CreateDebate


Debate Info

42
36
No, they are too powerful. Yes, they aren't that big.
Debate Score:78
Arguments:54
Total Votes:99
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 No, they are too powerful. (29)
 
 Yes, they aren't that big. (25)

Debate Creator

Houston(187) pic



Can any alliance of Nations defeat America, Germany, England and France?

If America, Germany, England and France decided to conquer the world, could the other nations stop them?

No, they are too powerful.

Side Score: 42
VS.

Yes, they aren't that big.

Side Score: 36
1 point

In modern war there would be no victor. Only mutually assured destruction. It's not 1940 anymore, people.

Side: No, they are too powerful.
1 point

SOOO in 1945 there was not the one and only use of nuclear arms in recorded history ( in war ) ? Believe me, if it came down to it, mutually assured destruction wouldn't stop the fighting, intelligence and preemptive strategies would become more important, but the war would still be waged.

Side: No, they are too powerful.

You write something that people don't want to hear and you get down-voted!

Side: No, they are too powerful.
1 point

Heh. I'm used to it. You should've seen what it was like in the olden days -- before it cost a point to downvote, before there were limits on how many times you could do it. The downvotes fell like rain. JoeCavalry had a 50% efficiency score back then, which I think was as low as it could go ...lol.

Side: No, they are too powerful.
1 point

To all those who say we would easily be defeated, you are morons.

Side: No, they are too powerful.
obama12(5) Disputed
1 point

lolololololololololol BRICS lauphgs at your foolishness pig dog!!!!!

Side: Yes, they aren't that big.
cookieMUNCH1(31) Disputed
1 point

i'm guessing you're from an middle eastern country? Well, shut up, the middle eastern enemy nations would be toast after NATO forces are done with it :/

Side: No, they are too powerful.

no, All the country's listed are part of NATO, anyone try and attack any of the four, They will have 27 (I think) angry country's descending on them, not to mention on combat able and wealthy.

And put France out of the picture, they aint an military country, no offence to them, but they have lost almost every fight they have been in, Its a fact! But are okay economically with a stable GDP.

Side: No, they are too powerful.

Those nations have the power, so, an alliance of other Nations wouldn't have a chance.

Side: No, they are too powerful.
0 points

America and Germany make the best guns in the world, for you gamers out there, about 90% of the guns used in video games are American made or German made.

In my opinion the US would first attack north and south, hitting Canada and South America. Then the US would attack China and Russia. Germany and Britain would attack east, then France could attack south down into Africa.

By the way, I should have mentioned this but this is NOT A REAL LIFE EVENT. I am just bored on a Sunday afternoon.

Side: No, they are too powerful.
Bradf0rd(1431) Disputed
2 points

The only gun that anyone needs on any game is the AK47, or any variant of it. The AK47 is Russian.

Russia would beat the shit out of all of us by themselves. France would drown in their tears, America would go bankrupt and burn, Germany would flee in their V'Dubs and spin out thanks to their "German engineered" ass-heavy chassis's, England would talk a bunch of shit with crumpets in their mouths, suffocate, and then disappear under a vibrant flash of white light... and then Russia would have a party for a day and carry on trying to implement true socialism.

Side: Mother Russia would own all
Americus12(1) Disputed
2 points

Lol the US, France and Germany could bribe the Russians with matryoshka dolls, fur hats and vodka.

Side: No, they are too powerful.
1 point

liar! the americans would stage a huge invasion and then when russia attacked they would as someone else said "have 27 other very pissed off nations at their door step"

Side: No, they are too powerful.
1 point

can Ukraine and Belarus come back I miss the motherland, oh yeah i cannot agree more!!!

Side: Yes, they aren't that big.
Houston(187) Disputed
0 points

I need my M16! The AK47 is too old and the barrel heats up to fast, it also is very inaccurate. America outnumbers Russia in everything, tanks, infantry, planes, porn-stars and ships. Plus, America makes the most porn, right? If we stop sending our porn to Russia they all would start crying.

Side: No, they are too powerful.
0 points

Not a chance. In fact, America alone could probably take on the whole world were it inclined to... it would suffer many losses but it would win in the end. It simply has too much money and resources to be challenged at all.

