russia sends soldiers rushing through Alaska. North Korean nukes Seoul and takes South Korea. China puts up a defense. Russia nukes the US into submission.

The US would freeze in Siberia. Do you know how cold it is? Russia has stopped two invasions due to its winter. If you don't know, it was the French in the early 1800s and Nazi Germany in the 1940s.

But you do know there would be little homefront left for the troops to return to. The Chinese and Russians would nuke it.

[Robertclive]

Can you point to Korea on a map, sir?

All China has to do is ask for the US's debt back, The US is broke, Russia sends soldiers rushing through Alaska. North Korean nukes Seoul and takes South Korea. China puts up a defense. Russia nukes the US into submission.

The US would freeze in Siberia. Do you know how cold it is? Russia has stopped two invasions due to its winter. If you don't know, it was the French in the early 1800s and Nazi Germany in the 1940s.

But you do know there would be little homefront left for the troops to return to. The Chinese and Russians would nuke it.

omg, a butt hurt brit. First, it doesn't make asking for your debt back when you're already at war. Second, why bankrupt the country keeping your ass alive. Russia couldn't mount a naval invasion to Alaska, and it would be worse to fight there than Siberia. Russia stopped two invasion because the opposing forces were to ignorant to equip their armies with winter gear. Plus, the invasions were clearly planned off of blitzcrieg and everything else was given little thought. Nukes are out of the questions and plus the we can shoot them down and we would still nuke them.

[EmperorBatman999]

Can you point to Korea on a map, sir?

All China has to do is ask for the US's debt back, The US is broke, Russia sends soldiers rushing through Alaska. North Korean nukes Seoul and takes South Korea. China puts up a defense. Russia nukes the US into submission.

The US would freeze in Siberia. Do you know how cold it is? Russia has stopped two invasions due to its winter. If you don't know, it was the French in the early 1800s and Nazi Germany in the 1940s.

But you do know there would be little homefront left for the troops to return to. The Chinese and Russians would nuke it.

We simply don't invade Russia or go deep into China. Napoleon and Hitler were too ambitious, I doubt US High Command would make the same mistake as them.

And I thought this was a No Nukes scenario?

[Stildawn]

If we remove occupation and morals out of the equation... Im fairly sure that eventually after prolonged bombing campaigns, that the USA could drive tanks through most of China/Eastern Russia... But by doing so they would need to be ruthless against any trouble making civilians...

Occupation is entirely different... But simply driving through... After awhile yes...

[RZZZA]

We simply don't invade Russia or go deep into China. Napoleon and Hitler were too ambitious, I doubt US High Command would make the same mistake as them.

U.S. military/government learning from history? When has that ever happened

[(s)AINT]

Or the USA could lose because we lose 200 troops and the home front is already wanting to end the war lol.

LOL

U.S. military/government learning from history? When has that ever happened

I don't think so. I fixed what is correct

[Robertclive]

If we apply total war than the USA would win hands down

[Vanoi]

If we apply total war than the USA would win hands down

If we apply total war than no one wins.

[Robertclive]

If we apply total war than no one wins.

Who would get destroyed more

[Dave Strider]

This is a no-nukes scenario, guys.

[Jean=A=Luc]

Who would win in a war between the USA and a China/Russia/North Korea coalition?

The terrorists.

[Kamos]

All China has to do is ask for the US's debt back, The US is broke, Russia sends soldiers rushing through Alaska. North Korean nukes Seoul and takes South Korea. China puts up a defense. Russia nukes the US into submission.

While I'm not in agreement with Clive I like to comment on this in particular.

Why on Earth would a nation agree to payback someone they are at total and complete war with? That's just plain illogical.
"We suddenly hate each other with an apparent rabid ferocity now but I really should pay you guys back"

The Russian would invade through Alaska if they had a death wish. Alaska kind of has really inhospitable weather and probably doesn't have the infrastructure to support an army passing through. Furthermore to invade through Alaska means to invade through Canada as well, a very poor decision if the scenario of the US without allies is to be stomached. The forces that do land will likely be cut off by superior naval units and the air force will prevent resupply.

North Korea will likely fail at any nuclear attack as their missiles are garbage and I couldn't fathom try to launch a nuke from a plane these days with air defense the way things are.

And the Russians wouldn't nuke the US for the same reasons it never came to nukes before. It would to likely destroy the world.

[Påsan]

Russia couldn't mount a naval invasion to Alaska,

Yes it can, and have extensive plans to do so.

and it would be worse to fight there than Siberia.

No.

Russia stopped two invasion because the opposing forces were to ignorant to equip their armies with winter gear.

Let me tell you, as a former solder that have served above the polar circle, one thing is to have the gear, another thing entirely is to learn and master the routines necessary to survive and conduct warfare in extensive periods of time in the far north. Ive lived in the north for most of my life, i love snow, and i found it hard, tiresome and downright horrible at times. Remember your thread "Omg is it really so cold in Europe" Its even colder in Russia. How do you think Americans from Miami, California or any other plce with no experience are going to fare against the Russians that that have more experience in winter warfare than any other power? Badly. I had Americans hatin in the English winter while i was wearing T skirts, and we have Americans on exercise in Norway that say cold is the worst thing they know of as soldiers, and they very rarely master how to ski.

Sorry, but in a winter warfare situation, my money will always be on the Russians.

[RedGuard]

The terrorists.

CORRECTION::

SPECTRE

[Robertclive]

Alaska is colder than Siberia. Alaska is harder to navigate because of it's mountainous terrain while Siberia is mainly flat. Last, the invading forces have to cross through the Tundra's of Canada to reach the US.

Let me tell you, as a former solder that have served above the polar circle, one thing is to have the gear, another thing entirely is to learn and master the routines necessary to survive and conduct warfare in extensive periods of time in the far north. Ive lived in the north for most of my life, i love snow, and i found it hard, tiresome and downright horrible at times. Remember your thread "Omg is it really so cold in Europe" Its even colder in Russia. How do you think Americans from Miami, California or any other plce with no experience are going to fare against the Russians that that have more experience in winter warfare than any other power? Badly. I had Americans hatin in the English winter while i was wearing T skirts, and we have Americans on exercise in Norway that say cold is the worst thing they know of as soldiers, and they very rarely master how to ski.

Sorry, but in a winter warfare situation, my money will always be on the Russians.

It gets cold here in America too, and we've fought in cold climates like Western Europe and Korea and have still won militarily. Do you think the Russians could last in hot climates because they couldn't in Afghanistan.

[RedGuard]

Yes it can, and have extensive plans to do so.
No. Let me tell you, as a former solder that have served above the polar circle, one thing is to have the gear, another thing entirely is to learn and master the routines necessary to survive and conduct warfare in extensive periods of time in the far north. Ive lived in the north for most of my life, i love snow, and i found it hard, tiresome and downright horrible at times. Remember your thread "Omg is it really so cold in Europe" Its even colder in Russia. How do you think Americans from Miami, California or any other plce with no experience are going to fare against the Russians that that have more experience in winter warfare than any other power? Badly. I had Americans hatin in the English winter while i was wearing T skirts, and we have Americans on exercise in Norway that say cold is the worst thing they know of as soldiers, and they very rarely master how to ski.

Sorry, but in a winter warfare situation, my money will always be on the Russians.

There is such thing as winter warfare training. Im pretty sure the Franks and the Nazis didn't have the luxury of going through that. maybe the norwegians would let us train here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aS0GB9w0KRU