United States Vs The World (Simulation)

This video is made for entertainment purposes only and is not meant to be realistic
The day counter alternates every 5 years
INFO:
Programs Used: GIMP, Windows Live Movie Maker, Microsoft Paint,
Frames: 2743
Production Time: 1 Month
Music:
-East Vs West - Allies Battle 1
-Hearts of Iron - Rise my Comrades!

[@soulchester3194]

Genocides were allowed, hence, some nations losing millions of people.

[@ernestsdzelzitis7567]

1. i think they should have lost guam latter becouse usa has the strongest navy in the world and the other countries navies would take a while to cooperate 2. invasion from north canada just wild

[@ShadowKAnimations]

As a mexican, guess ill die

[@IBerianTeen]

@@ShadowKAnimations ill rather live on somalia than see mexico getting invaded 😩🙏

[@DZam-ct8eg]

That's a lot of Damage!

[@aaravdiwakaristhebest]

​@@IBerianTeensame

[@gametimelapsesmemes2192]

Imagine how quickly the advanced weapons used to fight this war would run out. Also imagine how the world economy would look after 15 years of war!

[@Towermidguard]

I wish I could explain everything normal realistically our reserves in the United States are so deep that we would be able to leverage Our Own oil reserves in a mass production of oil refineries all around the inland US, along with the agricultural industries that we would stop exporting, and then just keep a stock piles in our strategic reserves in the advanced amount of munitions that we would be able to produce along with the manpower so long as we had the water running for at least 40 years, we will be able to have two generations of fighters Increase or 360 million population to over 1 billion easily within 20 to 30 years as long as we get people to want to reproduce and have a certain characteristic of general ideology, the vast amount of control we would have from the Panama Street from the south America the entire control of the both north and south American continents would ultimately sustain a hold specially if the naval power was expanded beyond just smart weapons, the older model ships would probably be employed. Nevertheless, the United States would ultimately be the most strategically advanced nation in all odds. If it were to just be expansionist and warmongering, the entire culture was manipulated that way from the people in the states at the end of the day, the capability to pull together, resources, produce enough weapons, food and water supplies, and advanced weapons to shoot down nuclear missiles. The United States would reign supreme specially with the space force capabilities, perhaps evening to make bases on the moon for a Plan B scenario with earths, became rotten by nuclear waste.

[@Gabriel-ij1hd]

@@Towermidguard uhm...no? the usa would win navally...for a while...it's the entire world my guy...the usa is ahead of the other but by a reasonable margin, it's the resources of EUROAFRASIA against the u.s,the middle east's oil,russia and china's iron, brazil's silicon/iron along with many other resources from africa, the techonological increase would be...absurd, no way the usa can survive for more than 1/2 decades

[@flying0possum]

Bro graduated from HOI4 💀 In all seriousness, it was pretty accurate and I like how it took a decade to get any sort of naval invasion done. All the island hopping though would take so much casualities... In the scenario, it assumes that no one has morals (so doing stuff like genocides against insurgents are ok now) I can kinda see how the casualities add up here... It would have to be decades of repeated destructions on both sides against the central americans... One thing I dislike about videos like this is that they never count logistics 💀 If logistics were more accounted for then it would be another 20+ years for DC to be taken. You can't just stack up millions of soldiers in Alaska like that.

[@EquinoxKiwi]

Read the description, lol Video’s just a silly project someone made that wasn’t meant to be realistic.

[@ThatOneTexan738]

I agree with the logistical part

[@CountryBaller1796]

🤓☝️

[@iamafire1521]

​@@CountryBaller1796 🤓 -🤡

[@Generalvladmirborosk]

I disagree with just what you said in the 2nd paragraph

[@andrewcizas4362]

You say no WMDs allowed but those casualty figures beg to differ. Mexico and Canada losing almost 2/3 of their populations, Cuba, Guatemala, and Nicaragua losing almost every single person, Venezuela and Russia about 1/10 of their populations, etc. Even WWII at it's bloodiest wasn't that deadly proportionally speaking. But otherwise, cool video!

[@irenaveksler1935]

Mexico Canada Guatemala and Cuba Nicaragua Colombia Venezuela casualties don’t make sense lol

[@irenaveksler1935]

Russia kinda makes sense Also what is wmd?

[@irenaveksler1935]

Russia casualties maybe are somewhat possible over that long

[@irenaveksler1935]

@@LeKing_ Ah

[@Generalvladmirborosk]

​@@irenaveksler1935I disagree about Russia's part since even though the United States is a great power we have to remember that it would be alone against the entire planet

[@E60666]

i don’t think anyone in the US is legally allowed to have a video of America Losing lol

[@CAProductions051]

I can confirm, I’m on a government watchlist now.

[@FlyingAlfredoSaucer]

Freedom of speech allows it

[@eurotec_]

definitely not in Russia

[@FunnySpaceMan.]