Side: No, they are too powerful.

Of course not. People forget that modern warfare is not about numbers. This is an age in which hundreds of thousands of people can be killed by one bomb. Technology is the key to victory. One Briton armed with a machine-gun could defeat fifty opponents armed with man-portable weapons. China, for example has approximately 2.25 million infantry, but only 1500 aircraft. The US air force has over five thousand, most of which are miles ahead in terms of armament and technology. Without control of the skies, no 21st century military can achieve victory. A time honoured adage of war is 'never go to war with your land armies in china'. Without air superiority, how can any Asian nation move these massive armies?

Side: No, they are too powerful.

I agree with you, the US may be powerful, But think about it, the US could attack the UK or France or Germany ext... But with this, they would have 27 (I think) angry country's at their door step.

Also, with combined strength of the US air force and the British navel power, they make a force to be reckoned with...

Side: Yes, they aren't that big.
4 points

The countries with nukes and willing to use them could defeat the American government. Now the American people...that's another story.

Side: Yes the ones with nukes could
Houston(187) Disputed
4 points

I think Nuclear Holocaust and defeat differentiate a great deal.

Side: No, they are too powerful.
paradox4(2) Disputed
1 point

I'm not so sure the other nations would actually use nukes. Keep in mind that so far America is the only nation with the right combination of balls and stupidity to have actually used a nuke as a weapon. I think nuclear holocaust is a strong enough deterrant to prevent most countries from using nukes. However, Russia does have the FOAB (Father Of All Bombs) which is at least twice as powerful as our (America's) MOAB, (Mother Of All Bombs) if I remember correctly. And if you used every non-nuclear bomb most of the countries that would stand against America, Germany, England, and France, you could probably wipe those four nations off the map...albeit at the cost of your own.

Side: No, they are too powerful.
cookieMUNCH1(31) Disputed
0 points

NATO, ring's a bell? Other country's like Russia would not be able to touch us with out the might of 27 other wealth and combat able nations acceding on you!

P's. I'm form the country of Wales, Part of the Uk, so don't just say England, IT's the Uk, England isn't just the only country in it, may be the capital, but not the only.

Side: Yes, they aren't that big.
2 points

Yes, if by some miracle you could get the rest of the world to side against America, Germany, England, and France, then we could be defeated. China could mobilize an army larger than all four countries combined plus call in debts making it harder for us to mobilize and arm a significant force. The Middle East at the same time could simply quit exporting oil. That along with the various forces from around the world would be quite enough to defeat us.

However, it would take backroom planning on a massive scale, a complete failure of the intelligence of all four nations, and a series of surprise attacks.

Due to technology and money and training of forces, these four countries with ample planning and warning could win a war against the rest of the world as things stand now.

Side: Yes, they aren't that big.
paradox4(2) Disputed
1 point

When has our financial status ever prevented us from going to war? We'll just de-value our dollar a million times more if we need to, but there's basically no way to prevent us from raising an army large enough to crush most opposing forces. The only effective way to do that, is to wipe out the whole country.

Side: No, they are too powerful.
2 points

China, South Korea, Japan, North Korea, Vietnam, Mongolia, and Russia = 1.80 billion people. This alliance can easily defeat the AGEF alliance. The Russian will airlift the battle harden North Koreans and Viet Cong's to take on France and Germany ( the french lost to the VC's before). Russia and her troops will back up the North Koreans and Viet Cong with air and land firepower. The Russian will first use the Chinese ASBM's to decimate the English, Germany, French navy...first the aircraft carriers will be sunk then the Russian and Chinese sub fleet will finished the rest of the surface ships.With the help from the Russian airforce and navy...the Mongol horde make an invasion of England. After G.E.F are defeated... the Russian,North Koreans, Viet Cong's, Mongol horde will come from the East to invade the U.S east coast. Again the U.S navy will go against the Russian,Chinese,Japanese navy. They will use ASBM's, ASAT, Subs and the Shkval torpedo's to take out the U.S fleet. Japan and South Korea will take Hawaii then California if the mexican haven't taken it yet. China will then mass an army of 500 million troops and arm them with AK-47's, RPG's, rocket launchers, to invade the U.S. by building a bridge from Russia Far East to Alaska. The Red Chinese will take out Canada if she don't submit then 200 million Chinese troops will join the japanese, south korean in California and 300 million will come down from the north all along the canadian/us border. West North East invasion of U.S. The U.S will lose, they can't fight on three fronts against that many troops.

