Can the US Military Defeat the Entire World?

[@PKAClips]

Do You Think the US Military Can Defeat the Entire World? SUPPORT PKA! • PATREON: www.Patreon.com/PKA • PKA PODCAST CLIPS: kzbin.info • PKA 653 PODCAST CLIPS: kzbin.info/aero/PL3TI5YrC9y_1l_zSFEXT5HuIaj6_roqS3 • FULL PKA 653 PODCAST: kzbin.info/www/bejne/omGqqJR7oLqYh9U

[@lewiegan216]

The US secret weapon is out location. Geographically we’re set up for our own survival. We have more Natural Gas reserves and our oil reserves rivals the Middle East. We currently are the largest oil producer in the world. Now a war with the world where we have to fight Canada and Mexico we would bomb them to submission. Any attempt of countries invading the US would be nearly impossible. They would have to spend a innate amount of time and money and coordination. Now the Navy would not fight a defensive action we would us it to our advantage which would choke out oil in the Middle East denying China and Europe their oil dependency. Our aircraft carriers groups would be used to knock off governments and destroy energy infrastructure. The US military production is almost entirely built and designed in the US. When it comes to logistics of materials that we need outside the US we are the most capable of delivering materials across the seas. We are a strong military force because we can move a large contingent of troops and equipment anywhere in a short period of time.

[@Chickensammichgod]

If I had to do it, easy secure north and south America and that alone would allow most materials needed to be acquired and the other would leave a couple places to take as needed for materials

[@PandemicGameplay]

It's so funny watching Kyle and Taylor argue while Woody's eyebrows lift up and down and BlameTruth is just chilling

[@randomaccount119]

You'd get those rare earths from Canada as soon as we surrender (so a day tops...). Kyle's right 100% here

[@Blankname209]

Cobalt not found in canada 🤡

[@budget-88]

⌚911 Missing Links

[@inspectaslime]

​@@Blankname209They have other methods besides the ones that use cobalt 😅

[@jaxontrimble2553]

You can't get cobalt and tin here dummy.

[@patrickriarchy6054]

Trudon't would be gone also.

[@josephstaggs4545]

One thing they didn't account for... Civilian gun owners. Our military is 1.4 million personnel and almost half of America is armed. I couldn't find an exact number but it's a fuck ton. So even if they manage to break through the border they are more surrounded in unfamiliar territory. Every neighborhood would become a small militia led by one of many military veterans. And like Kyle pointed out... Majority of countries wouldn't even be able to get here, much less effectively invade. Most countries Navy would get wiped out by one jet.

[@CodenameHaswelly]

yeah most civilian gun owners wouldn't do shit and a vast majority that say they would are cowards who are afraid of the spider in their bathroom lmao, thinking america can take on the entirety of the planet is further proof of the failed american education system and major copium

[@oppboy3344]

Yup, fat hillbilly’s are going to stove off trained armed personnel loool Americans really are the dumbest most egotistical people on the planet.

[@randemize9595]

USA would run out of resources. 80% of the worlds oil alone would mean US wouldnt be able to sustain its military after a certain point. Canada is also a key land border which would be able to split Alaska the source of 1/4 of the US Oil production. Even without that a simple airforce would be able to whip out the US population due to its city based population.

[@isaiahmayle4706]

​@@randemize9595We happen to make MORE money during wars than less. America is fucking GOOD at war. Even when we lost, we didn't really lose.

[@CamMackay96]

​@@isaiahmayle4706by selling weapons to allies which isn't what he's discussing... how would the US get enough oil to power their military?

[@thecwwshow8036]

The fact that Kyle ask if it was offensive or defensive. Taylor said defensive then continue saying offensive arguments. Like bro you just said defensive war

[@LukeReborn1195]

This is why we love them as entertainers not experts

[@orcabattista8919]

You’re joking right ? Kyle completely contradicts himself the entire debate. Taylor points out how we would be out manufactured by the entire world “we would just destroy their infrastructure with our nuclear powered submarines” or when Taylor points out how we don’t have the all of the rare materials required for modern manufacturing “we would just go and get it”. Kyles arguing that we are fighting a defensive war while on offense but suffer none of the consequences of being on the offensive.

[@orcabattista8919]

Kyles also ignoring the fact that the untied states navy is only a global threat because of access to foreign naval bases across the world through our Allies, without the logistical system supported by our current Allies our navy would be extremely limited in its ability to project power. A nuclear submarine/carrier only has unlimited fuel, it needs to constantly be resupplied with food, water, and all the other necessary goods needed to operate a submarine/carrier.

[@isaiahmayle4706]

​@@orcabattista8919You're mad, breathe.

[@mynameisjeff6988]

@@orcabattista8919 Three months is long enough time to go do your job and then come back to the mainland. Takes 3 days from hawaii to be within striking distance of China, less if you wanted Japan. And there would be nothing another country could do about it if they wanted to keep their own subs alive. Those subs can go wherever they want on the planet without interference for a fire mission and then go back for resupply. We use other ports in different countries for convenience and deployment time. If neither of those matter, you could just have the subs go back home. It would be a couple days instead of a single day to return to a resupply this way but it can be done. This is all foregoing the fact that Submarines resupply in the open ocean pretty often. Just send a helicopter or a plane to airdrop the supplies like we do now, they don't need to go anywhere

[@14arma]

I think Germany tried the vs whole world thing a while back, and it was actually pretty close.

[@kim-jong-poon]

TWICE!

