Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Armed Forces of the World Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: USA vs EU
gixxxerking    1/6/2005 6:13:25 PM
This is the mood in the Fighters forums so I thought I would just declare war here instead. C'mon all you armchair generals, who wins this fight?
 
Quote    Reply

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Goths    RE:USA vs EU   1/11/2005 5:17:23 PM
Exactly right Europeans are more interested in appeasing the arabs and hanging out in discos. European populations are on a steady decline except for Muslims being born of course. Furthermore while our boys are constantly gaining valuable experience world wide in all spectrums of warfare. The Europeans find themselfs soul searching for there place in the military order of world politics. US Marines take Fallujah in a week killing 2700 taking 3000 prisoners and only losing 50 in the process. While the french take a butt whipping in the ivory cost to a bunch of tribesmen throwing spears. Furthermore I wont even go into how many times we saved your asses from each other or taken care of conflicts in your own back yard you are unable to handle Example Bosnia. Don?t fool yourself into thinking you would be able to defeat the US. They all think that until they step into the ring and get knocked out. Here is a question when was the last time American women where being violated by an invading force? When was the last time European women were being violated by an invading force excluding the UK I see why the french and Germans are so close these days. Bottom line fight your hypothetic victories against the US all you want. However when it gets down to going blow for blow ill put my money on an American over a Frenchmen or a German any day of the week
 
Quote    Reply

Goths    RE:USA vs EU   1/11/2005 5:20:05 PM
Ivory Coast
 
Quote    Reply

Goths    RE:USA vs EU   1/11/2005 5:28:13 PM
I apologize for the spelling errors I must be fast when at work. you get my point
 
Quote    Reply

Bluewings    RE:Absurdity   1/11/2005 5:43:55 PM
About the US carriers able to survive in open Atlantic : 1) If Europe has 80 Submarines , let say we throw only 40 after the USN . Remember during training that a US carrier has often been "sank" by a SINGLE European Submarine . Now let 's be very pessimistic and let say only 1 submarine out of 10 makes it to the carriers . That 's 4 US carriers in the bottom of the Atlantic , with everything onboard , Aircrafts and Personal . You now have only half your Air assets left and you 're still in the Atlantic . Europe has lost 36 submarines and you a few too , let say 5 to stay optimistic . Would you keep coming at us ? uh ? Yes ? ok . We give a rest to our Subs (They deserve it) , and start to send half of the British Fleet as well as half of the French Fleet to what left of the USN . A huge Sea battle take place and after a while 75% of what Europe sent is sank but you lost 2 more carriers . You still in the Atlantic , 6 of your carriers are in the bottom of the Ocean . Would you keep coming at us ? uh ? Yes ? ok . As we had time to prepare , we send : a) 280 Strike attack Aircrafts : 50 M2000B from France . 50 TornadoGR.MK1 From Britain . 30 TornadoGR.MK1 From Germany . 50 F-16C/D from Netherland . 20 F-16C/D from Belgium . 30 F-16C/D from Danmark . 20 F-16C/D from Norway . 30 F-18 from Spain . b) To escort them : 180 Interceptors : 50 M2000-5 from France . 50 Tornado ADV from Britain . 30 Tornado ADV from Germany . 20 F-16C from Netherland . 30 M2000-5 from Greece . Logistics : 4 AWACS . 10 KC-135R for inflight refueling . Another huge battle take place . We loose 50% of what we sent , the USN is down to 1 ship , 3 dingies and a bunch of swimming Marines . You are almost at our costs . Would you keep coming at us ? uh ? I we did NOT use 1 (one) nuclear strike . Cheers .
 
