 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
The Viceroy
|
 |
tu mumbai se, mai Bombay se
Nov 2000 time: 05:19
|
|
Ohh of course, in reality, there would be no reason for us to ever fight .. but I guess its like brothers wondering what they would do if an enemy the same size attacked ..
If I was the US, id go for UK/Germany .. simply cos they are the economic powers of the EU .. After trashing as much industry in Germany, and Commerce in the UK , id land my troops on mass in the UK .. simply cos, they have the most profesional army, the people speak the same language and will be easier to control/win over .. and you could install a conservative government who'd support your war on Europe
From there, you have a base ready to attack the rest of Europe..
As for the EU attacking the US .. well your faced with two sides of the fence .. East and West coast .. as Europe is off the East coast, this seems the most likely place to go .. destroy any naval installations along the east coast, take Panama to delay the West coast fleets , and hit New England and surrounding area's hard .. Land seperate troop divisions in Canada, Florida and pinser Washington DC
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Triped
|
|
Caledonia, Illinois, USA
Sep 2001 time: 23:19
|
|
I don't believe Europe is at our level of missile technology, and with a R&D focus on the war, probably never would be.
I do understand how big Europe is, but I think that missile barrages aimed at critical military targets would definitely make things easier on our troops, even though there are so many targets.
I believe our navy is more than capable of bringing the missiles to Austria, particularly our submarines.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Saint Marcus
|
 |
Scio Me Nihil Scire
Jan 1970 time: 06:19
|
|
quote: Hmmm statements like that just make you look silly .. calm down, stop ranting.. and return to the light hearted thread, and tell us your plans .. if you have none, and you think its immposible .. wuppie for you .. go elsewhere. |
Statement like that make me look silly? LOL. How old are you kid?
Ok, let me spell it out for you. You say you'll go after Germany first. So in other words, you'll have to pass Britain, move into the North Sea, make an amphibious landing in the small German north sea coast, and then move south to destroy Germany's production centres. During this time being heavily bombarded by all of Europe's airforces, and severaly outnumbered on every front. The American carries there in the north sea only carry F-14s and F-18s, while the European airforces have Typhoons, Rafales and Gripens, and in higher numbers as well. And how on earth will the US manage to ship enough forces to germany to defeat that country?
What a joke. Go back to school kid.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
catullus
|
 |
Norway
Jan 1970 time: 06:19
|
|
Don't stare too much at relative strength.
France and the low countries (supported by a large Brit force) were taken by Germany in a couple of weeks, a Germany with far fewer troops and inferior weapons. Germany then proceeded to take half the European part of Russia.
Germany had superior battle tactics and highly motivated soldiers backed by her citizens.
US take EU: Divide and conquer.
Use Hollywood, trade negotiations and local independence movements to weaken the bond between the nations. Secretely support terrorist groups, extremist parties. Try to start rebellions. Support these, however small they might be. At one point, offer either to help a national government with troops to quell evil rebels or to help a rebel group to stop the genocide against them by the evil state. Install puppet generals as presidents with US advisors by their side. Repeat.
Hey, that's what you did in South America!
EU take US: Isolate and strangle
Easier to break, I think, but far worse to control.
The US is already pretty isolated, no real friends left. Current US policy would be easy to exploit, point out that the US never respects UN resolutions, never signs human rights conventions, puts her own economic growth before the global environment any day. Use the US trade barriers against her, restrict trade with her, to enforce an economic slump. US' main strength is economy, her best weapon is growth. Even a global slump will hit the US more than any other nation. Ignore her. With luck, you'll have a Roman Empire-style implosion of power. See to it that you are there to support the new local authorities.
That said, I see no reason why either US or EU woul invade each other. Invasions of large landmasses are so old-fashioned. What would be the gain for your nation in holding another continent?
C.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:19. Apolyton Time is 00:19. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|