Pfft. Only because you know this is going to happen.

I replied to your quote on page 13 of this thread. I forgot to quote it.

I'm sure Europe would win easily after receiving some training from the Vietnamese.

Poll is funny.

You can tell Europeans are just voting and not reading. I have seen zero arguments from Europeans why they have advantages without either adding Russia, or China to the mix.

Even with Russia AND China it's rough, just due to ridiculious US naval superiority.

What I find funny is how everyone complains about how much the US spends on the military vs other stuff, why the US has such a big military compaired to the EU that it can use everywhere and is stationed everywhere etc...

but as soon as the question boils down into a "Who would win in a fight"  everyones liberal predalictions disapear because nobody wants to be on the side that loses in a war that will never be fought.

Suddenly Europeons want to have an army just as good, even though a combined EU is really only about the size of the US in GDP terms,  and a combined EU and Russia still smaller then USA, Canada Mexico....

Sort of reminds me of the guys who are "totally cool" with homosexuality, except have to act exageratidly grossed out if they see two dudes kissing. 

At the end of the day, no matter how enlightened most guys are, it all still boils down to one big pissing contest for most people.

Outside which a  EU + Russia army that was superior to the US army would actually cost a hell of a lot more as a percentage of GDP.

Christ the fact that the US would pretty handily defeat a combined Europe+Russia should be seen as something upsetting... for Americans.  Not Europeons.

Because it shows just how freaking wasteful military spending in the US is, that a combined fictional superthreat isn't even really any threat at all.

Well, I know you said only conventional warfare but one of the things that would be a huge factor in any attempt to invade the US is the fact that well, unlike most of Europe the average Joe can own an assault rifle, and people know how to use them. There are something like 200 million guns in circulation in the US (including all types of firearms). However, because of this I believe the manpower pool in the US would be more capable(since most americans know how to shoot a firearm) if both sides started a draft (which in this type of all out war it would be required)

I think right NOW the US would win and I'll tell you why. The rest of the worlds military might is in shambles. Really, only the US has increased it's strength in this department and while the numbers would be against them as far as population? American citizens would rise up, and take arms. It's just how they are. Alot of Europe has moved past this sort of mentality. You'd have every man woman and child working in near harmony to defeat the threat and when you combine that sort of unity, will and spirit with the worlds number one military force, it's going to be nearly impossible to defeat.

well now we are talking Vietnam... you do realize that the French got their asses whooped badly before the US intervened. The Kill to Death rate was over 10-1 in favor of the US in Vietnam....so ya take them tactics. Just because we quick because a bunch of hippies and the media turned the general populace against the war does not mean we were not kicking their asses from a tactical and operational standpoint, where we struggled/failed was the stategic element.

You seem to forget that a lot of european countries (especially in the east) have or had a mandatory 2 year military sentence for all men once they reach a certain age.

Why would they need to. Pretty sure America makes it a point to attack on other peoples soil in all circumstances lol.