Uh, no? The 1st Amendment allows us to speak out against the government

[@old-men2803]

Well its a free country so its definitely alright

[@vileplumeesperantist]

If this was a library book, I'd put it in the DIY section

[@7h31d1o7]

We'll finally see what's in Area 51 😃

[@cumunist2120]

It’s probably nothing Area 51 is too well known for for them to put anything truly top secret in there

[@mr.nobody68]

It's all fun and games until the American gun owner comes out to play

[@andrewmckenzie292]

By the time that became a factor it would already be too late. "The World" would presumably have already set up their battle lines and bought in massive amounts of advanced armour, "minutemen" would be no match and would be slaughtered if they resisted...kind of a more extreme version of what happened in the Soviet Union during WW2 except America would not be fighting on just one front but several fronts at once (hence the already unlikely complete Soviet victory that actually happened would be in effect impossible in the USA in this situation)....it would be a heroic/strong defence but ultimately futile. In any case, Americans have never known something close to foreign invasion, trying to adjust to the idea that America is this weak (in this scenario) in itself might be a huge morale killer.

[@red-gp9ohh]

But the rest of the world has manpower. China and India can alone muster up an army of 100 million soldiers

[@seanwalters1977]

@@andrewmckenzie292 Sounds like a bunch of ifs. You think the US wouldn't notice massive troops movements near its borders and not send out preemptive strikes? That's also assuming the US doesn't develop any similar weapons or vehicles that you mentioned (which they likely already have developed). People really don't understand just how vast and resource rich the US is. Not to mention its industrial capacity. The world hasn't seen the US actually mobilize for war since WW2. You think the US would become weaker because enemies landed on shore? Boy you really know nothing of Americans. Same logic and mindset the Japanese had when they attacked Pearl Harbor. Then the sun was dropped on them twice.

[@dfmrcv862]

Except minutemen would be capable of disrupting logistics lines, the one thing an invading force needs most and most world powers don't have a handle on aside from the US. Even western nations aligned with us depend on our military for logistics.​@@andrewmckenzie292

[@aperson626]

@@andrewmckenzie292I don’t think think they ever account for morale much because realistically nobody would want to fight due to casualties and economy. And the economy would be disrupted, plus I don’t think they’d be immune to guns since the war probably wouldn’t last till 2034

[@auberginereverie]

This is surprisingly accurate, since: - Canada is very expected to be the first or second country to fall, since they are pro-American. - America attempted to buy Greenland, and they could be the first or second country to fall after Canada by the fact that they don't have regular native army (Denmark does have a base in Greenland but they are just a handful of soldiers) and Denmark (the country also responsible for Greenland's military) might not have a full response to the invasion during the early stages. - A guerrilla warfare happening in Mexico might be expected too, the cartels and El Chapo made an example in the Mexican Drug War where they built tunnels to hide.

[@Chirchy]

loved the blitzkrieg at the beginning

[@XFlames]

Of course while I'm making my scenario, i see another one XD. Very accurate (except casualties). Mexico losing more than the US seems a bit unrealistic, but all in all, a great video.

[@irenaveksler1935]

The super unreasonable and unrealistic part is Canada losing 26,000,000 when it has 39,000,000…..

[@irenaveksler1935]

Cuba and Guatemala losing that much doesn’t make too much sense

[@b.j.likeseverything1906]

WHY WON’T YOU MAKE THE VIDEO YOU SAID “Soon” and it’s been a year and you still haven’t made a single video

[@Luhlupiamexico]

​@@b.j.likeseverything1906 I feel realistically Mexico would prepare to fight the US Army, in addition to Canada the US Army would not tolerate the cold to the maximum that there is in Canada

[@PanzerkampfwagenVITigerIAusfE]

personally I don’t think usa would reach Panama before reinforcements came

[@VortexMopping]

Awesome video, great quality.

[@caballeroarepa9223]

Great video, very realistic, except for the casualties, if they were at half they are shown, it would be more accurate. Why? Because countries now don't allow themselves to have as high casualties as in ww2

[@Nonamelol.]

Not even a half. More like 1/5 of whats shown 😂

[@Iberian_XAVO]

@@Nonamelol. more like 1/10, modern wars are not that deadly

[@Nonamelol.]

@@Iberian_XAVO Please tell me you’re joking.

[@laboot7447]

@@Iberian_XAVO Yeah, maybe because besides Russia and Ukraine there are no large scale wars right now, even Russia and Ukraine would be considered just another proxy war if this was the cold war. No two superpowers have fought since world War 2, world War 3 would be a blood bath Because it would be a such a blood bath it would be unlikely to happen, hence why there's no ww3 or deadly modern wars

[@Iberian_XAVO]

@@Nonamelol. Look at how many people die in modern wars, small percentages of the overall population. I estimate 3 million people would die in this war, maybe.

[@aksmex2576]

You make very good videos. I suggest you keep making them.

[@ata2943]

Perfect job

[@Togo304]

Underrated man

[@Miskolcz_Mapper]

Soulchester upload is one of the best christmas presents

[@romaniamapping6002]

I always see you in comment sections

[@Miskolcz_Mapper]

@@romaniamapping6002 Yeah I see you too!