Quote    Reply

gixxxerking    Umm, forgetting something?   1/11/2005 7:06:13 PM
You forgot a few things, When your SSKs have to SNORKEL long befor they are in range of the Carriers, Seahawk, P-3s, Seawolves, Los Angeles Class Blast them out of the water. Rubis is SSN and hunted down by USN ASW. Since Period of tension arises prior to hostilities it is safe to assume USN Carriers are near attack positions. Just prior to firing, They sprint towards lauch points that are sanitized by waiting SSNs. When SSK tries to move int to catch up. ADCAP. You could not keep an airforc that large on alert for very long. And even then it would take time to scramble all of them. And with 4000 Cruise missiles racing towards Europe. Your interceptors would lauch first. Before even a third of them are airborne Runways are cratered trapping the rest on the ground. But I will allow for 70% of the interceptors to take off before runways are cratered. Meanwhile cruise missiles are killing the trapped aircraft and taking out EW radar. Each of your 4 AWACs is assigned to a pair of F-22s from CONUS. These F-22s are refueled inflight. And carry 8 AMRAAMS. EACH AWACs is attacked by 6 AMRAAMS. Escorts are ignored because the F-22s simply supercruise away to their secondary targets, your Tankers. So you lose all your AWACS and 8 of your tankers within the first hour of the conflict to the longest fighter sweep in history. You are now blind and low on fuel due to after burning scramble takeoffs. Of the 180 interceptors, 54 of them die in the initial attack on the ground. 40 were already on CAP due increased tensions. These CAP fighters are spread all over Europe and unable to meet the attack in mass. Also they are low on fuel and weapons after trying to stop 4000 cruise missiles. The remaining 86 are also geographically dispersed. They are also more concerned with stopping the initial attack. No non stealthy manned Aircraft enter EU airspace so they are most chasing TLAMs. With no AWACS and EW radars destroyed by F-117/SSN TLAM/SOF/HPM Warheads your interceptors must rely on on-board radar to locate B-2s/F-22s/F-117s and TLAMs. Of your 280 strike aircraft, 50% are destroyed on the ground. Damage to runways prevents 40% of the survivors from taking off to join your initial counter attack. You manage to get 84 strike planes and 40 escorts airborne after the initial damage. However they are largely blind as to the locations of USN because prowling Raptors have removes AWACS and Sea Recon Planes. However, sympathetic merchants are able to give some rough approximates. Also pre attack data is just enough to get a strike underway. In a stroke of luck, a Trafalgar-class has crippled one of the 4 US carriers before slipping away. It is adrift and requesting tow back to CONUS for repairs. Trafalgar has radio coordinates of SAG and EU strike force is directed by surviving ground control to the location. EU pilots must use manual navigation techniques as EU global positioning Satellites are off line. Along the ingress route to the striken Carrier, 8 F-22s fire AMRAAMS into the formation by surprise. Each F-22 is armed with 6 AMRAAM and 2 AIM-9X. Aided by their Stealth, the USAF pilots choose attack points outside of the detection cones of most EU escorts. 48 AMRAAMS tear into the formation rith 60% kills. 28 EU aircraft dissappear from the formation. As the EU strike nears the Carrier, AAW picket ships begin ripple firing Standard SAMs at the EU formation. The survivors then, 70% so thats approx 70 by now, bravely continue. Suddenly EU RWR indicate that multiple APG-73 Radars. comming from just outside of escorts radar. Its 40 F/A-18E's and 10 F-14Ds. AMRAAMS gut the EU formation. USN fighters do not close to visual range. Each figher Fires 4 missiles before returning to ther carriers. 50% of the AMRAAMs get through EU ECM and the formation is reduced to 35 EU aircraft. The survivors scatter in disarray back to the continent. 8 EU ASMs are fired and shot down by AEGIS. Blinded by the loss of AWACS, satellites and graound based EW radar, EU miliary leaders begin to consider their options... That s a more accurate first day scenario.
 