Side: Yes, they aren't that big.
Houston(187) Disputed
3 points

The French lost to the VC in guerilla warfare, not in an invasion-type style war. As from reading earlier posts of yours, you seem to really like the ASBMs, but any American ballistic missiles can be just as effective, and our thousands of SATs will destroy any ballistic missile you can even hope to try on America. Also, if it comes to drafting, American citizens are the most armed and gun-trained in the world, I am only 12 and I can hit a coke bottle with a .22 from 50 feet away. I practice the air-soft, I use a SCAR-H and have near-mastered the art of ambush. I have read the Art of War three times, and can tell you about many ancient battles (as far back as the battle of Kadesh, and up to the battle of Chalon), as well as World War II battles. You also seem to be taking no notice of the American Navy, search it on Wikipedia, then go change your pants. By the way, China doesn't use AK-47s, they used to use a knock off, the Model 56, but now they use the indigenous QBZ95 . And, an army of 500 million is impossible, the PLA currently has an 3 million personnel, getting a third of the country's population to join the military is even more stupid than the Great Leap Forward.

Side: No, they are too powerful.
3 points

if the asian nations try that the agef alliance will call on places like brazil and switzerland which have huge forces and would help since they are smart enough to know that the asians are back stabbers and then america would launch patriot rockets and send fleets of bombers and destroy hundreds of asian forces. ps china would never attack since they need our @#$ing money

Side: No, they are too powerful.
obama12(5) Disputed
1 point

ummm yeah if they win America has to pay back dumbsgit and also BRICS could sweep this theoretical force off the earth

Side: Yes, they aren't that big.
MicronX(9) Disputed
2 points

HAHHA, I have to admit, that was very creative, and more than a bit naive. Based on what you've just said, should allow you to realize this has all been thought of before, and the French and German battlemasters I am sure, have an app for that. LOL Just be serious with your expectations for a moment.

500 Millions troops is impossible to move, arm with sling shots much less AK's and feeding them would be impossible they are starving as it is. Building a bridge? Really with what?! The first things the French and US would acquire would be the fuel resources. Also, do you really think you could get that many people to fight!?

Ok I'm not even going to continue on this tangent. I don't even know if Japan would go to war like that again... they still remember what happened last time.

OMG and French intel is their most powerful weapon, they would know your moves before you thought of them, coupled with the USs resources Oh my that would be a force.

Side: No, they are too powerful.
maomao76(32) Disputed
1 point

With China, nothing is impossible. China will mobilized a labor force of 20 million to build a high speed rail system from China-Far East Russia-Alaska-Canada-US. It will be finished in 6months. This will transport the 500 million troops to U.S. for invasion. China is factory of the world, arming them with AK's won't be a problem. Don't forget China is in alliance with the other countries...they will be producing weapons as well. The Chinese,NK,Mongol,Jap,VC's can survived off the land..we asian can eat more than the four animal group, cow, fish, chicken, pig. The promise of land to farm will get all the chinese, VC, NK to fight..no problem there. If japan don't fight, then she can use her robotic manufacturing assembly line to assemble AK's!! Japan will share her technological advance manufacturing process to build hitech weapon.

Don't forget China invented the Art of War a thousand year before the French and German even become battlemaster..lol. The G.F. will fall easily to Russia,NK,VC's. I don't know how french intel will work against asian countries..they can't infiltrate into the commands unless they can read minds. The U.S will fall fast...I'm sure the Mexican's will want some land back. the cartel's will sell drugs to U.S troops to make them stone. I'm also sure the Native Americans will also join China to take some land back, they still remember how white folks wrong them, steal their lands and convert their children.

