StarDestroyer.Net BBS

C.S.Strowbridge wrote: Canada could win. First thing we'd do is shut off power to the Eastern Seaboard. Once New York is rioting the army would have to be recalled to deal with that. No more BC Hydro to power California, no more Alberta water, etc.

The US is dependent on Canadian resources to survive (and vice verse, Canada and the US are interdependent.)

Plan Red was created specifically to deal with these issues.

I hate this question. I am a proud citizen of the UK but on the other hand i love America. I think the USA would go with it's age old tatic and arm a ready terrorist organisation like the IRA. While the Brit army is dealing with them the US would sneek up and carpet bomb the place.

Tony Blair's polished skull would be hanging on Bush's wall.

Withen 2 days Canada will have a army of 500 000 MBTs each able to take out a million M1A2s. Withen 4 we'll have 25 Carriers, 50 BBs, and 289 SSNs. Withen 5 we'll have 100 000 Tactical fighters. Withen 7 Canadian troops will be marching through Texas.

Withen 7 Canadian troops will be marching through Texas.

And then, dear northern brother, you shall die.

Now correct me if I"m wrong, but doesn't the national guard of Texas outnumber the Canadian army? If so, I see states 51, 52, 53 and 54 coming in the near future if this war were to happen...

but besides that, once mainland britain has been conquered, various British anti-US occupation groups will form and try to kick the U.S. out. Will they succeed? I think so. It is an ass hard job holding a country together after a long fight. If the occupied people think they have any hope of getting un-occupied, they'll try it and they'll eventually "win"

Anyways, Canadian superpower aside, the UK can't hurt 'Merika. But they can make it bloody.

LOL, you Canadians are so silly. Americans may be arrogant and jingoistic, but at least we have a reason to be that way.

Shadow WarChief wrote:It is an ass hard job holding a country together after a long fight.

It's a fucking lot easier when the populace has been disarmed. Canada
hasn't been disarmed yet, so I'd have to put at least twenty divisions down
to keep them pacified, but a single division or so should account for
Great Britain and Australia each....

it is SOOOO much easier to occupy a country if nobody except YOUR people
has the guns, meaning you can do whatever the fuck you want once you've
rounded up every last weapon in their Army Depots...

Grand Admiral Thrawn wrote:Withen 2 days Canada will have a army of 500 000 MBTs each able to take out a million M1A2s. Withen 4 we'll have 25 Carriers, 50 BBs, and 289 SSNs. Withen 5 we'll have 100 000 Tactical fighters. Withen 7 Canadian troops will be marching through Texas.

ROFL

Also, it might not be the wisest course of action to first attack Texas, since everyone there is armed. You'd better stay away from the South, too. New England and the West Coast would make much easier targets.

Keeping the majority of Great Britain would probably be relatively easy, since guns are outlawed for civilian use there... Hell, even their <s>police</s> constables don't have guns most of the time...

Exonerate wrote:Keeping the majority of Great Britain would probably be relatively easy, since guns are outlawed for civilian use there... Hell, even their <s>police</s> constables don't have guns most of the time...

Trust me, guns could easily be obtained in time. We are not totally unarmed and I doubt 60 million people being held against their will would be a nice thing for a relatively small assault force.

Exonerate wrote:Keeping the majority of Great Britain would probably be relatively easy, since guns are outlawed for civilian use there

only handguns have been banned. Its still perfectly legal to own a rifle or shotgun. Just try taking over dorset or yorkshire (more shotgun wielding farmers than you can shake a stick at). And then theres the not so law abiding parts of Manchester, London, etc. Tell the people there that handguns are banned, hell there was gang war outside a police station (where the police are armed with semi-automatics) about a month ago.

Ok, off the top of my head:

1. The USMC is roughly the same size as the British Army. Thats just the Marines and not the US Army. The US has a large advantage on troops, and if the war with the UK can become a war of attrition the US has the advantage.

2. The UK and the US are roughly the same in technology, but the industrial capacity of the States gives them the advantage here. Also to note is that because of the larger economy and industrial base, the US maintains a larger number of weapons and various tech then does the UK.

3. Sea lift and/or Airlift capacity. Once again it is the American's with the advantage here. The UK does not have the capability to move large amounts of forces in a position to attack America with out a large build up that would be vulnerable to attack. This makes the British side of the war a defensive on and by default, gives the advantage to the American's.

4. No offense to Canada, but if they entered the war, they would be of little significance. The NYPD has more personel than the Canadian Army. The National Guard and Reserves of the Armed Forces would be enough to stop, and the crush any Canadian offensive. Fucking with our power and such would just make you a secondary target for America to deal with. Once again the American military has enough resources to deal with the UK and the Canadians at the same time.