[@EddiXP]

Not long ago lol

[@ehmul1510]

close? they couldnt have won, atleast not if they waged war on the countries they did

[@ET-Gamer]

@@ehmul1510Look up “Norm McDonald on Germany”

[@thecatthatgotaway]

Love Norm but it honestly was never close lol

[@jaimemannering]

I don't often agree with Kyle when it comes to the topic of war or military in general (still appreciate him, at least he's an enthusiast, he's just a casual). He is 100% correct for 1 reason alone and he kind of knew, but not specifically why: Our submarine fleet. Our surface Navy can already control 80% of the globe, but it's nothing compared to our nuclear sub fleet. I was Fire Control on a fast attack sub (the guy running and aiming all the weapons/tracking systems). We outright troll our "rival countries (lul)" in war games and even vs our own air craft carriers (10x anything any other country has on the water) they gave us a box we had to stay in, our subs weren't allowed to leave said box, and they told the surface ships where said box was. Even being told where we were, they couldn't find us. The rest of the globe has ZERO chance not only because our surface fleet could dominate the world, but primarily because of the sub fleet. US Surface = Goku, US Subs= Beerus/Weiss.

[@jaimemannering]

Taylor is hilariously wrong, but not bashing on him because to be fair, none of them truly understand why.

[@skinnylong2023]

Yet we can't even keep China from dominating the South China Sea This is delusional

[@easy94883]

You do realise Russia, China and NK have 110 subs combined more than the entire USA sub fleet. You wrote a whole novel and failed on your first point lmaooo Jesus 😂

[@FumblsTheSniper]

@@easy94883there’s a difference between submersibles and our space ships that disappear into the black depths of the ocean for months at a time and can surface/fire/dive without detection whenever they want. Dude above wasn’t even bringing up our submarines attack capabilities. Just their stealth capabilities we openly show off to other nations. Look up what a tomohawk cruise missile does. Nukes are a waste of time when we can send a warhead through a bathroom window in Siam from the other side of Taiwan.

[@mynameisjeff6988]

@@easy94883 Most if not an overwhelming majority of those subs are not attack capable. All of the ones we count are lmao.

[@HaywoodJablomii]

nice editing dude. nice to see people put effort into clips and actually improve them for once

[@imthebestmayne122]

I think, if for instance, every single country other than the US simultaneously invaded the US with any and all means possible, we would probably lose. But that is insinuating that level of coordination is possible with zero hindrances, which it is not. Am I wrong here, anyone else have an opinion?

[@thesebadseeds]

Even with or without the US military, an invasion would be difficult due to the citizens having firearms.

[@Toxic_COB]

It'd only have to the largest naval invasion with at MINIMUM 3x the troops involved with D-day

[@inspectaslime]

​@Toxic_COB Yeah but according to our wartime doctrine we only need 4 out of 11 aircraft carriers to win a war on 2 major fronts and in 2 different hemispheres. Really if the US secures oil fields in the middle east, and then shuts down trade routes they could just sink a cargo ship in the suez canal and then blockade south China sea and Indian Ocean the rest of the world would collapse without oil. And no one could ever do a land invasion they would never be able to make the journey. China doesn't even have a blue ocean navy 😂

[@qkffn5118]

I think the U.S. cripples by just having all trade blocked off. Because in this scenario the U.S. only has whatever is inside their borders right this moment. No more food, oil, microchips coming in. Some of those things can be manufactured by the U.S. but that takes time, which you don’t have without being able to import food. The U.S. would have to take over the entire world in 2 weeks or else they lose. And no way that can happen

[@AmericanGadfly]

If you put the entire earths population in mexico and canada to do a land invasion they still lose. Helmets dont protect you from our airforce dropping bombs. It would be an absolute bloodbath. And whatever isnt taken out by the airforce and military will be cleaned up tlby the 150 million guns owned by civilians here

[@POVDEAD]

Taylor under estimates just how much work goes into logistics, and how good the US is at deploying worldwide

[@ryantadashi9288]

yeah, you can tell he doesn't know what he's saying when he shifts the conversation from "chinese land invasion" to manufacturing after being questioned once lol. plus he's obviously never researched how smoothly the US can shift to war time economy while simultaneously shutting down other countries' manufacturing abilities

[@THISISLolesh]

Yeah, they were great in Afghanistan against goat herders.

[@TheChosen1inc]

Taylor is right wing brain rotted. They think the US is unironically not that strong. Wild take lol, rare kyle W

[@doyouseeit7819]

Kyles kinda right like it’s basically impossible for anyone to land and attack the U.S. getting there is a problem

[@thomasdonnelly7241]

Just go to Mexico or Canada make a landing spot and then March. America doesn't have the resources to cover all that ground

[@vorbo01]

​​@@thomasdonnelly7241mao what? Their ships would be sunk in the middle of the Pacific before they got anywhere close to landfall

[@ClaytonTheCracker]

​​@@thomasdonnelly7241bombing runs, especially if you're STARTING outside country, foreign soil, and even if you got into America and occupied land they'd still be fine with blowing up a few city blocks, our government has done it before for less AHEM ✈️

[@zehsackett6132]

​@@vorbo01Tell the millions of refugees pouring into this country how impossible it is

[@davideventili2881]

So that means that if america and Europe went to war america wouldn't be able to reach Europe in the same way right?

[@headless0ptomist198]

To quote a retired sniper with the nickname "Reaper". "The taliban had AK's and flip flops and they kicked our ass for over 20 years." That is a word for word quote.

