Brit Reacts to The United States (USA) vs The World - Who Would Win?

[@DavidPaul-cd9tk]

US Air Force Top air force in the World. Number 2, US Navy.

[@dantebarnes8187]

Army is the 3 best Air Force

[@MrYabber]

@@dantebarnes8187The Army doesn’t have an Air Force. The Marines do though.

[@dantebarnes8187]

I live a few miles from the 101st Airborne, which is army.

[@creinicke1000]

As an American, I know we've lost some small battles.. BUT in my opinion, it's been because we didn't have strong leaders or military leaders who wanted to win because of back room politics internally and externally. Americans are ready to defend if anyone comes against us.. because most of us are raised as fighters.. our sports, our business attitudes, how our nation began. We will use nuclear by the way.

[@acjcunleashed7946]

I feel like so many of our citizens would immediately jump up and join what's the armed forces as well

[@Nimbus1701]

This is a good assessment. If the shackles and conditions are off our military and the goal is unconditional surrender and/or complete annihilation of the adversary (like in WW2), we would not lose. It's the poor leadership and lack of clear military objectives that hampered us in Vietnam and Afghanistan. Hell, even when General Schwartzkopf led the war against Hussein, we completely destroyed them in just a few months, and Iraq was considered a top 5 military force at the time, with many Russian antiaircraft and short to medium ranged missiles. It's why war and conflict should be avoided, but if you have to fight, win, and do it decisively. History and the armchair pundits are going to criticize you no matter what, so you may as well earn the criticism while winning.

[@ShellyBeans259]

The Whole WORLD ? Mercy ! May it never happen! At least I can see us saying “ you should see the other guy”

[@arcane-z8217]

What happens when the local National Guard bases start to train civilians in a defensive posture. Some of us are armed and most will volunteer. Urban militia units will connect with the Civil Defense Command through the ham radio network, which is already in place. Command and Control systems will spring into action, rapidly. Armed and equipped citizens will make ANY invading force pay for each inch. We will then teach the World a lesson it should have already learned. - United We Stand , Indivisible -

[@James-c5e1e]

The point about this or that country having a lot of people is that most of these countries can't project that advantage around the world ...Remember ...a large army means you have to have a huge logistical capacity to move and sustain them. U.S. has this ..but other countries don't.

[@Psycho-go5yr]

There's also the fact that countries can't just increase their militaries limitlessly as long as they have the people. They also need to be able to outfit and supply their soldiers. While most militaries are sitting on stockpiles of weapons, very few even have the number needed to double their military much less increase it's size even more than that.

[@matthewslentz5481]

I mean, just look at Russia, one of America's two primary rivals. They can barely project power over their border into Ukraine. Meanwhile the US is giving Iraq and Afghanistan backshots simultaneously for 20 years.

[@FuzzyMarineVet]

The Grim Reapers channel just had a video using simulated warships from the end of WWII to now pitting everything Soviet v everything US. The prediction before the scenario was that the Russian missiles were so much better that the Soviet Navy would win. The scenario played out opposite of the expectation because the US Navy defends its ships better than the Soviets ever could.

[@lorddomini2234]

Grim mentions that he doesn't include some of the US Arsenal at the beginning of the video because it would make it one sided for US Ships.

[@troymendiola3676]

My friend I love your videos, and I will be honest, in the US it's all about the citizens, just here in Wisconsin every November we put out the world's largest militia in the woods for Deer hunting for 10 days. Just think about that One state puts 15k people in the woods with high power rifles...

[@georgetaylor3978]

I think the public really needs to see a video about the lack of defensible transport to project power for other powers.

[@Seacub42]

It doesn't matter the number of men. You have to be able to send them to battle. Most countries do not have the ability to transport soldiers any way but by foot.

[@A_Name_]

If we are counting what most other countries call air craft carriers the us has way more than 11. We have between 12-20 other ships other nations would call carriers.

[@steventambon2588]

I do love Millie, but I must say that I have been enjoying the solo vids you both have been doing. As a longtime subscriber, it is quite nostalgic to have just James

[@gabrieldrummond8647]

When everyone attacks the gloves come off.

[@DarthKilaj85]

This doesn't take into account that the US also has more land free for growing food and supply itself that way too as well as our 5th gen fighter jets would not be able to be used by other countries as we have them technically on loan to them and with buildup, we would bring them back to our use leaving only F15s which the F22 beats.

[@NancyElizabeth-n9n]

It would be from internal destruction, from the US itself becoming unglued.

[@bar5radass]

Idk, the US has a tendency to come together in times when they’re attacked. It’s really the only time the US is truly a united country. In fact, it may be just what’s needed nowadays…kidding of course.

[@aldrintejada598]

First off, compared to the US, the UK desperately needs to upgrade their aging equipment

[@Nimbus1701]

All these types of vs. video scenarios start with the "no nukes allowed" thing. Nobody even considers what if there is a technology worse than nukes, or greatly diminishes their capabilities. If I had that type of weapon, you can bet the world wouldn't know until they fired all their nukes, only to find they were only about 1/10th of what they expected them to be. That would be a nightmare scenario for the rest of the world.

