The US army would not have enough men to wage a war like Ukraine does, since it got rid of the draft

JulesKorngold

Argument Topic: WTF??

@Martin
Are you seriously advocating reintroducing the draft?  Did the draft win the Vietnam War for America?  Did it improve morale?

jack

Martin said:

I do not see the USA being able to wage a wider-front conventional war,

Hello Martin:

Nahh.  The US spends more on defense than the next 9 countries combined..  And, that's a lotta tanks.

https://www.pgpf.org/blog/2024/04/the-united-states-spends-more-on-defense-than-the-next-9-countries-combined

excon

Martin

@jack
But what I am saying is that it cannot replace it's losses. There would be no way. 
Russia has more tanks than they USA, and they are far more capable than people think.
Russia can deploy hundreds of thousands of troops (even millions) on the battlefield. 
America has in total about 2 troops million i think (active and reserve in total).

jack

Martin said:

@jack

Russia has more tanks than they USA, and they are far more capable than people think.

Hello M:

Uhh, no.. Russian tanks are the old Soviet style tanks built to operate on flat land..  US tanks are built to fight anywhere in the world..

excon

MayCaesar

This is a bad argument, missing the fact that the countries in question have different population sizes, army organizations and cultures. From the numbers I can see online, it appears that currently around 2.2 million Ukrainians are participating in the war in some way - and in the US even during peaceful times like today this number approaches 3 million. Furthermore, if a war broke out on the US territory, millions of volunteers and armed militia would join in the fight. If China invaded the US, it would be looking not at 2.2 million people participating in the war, but at more like 50 million people doing that. And it (China) would lose, badly.

The US also heavily relies on its technological superiority. For example, the US army has over 10,000 unmanned military aircraft units, many armable with high-impact missiles or even nuclear warheads. No country that could potentially engage in a war against the US has anything resembling that. The fact that the raw number of people directly participating in a war would not be as high as the US population could suggest does not at all compromise its military supremacy.

Read a bit on what people fighting against Americans in Syria had to say... They were absolutely terrified. Their entire platoons would blow up before they even realized they were under fire. Russian soldiers, for instance, are still armed with (slightly modified) AK-74s... Compare it to smart guns American troops carry - it is like a plastic toy sword versus a well-crafted katana. It is like cavemen fighting against the Roman legionnaires.

Factfinder

@MayCaesar

So true. But you know China is making ground on the technological front and they have numbers. We can never underestimate the greatest resource on earth, people.

Fredsnephew

Argument Topic: Hey


A "Tank" is a short term explosive projectile launcher, short term crematorium, and long term heap of scrap metal.

all4actt

@Factfinder

They maybe asking technological advances but can they afford to decouple their finances from Western Countries?  If war with China was to happen their GDP would bottom out.  It would not take them long to run out of money.

There is also the fact that their military has no really war experience or any leaders left that have fought a real war.

I may be wrong but I think China may just be a paper Tiger.

Fredsnephew

Argument Topic: Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm

@Martin

Hey Martin.

The Russians to their dismay, couldn't subdue the Afghanis...Similarly, neither could a U.S coalition.

Neither can the Russians subdue the Ukrainians.

And the coalition fu*ked about in the Middle East and then gave up.

Such is the nature of modern warfare.

When will they realise?

Clever gene.

MayCaesar

Factfinder said:

@MayCaesar

So true. But you know China is making ground on the technological front and they have numbers. We can never underestimate the greatest resource on earth, people.

To win a war like this, I do not think it is sufficient to just have a strong manpower: the willingness of people to fight and sacrifice their lives is the determining factor. In the US, despite all the ideological upheaval, generally people have a strong sense of national identity: they know what ideals their nation represents, and they will fight to the death for them. Chinese, on the other hand? They tend to abandon their loyalty to the Communist Party pretty quickly once they have crossed the Chinese border.

If the CCP sends 100 million Chinese to fight against the US, then chances are after a few months 50 million will happily switch sides in exchange for Green Cards. American soldiers, on the other hand, are very unlikely to suddenly start fighting under the red flag.

Factfinder

MayCaesar said:

Factfinder said:

@MayCaesar

So true. But you know China is making ground on the technological front and they have numbers. We can never underestimate the greatest resource on earth, people.

To win a war like this, I do not think it is sufficient to just have a strong manpower: the willingness of people to fight and sacrifice their lives is the determining factor. In the US, despite all the ideological upheaval, generally people have a strong sense of national identity: they know what ideals their nation represents, and they will fight to the death for them. Chinese, on the other hand? They tend to abandon their loyalty to the Communist Party pretty quickly once they have crossed the Chinese border.

If the CCP sends 100 million Chinese to fight against the US, then chances are after a few months 50 million will happily switch sides in exchange for Green Cards. American soldiers, on the other hand, are very unlikely to suddenly start fighting under the red flag.

That is a good point. Historically the American soldier was usually the one most likely to believe in what they're fighting for where her enemies have been concerned. 

But even at that there is still the ominous numbers China has and since opening up to capitalism as it has more Chinese could be feeling that since of national identity. And the raw numbers provides China with a much larger pool they can draw from to throw into an organized military. Thus hypothetically helping them replace soldiers (with their hearts in it) and equipment at a faster and ultimately greater rate than the U.S plus the others who don't care but will fire a weapon to live if they must.  

In the end though I still believe we could come out on top as long as no nukes are used. We do have experience, proven strategies and methods of war, and equipment that is battle tested and superior in almost every way. I think we're pretty close to the same page on this point.