[@aliuniversal4100]

I feel like mexico would just say no gracias to the attack US plan

[@nickstone3012]

Canada too, they'd become a North American axis one way or another so it'd benefit them more to just nope out and side with the US on day one. By the end of it they be one of the most powerful countries on the planet to boot.

[@pH_Dav]

The cartels would probably give the US as much trouble as the Taliban had in Afghanistan. America wouldn't face that much resistance but there will be many sporadic eruptions of unrest and terror.

[@campy3888]

Zimmerman telegraph

[@nickstone3012]

@@pH_Dav 🤣

[@zekromaron]

@@nickstone3012 that's not at all the argument, no shit a current American ally would like to stay an ally instead of go to war

[@thesebadseeds]

"Behind every blade of grass lies an American with a rifle". America is a fortress due to the citizens having access to firearms and mil-surp, but the US Military would not fare well against every other military combined.

[@FumblsTheSniper]

We would turtle up everything but our submarines, which it’s all but confirmed are untouchable except the hour they need to surface, launch some tomohawks, then go back to the depths for a week. Nobody would land anything and we would shoot everything down that came from the sky. I’m also just perplexed by the notion that even 1/3 of the world would would be able to unite without extreme backstabbing. We’d have to be worse than the literal Nazis for our NATO pals to turn their backs on us. Hell, we let them get away with breaking our agreements all the time because we like to do it too. Vietnam still likes us more than China, and South Korea is basically an inseparable sibling that we have been down to go to ww3 over since the 60’s.

[@soul0rison536]

Idk we supply a lot of equipment to other countries and without people like Lockheed Martin to supply them with parts a lot of their best military equipment is gonna wear out and be unusable quick

[@bryceredman7143]

I think by fire power yes but overtime we would lose because we’ve outsourced a lot of our Manufacturing and some of these rare earth minerals we don’t have or don’t mine in North America

[@ehmul1510]

finally someone gets it

[@justanotherdave4835]

The US can defeat any and all military in the world but they are currently 0-1-2 vs farmers so it depends on the context

[@14arma]

Don't forget Japan and Germany, we lost A LOT worse to them in WW2. In Japan, their leader survived the war, also we operate fewer bases in both of those countries combined than we currently operate in Iraq. They also killed a lot more of our troops than the war in Iraq ever did. I cant wait till a country invades the US, kills or captures our entire military, executes our leader, flys their flag over every part of our country, then opens bases all over our country that they operate after they pull out combat troops... that way we will finally have a win under our belt.

[@SteelxWolf]

@@14armabecause we hadn’t modernized our military until 1943? You do understand the context behind why the Japanese were better in the early war? It took Japan 10 years (the 1930s) to build up in tech, resources and a war machine which they used on essential the defenseless Asian hemisphere, it took us not even 4 to out produce, out tech, out logistic them.

[@Texasplit]

During ww2 we ramped up homeland production a ton… America has plenty of natural resources as well.. Edit: and Canada has like 18 tanks…

[@FumblsTheSniper]

My local national guard depot has rifles for every adult in town and armored personal carriers for a thousand. That’s besides everyone has their own guns and trucks to begin with. Most of the world, it’s unheard of for anyone but the military or police to have guns and even they will only have experience with a very narrow range of firearms. Many American teenagers have practical experience with several platforms of both pistols and long rifles, to a English serviceman who will know of his service pistol and rifle and maybe some platform gadgets on the side. If people do drive it’s a tin can that would get stuck in grass and could be disabled with a peppering from .22lr. People with off-road experience are rare, whereas it’s a huge hobby here. Americans go on vacation to the Appalachians for a month, to decompress from stress. In most places you go to the mountain wilderness when you wish to die alone.

[@chrisradtke3645]

Its weird how Kyle cheerleads the US government when they were in fact the people who neutered him.

[@pH_Dav]

It's a damn shame.

[@taylorm771]

Almost as if you can objectively assess descriptive facts... separate from personal bias lol

[@TheImmoralNosferatuZodd]

acknowledging the objective superiority of the US military, isn't simping for the US government...

[@AmericanGadfly]

Stating facts isnt "cheering"

[@joeynass7290]

He’s just stating facts not cheering

[@ArrowArchitect]

Woody: knows and morally explains the difference between a burka and a hijab Also Woody: "Sh-Sh-Sheera law?...shire..? How do you pronounce it...? oh, Sharia Law? and...y'know a religious government and their kinda backwards and they hate women and I'm like I don't know what the truth is." Gee, thanks for the insightful input bro

[@joeeyerman1023]

This is the type of content I'm subscribed for

[@CodenameHaswelly]

taylor is 100% correct, americans are coping hard

[@skinnylong2023]

I seriously can't believe people can be this stupid, American propaganda is better than I thought

[@CodenameHaswelly]

@@redshrimp6206 ur coping

[@KinoDerTotenTrain]

@@CodenameHaswelly no country could go against the whole world by themselves 🤣 its a retarded rhetorical

[@CodenameHaswelly]

@@redshrimp6206 purely defensive you lose by attrition as taylor said, you don't have or have access to many precious metals to continue making machines of war, invade another country like canada for their resources? way too much land to commit your military to and you'd just get outflanked by mexico from the south or another country on a coastline, youd be surrounded and embargo'd into oblivion regardless of having a superior navy as you couldn't sustain it forever

[@Swoozy585]

Realistically, with the internet, (which is already happening now) the other countries would convince us to fight ourselves. Say we are only talking brute force fighting... between all countries could get to our borders thru Mexico and Canada. Alaska and Hawaii are gone. Defending the borders is hard enough.