[@romaniamapping6002]

@@Miskolcz_Mapper haha

[@vamsigaming1233]

This video is very satisfying

[@HeadphoneUsers]

this is beauiful

[@fan_srpelo]

How tf did mexixo and canada lose 3/4 of their population

[@irenaveksler1935]

@@pzwang4109 still Canada losing that much doesn’t make sense

[@flying0possum]

I assume because America had to assert a lot of resources on Mexico and Central America because realistically there would be insurrections to a scale higher than the Taliban. I guess also chem, bio, etc. are on the table so I suppose as this is just a hypothetical scenario that the world uses all of it's capabilities regardless of morals (besides china, russia, nk, iran, etc. because they don't have any to begin with)

[@orangecitrus8056]

@@flying0possum many western countries also don't have any to begin with

[@GarkKahn]

Depending on the situation usa (or any major power) may not have them either

[@user-gw4jw7pg7e]

because the youtuber allowed g3n0c1d3s

[@j.a.s.d.r]

Realistically, the USA wouldn't last this long, but excellent video with high quality and an overall entertaining video to watch.

[@theremapping3840]

The would probably last longer lmao

[@isukdik]

@@theremapping3840 nah it's just in films thet USA is very powerful

[@acidstudios7995]

@@theremapping3840 true

[@polskamapping6116]

I mean, the U.S. has a lot of natural resources, a strong economy, and a powerful army. Their only issue would be running out of supplies they need in other parts of the world, since, obviously, this is against only the U.S., they wouldn't be able to get them. But, again, they have more than enough strength to keep a decades long war going like this.

[@troyg3831]

@@polskamapping6116 yeah theres another video that's much more accurate. We wouldn't waste military hardware and lives fighting over useless islands. First thing we would do is sieze and destroy all the oil production in the middle east. The US can supply itself. The rest of the world gets 80% of it's oil from the middle east. If the war lasted even close to this long the rest of the world would be out of fuel and the US would still be fine.

[@Reksimy]

And these should be done before its late, but with all the potences

[@CrazeTheZilla]

I love how the music swells as the contiguous 48 are being invaded. No country has been able to touch the US in a significant manner like this in all our history, So seeing Texas, California, and the Northern States getting swept over is straight up surreal

[@heitorframos]

Maybe it's the toll of almost 10 continuous years of war. America would be on tatters, short on personnel and materiel. You see the World forces even made a brief stop at the pre-war American border before invading. A last surrender offer?

[@justabingbong]

Overall it's good, but too many pockets, even if it's Germany during WW2, they wouldn't left it's army being encircled without trying to retreat in frist place, morover the soldiers inside the pockets doesn't even bother to breakout

[@draconianscout]

I'm confused as to why America didn't continue the offensive. The fact it lost islands here is mind blowing considering no one has the capability to match our navy.

[@nicholass.brisco2213]

The United States' goal as stated in the video was white peace. This would probably be achievable by applying pressure against them, not just conquer. But obviously, time is not on your side in this scenario.

[@CAProductions051]

I’d assume they were more focused on trying to create a defense perimeter around North America from which to hold off the rest of the world.

[@Eric0225]

Because the other countries would be on the defense, while the US navy is strong, i doubt they are capable enough to invade China or Russia.

[@amelinadebritobelchior4743]

it lost islands because, while its navy is currently stronger than that of any individual country, it is weake than that of every country combined.

[@Eric0225]

@@amelinadebritobelchior4743 people said that the US navy is in fact stronger than all countries combined. But i doubt that, the US has a lot of carriers, yes, but they're only useful for power projection, all other countries like China and Russia have invested in anti-carrier missiles, so the moment USA gets near to Russia or China their carries will go kaboom, and you might say that carriers can deflect those missiles, but i doubt carriers can deflect nuclear bombs. Also, literally nothing is stopping the world from coming together and building 400 carriers. The reason countries like China and Russia don't invest into carriers is because they have no interest in projecting power overseas, because they can literally just do that on land.

[@WeakestYogurtEnjoyer]

Why would America invade Canada and Mexico at the start of the war? That just gives them a massive amount of territory they have to occupy and defend on top of the mainland.

[@andrewmckenzie292]

To avoid "The World" having a large land base from which to invade the US, if US can strike hard, large and fast on land initially and turn it into mostly a Naval push near the end the US Navy might come into play which could put up a formidable defence even against the whole world?

[@seanwalters1977]

Because non-americans or self-loathing americans that hate the US wanted some wet dream to save to a playlist knowing damn well it could never happen even if the world somehow all united against them.

[@MarshallFoss1]

Yep. Huge tactical disadvantage to spread out like that .

[@PanzerkampfwagenVITigerIAusfE]

@@MarshallFoss1it would be easier to defend that because you wouldn’t have the bigger frontiers with Mexico and Canadian, with that frontier the world could just send a lot of troops and advance into usa

[@OliLego]

Honestly idk if they’d be able to secure canada Mexico and Greenland at the same time that fast but this is a cool concept great video

[@DuckthePolarxd]

I am not an american nationlist, but, USA haves the top economy, i think he can keep that zones for some time.

[@chromaz4299]

I think Greenland would be quite easy to secure honestly .

[@OliLego]

@@chromaz4299 it’s mostly I’ve not really

[@OliLego]

@@chromaz4299 by the Canadians yes, not americans

[@OliLego]

@@DuckthePolarxd yea but not 3 insanely big places at the same time

[@mathewkeen2356]

Look at Sinola holding its own.

[@lulunautigall9141]

Realistically, the US could certainly seize all of Canada, northern Mexico and part of the Caribbean in a few weeks rapid war. The US would next sink into economic stagnation because of its pariah status (like Russia since its invasion of Ukraine) and the war would turn into an indefinite impasse (as the rest of the world cannot get a foothold in North America because of logistics). A likely outcome to this conflict would be a negotiated peace agreement where the US would be allowed to annex Canada but would have to evacuate occupied territories in Latin America and give up Hawaii and other American territories in the Pacific.

[@KoroPro]

You should do the U.S, Russia, and China vs the world

[@L-lv5df]

probably the Will won if they atacked fast an quickly in taking Asia and after defend untik take África and América europe and Oceanía Will not last

[@PanzerkampfwagenVITigerIAusfE]

I think that would be a fair fight

[@JonasDoherty603]

I think a nation with 46% of the world's guns and unmatched industrial capacity could hold out for a while before being overwhelmed by the global forces.

[@ProToGoOfficial]

to be fair, i think the americans could hold canada and sneak around the mountains of mexico to hold a defensive. some thing else, there is a 128:100 ratio of guns to people

[@metatron6254]

I very much doubt that the Americans know the Mexican territory better than the Mexicans themselves, and in the past Pancho Villa's guerrillas had entered the United States and looted towns. I don't know how Canada would handle it, but I am sure that the campaign in Mexico will be much worse than in Vietnam, it is no longer the same Mexico of the Mexican-American War of the 19th century

[@MikeLippsMapping]

Good👍

[@velozio]

Merry christmas!

[@Alex-yy5wo]

Nicaragua lost like most of its population in this war, Canada too.

[@linearis]

Pretty good stuff

[@stephmod7434]

We do not scare easily! We neved bow we never bend! We endor! We overcome! We are America! Second to none! AND WE, OWN THE FINISH LINE!

[@jeaniusedits6094]

Can you do an alternate history ww3?

[@gamekiier45]

Is it a app or just an Animation?

[@FoxFlynn]

bro nearly all of mexico and canada died ( population wise )

[@TheIridiumic138]

Lol the majority of my state was captured and they tried getting to Chicago I love how Los Angeles was the only huge city that got captured, rip Hollywood lol. Meanwhile Tennessee and Florida stayed strong the entire time

[@IBerianTeen]

Fun fact: united states was made for make peace on the whole north america, but aint seing peace movements💀

[@Politography]

Tbf no other country win in a war with every other country.

[@gaming_bronut372]

Very professional video

[@NormalChannel95]

This is kinda realistic, USA can only take all of North America and no more without taking too much causalities, so can the world, they can only take some US Territories but cannot take the Mainland without taking so much causalities which is gonna take a long time to wear each other down.

[@WATERMELON-ED1TS]

Naur💀

[@RLGMapper]

So good simulation, this probably took so much work.

[@fawkewe]

I doubt Canada would loose anywhere near 26 million. Thats over half the population, and lets face it, we are the ones going first and we have accepted it.

[@BrianLyons315]

How about you do France vs The World.

[@Flutterzancelight]

How USA can handle 10 years ?

[@RLGMapper]

China vs the world, next?

[@hakikiusta2598]

Will WW1 come out soon?

[@adhip0574]

Good video but I think you need to have a small fight between Canada and USA.... I think they would be equals up north where the Canadians have the home advantage.

[@trevorreese3510]

I’m sorry, I have nothing against Canada, however it was pretty accurate. Considering we have no reason to fight plus the small Canadian army and Population which is close to the border… sorry man.

[@adhip0574]

@@trevorreese3510 I dunno, I think the Canadians would have a better chance of holding off the invading Americans towards the far north due to much closer supply lines and the harsh weather making it difficult for the US to send troops and heavy equipment in large numbers. I think it would end up like the winter war IMO.

[@trevorreese3510]

@@adhip0574 Even with shorter supply lines the Canadians cannot hold such a frontline because of the gaps in their lines. The Americans could just straight up walk around the Canadian divisions.

[@adhip0574]

@@trevorreese3510 Vietnam

[@trevorreese3510]

@@adhip0574 That’s an entirely different scenario where America wasn’t able to send enough troops to make a difference because otherwise the Chinese and Russians would’ve gotten involved. Not to mention that was decades ago, modern warfare doesn’t work like that.

[@sleepinbee9213]

if you want to put 10 counties as a world, at least put the 10 strongest military countries..

[@christopherflynn7986]

What was the cause of the USA decline? Doesn't seem very feasible that the USA would expand so far and then suddenly reverse.

[@obamagaming-zv4vy]

You can say the same about Nazi Germany and Japan in WW2,they got very far very fast,but lost in the end because their victories werent of raw outproducing and outmanuevering,but just being too fast for the enemies to react,and at some point,supplying these rapidly gained areas became a nightmare,partially because of a war still being fought,and bombing,rebellions etc,and at this point,wit the combined navies of the world,and the airpower and tank fleets,basic military unit advantages would render the United States undefendable after some extended period of time,example,China ALONE has some 600+million fit for service individuals,much more than the entire population of the United States,also including that in this,the United States has to produce everything it jeeds because it is fighting with all its trade partners,so basically it was a ticking time bomb of a lack of everything after a while,it is a "come as you are" war

[@christopherflynn7986]

@@obamagaming-zv4vy nice reply and all you said is feasible. It's just seems off cause in this the US gained ground across the entire globe. Germany or China never got that far. It just seems that if you actually got that far you would have killed or destroyed the world's fighting pop or it's armaments already. Supplies would be a major tilting point as you point out though. It was an interesting video none the less.

[@jrus690]

This is conjecture, we would be able to hold off the world for a long time, they might never beat us. We have all the resources we need and if in a real war, we would be building out the armed forces just like everybody else. In WW2, we out built the rest of the world combined, with the exception of USSR armored vehicle production. This time around, we already have a huge head start, due to the Cold War and right to this day we have an armed forces designed to destroy countries, if we so desire. Only other place to get this ability was the Soviet Army.

[@Turkish-person]

@@jrus690 no healthcare?

[@Turkish-person]

Everyone would have sent troops at that point

[@newwaveinfantry8362]

It's a really cool video concept but here are a few inaccuracies: 1) The US would take Iceland (which has no military) and a bunch of tiny islands in order to control the arctic trade routes and military bases. 2) The US would immediately take Costa Rica (which has no military) and Panama (which has almost no military) and Colombia in order to push into Venezuela and take the world's largest oil reserves and actually send troops northwards toward Mexico while having troops push southward into Mexico. 3) The last holdout in Mexico would be the mountain castle surrounding Mexico City and a lot of the big population centers. 4) The US would occupy oil-rich parts of the Middle East and Africa like Angola's exclave of Cabinda.

[@FBW83]

Can we talk about the fact that Canada lost almost its entire population

[@greathistorymapper]

👍👍👍

[@soulchester3194]

Merry Christmas to you all!

[@jeaniusedits6094]

Can you do an alternate history ww3?

[@Joaco3406]

Happy new year

[@micahistory]

merry christmas

[@unclesam5230]

Could you do a scenario of The United States of America VS the rest of the Americas

[@OusmaneDembélé2210]

Bro not 15 years.Are you crazy?

[@daniv5843]

1:49 6/26/24 this is the day when i'm in that day

[@2pocketsofsidor917]

so technically half of canada's and mexico's population got erased

[@aryanbparida5998]

India having 20 million loses- Joke of the decade Anyways grt vdo

[@red-gp9ohh]

India is no where close to USA in military capability. All they can do is stay defensive

[@joeyj6808]

What does White Peace mean as the goal?

[@Thedouchenugget]

It means a peace in which nothing changes. Essentially just ending the war and everyone goes home like it never happened.

[@SamuelHasTakenTheLifeOfAMan]

Average Hearts of Iron IV game

[@APhilippinesCountryball]

You could’ve used Ages Of Conflict…… and made the rest of the world allies and fight the USA…

[@jdk4914]

The Pentagon has run a similar scenario, including research from think tanks and simulations. It expects, with nuclear weapons and destabilization allowed, that the United States could hold the world off to a stalemate.

[@Sicilyballproductions]

nah

[@jdk4914]

@@Sicilyballproductions if they land an army on the continent we’re probably screwed, but the object of the simulation was to prevent a landing, after annexing everything from Greenland to the Darien gap. Realistically we would lose in an attrition war, but in the short term we have all of the advantages.

[@seanwalters1977]

@@Sicilyballproductions Yes. The majority of the powers that would be attacking the US heavily rely on US military logistics and support to do anything. Not to mention the US exports the most amount of food in the world. The US could literally just wait and starve everyone out while they throw bodies at us. Good luck keeping your supply lines open.

[@PanzerkampfwagenVITigerIAusfE]

@@jdk4914eithout nuclear the world would conquer usa in probably 3 years

[@cazantrabant519]

No way usa can be defeated cuzmof the lack of military transport of the rest of the world

[@goobot1]

This, what are they gana do swim across the Atlantic and pacific?