[@robertevans2450]

OR, what if this "Nukes" boogieman was so overexaggerated that reality just couldn't produce the effect of eliminating the US enough to force capitulation and instead would just be the end of whoever attempted such an attack, the end of their entire society, leaving only remnants of itself that had escaped to neutral countries prior to the war, diluted and forgotten in just a few generations existing within their new society. When you realize that over 90% of the animals on the ships & Bikini Islands testing grounds survived...that the deadliest part of the weapon effect is the shockwave and how quickly it dissipates, making the requirement to eliminate LA Metro alone so taxing that even a combined effort by all non-US nuclear-armed countries couldn't destroy enough of the US to force a surrender and would face the full force of its vengeful response. This is before we talk about the effectiveness and capabilities of getting those warheads on target, that the world doesn't have sufficient capability to believe it had a chance, let alone entertain how well defended against such capabilities the US is.

[@vanessamoore5621]

Is there a more updated version of this ? That includes the changes during 2023-2024?

[@ViolentKisses87]

Give it another 5 years and the US won't need Taiwanese chips.

[@randlebrowne2048]

Most of the actual design of the chips has always been inside of the US to begin with. Those US companies (like Intel) have just used Taiwan for offshore manufacturing at cheaper labor costs. Once we get sufficient numbers of chip factories built inside the US, that will no longer be a strategic problem.

[@andrewmarshall360]

I believe the British need to toggle up, god forbid

[@chexmex805]

even if enemies denied us oil from the middle east it wouldn't matter. we sustain our own large supply. we only use middle east oil to preserve ours.

[@robertevans2450]

actually, it's an issue of purity. We don't wish to pollute our air refining the dirty oil when we can just trade it for sweet crude that other's produce. We also produce sweet crude but it is cheaper to trade to Mexico & Canada rather than build refineries to meet the total demand.

[@andrewmarshall360]

How is gb helping anything

[@greggmaclean6036]

What does the U.S. have ...no one knows about?

[@bobbyschannel349]

The United States were literally collapse, you guys are thinking about military capabilities and all that well the United States had a top military capacity back during Vietnam in the loss to mention.. United States needs economy to find their military and if it goes to war with the world obviously they're not going to have economic relationships it's astoundingly expensive to have a military campaign especially one that stretches the military all around, so this scenario wanted to get to this point

[@bobprivate8575]

@6:00 I'm horribly disappointed that you, a Brit, are putting so much emphasis on how many PEOPLE other countries have to throw into a meat grinder. "The fleet is our wooden wall." This worked for you in the past, quite well, and the same principles apply to us today. The number of people is totally irrelevant, if those people cannot make it to shore.

[@ThatitJack]

Manifest destiny! Canada, Greenland, and Panama

[@robertevans2450]

don't forget the islands, in the North, the South and the West.

[@Supremewin777]

The United States can destroy all life on earth 3 times over. 🤔

[@leovaldez5419]

So can Russia unfortunately so it’s not something we want to ponder about.

[@Supremewin777]

The GDP of the United States is 29 Trillion. 😊

[@JoPerry-by3wd]

I would not view it as the US doing something unforgivable. To be us against the world, it would have to be more like the world power oligarchy tries to take power of the US, and we resist. The only way half the world would face us down, is if they could convince the other half it would be their only choice, to join in against us. A couple of things overlooked: 1) in the case of us against the world, it would make total sense to dredge up some old school tactics. We would need to claim any ground aquired, mostly by extending our borders northward into Canada, and southward as far as we can advance; enlisting or enslaving people as we go. 2) Hawaiian civilians would have to be evacuated to the mainland, leaving behind only military 🪖. 3) Sure, we could control cyberspace, but they completely left out • outer space. With Space Force, we would have a total overview for exceptional intelligence gathering. We would be in position to destroy, or control the satellites of our enemies. We could evacuate our most important decision makers to space station. We could set laser fires around the globe. Even if we were faced with fighting all the other countries, there would be great numbers of individuals in several countries who would spy, or fight in our favor, helping us cause chaotic activities for the other forces. There is one scenario many of us can imagine which would trigger such a terrible thing happening, but none of us want to even say it, let alone imagine it would occur. 😢 May the human race survive many eons ahead. ❤️🤍💙 ❤️🤍💙 ❤️🤍💙

[@slothachunk]

Aren't the oligarchs in the US doing that right now?

[@gracemercy2159]

2nd

[@TyOneWorld66230-y]

4:30 This is, of course, entirely inaccurate. The war is over and Russia has won. This has been the case for almost a year as Ukraine simply doesn't have adequate troops to fight long-term. The only way a Russian victory can be averted is if N8TO puts 100,000 troops on the ground. However, this would instantly lead to WW3 which would quickly turn nuclear. Please don't rely on silly military videos, likely with funding ties to the US State Department, for information. They'll have you believing the opposite of reality.

[@WOWChicken-td7rp]

Lol ok buddy

[@TyOneWorld66230-y]

@@WOWChicken-td7rp Everything I wrote has been printed on the pages of mainstream newspapers for the last 18 months, spoken by top officials in the US and Ukraine. Because you exist in a bubble and don't read, it sounds to you as though I'm talking about a fictitious world.