[@Swoozy585]

Now imagine the world plans an attack on both borders and attacks on both coasts. That would be impossible to stop. To try and actually defend from that would be suicide

[@samhirst2830]

My thoughts exactly. Forget fighting the rest of the world, the blue states & red states would just use this as an opportunity to just start fighting each other.

[@GenericProtagonist7]

The hypothetical is implying this is a war to the death, it's the entire world fighting to destroy all of U.S. and all Americans. Your first idea is like saying a murderer can walk into your house and convince you to attack your family while he attacks you.

[@dancing_odie]

Taylor GROSSLY underestimates the power of the US military

[@thekamotodragon]

forreal, Americans esp think that all other militaries are sorta like their military, but just less powerful, they aren't lol. Not even close, US military has access to unique tech and equipment other countries don't have. Like most Americans probably think a lot of other developed nations also have nuclear subs, and battleships and aircraft carriers, and 5th gen fighter jets, and tanks but almost none actually do lol. VERY few have even 1 of those things and even then they usually have far less in number than the US has.

[@Indiana_Jesus]

And the location really helps simply islands are a lot harder to invade then countries connected by land

[@zehsackett6132]

Couldn't even beat the taliban.

[@XmXFLUXmX2]

the US ran out of munition stockpiles 1 year in to the russian proxy war. there is no military might anymore, we cant even meet recruitment goals much less beat them.

[@CapNCreampie]

CLEARLY we could take China, Russia, Bosnia and Scotland at the same time, while kicking off John Lennons comeback tour 🇺🇸

[@tomcampbell9105]

I'm surprised taylor had such a woody take on this

[@craigjones3506]

I love Taylor. He's wrong af here.

[@budget-88]

⌚911 Missing Links

[@Figureitoutpodcast]

He just wouldn’t shut up

[@craigjones3506]

@@Figureitoutpodcast yeah woody never learns

[@jeremywatson9129]

Taylor's correct that we don't have any manufacturing anymore.

[@FumblsTheSniper]

When was the last time you worked in manufacturing in the US? I’ve worked in multiple cities, multiple states, in production for plastics to medical equipment to car parts. Each factory has the machinery, tools, and technicians to start making whatever you want. With a facility down the road to put the parts together, food supplies to feed the workers, and the shipping network to get it where it needs to be fast.

[@broderbunto2305]

Good god is Taylor would make a neutron star ashamed of it's meager density compared to his.

[@mace1633]

Because we totally won the last two wars against dudes in sandals (Vietnam and Afghanistan) I’m sure America would totally win guys!

[@soul0rison536]

Not comparable in this case we would be the ones in their position defending is much easier than attacking especially considering our civilian population would be like the Taliban times 100 by number of armed fighters

[@vorbo01]

​@@soul0rison536not only that, this would be a total war scenario. The first 6 months would be naval and air battles, and once every single fleet the world could muster is at the bottom of the ocean, the remaining US naval forces control every ocean, every shipping lane, and all international air space. Nukes are the ONLY reason the US couldn't do this now.

[@SteelxWolf]

@@soul0rison536hiding behind civilians against a nation which adheres to international law kinda works dont it? What would happen when we have home field advantage? Oh right the same thing.

[@BLINC606]

Kyle is closer to the truth than Taylor imo. It’s actually laughable how much more powerful our military is than anyone else.

[@dala7862]

In micigan we have some car plants that can switch to building tanks within 24hrs. And, we already have a little under 800 bases around the world without sending anything anywhere.

[@CamMackay96]

Those bases would now be in hostile territory, how long would their supplies last when they're cut off?

[@vorbo01]

​@@CamMackay96why would they be cut off? There's no base in the US which isn't like two days from being supported by US naval group

[@virusthirtytwo]

Taylor was acting like Woody

[@no-oneyou-know1558]

bro he is 🤣

[@nickmiller5685]

LMAO

[@scottm3142]

He had no clue what he was talking about. He sounded like a CNN artical on the downfall of the USA.

[@Dante.-]

He does that when the topic is war or military stuff

[@nickstone3012]

So incredibly wrong based off of information he very clearly doesn't know. Yeah I can see it.

[@cl570]

I think the US could take north america, maybe half of south america, half of europe and none of asia, realistically. the US would probably deploy nukes on asia, but choose not to invade, because it would be stupid in any capacity to do so, america has lost pretty much every war in major territories in asia it has ever fought.

[@mynameisjeff6988]

The wars in Asia are political losses more than actual combat losses. If the US was at war with EVERYONE and Nato, the UN, or the Geneva Conventions no longer mattered, can you imagine what a country would look like after the entire might of the US military was let loose on them? Vietnam and Afghanistan were failures from the problem of fighting unconventional forces. You cant kill an idea, so you're just shooting a soldier who now has two brothers back home who join the war for revenge and to protect the homeland. The easy way to stop this is to steamroll EVERYTHING... Which can absolutely be done and is so much easier than fighting a war in a country full of civilians and infrastructure you cannot harm without the world police on your ass. Ground war with no rules of engagement the US wins every single time very easily. Look at the kill ratios of all of the wars fought in Asia, they are MASSIVELY one sided towards the US. The problem wasn't killing armies, it was trying to justify wars to the American people that we had no business in and trying to convince people that being a "baby killer" is kind of necessary when you're invading a country where every military age citizen aids the combatants

[@FumblsTheSniper]

Why would we invade anywhere? No American wants that, we never have. Invading the Middle East or Vietnam is a technicality. We never had any intention to actually take that land for ourselves. Again, this would be a defensive war. That also would be a technicality because in order to oblige them their conflict we would have to go to them once this half of the world is subjugated. 1/3 of central/South Americans would capitulate just hearing we are coming. Want to talk about not being able to manufacture goods? Good luck to Brazil, who will have to resort to cannibalism if they want to maintain their population for a month with our navy blocking all trade. All while that’s happening, we dropped every plane from every nation out of the sky, bombed every dry dock on the ocean that isn’t ours, and have secured whatever rare/heavy earth materials that were being shipped anywhere (our navy was protecting it to begin with).

