Who would win in a war between these two continents, /pol/?

>>129436854
nuclear winter for everyone

>>129436854

Neither

>>129436854
MEXUSCAN will dominate the world.

>>129437014
this

File: retro-nuclear-winter-superJumbo.jpg (319KB, 2048x1152px) Image search: [Google]

319KB, 2048x1152px

>>129436854

>>129436854
The Jews

If war goes nuclear: The obvious outcome.

If not: Stalemate because neither side can sustain the necessary supply lines across the atlantic to seriously try to occupy the land.

The US has an advantage in power projection (it's like 12 carries vs 8 or something), but all of it is useless if you now need to occupy a territory as large as the entire european continent, the US army would need like 20 times more people to even attempt this.

Vice versa, Europe has no chance of actually occupying the US mainland in any serious capacity.

>>129437366
The US occupied the Western Europe for years over 50 years ago. It would be even easier now.
>>129436854
The US spends more than the next 9 countries combined on the military. Unless the Europoors had China on there side they would lose pretty hard

>>129436854
No more brother wars

File: Braves1957.gif (18KB, 545x417px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 545x417px

>>129437366
>Europe has no chance of actually occupying the US mainland in any serious capacity.

>>129437595
>The US occupied the Western Europe for years over 50 years ago. It would be even easier now.

With local support and allies. Right now it would be straight up impossible.

Supply lines dictate wars, it's why Russia was never conquered.

>>129437194
This

>>129437595
How the fuck are the Chinese even going to project themselves into Europe? Fucking retards don't even have a Blue-Water navy

>>129437194

^The thread is over, you all can go home now.

>>129436945
Euros are so obsessed with the environment they'd never use nukes to defend themselves.
Russia would first strike the moment a superior conventional military crossed their borders. They've played that game too many times and know they won't be bailed out of the next one.

>>129437890
Russia isn't in Europe.

US has already won.

>>129437983
Well at least the part that matter are, I digress.

>>129437983
It is, and it's rightful Swedish clay.

>>129437194
Nailed it van Dyke.

>>129436854
Fuck you, I'll shove a baguette in your butthole.

>>129438187
You won't even fight for the clay taken over by Islam.

>>129437595
You could spend your whole budget and you still wouldn't stand a chance at conquering Europe without local allies. There are simply far too many people and far too many weapons.

>>129437014
you wouldn't even be contributing

>>129436854
The United States would win hands down. America is completely unchallenged on the seas, so Europe could never realistically go on the attack, and America can use that to dictate when and if an invasion of Europe would take place. The US would also have complete air supremacy in a short amount of time, given the utter mismatch of the US Air Force/Navy air arm against its European counterparts.

With sea and sky under control, the US can destroy the relatively centralized European infrastructure at its leisure. Power stations, military command and control, fuel depots and pipelines, etc. are all fodder for tomahawks and bombers. The only possible stumbling block would be the French and British submarines, but they are few in number and the US has enough intelligence and ASW capabilities to take care of them.

>>129436854
The Jews

>>129437983
Nice education

>>129437014

C.U.M. Will have its day.

>>129438397
We're talking the whole of Europe, not just Germany, building ships wouldn't take long.

Israel

>>129438375
There's no need to be an overly hostile autist, I didn't say we'd pull as much weight as you would.

>>129438468
You could just read my other post.

File: who.png (49KB, 400x467px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 400x467px

>>129436854
Answer:

>>129437366
European countries have shown a strong propensity to surrender to invaders. European militaries would not be able to stop the invasion of the continent. European forces are not in a state of readyness. It would be like the German invasion of France but on a continental scale.

The end result would have Europe dominated by American culture and occupied by Amer---- oh wait...

File: 1404095780903.png (356KB, 572x380px) Image search: [Google]

356KB, 572x380px

>>129438602
>It would be like the German invasion of France but on a continental scale.

Yeah no it wouldn't.

>>129438529
Honestly it would be better without you so in the history books we would write that the US conquered Europe alone.

>>129438720
European militaries are incompetent, unfunded, and 75 years out of practice. Their military traditions are irrelevant to modern warfare, their gear is untested and their population is almost as weak as Canadians are.

The cold hands rubbing merchant monster!

>>129438602
Hey is this a Psy-op to make NATO members increase spending...

Also France was neighboring Germany, you're an ocean away from Europe

>>129438736
>>129438828
Mind if I post this to Reddit?

File: plp.png (46KB, 504x503px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 504x503px

>>129436854
We would. As long as e keep destabilizing the middle east, through opposing rebel faction funding, CIA spooks, and ISIS. The "refugees" can flood inwards to their open arm socialist society. At the same time we lend support in various ways for Poland to keep closed, since they will be the new power balance for Russia.

Keep the flow and destabilize Europe so hey either break and we can gain new alliances, or they unite and make a Euro army we can slowly lead into pressure for more muscle towards middle east/Russia/China. But the real cat in the bag we should be focused on is China. And that requires investments into cyber-warfare infrastructure, off,def. And we need to pull our factories out and back to America, not to be worked by the people but full automation. We can also hopscotch the process by filtering factories now into India, giving them regional power to offset the Chinese, while gathering alliances and deals with Japan, S.Korea and various Asian island nations.

>>129438481
>We're talking the whole of Europe

So was I. You have no chance.

