Europeans would lose. Not prepared to fight for their country,
North America or Europe? - continent wise | |||
| North America | 320 | 50.24% | |
| Europe | 313 | 49.14% | |
| Total: | 633 | ||
Europeans would lose. Not prepared to fight for their country,
| weaveworld said: Europeans would lose. Not prepared to fight for their continent. |
Fixed
North america would probably win, In force or man US Alone Is gigantesque, just second you have China which is one third of them ... its kind of scary when you think about it.
But A north america, and EU war will never happen they have to much close history.
I imagine most people here think that the USA is trying to conquer europe etc. Because most of the wars were happening in europe.
But lets assume that Europe is able to somewhat invade or at least bomb some of the US cities then you can be pretty sure that this would be devastating for the US moral. Noone ever was able to invade the US and (no offense) the superiority complex will somwhat kill the US from inside when they see that not only 2 skyscrapers are gone (like in 2001) but 95% of new york.
And since most of the big US cities are located "close" to the coast what else is left if San Francisco, NewYork City, Miami etc are gone? Sure there is tons of big cities but again think about the moral when those cities are gone.
I am not so sure N+S Dakota, Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa etc have alot of man power or have the needed importance to keep the moral high etc.
Other than territory Canada should not be a problem Ireland, Luxembourg, The netherlands and belgium combined should be able to win against Canada.
Mexico would be harder to conquer because of its population but since its not exactly the most advanced country in terms of weaponry it will still be alot easier to defeat than the US.
Since europe consists of a ton of countries most people in Germany France or Poland would not care if Madrid would be gone. But spanish people will fight like crazy to defend their capital city because its important for the countries moral etc.

| dyremose said: isnt it human nature to set aside their differences when a threat approaches? |
This. And for alk intents and purposes, the european countries are the only big coalition of countries i see working. The differences are overstated. The facts are, we can unite.
No one. Nuclear weapons has made it impossible to have war with 1st war countries.
"Excuse me sir, I see you have a weapon. Why don't you put it down and let's settle this like gentlemen" ~ max
| soulsamurai said: I can see it in history books now..... "Well WW3 all started when nations started bickering about a fight on a video game forum in February of 2014. Little did we know Obama, Putin and various other leaders actually frequented the forums and got in on the debate...Things escalated quickly" |
LOLZ!!! dyremose started WW3!!!!
If we added Russia to the EU, they will win. Why ? Fight on two fronts. No country afford to do that. Much bigger resources than North America. . And Russians military technology can fight vs US technology.
Ships, tanks, rockets etc.
If not - USA will win. Why ? EU does not have enough good ships to fight on seas, they dont have a real opportunity to attack, they can only defend themselves, thats all.
On other hand, i think Russia/China/arabic countries vs USA/Eu/Japan conflict is more likely.
| KingofTrolls said: If we added Russia to the EU, they will win. Why ? Fight on two fronts. No country afford to do that. Much bigger resources than North America. . And Russians military technology can fight vs US technology.
On other hand, i think Russia/China/arabic countries vs USA/Eu/Japan conflict is more likely. |
If the EU does not have enough good ships to really attack (only defend), then there wouldn't really be much of a fight on two fronts for NA.