[@PanzerkampfwagenVITigerIAusfE]

@@goobot1the rest of the world has a far bigger navy, usa would have to leave their ships near the coast to try to protect them, o think the war would last 1 or 2 years until usa falls

[@goobot1]

@@PanzerkampfwagenVITigerIAusfE bigger in numbers not tonnage, a tiny boat isn’t making the trip across the pacific and even if it makes it it will have few people or weapons and will be sunk in an instant

[@PanzerkampfwagenVITigerIAusfE]

@@goobot1 im pretty sure it’s also bigger in tonnage lol, usa would have to be defensive to live longer

[@goobot1]

@@PanzerkampfwagenVITigerIAusfE I think the us would play some variant of defense yes, but mainly cause they can hit any target across the whole planet easily

[@visporintaganeo3545]

Us would get killed in like a year lol. good video tho

[@nicholass.brisco2213]

Not really. Although global sanctions would be catastrophic, the United States is quite self-sufficient.

[@red-gp9ohh]

​@@nicholass.brisco2213nope, allmost all US bases will be conquered by the host country pretty much easily. This can alone cripple USA's ability to fight a global and be forced to switch on defensive

[@Thedouchenugget]

Global sanctions would be catastrophic...for everyone else. The US economy is so massive and intertwined with global trade that any sanctions on us would cause only relatively minor problems, and only for a short time as we possess most of the resources we need already, and a conquered south America would give us the rest. Meanwhile, every other country except north Korea would flat out no longer have an economy at all. Nowhere in the world has the economic power to counteract the loss of America from global trade. Period.

[@ImLiterallyYourDaddy]

USA when metric system

[@karimtir]

Can i have you're simulator please

[@NSPAEX]

The oil war has begun

[@tabletgenesis3439]

My way: Ottawa is taken, but Canada is preparing to reconquer it. USA tries to push through Siberia, but it went poorly. Russia occupies some of Alaska's coast. Mexico sent navies, but didn't excpect an airforce bombing. The secret "Operation Louisiana" went suceeded, southern Louisiana is now occupied. Ottawa is reconquered, USA still tries to take it back. Alaska now borders Washington. Louisiana is taken back, Baja California surrenders. Chinese and japanese boats annex San Francisco. Alaska surrenders, and it's divided between Canada and Mexico. Florida surrenders due to naval invasion. Navies from Brazil and Guianas bring down South Carolina. Indonesia and Philippines sends all their navals and fight for the Californias. USA surrenders. The new capital is New York City.

[@agenius4399]

Canada got f**king deleted lmao

[@taiyeebmuhtadi]

Astronomically high losses, why is that if weapons of mass destruction weren't used?

[@unclesam5230]

Imagine a world war that last 15 years with the technology we have

[@Ark4dlusZ]

Maybe the US committed war crimes against civilians like Germany at ww2

[@LuffyPortal]

the gdp of the world is 200 trillion (when excluding the us) and the us is just 24 trillion. The us is like a third world country when we do it like that.

[@aydenhudson1026]

no it's not, the worlds gdp excluding the us is around 70 trillion not 200 trillion

[@LuffyPortal]

@@aydenhudson1026 Wrong, the worlds is actually 180 Trillion but I rounded it. Its still almost a bit more than a third of the worlds gdp.

[@aydenhudson1026]

@@LuffyPortal I'm not wrong, look it up, excluding the united states from the worlds gdp is around 70 trillion

[@goobot1]

You act as if you can fight a war with dollar bills, India was richer than the uk yet they got swiftly conquered.

[@seanwalters1977]

The US ($25T) makes up a quarter of the world's GDP ($100T). You are incorrect. The world has more to lose economically than the US does if this conflict ever happens. Also keeping in mind the US keeps finding new deposits of needed resources like lithium, cobalt, copper, etc. And guess what, they're the leading producers of a lot of those resources as well as being the largest exporter of food.

[@user-mc1xn3om7i]

3:35 what music?

[@aureolqx]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/hqeTlaalZ8eDpaM this is

[@user-mc1xn3om7i]

@@aureolqx good

[@HeronKChaves]

Attomic bomb?

[@jacobhansen718]

American painter🎨👨‍🎨🖌️

[@davochinomalo]

Cuba losing 90% of its population 💀

[@alicorn3924]

I hate that 40% of the comments and most of the replies on this video are some stupid af takes

[@codylowe1683]

In all fairness the world world have a very hard time it's un unified and no has the logistical support that the us does in 2 days the us military can be anywhere in the world not to mention the continental us is literally a fortress we have 2 oceans as a mote and enough resources to supply all off Europe and ourselves for 20 years also the united states has the most heavily armed population in the world even if you got past are military which is the largest and most advanced in the world you would then have to deal with it's citizens which considers about 300 million people in the US own guns you better believe no one could easily beat us

[@pumpballzzz]

Se nota que no sabe geografia de México y canada parece que canada esta solo por estar ya que cae casi de inmediato y mexico igual a pesar de su terreno montañoso que si o si haria que america tuviera que esperar minimo 4 años para tomar mexico

[@goobot1]

Almost all of Canada’s population is in Toronto and Quebec which is surrounded by the us in 3 directions. After that falls what’s left of Canada to fight back? Grizzly bears? Mexico I kinda agree with, the north would be a quick capture but after that it would be a bit of a fight

[@pumpballzzz]

@@goobot1 bueno en lo de que después de que tomen el norte México estaría indefenso estoy de acuerdo pero si tardaría un buen rato

[@earthball2024]

Proves how powerful American is to potentially conquer a whole continent in a year.

[@micahistory]

interesting scenario

[@Private_jin]

wtf happened to canada ☠️☠️☠️

[@seanwalters1977]

Fought the US

[@jackdotchel2504]

I don't understand what the US was supposed be doing between 21 and 24. Dissembling it's army?

[@depressedmidlifecrisistimm3043]

It was probably a stalemate on the fronts or preparing forces, maybe something like during the Battle of Britain during WWII except over the Pacific, Arctic, and past the Panama Canal.

[@ItsRainy13]

Game name?

[@boedude8496]

all these scenarios begin like a referee blowing a whistle or shouting go. that isn't how it happens. the most likely would be heightened tensions in a given area with the us amassing military assets. things would escalate very quickly from a shove to all out war. china or russia or noko might attack first but it would be met with an overwhelming retaliation due to their potential danger. it would not last more than a month until everything of any importance was leveled. the other possibility which should be taken is us makes a strong but limited first strike, sending the message that a times 50 2nd strike will happen if conditions aren't met. and no country could withstand an all out first strike by the us

[@laboot7447]

Yeah in no scenario would the US win this, I'm from the United States, I've studied lost of conflicts and world affairs, it's not a simple "We're the strongest so that must mean we can take on the whole world" The us heavily relies on the outside world for shipping, even large companies such as Nintendo, Volkswagen, and most school supplies are made from other countries, if for any reason the world declared war on the US, every country would have to hate the US, decreasing the US economy. Second the US wouldn't issue a first strike unless it's a last resort as a nuclear war would be as catastrophic for the US as it would be for the world, nuclear bombs don't follow borders, even if almost no nukes hit the US at all, nuclear winter and radiation from the wind would cripple the US agriculture, a large famine would ensue, the US doesn't "win" as no scenario where the world goes catastrophic is a win for any country. Second, we do not have the largest population or largest standing army, at some point, quantity can beat quality, if the entire world came together to defeat one country, I'm pretty sure the world was preparing for thus conflict just as much as the US. Imagine every non amerocan scientist working together under a unifying cause. You can see how under no circumstances there is a win for anyone as this would all in nuclear annihilation. I don't feel like typing this comment 1000000 times to 10000 people who don't get it, so....I'm gonna copy and paste this.

[@boedude8496]

@@laboot7447 we import things because they are cheaper. after any war we could easily resume a self-sustaining economy if need be. places that would be of strategic benefit would be taken over first .. food, fuel, etc. plenty of small countries of little military import to choose from. you are mostly correct that we would not strike first, depending on intel, political rhetoric, and global military movements. also depending who is commander in chief. )the present one would just let china come right on in, since he is/was on their payroll). but even if we are hit first our response would depend on where/what and by whom. would vary from a drone strike to a capital city destruction. all fighting would be outside our contiguous borders except for sleeper cells doing their terrorism thing. our infrastructure would remain intact and operable. we do not need the largest population to win a world war. technology has drastically reduced the need for boots on the ground until much closer to the end. besides, china and india (the two more populace countries) have no way of getting their boots anywhere they would be of benefit. they could not train or arm the billion more people to have any effect. numbers would mean very little if anything. canada and mexico (and below) would be ineffectual as invading countries. we would not have to kill everyone in any country to make them irrelevant or surrender. if nukes are used then almost everything changes strategically. don't overestimate the chances of dozens of them hitting our cities. one or two would be horrible but not debilitating. no country believes it would remain if it went nuclear, except us. correct again that no country would win such a war but we would recover and become even better and stronger because of it. in time. how things might start or progress is conjecture but the end is not

[@somelostguy]

​​@@boedude8496In Case of a nuclear Engagement the temparatures in the Northern Hemisphere are expected to drop to a avarage of -60 Celsius, wich would mean EVERYONE in the Northern Hemisphere either Makes it Out to the southern Hemisphere in time or He Most certainly will die.

[@tylersmith1468]

@@somelostguy So frostpunk, radioactive edition?

[@thinkersreasoning1575]

I disagree, no one would ever atttack across the narrow piece of land that is Panama it needs less troop garrisons from the defender in proportion to the attacker since it’s like a tunnel. American logistics is supreme and island capturing campaigns in the Aleutian Islands would be costly and meaningless besides the importance of long range missiles. America would analyze all possible, possible, suitable, and good landing spots that are advantageous for the attacker and make it a disadvantage by garrisoning it. An invasion across the Atlantic from Bermuda would cross thousands of nautical miles and would be impossible without wiping out the American defenders the fact that naval invasions are so hard and that the united states happen to start with the world's finest arms manufacturers and best logistics in the history of any kind and being the safest from invasion ever just makes landfall in America impossible.

[@seanwalters1977]

I agree. The US military has contingencies for literally any scenario imaginable, including those against current allies should they ever become hostile overnight.

[@emersonbouillon]

Mexico is the spviet union of this war

[@lmaodead2900]

4:25

[@matthewbarabas3052]

canada lost more than 50% of the population-

[@hyp3rdr1v33]

murica

[@unitedstatesarmy2003]

cap

[@S6per11S2vior]

851st like lol

[@laboot7447]

Yeah in no scenario would the US win this, I'm from the United States, I've studied lost of conflicts and world affairs, it's not a simple "We're the strongest so that must mean we can take on the whole world" The us heavily relies on the outside world for shipping, even large companies such as Nintendo, Volkswagen, and most school supplies are made from other countries, if for any reason the world declared war on the US, every country would have to hate the US, decreasing the US economy. Second the US wouldn't issue a first strike unless it's a last resort as a nuclear war would be as catastrophic for the US as it would be for the world, nuclear bombs don't follow borders, even if almost no nukes hit the US at all, nuclear winter and radiation from the wind would cripple the US agriculture, a large famine would ensue, the US doesn't "win" as no scenario where the world goes catastrophic is a win for any country. Second, we do not have the largest population or largest standing army, at some point, quantity can beat quality, if the entire world came together to defeat one country, I'm pretty sure the world was preparing for thus conflict just as much as the US. Imagine every non amerocan scientist working together under a unifying cause. You can see how under no circumstances there is a win for anyone as this would all in nuclear annihilation. I don't feel like typing this comment 1000000 times to 10000 people who don't get it. The winner is...nobody The end

[@Thedouchenugget]

Wrong. This war game is based on a no WMD premise as nukes and the like too obviously negate the purpose of such an experiment. In the event of a global conventional war of the US vs everyone, we would win. We possess the means and resources to gain full self sufficiency with months in such a scenario. Besides which, any damage to our economy due to denial of foreign trade would result in similar or worse economic damage to those nations. The US is not utterly dependent on any one foreign nation for anything except maybe the anime market lmao. In contrast, most foreign nations that trade with us would experience economic collapse immediately without our economy to buy their stuff. Furthermore, a significant majority of the world is dependent on US aid, military support, and/or investment. Including almost all of Europe. The reality is that a us vs the world conventional war would result in a us victory almost immediately as everyone else would just collapse. The few that wouldn't, would have no means of striking us across the seas and any attempt to build up such forces would be destroyed immediately by our overwhelming headstart and technological advantages at sea and in the air. Kindly don't comment when you don't even understand the basic STATED premise of the simulation.

[@goobot1]

Oh no we can’t buy cheap pencils erasers while the rest of the world can’t buy our food and use our satellites and internet

[@seanwalters1977]

The world would literally starve without US trade. All the US would have to do would be to wait it out and let the world fall apart either literally or figuratively regarding the "alliance". A lot of liberties are taken against the US in this video.

[@ZachPlaysChess]

Crazy Unrealistic on A few things, but other than It just seems the U.S Just forgets it has 22 Aircraft Carriers By 2033, Realistically Ground troops could never Logistically Land On American soil without getting Bombed by American Air Supremacy, not to mention Destroyed by the U.S Super-Carriers before they even reach the Americas, Not to mention F35Raptors Have a Radar Cross Section of 0.005m2 Size of A Golf Ball, Or F-22 0.0001m2, about the size of a bumble bee. Meaning That the Enemies won’t Know they are about to die until The F-22 has already Launched Missles, the U.S is so Technologically Ahead every other country Example: It’s like putting A Maximum lvl player, VS Lvl 1 Player. If y’all Watch Infographics Show then, he has a Video “U.S Vs the world” Spoiler Alert The U.S is stronger than the rest of the world combined.

[@ZachPlaysChess]

@@hbrwdtntrhewh1 The world has basically no Defense against the U.S unless The Forces of Russia, China, Japan, N Korea, S Korea and all those Countries decide to work together. Which I doubt they’d be able to set aside their differences. Maybe Just maybe with A Little time China, NKorea, Russia would be able to overpower The U.S to a curtain extent. But I think overall the U.S is Undefeatable when it comes to Earthly Entities. But also I think the U.S is simply to overpowered like sure the other nations could build up, but they are so far behind that The U.S could just crush them before they get to powerful. Idk that’s my take on it and Other people have their Opinions. That’s my Opinion. (We all know I love talking about stuff that makes me sound smarter than I am lol)

[@luisfernandogarciaborges8]

Yanki a la vista

[@OfficialUKGov]

the us cant beat *EARTH,* they would simply run out of oil needed for all their stuff

[@Zz_Mike-Hawk_zZ]

Mate do you realize this is the Entire world against the US? All production from Europe, China, Russia, India, rest of Asia, Africa and South America. The production capacity of Europe+ China is already enormus. Think before you write.

[@goobot1]

@@luisfernandogarciaborges8he’s right tho, few countries have a navy capable of traveling across the world, and the ones that do are extremely outnumbered and outdated in comparison. What are they gana do swim across the ocean?

[@stephenperry5617]

Excuse me what the FUCK THIS NATION IS POWERFUL THEN EVERYONE

[@imbored394]

Extreamly unrealistic.

[@tampaxhero5176]

The world would get slaughtered lol