>building ships wouldn't take long

It takes months under ideal conditions. When the entire Atlantic is now enemy territory, your opponents control the skies above your head, AND have been destroying your industrial capacity since the start of hostilities, you'll be lucky to supply your soldiers with electricity and oil, much less warships. Even if you were able to cobble some boats together, you'd have to be able to utilize them in an environment crawling with enemy submarines and anti-ship capable aircraft.

Good fucking luck.

>Population

C.U.M. - 579 million

Europe - 743.1 million

Well, we lose in population/man power by quite a bit.

>>129438958
And the majority of that are brown weak manlets

>>129438940
Ehh Europa has more ships combined than C.U.M

>>129437712
Also keep in mind that we have military bases all over Europe, now.

And Hitler totally had Russia curbstomped, til our traitor politicians gave the filthy commies practically unlimited weapons and food and shit.

>>129438958
That's assuming this war would have an equal kill rate between the EU (or EU and Russia) and CUM.

>>129438958
Also nice fake, your total population is like 480

And Europe today is closer to 800+ Million

>>129436854
Us, three times in the 20th Century.

>>129436854
Now? USA.
Europe is falling apart. We cant defend themself against shitskins and sandinggers.

If you want to invade, dont worry. West EU will just let you in with billboards: occupations forces welcome.

>>129439070
>Ehh Europa has more ships combined than C.U.M

Refugee dinghies don't count, Muhammad.

>>129439070
Most of Europe's navies are green or brown water.

>>129438397
Swedish submarines, gotta give credit were credit is due, the Swedish are sub-human filth, but they make the best submarines.

>>129439282
>Afghans and Iranian who blow the fuck out the U.S. in the Middle East don't count
>But Brown little spics count

>>129436854
America would rape us in less than 6 month
/thread

>>129436854
depends, are we talking about the European subcontinent or the whole Eurasian continent? If we are talking about just north america vs Europe I would imagine that NA would smash pretty hard into the coastlines of europe forcing up a new mountain range and disfiguring the continent. beyond recognition. Although at that point it would be just one supercontinent. I think a better question is would Australia subsume New zealand or would it merely create a new mountain range along its coast?

File: HMS_Gustaf_V.jpg (71KB, 392x249px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 392x249px

Bring it

>>129439377
The quietest, perhaps. But how fast can they go when they DO have to move? And can they launch nukes?

File: IMG_1989.jpg (62KB, 639x520px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 639x520px

>>129438476
Kek, underrated

>>129436854
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6filPCtrt0c

>>129436854
>america
>beating croatia in a war
WE WOULD ANNIHILATE YOUR SHITTY LITTLE COUNTRY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iPji1ZGgeoc

>>129439417
>0 tactical victories

yeah the Afghans and Iranians don't count, not a single American unit, down to the squad level, has been lost in one event. If you can't even kill a squad at once you don't count.

>>129437194
/thread

>>129439377
Swedish submarines are good, I'll give you that. I cited British and French submarines though, because they carry nuclear SLBMs. Their threat is their missiles, not in their capacity as anti-shipping tools. While non-nuclear submarines (the Swedish ones are diesel-electric) are potent weapons, they have to surface frequently. In a battlespace where your enemy not only controls the skies, but also has more submarines than you do, that limits their lifespan dramatically.

European attack subs admittedly have a chance of scoring a few kills against the USN, but the mismatch in naval power is so great that the losses can be absorbed. Once a USN ship is hit, you can bet it's going to focus its ASW capabilities there, and Europe has so few submarines that every single loss is a huge reduction in relative strength. That is all assuming that the European subs can get the jump on the USN, and decades of playing cat-and-mouse with the USSR has made the Americans the world's best sub-hunters, so I have my doubts.

>>129439629
lel

>>129439617

I giggled

I'm assuming the war will not go nuclear, because once one is fired the world is over so everyone is pissing their pants at the suggestion.

The war'll probably start in the Atlantic over who controls that area, the US will definitely win that, even if Europe is able to attrition fleets and supply lines with submarines.

If anyone ever is able to land, it'll be the US. Even if the EU won the sea war, the US navy is to large to be annihilated. The US would probably land in Spain, Britain, Ireland, or France. Most likely Britain since occupying would be easy as fuck since you don't need translators.

Once they take land the chance of it returning to the original owner is minimal, unless by insurgency or evacuation of American troops.

If the war lasts a short time the Americans will either take wherever they occupied or end the war in a white peace.

If the war lasts a long time the US will eventually be able to stabilize regions under their control for long enough to take more land.

If it's a hundred-years-war style war where it lasts for a century or more with long breaks and lulls in the war, then the US would definitely win, they have greater industrial potential, more farmland to population and a more powerful military and administration.

The Europeans would have to fend off the Americans fast if they were to win the war.

This is assuming no EU militarization in the future, in which the odds would tip a bit more in the EU's favor.

>>129436854
Also the relevant question here is who would win, Mexicans with old American equipment or Muslims with old European Equipment. By the time this actually happens that's going to be the situation.

>>129436854

The answer to this question has already been answered. It's very simple, you just need to look back at ww2. If Hitler had success in the Eastern front, there is no way the US had the slightest chance in stopping nazi hegemony over the world. I would be posting from Mars right now.

>>129436854
I stand with the toothpaste. The Jews would win.