Side: Yes, they aren't that big.
B1az3(14) Disputed
1 point

L-o-freakin'-L!

"China, South Korea, Japan, North Korea, Vietnam, Mongolia, and Russia = 1.80 billion people. This alliance can easily defeat the AGEF alliance."

You're joking right? North Korea and South Korea would never fight together and as i recall Japan & South Korea are OUR allies.

"China will then mass an army of 500 million troops and arm them with AK-47's, RPG's, rocket launchers, to invade the U.S. by building a bridge from Russia Far East to Alaska. The Red Chinese will take out Canada if she don't submit then 200 million Chinese troops will join the japanese, south korean in California and 300 million will come down from the north all along the canadian/us border. West North East invasion of U.S."-

Um, yea... how the hell are the Chinese supposed to transport that many troops? BTW nowadays almost everybody has a gun in America. I'd like to see some Mongolian soldier trying to order me around. Do you really think people won't retaliate? (sigh) Another point is you're concentrating all your efforts on the U.S what do you think the Germans, English, and French would be doing? Standing around and looking pretty? I don't think so.

"Japan and South Korea will take Hawaii then California if the mexican haven't taken it yet"

You're an a#&#xho;le

Side: No, they are too powerful.
2 points

SO what if we are to big we need to have a plan if the middle east combines there nukes together or sends a war fource we can not defeat them all alone so no it is a good idea if that happend all country's could support each other kind of like a big bro deal

Side: Yes, they aren't that big.

still, we have better defense systems for just that occasion, the force they send also will be under trained and under armed to take down all the western country's at once.

Side: No, they are too powerful.
1 point

Any nation can defeat any of the powerhouse nations. With much wealth also comes much poverty. The gap between the poor and rich will grow larger and larger until there is either civil war or worse, invasion. Wait long enough and any country will fall.

Side: Yes, they aren't that big.
1 point

yes bring back the warsaaw nations!!!!!! we will show you pig dogs how to fight

Side: Yes, they aren't that big.
1 point

yes definately i cant see why not!!! Many real alliances could right now

Side: Yes, they aren't that big.
1 point

BRICS could undoubtfully beat those dumb mother fuckers motha russia wins

Side: Yes, they aren't that big.
1 point

the former soviets and china scared/ scarethe living shit out of NATO so i do not see how these guys would win against the soviet nations coming back and ass fucking America and Europe same with china

Side: Yes, they aren't that big.
1 point

If the Klingons and the Romulans unite.... they could pull it off.

Side: Yes, they aren't that big.
1 point

Yes, if Russian,Chinese,North Corean,Vietnamese,Cambodgian,Laosian,Iranian,Pakistanian+ another countries of middle-east do a alliance we can defeat America, Germany, England and France.

Side: Yes, they aren't that big.
0 points

former warsaw pact nations, china, india, brazil, south africa, cuba, north korea, vietnam, afghanistan, iraq, iran, pakistan, libya. THese nations wether or not they like each other wouild come together for the common goal: REVENGE ON THE EVIL ONES!!!!!!!

Side: Yes, they aren't that big.
cookieMUNCH1(31) Disputed
1 point

What? most of these have already tried and failed to fight the west :/, not to mention that most of the countries you mentioned are poor economically and defensively! Not to mention the Low GDP of the countries! And again, some of the country's on you're list do not even like each other!

- South Africa is the UK’s largest trade partner in Africa and an important partner for the UK in a number of areas and without the UK's money, they will become bankrupt !

- China may have an huge military, But no air and hardly any navel power, along with its increasing population!

- India are allies of the US from fighting the Pakistan's!

- Brazil well, The Brazilian economy is the world's sixth largest by nominal GDP and the seventh largest by purchasing power parity, as of 2013. Brazil has one of the world's fastest growing major economies, and its economic reforms have given the country new international recognition and influence. BUT, Brazilian troops joined United Nations peacekeeping forces in five countries.

- The Cuban's armed forces may be small, but are well equipped, BUT, why would they risk their own safety? If they thought against the US, they would be signing their own death pass, They will be a few hundred miles off of the coast of the US it's self and Allie Candia!

- North Korea, very dangerous, But, With Japan and S.Korea (allies with us) at their door step, they would just attack! The Chinese will be too occupied with defending their own country to help!

- Vietnam, they could protect them self's, but they lack the tech to actually fight outside of their own country effectively, unless they had someone like china or Russia supporting, which both country's will be to tied up in their own battles!

- Afghan, oh wait, the US and British already have alto of soldiers there! HAHAHA

- Iraq, hmm, well, Iraq is very poor and well,same as Vietnam, could not really do much manage out side of their own borders, they may have missiles, but WE have more and better defense systems!

- pakistan, already would have a problem with India so they would not be able to do much anyway....

- Libya, been defeated in civil war and now has an pretty stable government and along with the fact that western country's aided them in the fall of Qaddafi.

So yeah, they would also lose

Side: No, they are too powerful.
ghostheadX(1105) Disputed
1 point

Your on the right side but you don't have the right argument.

1. Not every country that America has beaten in a war is a former Warsaw Pact member.

2. China is our ally. The US is fine enough with Brazil to play soccer with them.

3. People visit India all of the time and the Indies don't get mad at us. We have a good economic relationship with India.

4. Vietnam now a days is pretty friendly with us. And they have the eighth largest amount of international students, studying in the US.

Here are some other facts:

1. North Korea, like what I've listed before is not a Warsaw Pact nation. In fact, it didn't even exist until after the warsaw pact nations, even thought they hate the US.

2. The same as North Korea can be said for Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, and Libya.

The four warsaw pact nations were: the soviet union, Albania, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, East Germany, Hungary, Poland, and Romania. You listed none of those in your example as much as your example includes enough countries that hate the US. Further more, South Africa? South Africa is a region, not a country. Africa is a continent filled with many different countries in it. So, don't even try to argue with South Africa. Especially not by asking about Libya or Egypt because those are from North Africa.

Side: Yes, they aren't that big.
0 points

You guys are overlooking something. There are over 300 countries in the world. France isn't a military country. France has lost to everyone. So they'd lose before the other three won, even if they won. The rebels in France lost, even when they were going to have a revolution and that's about the only time the French military ever won anything. So, what your really asking is between US, Germany and England. Three countries aren't going to beat probably 5 billion other people in comparison to the probable 1 billion at most in those three. What's your limit on alliance size? In fact, if you add up the population in Germany (around 81 million), England ( around 53 million), and the US ( around 313 million) you still don't have a billion, even if you add France (around 65 million). You still only have a little more than 513 million. A little more than half a billion people could be outnumber by the Chinese (around 1.3 billion) alone at more than two to one. If you add that plus one other reasonably powerful country, we'd be outnumbered by too much to win most of the battles.

Side: Yes, they aren't that big.
cookieMUNCH1(31) Disputed
1 point

well, you may be right, but, their are also plenty of allies to back The UK (Not just England) Germany and France in this war... NATO ring any bells??

Side: No, they are too powerful.
cookieMUNCH1(31) Disputed
1 point

okay, but what about NATO? does that ring any bells? The defensive allies we have? any of us get attacked, there is about 27 other angry country's of power willing to back us up...

Oh and it's the UK, not just England, I'm from a small country in the UK called wales, and it drives me nuts when people say England is the UK....

Side: No, they are too powerful.
ghostheadX(1105) Disputed
2 points

Open your eyes. 27 countries adds up to maybe half of earth if your lucky because there are 196 countries in the world and 193 are part of the UN. So they aren't all allies. Want proof they aren't? Iran, Iraq, North Korea, Afghanistan, and BOOM four countries that are probably all part of the UN that aren't our allies. And there are obviously others. The average country doesn't have that high of a population. They are mostly low in that regard.

27 countries vs the Islanic countries? Even though the US has beaten them Islam is the most popular religion in the world. Most of them hate the US. Them + China and you have what it takes to outnumber the 27 countries backing us up. Especially with China. China already counts as probably twelve of your 27 countries. I mean they would probably side with us but I'm just saying. That is, if they don't choose NK over us which they would.

Side: Yes, they aren't that big.