5. I hope this senerio never comes to pass. While America, Britan, and Canada has differences, all three of us have a long history of friendship and have common ties between not only goverments but in the actual people as well. I respect both the Canadian and British people who serve their country and would not wish them any harm. There are just too many of us and to few of you to make any war between us a favorable outcome for you all.


As alway's IMHO, and no offense was intended to any of the nationals of the respected countries.

The COMMONWEALTH vs the USA? You realise the sheer size of the military that the Commonwealth contains?

USA loses.

I was under the impression that the British Commonwealth was the UK, the Falklands, Gibraltar, whatever.

This would be very one sided. Overwhelming US Victory.

People are arguing for Canada to keep the US busy? WTF? The Texas National Guard does indeed outmatch not only their army but their air force as well. Canada's total firepower is equal to about one US heavy brigade, and they don't have the ammunition to fight for more then a day or two. The whole country has just 5000 artillery shells.

weemadando wrote:The COMMONWEALTH vs the USA? You realise the sheer size of the military that the Commonwealth contains?

USA loses.

Do you realize how hopelessly outmatch it is technological, and in the air and on the open seas? The whole Indian air force would be hard pressed to beat five AGEIS ships. Adding in the whole Carrier factor is just mean.

C.S.Strowbridge wrote:

Bastard wrote:The United Kingdom AND THE COMMONWEALTH you say?

Well then the US is going to be majorly distracted at the Start with Canada getting going right on its doorstep.

The Canadians should be able to buy enough time for the UK to militrise massively and begin mass armament production, production of aircraft, ships etc...

Canada could win. First thing we'd do is shut off power to the Eastern Seaboard. Once New York is rioting the army would have to be recalled to deal with that. No more BC Hydro to power California, no more Alberta water, etc.

The US is dependent on Canadian resources to survive (and vice verse, Canada and the US are interdependent.)

And once that's done, we'd send a special diplomatic envoy to burn down the White House for old times sake.

But seriously, any war between Canada and the US would be devastating to both countries. Enough so that a power like the UK could easily mop up.

One problem. All of British Columbia has no active CDF ground forces, and the reserves are minimal in number, don't even have uniforms in many cases and have no ammunition. The dams and stations would be overrun rather quickly, 36 hours or less if the US used the 82's alert brigade.

Admiral Valdemar wrote:

IG-88E wrote:

innerbrat wrote:Poodle blair

Ouch.

No, very well done. Blair is a fucking tit.

Mind you, Bush is an absolute eejit too.

Putin however, now that guy has balls.

All hail Putin

NecronLord wrote:
All hail Putin

You can't truly call Russian leader as decisive until he has one of his sons shot.

MKSheppard wrote:

Shadow WarChief wrote:It is an ass hard job holding a country together after a long fight.

It's a fucking lot easier when the populace has been disarmed. Canada
hasn't been disarmed yet, so I'd have to put at least twenty divisions down
to keep them pacified, but a single division or so should account for
Great Britain and Australia each....

it is SOOOO much easier to occupy a country if nobody except YOUR people
has the guns, meaning you can do whatever the fuck you want once you've
rounded up every last weapon in their Army Depots...

Hahahahahha!

You think Australia has been disarmed? Goddamn you are foolish. First off, only certain weapon types were banned. And most of these instead of being handed in were buried in sealed containers. There are few stashes of assault rifles I happen to know about, each with about 100rnds of ammo a piece.

And the Reserves standing order is to get weapons and ammo at barracks then scatter and go to ground.

Oh and did I mention that we have bikie gangs here that are better armed that the majority of militaries?

You'd need a division just to hold Sydney.

Bastard wrote:The United Kingdom AND THE COMMONWEALTH you say?

Well then the US is going to be majorly distracted at the Start with Canada getting going right on its doorstep.

The Canadians should be able to buy enough time for the UK to militrise massively and begin mass armament production, production of aircraft, ships etc...

Anyway, even the UK as it stands would be bad for the US. Britain has a modern navy, which includes state of the art nuclear hunter-killer subs. The US would not be able to use its favoured tactic of parking a few carriers off the coast of the host nation and bombing away, then bringing up troopships and sending in the marines.

Britain also has a modern air force and air defence. Any air campaign against the UK would result in massive US losses. ANd a ground war would be hopeless without first gaining air supremacy.

First off, there is nothing to worry about from the Canucks. Who says they're going to side with the pansies across the pond? No, this is what's really going to happen. All five Canadian soldiers are going to be offered space heaters if they defect. Then America is going to sail over to those little islands and bbq some picket fenced teeth, tea drinking bastards!!!

Admiral Valdemar wrote:As a half Scot, there ain't enough Southern Comfort in the whole world that can stop the Scots a coming.

Then you've never seen a shotgun at a tail gate party boy. All I can say is, once Jack and Jim get rollin, your ass will be grass, and my name just happens to be john deere!!!