[@vorbo01]

Lmao the US didn't lose any war in the East, what are you talking about. Japan was losing, badly, long before the bombs were deployed, and the only reason N Korea and Vietnam happened was because of China being an Ally of the USSR, and would have joined the war effort of both nations if the US passed the parallel. Without nuclear weaponry, there is no nation on earth that stands a chance against the US ina purely kinetic conflict

[@SIX6SIXer]

Name one of these major Asian wars we lost please.

[@LedjoSolbjor]

Kyle keeps saying wartime economy like life is a paradox game. "There isnt an economy" bro stop basing your real life opinions off of youtube videos

[@colummcgrath6564]

Couldn't beat a bunch of rice farmers and decades later flipflop wearing goat farmers

[@zehsackett6132]

The American arrogance after having just lost a war to the Taliban and under-armed Russians is funny

[@mikeyb1453]

A goof of a president pulls everything except the weapons out of the middle east and that counts as a loss? If we wanted to level it before we left it would have been named lake america

[@teddy-jameslambert1514]

Americans really do love themselves huh. This comment section is wild 😭

[@DonutTeaBagle]

trust me, They couldn't even beat Vietnam and now they are talking another 149 countries?

[@mstone-wd7kc]

@@DonutTeaBagleYes, Sam!, everyone should trust your ridiculous analogy. By that logic, the British should be a victory for Vietnam, too…

[@DonutTeaBagle]

@@mstone-wd7kc you grammar is off and i cant tell if you are saying the British would beat or loose to Vietnam? Reword your sentence mate and think before you type

[@mstone-wd7kc]

@@DonutTeaBagle Your* I* can’t* Lose* ~ where are the grammar mistakes in my comment? These are yours. You’re a joke. Good luck

[@TheDanggamers]

Taylor serverly overestimates the power of every country that isn’t a developed superpower.

[@DonutTeaBagle]

Yanks couldn't even beat Vietnam and now they are beating another 149 countries?

[@XmXFLUXmX2]

The US has lost literally every single war it ever fought, except the wars where it had allies to back them up ala ww2. Without Napolean, the US is never born and all of the founding fathers are hung in the streets like idiots.

[@pastrie42]

Nope. We need materials to win wars. Most of our weapons require shared resources and technology.

[@HardcoreGamerAus]

There is no way the USA beats the entire world. For getting to the USA, Canada and the entire South American would act as a landing and group area. The us navy would have to defend the entire North and South American coastline. Most things would have to move via aircraft. Man power would be 7 billion vs 300 million. The USA would be fucked. It would still be a rough fight, but the USA is not beating the entire world.

[@Diddy_claps_Meek_Mill]

The U.S. in a total defensive posture vs the world wouldn't fair against a total of 3 different large militaries giving their all. military on military no armed civilians and militias involved. The U.S. would give them some rubs, but we will not won.

[@tomstone5110]

The thing that Taylor is forgetting is that our military has very strict rules of engagement. If it were the US vs everyone else. Those rules get thrown out the window.

[@dasrubberduck7331]

Also consider that the US supplies military equipment to the many countries and at anytime we could stop supplying them with parts for the more advanced stuff, immediately knocking out most countries military power, until other countries agree to supply them with something else

[@skinnylong2023]

And we would still have a near pier, and multiple first world well funded militaries with power to project force in the case of Britain, France, China, which would empower other nations to project force

[@DJpepmar]

roman empire says no

[@chipsthedog1]

Beats the world but couldn't beat Vietnam or Afghanistan

[@thekamotodragon]

true, but you gotta remember that in these "hypotheticals", the US is going all out and is unrestricted by politics or whatever else and is just making the best strategic decisions to win (or it's assumed that's what they're doing). Vietnam and Afghanistan were limp-wristed "attacks" that were called off due to political turmoil. Also, they were on the defensive advantage for both conflicts and US goal in both countries was not to completely annihilate them, but accomplish a specific objective in country, which made it MUCH harder. I'm not saying they didn't do a good job btw, they both held a stalemate against most powerful nation on earth, it's just that obviously US could've just destroyed them at any time, but that wouldn't have gone over well politically and was never the goal. Politics restricts the full capacity of military might most of the time.

[@aidanquiett668]

Well, our biggest contender is now failing to make it halfway into a tiny neighbor while throwing away basically all their supplies in the process, and the only real second place contender is china who mostly built their military to fight against internal conflict and potentially take small amounts of land from India and Taiwan. On our allies side I think France would be the biggest threat, but if we assume a no nuke war they cant really do much

[@Imugi007]

Russia isn't our biggest contender and hasn't been for 3 decades... After the fall of the Soviet Union, it's been pretty clear that China is our biggest adversary

[@nickstone3012]

Actually happy someone else recognized Frances power projection exceeds the rest of Europes.