Quote    Reply

RM-Nod    RE:Umm, forgetting something?   1/11/2005 11:36:53 PM
You have just systematically ignored everything put to you and used 700 words to say ?nah we can do it? First of all you have P3s attacking our submarines despite being 4000 miles away and then just said that you would destroy our submarines without given any reason to your argument. Disregarding the fact that submarines are one of, if the not the, most difficult to detect assets. Then you?ve got USN carrier groups parked off the coast of the EU and expect nothing to happen. You have an outnumbered SSN force ?sanitising? large parts of the Ocean without any regard for how they could do it successfully. You say the EU could not keep its air assets on alert yet somehow forget to say how the US could do it but the EU couldn?t. You have 4000 cruise missiles flying before you?ve even said how the platforms are supposed to be able to get into position against heavy opposition. Only now you have them destroying all of the EU?s air fields as well as ports. The facts ignored hear are that it took 4000 missiles to hurt Iraq, believing the same number could do much against the EU is ridiculous; SSNs needed to launch these weapons would have to be a minimum of 500km of the EU coast and to hit most air fields they would have to be far closer, all the while being outnumbered, facing EU surface ships and facing maritime patrol aircraft both in very large numbers; if they don?t destroy the submarines they would certainly deter any launches. You also miraculously know where everything is and claim to be able to destroy all of our AWACs and aircraft, radar etc You?ve got missiles being launched from B-52s and B-1s without any regard to EU air defences. You?ve got these missiles being successful but you do not take into considering EU ground based air defence systems. You?ve got F-22s fighting EU aircraft despite them not even being in service yet, despite the battle zone being 6000kms away from the US coast to coast, which is just coast to coast, if you want to actually get any aircraft over the EU itself and take off from actual bases and not the beach then it?s nearer 8000km at least. The max ferry range of the F-22 is around 3000km so if we assume they are refuelled mid flight (from where?) then they just manage to get to the EU coast line and then drop into the sea So unless you don?t mind the aircraft you send ditching into the sea then it isn?t going to happen. You have satellites being destroyed despite not have any OPERATIONAL ASAT weapon. All of that last post was complete rubbish, just random numbers strung together without any consideration for the facts, history, doctrine, or anything. (another example, you?ve got only 1 submarine out of 80 hitting a one of just 7 targets but at the same time have the entire USN submarine fleet firing TLAMs into Europe from 300km off the coast without any problems) I still haven?t seen you even mention the logistics of this either.
 
Quote    Reply

ex-98C    RE:Umm, forgetting something?   1/12/2005 12:03:13 AM
I knew it; I should have just listened to myself and just ignored the topic . Gixxxer, as I am sure it has been mentioned before this topic has been done numerous times and most informed posters agree that the US would have little chance of a victory over the EU in Europe. One poster said that it was all about morale, no it?s about logistics. The US forces would be stretched out, while the EU would have the home field advantage. I am also very curious about where this ?surprise? 4000 cruise missile attack it coming from. The majority in your scenario are coming from the 5 carrier in the Strike fleet..What type of missiles? If you are talking TLAMS then that would just about shoot the ships dry with no SAM load out. If you are talking about the airgroups then you are talking not about the TLAM but the much shorter ranged JASSM or SLAM-ER (I think the Navy pulled out of JASSM procurement). I fall to see how an Alpha Strike of 350 planes is going to launch 2000 missiles, not to mention that they would be seen and most likely engaged before launch. Even if it is a split between the two, do you really think that a 5 carrier Strike Fleet is going to sneak into missile range without being spotted? So here are my two cents on the whole deal of the EU vs. US: Conventionally the US would win over the US and would most likely win in neutral territory. However, in Europe the most that the US could bring to bear is the Navy with some minimal Air force support. Against the combined EU navies and Air Forces? Not good odds. If we include full scale nuclear exchanges the most optimistic outcome is the US gets hit by approx. 250 warheads worst case 750..Europe well it wouldn?t really exist anymore. (Side note: there are only two nuclear threats that the US needs to fear from the EU; SLBMs and Spec Ops/Intel team ?suitcase? bomb insertions. Would not be that difficult for the Brits to slip a couple into the country, only slightly harder for the French. As for the French bombers, no chance unless they were an initial strike..once the balloon goes up..kind of hard to organize tanker support when they are radioactive slag.)
 
Quote    Reply

RM-Nod    RE:Umm, forgetting something?   1/12/2005 12:12:42 AM
Ok I'm bailing out on this one, it seems everyone agrees the US could do it except gixxwhatever. I'm glad I'm not a fish I wouldn't last long, I bite way too easily.
 
