U.S vs The World
Debate Rounds (4)
RULE: NO nukes.
Enemy countries are invading the U.S homeland
Pro= United States
Con= The World
"Shall we expect some transatlantic military giant, to step over the
ocean, and crush us at a blow? Never! -- All the armies of Europe, Asia
and Africa combined, with all the treasure of the earth (our own
excepted) in their military chest; with a Bonaparte for a commander,
could not by force, take a drink from the Ohio, or make a track on the
Blue Ridge, in a trial of a Thousand years..." Abe Lincoln.
I believe that the entire world's army would be swallowed up by America's large landscape. That the U.S military is the largest and best in history, I also believe that any military unit would be destroyed swiftly by U.S defenders. The air force would dominate the sky's, and the navy would make invasion by sea almost impossible. The Abrams tank would dominate the battlefield also, not because of it's superiority in armor but because of it's tracking system the tank commander could immediatly send your location to all the other tanks, you now have 14 tanks looking for you and all the Apaches in the vicinity are also after you, your survivability just dropped to 0.
The U.S Army's third Corps is garrisoned in Texas being able to secure at least some of the region before reinforcements arrive.
I would also like to add some facts about the size of our military. ( If we were being invaded by the world I am sure that most of these numbers would double.)
Budget(2014): 526.6 Billion
Total Air-power(Fixed-wing and Rotary): 13,683
Oil Production: 8,500,000 gallons per day
Hello everyone , this is a relatively simple debate, it is the
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA vs THE REST OF THE WORLD.
Allow me to post some facts below.
The collective active military manpower of only the ten largest armies in the world is...
The us military is...1,429,995...
(TOTAL SIZE OF ONLY THE TEN LARGEST ARMIES IN THE WORLD)9,471,864 minus
(THE CURRENT SIZE OF THE USA ARMY)1,429,995
...............................................................=8,041,869... Of army personnel left...This means a force of 1,429,995 would have to take on a force of 8,041,869...
By any resonable standards and common sense this is rediciously improbable, the most likely scenario is the largest force would easily win, given the sheer numbers.
NOTE, This isn't even taking into account ALL OF THE ARMIES IN THE WORLD... Merely this is the TEN LARGEST ARMIES of which the USA is one of.
You raised a very good point, but it's my turn now.
9 million men is a massive amount and that's only 9 countries, but is there enough transports to get them across the ocean? No, the worlds navies would be inadequate to transport any sizable force across the Atlantic or Pacific. The U.S. navy would be able to break up any amphibious invasion. See the U.S. Navy has 19 carriers, that is 9 helicopter carriers and 10 aircraft carriers. The invaders would have to rely on civilian craft, which would be easy targets for submarines and aircraft. The rest of the world has a total of 12 carriers. During WW2 the carrier became the center for any fleet and immediately showed it's dominance. Since a sea invasion is off the table, well the only way to invade is over land, through Canada and Mexico. Let me tell you something about Texans... their crazy and an entire Army Corp is garrisoned in Texas. Invaders through Texas would meet fierce resistance no doubt. Thus in the north invaders would have Logistical trouble; their best bet would be to invade through the north-west, but it's filled with national parks. The national parks are vast exspances of land thus creating difficulty for supply lines to keep up with advancing armies. Hitler's invasion of Russia is a prime example of this.
Here is the big weakness in my opponents argument... he forgot to include american patriotism, during WW2 the U.S military grew to over 12 million strong, I would not doubt that in the event of a crisis, such as one at hand, the U.S. military would be at least 4 million strong. But the big numbers come from the civilian populace, that is the 270 million guns in the United States, say 5% of civilians fought the invaders well that is 16.2 million militia men, no small force. Green Berets would be deployed to help train the civilians into something fierce as it fights to protect it's homeland.
The United states spends only 3.8% of it's GDP on the military, if we spent 10% of our GDP this invasion force would be fighting a grand opponent.
imsmarterthanyou98 forfeited this round.
What if the entire rest of the world attacked the US all at the same time??
Surely they quite simply would not stand a chance.
The entire world attacking by LAND, AIR and SEA ....ALL AT ONCE?...devastating...
WITH NO OIL YOU CANNOT FUEL A WAR>>> PLAIN AND SIMPLE>>>
IF THE US WAS DEPRIVED OF MOST OF ITS OIL < WHICH IT WOULD BE SINCE IT IMPORTS THE VAST MAJORITY OF IT THEY WOULD NOT HAVE OIL TO FUEL THEIR TANKS < PLANES> AND ANY OTHER WAR MACHINE
THUS RENDERING US TROOPS INCAPABLE OF MOBILIZING OR FIGHTING>>>
THIS WAR WOULD NOT LAST LONG FOR THE US<< IT WOULD LOSE>
I am obviously the pro for this debate, I believe the United States of America could never be truly conquered even if the entire world ganged up (excluding nuclear stockpiles as the U.S. and many other countries would be obliterated if they were used), the reason I believe this is due to the following,
- One of the biggest factors is the land it's self the U.S is 3,537,441 square miles. The logistics of many countries would simply not function, hundred of thousands of enemy troops would be under supplied and demoralized leading to easy victories for the Americans. Many countries would not be able to transport troops in mass across the oceans without relying on susceptible civilian craft.
- The U.S. also has a large population, some 324 million strong. Large groups of guerrilla forces would pop up, the military would have thousands of volunteers, and militias would grow also. The industrial system would also be brought to bear supplying the defense.
-My final point is that the United States could achieve almost complete resource dependency. The giant Utah copper mine, U.S. oil dependency is decreases no matter how you look at the numbers, we have millions of acres of farmland, and the list continues.
imsmarterthanyou98 forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by lannan13 1 year ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||6||0|
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.