[@aliuniversal4100]

@@nickstone3012 the hells france been up to?

[@nickstone3012]

@@aliuniversal4100 Military and naval projection in Africa for the most part. Capable enough air force, domestic manufacturing capabilities, the only other nation to field a nuclear aircraft carrier if I remember correctly, and enough military experience over the past few decades to be expected to competently use all the toys they've amassed which is more than can be said of many nations with an excess military buildup. If they wanted to be a large regional naval power the only thing I see stopping them is us and Germany's strangle hold on the European economic apparatus as a whole among a few other less important factors. Not the most capable military in the world but, definitely one far more capable of power projection than most, and one that may theoretically still be able to punch above its weight class.

[@PandemicGameplay]

@@aliuniversal4100 France is an extremely capable country and military. They have been for centuries.

[@bigpat1836]

Kyle pulled the 1 man army in this 3v1

[@jaxontrimble2553]

Kyle's points sucked and blame said nothing

[@austindiaz6767]

​@@jaxontrimble2553 his point is they have to land here but the us navy is bigger than everyone else

[@prodTyeDye]

Only 2 minutes in and no way Kyle actually thinks the US can solo the whole world at the same time, buddy watching too much videos

[@rev0102]

They definitely could

[@THISISLolesh]

@@rev0102Moron

[@HrZD16]

After watching this, the only way I can sum up my feelings is just, "Oh Taylor...". All i can say is a USA vs the world situation is too much of a can of worms to get a general consensus on how that pans out. The US is still a topical powerhouse and had its ups and downs, but the point i feel that was missed, and that Kyle seemed privy to is that the chaos that unfolds globally when one draws lines in the sand in such a scenario isolating one's self from a global super power that previously had your back, also capable of producing the materials we need locally, and those that are not should at least be stockpiled. if all else fails, we go full caveman and bring back mutually assured destruction.

[@williamcasey7115]

"That's true, Hawaii's never been attacked" 😂😂😂

[@BlackWater6937]

Taylor usually is right on a lot of stuff but he didn’t make any good arguments in this. Lol

[@FumblsTheSniper]

He was really stuck on the psyOP propaganda that we have no production capabilities. Dude worked at a car rental service after college. I’m glad most people are ignorant of how quickly the local factories would be pumping out artillery shells. I literally worked at a factory that got started making primers for bombs in ww2. The tunnels workers walked through to get to work secretly are still there. They still make small, intricate electrical components that are highly sensitive with a zero manufacturing failure allowance (brake assembly actuators for diesel trucks).

[@hossahunter22]

Play Fleet Command as a US fleet with VLS CGs, JPJ Class DDGs, and Nimitz Class Carriers, then play as the next best navy (russia or UK). Tell me what you think. And then add 20 years of technological progress to the US ships

[@kingpheno]

The US could win provided things didn't go nuclear. First move would be to take Canada then Mexico thru to Panama which would be easy goings. This would effectively remove any threat of land invasion to the US mainland without requiring the US to fight thru all of South America due to the fact that the Darien Gap in Panama is practically impossible to traverse by land (it's incredibly dense jungle with zero roads going thru it) especially for entire armies. This would also make the panama canal unusable heavily affecting ship transit times. After that the US could effectively turn it in to a war of attrition, by crippling the worlds fuel supply. The US carrier fleets could basically obliterate the middle easts oil fields from the air. And the US navy could effectively set up blockades of all trade thru the Suez and other ocean trade routes stopping the transport of necessary materials from africa and asia (lithium, silicon, semiconductors), more or less uncontested. The only other significant source of fuel left would be from Russia who's pipelines would also be subject to attack from balistic missiles. This would allow the US time to build into a full wartime economy on the mainland (increase oil production, local manufacturing of arms, vehicles, semiconductors, etc.) being practically unhindered due to its geological remoteness, while the rest of the world gradually ran out of fuel and materials for their militaries.

[@nickstone3012]

Taylor is so far off the mark on this one it's hilarious, he's usually way smarter than this, I'm disappointed. He clearly doesn't know that the United States has the majority of everything it would need to keep its economy running right here in its own borders. And everything else we could possibly ever want is within reaching distance thanks to our two North American neighbors that would definitely get annexed two days into this supposed war. This continent is an impregnable fortress the moment we decided we want it to be and even ICBMs wouldn't be able to stop an entire continents manufacturing capabilities behind our navy and air force. Outside of nuclear catastrophe the US takes that hypothetical war within a decade.

[@McGiblet69]

He's actually just pretty dumb or ill informed overall

[@skinnylong2023]

The US could not adjust its entire economy fast enough to withstand global sanctions in a hypothetical all out war with the entire world. The US is tied to the global economy more than any country in the world, and we can't accomplish reshoring without fighting off the entire world

[@easy94883]

Everything but rare earth materials which China controls 95% of world supply. You wouldn’t be able to make rockets once all stocks get used up. USA doesn’t last a month in this context

[@vorbo01]

Literally. Nukes are legit the ONLY reason the rest of the planet doesn't pay a fief to us for international shipping and travel.

[@TheGreatestJediOfAllTime]

A decade?!?