Quote    Reply

gixxxerking    RM-NOD    1/12/2005 12:17:34 AM
You can nit pick all you want. I know it frightens and embarrasses the hell out of you. The EU posters wanted a period of tension prior to hostilities so I would be able to move my Carrier Strike Groups within 500km. Maritime Exclussion Zone is 370km. Millions of sq km of sea to choose from. Raptors have unlimited range with inflight refueling so for a special mission like this, 16 of them from CONUS is reasonable. F-117 did 18.5 hour ferry to Gulf War from CONUS during gulf war. And I would have tanker support on station for the Raptors. US subs dont have to match less capable SSKs sub for sub. Thats why they are so big and carry many more weapons and far more advanced sensors. They are more efficient killers. And If I know where I will launch TLAMs from and you dont. I get to choose what areas to sanatize. Also years of cold war cooperation give me a good idea of how you operate. And I didnt use the entire USN sub fleet. I used 30 boats IIRC. Yes we are that strong. Also FYI, USN boats can operate anywhere undetected. AWACS are easy to find because they emit very strong signals. Even easier to kill with Raptors. B-1/B-52 do not have to contend with your IAD because of stand off weapons. Also EU has very limited High altitude SAMs. WE DO HAVE OPERATIONAL ASAT CAPABILITY. And with a year of tensions we could certainly deploy one. The scenario only accounts for the fist few hours of the war. And since I attacked first initiative is mine. I know where I am attacking from and will clear sub threat with SSNs and ASW aircraft. I gave you the one lucky sub because chances are if the USN knows the precise locations and times of the attack 6 months to 1 year in advance. They will Identify and track any subs entering those areas. I was very generous to EU side also. I gave US weapons 40% to 60% effectiveness. I have faith they would be even higher in real life. Notice that all the forces I mentioned could be surged RIGHT NOW in a very short time. A few days for Carriers and SSN/SSGNs. And hours for the CONUS based aircraft. Keep in mind I could increase my TLAMS by 2000 and double USN aircraft with 4 more Carriers if I really wanted to. This would leave 4 in reserve. You cannot stand in the face of that kind of firepower son. P.S. My back up ASAT is to target the SAT uplinks with F-117/TLAM. And they have a high probability of success.
 
Quote    Reply

Bluewings    Scenarios ...   1/12/2005 12:18:34 AM
Ok Gixxx , we know have 2 scenarios , yours and mine . What I notice first in yours is the fact that the USN is ALREADY in position of stand-by , ready to move to firing position . How did the USN arrive there is not said . In mine , we go after you when you are still in blue water , mid-Atlantic . French radar Nostradamus (or Satelites) telling us when you reach 2000 nm from our costs . As far as we know you will not have any operational means of destroying satelites in 10 years time . Gixxx , do you really think you can "blow out of the water" 40 Submarines ??? In my scenario only 1 out of 10 makes it to your carriers , and it is very pessimistic odds . Now , what about awareness ? By which mean do you know the position of our AWACS circling somewhere over Europe ? Same goes for the tankers IF they 're already Airborn . Keep in mind any incoming flying thing will be picked up by Nostradamus 2000nm from our costs . CONUS send 8 F-22's to where ? And alone over Europe ? Thoses 8 Pilots will tell you it is not folly , it is suicide . Let 's go back at sea ... You would have suffered losses before to be in range of firing cruise missiles . Btw , 4000 you said ? Really , 4000 ? Ok . Let 's play :-) We Euros had a bad day and manage to stop only 10 (???) . So you have 3990 cruises reaching their targets . Damage report : We 're still fine thank you . ---> It took more than 400 cruises and 3 months of bombing to clear the Iraki threat . 3990 cruise will not impair Europe much as there are probably more than 10.000 priority targets on European soil . You know what I mean ... Btw , the 280 Strikers with the 180 Interceptors are about a third of the European Fleet , taking off from more than 25 different Airport . No logistic problem here . Do you see where I am going Gixxx , you simply do not have the power to do it if we both stay conventional ~no Nukes~ . Just admit it . No one on Earth has the power to come to Europe and win . Cheers .
 
Quote    Reply



StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2012StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy