Poll: [If] England and America just went to war...

[commodorejohn]

The hell would we be fighting over?

 

[CardinalPiggles]

im english, so i voted accordingly.

I'm English and I say America would completely crush us.

We have some very good pilots and some very good seamen. But America have got several times more people, a lot more money, and better techology. Not to mention over the last few years our defense budget has been cut a lot and they've probably got just as good pilots/seamen as well.

We wouldn't stand a chance.

that wasnt the point of the topic, but i agree

 

[Yankeedoodles]

Kind of off topic but as an American I've never really understood the high esteem Canadians place in Britain. Sure I suppose you're still part of a semi-integrated government and you have a shared history and culture. But all of that you share or else could share with the United States as well. And it's not as if the British ever treated you as equals. After all they never allowed Canadians into the UK parliament to make the real decisions with the big boys. Nor would they ever as Canadian MPs would probably represent a majority. If Canada joined the US on the other hand you'd all have representation in Congress on day one.

I'm sorry, I'm usually quite good at this kind of thing but in this case I have to ask: are you joking or do you genuinely believe that is how Canada works?

I don't mean to be rude if this is what you think but I also don't want to waste time correcting a joke.

I'm being serious. From the tone of your response I can tell that you find something remiss with my comment. So go ahead, let me have it. I'll admit my understanding of the Commonwealth probably isn't what it ought to be. It's my understanding that both the UK and Canada have the same head of state but are otherwise separate entities. As such, in the INCREDIBLY unlikely case of a war between the UK and US it seems that it would be far more likely to enter on the US side than Britain's considering how much more we seem to have in common on economic, linguistic and cultural parameters.

 

[The Rascal King]

As an American who uses Xbox Live, I've wanted to strangle my fair share of British children, but I ain't got no beef.

 

[Yosato]

As a British person I don't want to see England nuked to hell, so I'll be on the side of my country

Being "British" is a hard one to justify. I'm Scottish and... well... I'm somewhat shocked to say it but im going to agree with u on this one. I don't want nuke damage near me.

On the other hand I can imagine many Welsh, Irish and other Scots would happily help America give England their "Just Deserts" as long as nukes were off the menu.

I should really have clarified - I'm English and live in England, I just use the term 'British' since many Americans and other nations don't distinguish between the two. That being said I had no idea there was such bad blood between the different countries in the isles: it amazes me to hear that people who live within a hundred miles of us can resent us so much O.O Guess I'm just completely ignorant to culture and politics xD

 

[NeuroticDogDad]

I'm sorry, I'm usually quite good at this kind of thing but in this case I have to ask: are you joking or do you genuinely believe that is how Canada works?

I don't mean to be rude if this is what you think but I also don't want to waste time correcting a joke.

I'm being serious. From the tone of your response I can tell that you find something remiss with my comment. So go ahead, let me have it. I'll admit my understanding of the Commonwealth probably isn't what it ought to be. It's my understanding that both the UK and Canada have the same head of state but are otherwise separate entities. As such, in the INCREDIBLY unlikely case of a war between the UK and US it seems that it would be far more likely to enter on the US side than Britain's considering how much more we seem to have in common on economic, linguistic and cultural parameters.

Actually what you've said there is correct. It just didn't seem to match up with the previous statements

And it's not as if the British ever treated you as equals. After all they never allowed Canadians into the UK parliament to make the real decisions with the big boys. Nor would they ever as Canadian MPs would probably represent a majority

I took from that sentiment that you thought the Canadian parliament was a subdivision or a lesser version of the British parliament. You have negated that now by correctly stating that they are completely unrelated and have no effect on each other.

Interestingly though you've struck upon something quite interesting. That is the concept of Canadian citizens being MPs in the UK House of Commons. I didn't know it until recently but a Canadian, like any other citizen of a commonwealth country, can be a UK MP. So actually, Canadians can be part of the UK parliament, but I wouldn't expect anyone to know that.

Well, since England tried to take over us Swedes during WWII (Which, funny enough, the nazis saved us from) and America tries to take over everyone constantly, I'd remain neutral and gloat at both of you. For shame, US and UK.

Er...what? When the hell did that happen?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Catherine

The more you know

I'm sorry but that proposed plan does not include or even mention "trying to take over" Sweden, more to the point it was never enacted. If that is your sole basis to believe that "England" tried to invade Sweden and were saved by Nazi Germany then you are incorrect.

 

[Chefodeath]

I liked the 51st state comment, probably because its accurate. See, when I become dictator of the United States, you think I'm going to settle for a measly fifty states? Hell no, I'm kicking that fucker up to 100!

I know what you're thinking. "Why don't you just divide up your current states to meet 113" Well see, here's the thing. I plan to make each of the 50 new state consecutively larger than the last, the smallest being a bit bigger than Alaska. Do you see the genius of my plan now? I'm doing it to piss off the texans! Now not only are they not the largest states, but they are actually going to be grouped in the smaller half! Its genius I tell you! The world will thank me for it.

 

[Chefodeath]

Well, since England tried to take over us Swedes during WWII (Which, funny enough, the nazis saved us from) and America tries to take over everyone constantly, I'd remain neutral and gloat at both of you. For shame, US and UK.

Er...what? When the hell did that happen?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Catherine

The more you know

I'm sorry but that proposed plan does not include or even mention "trying to take over" Sweden, more to the point it was never enacted. If that is your sole basis to believe that "England" tried to invade Sweden and were saved by Nazi Germany then you are incorrect.

Naw, the English never invaded Sweden. Iceland was more their game.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Iceland

 

[Dancingman]

well Canada is part of the commonwalth country so I am assuming that we would side with england.

Even at the risk of getting curbstomped by America for the possibility of providing a forward base for English forces to strike into the USA (no occupation, just disruption strikes)?

USA would win a conventional shooting war, even if it went nuclear and England managed to successfully hit American cities it would be a pyrrhic victory, a lot of nations would stay neutral if it ever got that bad, for one thing war with America is courting one's death, and for another thing America is too important of a trading partner, and so is England in the latter regard. There'd be a massive coalition of nations in the UN trying to stop any fighting that occured, nobody would make a decision to go to war against America lightly.

 

[t3h br0th3r]

You have to root for America in this, look at all the stuff we gave you, including TEH INTERWEBS


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_United_States_inventions

 

[Warforger]

well Canada is part of the commonwalth country so I am assuming that we would side with england.

Alot of nations are like Pakistan or former member-Mozambique doesn't mean they're going to do anything.

true
actually when I really think about it yeah we would become neutral like Switzerland!
also note I spelt commonwealth wrong. crap!

Yah the way you spelt it like Commonwaffles.

 

[Yankeedoodles]

And it's not as if the British ever treated you as equals. After all they never allowed Canadians into the UK parliament to make the real decisions with the big boys. Nor would they ever as Canadian MPs would probably represent a majority

I took from that sentiment that you thought the Canadian parliament was a subdivision or a lesser version of the British parliament. You have negated that now by correctly stating that they are completely unrelated and have no effect on each other.

Interestingly though you've struck upon something quite interesting. That is the concept of Canadian citizens being MPs in the UK House of Commons. I didn't know it until recently but a Canadian, like any other citizen of a commonwealth country, can be a UK MP. So actually, Canadians can be part of the UK parliament, but I wouldn't expect anyone to know that.

What I meant by that was that back when Canada was much more a part of the British Empire a Canadian could not become a member of parliament and speak as representative of a district of Canadians. Even if Canada was well governed (which to my understanding it was) it was governed not treated as an equal part of a greater whole the way say Rhode Island is in the United States. Regardless of how British a Canadian may have felt during that time they were effectively a lesser citizen as long as they remained in Canada. Kind of like a resident of Puerto Rico is in relation to the United States. And regardless of how British Canada may have been, to my understanding there was never any move to actually fully integrate them into some sort of expanded United Kingdom likely because Canada would represent a majority in Parliament. On the contrary, Britain started to sever ties with Canada in the late nineteenth century to preserve that 'British' majority.And it was that decision to eject Canada from the British Empire rather than bestowing them with truly full British citizenship which leads me to believe that Canadians hold Britain in far higher regard than it deserves. Honestly, I don't know why Canadians put up with it for so long. When it became clear that Britain had no intention of treating us like equals we Americans revolted.

 

[gellert1984]

As a welshman I support only 2 countries, wales and whoevers fighting England. I'm betting the americans win cos, y'know without the royal welsh commando and the SAS (based in hereford which is in wales) they's be pretty screwed, sure the SBS is good but not that good.

 

[Seives-Sliver]

I live in America, but have plans to move to Canada or England when I can, but theoretically if there is a war it would be unpredictable, because if they both just went at it, Europe has the same allies as America, though America is crippled by the recession, so even if Europe wins, America might just die from the backlash of a war.

 

[Dancingman]

I'd say America, for the simple fact that we invented awesome.

-Douche

I mean, we invented the atomic bomb, with some scientists thinking it could ignite the earth's atmosphere, and we said, "Meh, lets go ahead and do it."

-Albert Einstien came up with the A-bomb, and he was German you fool.

Wrong, Einstein was atomic theory and a hell of a lot of the foundation for the idea and concepts for an atomic bomb, he did not physically overcome the issues posed by creating said weapon, Einstein was theory and application, Manhattan gave us the physical bomb and its mechanics. The atomic bomb was created by the Manhattan Project which included a hodgepodge of scientists both American and foreign, but given that it was done in America, with American funding, with an American (Dr. Oppenheimer) at the head of the project, and for the explicit purpose of making the weapon for America, it could be reasonably argued that the Americans did indeed invent the physical atomic bomb.

So yea, we got this war thing pretty figured out. As for EU rising as one and winning, the logistical nightmare that would raise would seriously undermine its effectiveness. I mean, what language do you give the orders in? Whose orders do you follow, your own officers, or a foreign officer of higher rank?

-You got war figured out with friendly-fire and you lost Vietnam and the Cold War shamble and the problems in Cuba and now Afghanistan/Iraq. War can't be figured out as war never stays the same. There are just 'general' rules in a war. Read 'The art of War'.

Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq were counterinsurgency wars fighting guerilla or irregular forces entirely within the confines of the country they lived in. A US war with the European Union would likely be a much more naval and air based conflict. Neither side is going to throw away men trying to invade and occupy the territory of the other, the US and the EU are equally difficult to conquer but in different ways. Simply put, the US applies British naval strategy in WWI on a larger scale. US would have huge infrastructure and logistics bombing campaigns in early stages. Formulating a joint EU response would almost guaranteed happen, but it would probably take a little longer and give the US somewhat of a leg up in mobilization in the early stages of the war. US sub fleets would start taking out any sea-borne oil shipments bound for Europe, you don't need disruption of even a majority of any area's oil supplies to start putting the squeeze on it.

Later stages of a US-EU war would be more equitable assuming any wild victories on one side or the other. Initially the US has a larger, stronger military but the EU gets stronger the longer the war goes on, even factoring in efforts on the part of the US to cripple Europe's industrial capacity, that ultimately would probably be the deciding factor in any war. The longer it is, the longer we get a peace treaty that simply restores status quo ante bellum.

 

[I_am_acting]

and a good portion of the European militaries use US built equipment and aircraft, something tells me we'd have a little surprise in them for the guys

 

[King of the Sandbox]

Maaaayun, I'd be boned. I'm a 'merkin, but my wife is from England.

I guess we'd be sad when her family got nuked.

 

[iLikeHippos]

Er...what? When the hell did that happen?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Catherine

The more you know

I'm sorry but that proposed plan does not include or even mention "trying to take over" Sweden, more to the point it was never enacted. If that is your sole basis to believe that "England" tried to invade Sweden and were saved by Nazi Germany then you are incorrect.

Well, Britain would have to get in to Sweden if they would want to block the trade routes to Germany, otherwise it wouldn't work. It's not like they could set up fuckin' tolls and have Sweden yell at them. The Germans would tear their shit up.
And, one of the main reason it was never made and indeed merely proposed, was because they didn't wish to motivate the Axis allies (Italy, Japan) to push any more forward.

I'd say it's a pretty reasonable conclusion.

 

[Thimblefoot]

Well, as a Scot, I guess I would take England's side.