[@powerlifting1012]

Just because we have more guns, tanks, planes etc. We dont have the supply chains to sustain a drawn out war. They would only get stronger over time

[@vorbo01]

You have that exactly backwards my friend

[@Chickensammichgod]

My favorite quote in the world, the united states air force is the largest air force in the world, the second largest airforce in the world is the united states navy

[@punisher0717]

I’m going to disagree with Kyle on this one… sorry buddy. Taylor gets it

[@FumblsTheSniper]

Our navy, is as big as their navy. I’m talking the entire rest of the worlds navy put together, is the size of our navy. That’s being nice after you consider our Air Force wipes it’s ass with anything else that flies and will have sent 2/3 of Chinas navy to Davy Jones before it gets past Taiwan. Our marines are legendary, we barely even use half their capabilities because it’s cheaper to keep them warmed up and ready than all the collateral damage they cause. One battalion has been more than enough to take on nations in multiple occasions. They’ve been preparing Taiwan special forces for years. Our army is basically ready to kick ass anywhere, any time, with hot meals and clean water for everyone from warfighting rangers to their five buddies flying combat drones telling everyone where the enemies are they can’t drop grenades on. Our populace has the guns, technical/mechanical assets, supplies, space, and morale to go on a ten year entrenchment of every state, every county, and every hill. There are enough shotguns and shells to fill the sky with lead until literally every drone in the world has been shot down. Don’t even get me started on the cult of Stars and Stripes. We will bathe in the blood of our enemies.

[@no-oneyou-know1558]

America is geographically protected. invading is practically off the table without first infiltrating and weakening our defenses. Kyle's right on this one 💯

[@DonutTeaBagle]

silly yank

[@no-oneyou-know1558]

@@DonutTeaBagle dont be a sore loser you silly limey. Yall got smoke by Germany, who had to save yall then? 👀

[@arjanpetersen]

No… simple answer

[@trevorphillips8734]

The only way we lose is legitimately an influx all at once, and that’s like Somali pirate boats included, if millions of boats were all at the same pace at once, MAYBE they can win.

[@FumblsTheSniper]

The majority of our shoreline would be terrible or impossible to land on. The conditions to land a lot of people, enough to actually invade via the shoreline, are rare. On D-day we landed at the only places such a thing were conceivable. Now let’s just say they’ve got everything all at once coming. Going back to Normandy, we would never run out of bullets or people to pull triggers. The coastline would be an obliterated, cartoon-esque strip of scorched black earth and the seas would be red to each horizon. The fats and organ tissue rotting would create an ecological disaster on a global scale. It’s more likely the enemy has to call truce because we have to clean their buddies corpses out of the ocean. Which we would do, for an additional fee, all with a smile and handshake.

[@TheImmoralNosferatuZodd]

1:18 if it's the US vs the world, the US isn't going to be on the defensive. That'd be an up hill battle. The US would do preemptive nuclear strikes on everyone, and hope for the best. Imo... 5:16 exactly... Lol

[@vorbo01]

This hypothetical presumes kinetic arms only

[@amessman]

4 minutes into the clip and I only realize now BlameTruth was on this episode...

[@hamidkarzai7096]

They couldnt even beat the taliban.

[@powerlifting1012]

Defending is so much easier than invading a country. Especially when the opposition is using gorilla tactics.

[@SteelxWolf]

@@powerlifting1012or hiding behind civilians

[@mysteryman447]

there was a few war games done to figure that out and in those hypothetical situations it was found that the us could hold out against the world for as long as it wanted to lol, the combination of massive military and the two entire oceans between them and anything relevant is a major factor. also, love the popo medic inspired thumbnail lol

[@MultiMates7]

the US wouldnt even defeat NATO let alone the entire planet.

[@nicholasyoakum1439]

Literally clicked this thinking it was a new popo medic vid lol

[@CodenameHaswelly]

wargames done by the us: "yes we win"

[@mysteryman447]

@@CodenameHaswelly pretty sure they were dine by the british lol

[@easy94883]

Get your head checked the delusion is off the charts here 😂

[@Indiana_Jesus]

Taylor doesn't realize that the amount the US spends on its military budget and the military it has plus the defendable position it's more of an equal fight than he realizes (it wouldn't work for the long game but all of NATO yeah)

[@MrWarren1991]

Taylor doesn't get that the US operates the 3 largest Naval fleets in the world, the 2 largest airforces in the world, and as Kyle said WE are the only people with the logistics to fight a war across the oceans, as it is a necessity for the US as everyone that matters is across LARGE expanses of water. The US Navy is the largest fleet in the world, followed by the US Naval mothballed fleet, followed by the US coastguard. The US airforce operates the largest airforce in the world, the US navy operates the second largest airforce in the world, there is a reason we outspend them.

[@Brianchse]

Kyle is delusional, Taylor is correct.

[@No1LikesuRS]

All it takes is a world of nutrition and you lose in seconds

[@Jalex92]

We don’t have consumer manufacturing, we still technically have mass military manufacturing

[@easy94883]

No you don’t lmao it’ll take USA like 10 years to just replace all the stingers sent to Ukraine 😂

[@FreshMulch]

Taylor doesn’t realize the amount of munitions, ships and aircraft parts are manufactured in the US. The supply system is not necessarily the issue of it

[@XmXFLUXmX2]

the US is an import nation, without trade allies american metropolitan cities starve.

[@sparrow9990]

8:08 bruh who would be importing goods to us the alians?

[@falcor200]

Taylor is just wrong about this. Edit he has to be playing stupid. The guy is infuriating lol

[@TheImmoralNosferatuZodd]

6:18 we'd Japanize the whole world, and reduce everyone's military capabilities to that of a Self Defense Force.

[@duncanmcocinner5939]

I really thought this was a new Popo Medic video

[@johnmagus6341]

If it was no holds barred, I think we'd smoke a bunch of the Earth.

[@Diddy_claps_Meek_Mill]

I say it's plausible if the odds work in our favor. Germany nearly took all of europe for good untill the allies had to step up.

[@uJemai]

To occupy USA one has to cross an ocean. That's a logistics nightmare.

[@joeb1185]

YES BECAUSE ATTACKING FROM THE SOUTH IS NOT A THING...

[@garysimpson752]

Taylor needs more learning :)

[@jessew2321]

Taylor is trippin.. navy and Air Force alone would have a 100:1 ratio 🤣

[@prechabahnglai103]

How do they get here (US)? There’s no condition in this scenario that prevents Canada, Mexico and the Caribbean islands from being made staging areas for the coalition forces before the shooting war starts. Moreover, sabotaging forces could be deployed inside the country prior to the war given how easy it seems to cross the border these days.

[@Brooks_M3]

Taylor’s wrong and we are right.

[@TheImmoralNosferatuZodd]

Kyle's right.

[@kingwerdna9529]

Our boys with Xbox controllers would just drone the fuck out of everyone. We talking about 1000+ drones

[@Otmjv]

Fundamentally this question is actually an economic one. Kyle says the economic issue doesn't matter, because the USA would just switch civilian factories to military ones (this would likely lead to civl unrest, but let's pretend military police start shooting protestors in the streets). In truth, the entire reason America even HAS such a large powerful army is because it spends more than any other country by percentage of GDP already, meaning the rest of the world actually has far more capacity to change civilian production (much of which is already being imported by the USA, another factor against America).

[@Magetastic69]

Uhh WW2 was a thing and we did all of those things better than anyone in the world. The economy is literally not real it gets turned off at night and on in the morning lol turning to a wartime economy and federalize for survival it's exactly what we've done before.

[@warhammerfaction]

I think think USA come out on top

[@FumblsTheSniper]

If all our allies flipped on us the vast majority of our population would be all cards on the table. We have confirmation bias, but confirmation nonetheless, that our efforts are paragon in history. We allow our nation to be poisoned by Chinese fentanyl and South American cocaine, because our population is still healthy enough that it doesn’t effect us as negatively as us taking a flaming sword to the problem would. And oh boy, do we have a lot of young men with red hot swords in their hands with nothing to plunge them into.

[@Otmjv]

@@warhammerfaction When the rest of the world defeats you as a simple factor of mathematics, we get 350 million obese slaves and that's hilarious

[@SalveMaria777]

United states is like batman in doomsday

[@inspectaslime]

Taylor is kinda wrong about the whole manufacturing thing, Mexico has the highest manufacturing rating now by country, but not only that the US manufacturs all of its own military tech. Hell were manufacturing basically the whole war in Ukraine right now. Sure your wrench might say madw in China but i promise an F-22 or an Abrams doesnt say made in China 😂😂. We have some of most abundant natural resources in the world on the north american continent.

[@easy94883]

Wrong. China owns like 95% of the world rare materials which are used in USA missiles. The f22 and Abrams will be a completely useless without ammo. USA doesn’t last 1 month in this context 😂

[@psychzach1588]

The US Navy ALONE would win a true 1 v the world.

[@ryantadashi9288]

i dont know these guys, but taylor immediately loses credibility when he tried talking abut a chinese land invasion. The thought of chinese ships making it past even the kuril islands is hilarious. the only nation in the entire world who has a realistic chance of putting boots on the ground across the pacific or atalantic is the US

[@27steve88]

America hace lost the last 2 wars they tried in ,and didnt do great in Vietnam

[@zestry523]

If the US stopped military spending it would be almost 50 years before Russia reached one years of Americas expenditure, americas so far ahead of everyone at nearly a trillion a year

[@hardcoresolosurvival1340]

Kyle, yes!

[@Azioh]

as long as i live in maine no ones taking over

[@Mutter-Buffins]

Taylor is regularly trying to give woody a run for his money on redacted takes. Kyle’s new place is the tard wrangler on the show these days but makes more sense looking back w/the divorce and cheating last year

[@XmXFLUXmX2]

Taylor is the only one thinking rationally. Without trading partners the US starves, and the civil war of urbans vs rurals begins.

[@kingpolo1920]

We would lost to the emus

[@mondaysinsanity8193]

America is litteraly the singke most resource rich nation on the planet. We dont import because we have to but so we dont have strip mine our own nation

[@mondaysinsanity8193]

Plus were by far the largest exporter of food on the planet. China would starve in a month

[@XmXFLUXmX2]

we import literally everything you ignoramus. What's one of the biggest political complaints of the century? EXPORTING OF JOBS.

[@messagefamilystyled1101]

I have to disagree when you have the French, German, Japanese, and Korean militaries. They would pose the biggest issues if they waged a full fledged war on us. It’s like prison, you can be the biggest guy but you aren’t winning against 5 of the other biggest guys naked in the shower and 2 of them has plungers almost as good as yours.

[@Alexafm416]

If it was a defensive war we would win

[@Man_Darino]

All we got is tech and repititions. Were fat uninspired and self absorbed there's no worse recipe for a warrior than that. So no.

[@havelpants5248]

That all depends on what the conditions of victory are. But to be fair we couldn't beat rice farmers armed with busted up AKs in a fuckin 3rd world forest