INVASION!!!!!! What country do you trust to help?

[lostzombies.com]

I'd go with Georgia (country not state) just for the sheer size of their balls..I mean attacking Russia and not seeing a complete and utter curb stomp coming their way. On second thoughts I seem to be confusing balls with stupidity, so would go with Afghanistan...well no one can conquer them: Alexander the great, british empire, soviet union, modern US/UK/Canada/EU coalition

 

[Ravek]

How about the entire NATO ... sort of the point of the organisation, isn't it?

 

[real life potato]

Am I one of the only person who see's the irony in that most of the nations wanting the U.S. as their ally are also some of the most notrious for anti-american comments?

Personally I don't feel any single nation would be of much military aid to the U.S. in a conventional war, and a nuclear war means everyone loses. The only one's who have tended to benefit from past alliances are our allies, not ourselves. If anything these alliances are one-way in benefit and I can't name a single major conflict within the last 100 years in which our allies came to the aid of the U.S., only U.S. aid to allies in pre-existing conflicts. I'd approve of us instead having no allies but ourselves and letting the rest of the world fight their own battles.

you mean like the way without russia the whole world would be speaking german and japanese

and those brilliant victories when the US went in basically by themselves, such as korea and vietnam?

Arrogance quickly brings defeat, the best things have come when people put mindless patriotic clap trap aside and wrok together, whether in war or peace

Well someone has not brushed up on their history. Many nations were in the Korean war, though I will concede that the US made up a big majority.

FOR CAPITALISM!!!!

 

[Baron Von Evil Satan]

Once again, the reason the French did so poorly in WWII was because there was a traitor in the French government that sold them out.

Sorry to just jump in, but I have to side with Mucinex here. There were plenty of traitors in governments throughout history. Communists in the American government during the Cold War. Loyalists during the revolution. Hell, people have been selling out their countries since war was first thought out.

Face it, they were poorly prepared. End of story.

 

[dehawaiiansupaman]

If the US is invaded I would hope for the UK to back us up; if not maybe someone else from NATO (or most of NATO due to the mutual defense treaty).

 

[Shock and Awe]

Am I one of the only person who see's the irony in that most of the nations wanting the U.S. as their ally are also some of the most notrious for anti-american comments?

Personally I don't feel any single nation would be of much military aid to the U.S. in a conventional war, and a nuclear war means everyone loses. The only one's who have tended to benefit from past alliances are our allies, not ourselves. If anything these alliances are one-way in benefit and I can't name a single major conflict within the last 100 years in which our allies came to the aid of the U.S., only U.S. aid to allies in pre-existing conflicts. I'd approve of us instead having no allies but ourselves and letting the rest of the world fight their own battles.

you mean like the way without russia the whole world would be speaking german and japanese

and those brilliant victories when the US went in basically by themselves, such as korea and vietnam?

Arrogance quickly brings defeat, the best things have come when people put mindless patriotic clap trap aside and wrok together, whether in war or peace

Well someone has not brushed up on their history. Many nations were in the Korean war, though I will concede that the US made up a big majority.

FOR CAPITALISM!!!!

FUCK YEAH!!!!!

 

[lostzombies.com]

We are waaaay bigger than the entirety of Europe

well not in terms of economy, military, or population...

heh, not anymore it seems

? sources?

economy in terms of GDP, Europe is larger, so is military numbers and population. Granted the US has more dirt, I'll give you that one

 

[Dahni]

I'm from Scotland. I'd trust Wales to come to our aid.

Plus we both hate the English.
The enemy of my enemy is my friend, so they say.

 

[LANCE420]

We are waaaay bigger than the entirety of Europe

well not in terms of economy, military, or population...

heh, not anymore it seems

? sources?

economy in terms of GDP, Europe is larger, so is military numbers and population. Granted the US has more dirt, I'll give you that one

No, no, no. I was agreeing with you! guess it sounded better coming from my mouth than in writing.

 

[Crimsonsniper]

Am I one of the only person who see's the irony in that most of the nations wanting the U.S. as their ally are also some of the most notrious for anti-american comments?

Personally I don't feel any single nation would be of much military aid to the U.S. in a conventional war, and a nuclear war means everyone loses. The only one's who have tended to benefit from past alliances are our allies, not ourselves. If anything these alliances are one-way in benefit and I can't name a single major conflict within the last 100 years in which our allies came to the aid of the U.S., only U.S. aid to allies in pre-existing conflicts. I'd approve of us instead having no allies but ourselves and letting the rest of the world fight their own battles.

you mean like the way without russia the whole world would be speaking german and japanese

and those brilliant victories when the US went in basically by themselves, such as korea and vietnam?

Arrogance quickly brings defeat, the best things have come when people put mindless patriotic clap trap aside and wrok together, whether in war or peace

Your lack of reading skills are showing. I stated that the U.S. has never required the aid (or received aid) from her allies in conflicts actually involving the american nation within the last 100 years. The U.S. joined into a conflict that was pre-existing and helped those allies in the conflict, it was not a 2-way street, the U.S. received virtually no aid from her allies in any war to date within this time period. The Russians were already fighting the Axis powers long before the U.S. joined the Allies. Or are you claiming that Russian soldiers were helping hold the Phillipines against Japanese imperial troops?

It's high time we stop trying to be friends with people who would just as soon stab us in the back if they would benefit from it.

"I stated that the U.S. has never required the aid (or received aid) from her allies in conflicts actually involving the american nation within the last 100 years." -

yes so you are saying that the US didn't need Russia's involvement (aid in winning the war)

but that's politics, you can't simply say its high time to stop being friends with people who would just as soon stab us in the back if they would benefit from it...sadam anyone?

There isn't any high and mighty morals in politics, every country in the world will screw over their longest and best allies if they think the deal is right

You're very right with the morals thing. Countries had treaties constantly, despite the fact that they continually broke them because they saw an opportunity to have the biggest stick in the world.

So think of me as taking the moral high road, I state we should not get involved in foriegn conflicts and that furthermore we should not make treaties to do so.

Am I one of the only person who see's the irony in that most of the nations wanting the U.S. as their ally are also some of the most notrious for anti-american comments?

Personally I don't feel any single nation would be of much military aid to the U.S. in a conventional war, and a nuclear war means everyone loses. The only one's who have tended to benefit from past alliances are our allies, not ourselves. If anything these alliances are one-way in benefit and I can't name a single major conflict within the last 100 years in which our allies came to the aid of the U.S., only U.S. aid to allies in pre-existing conflicts. I'd approve of us instead having no allies but ourselves and letting the rest of the world fight their own battles.

you mean like the way without russia the whole world would be speaking german and japanese

and those brilliant victories when the US went in basically by themselves, such as korea and vietnam?

Arrogance quickly brings defeat, the best things have come when people put mindless patriotic clap trap aside and wrok together, whether in war or peace

Your lack of reading skills are showing. I stated that the U.S. has never required the aid (or received aid) from her allies in conflicts actually involving the american nation within the last 100 years. The U.S. joined into a conflict that was pre-existing and helped those allies in the conflict, it was not a 2-way street, the U.S. received virtually no aid from her allies in any war to date within this time period. The Russians were already fighting the Axis powers long before the U.S. joined the Allies. Or are you claiming that Russian soldiers were helping hold the Phillipines against Japanese imperial troops?

It's high time we stop trying to be friends with people who would just as soon stab us in the back if they would benefit from it.

"I stated that the U.S. has never required the aid (or received aid) from her allies in conflicts actually involving the american nation within the last 100 years." -

yes so you are saying that the US didn't need Russia's involvement (aid in winning the war)

but that's politics, you can't simply say its high time to stop being friends with people who would just as soon stab us in the back if they would benefit from it...sadam anyone?

There isn't any high and mighty morals in politics, every country in the world will screw over their longest and best allies if they think the deal is right

You seem to be in need of some history lessons my friend, the U.S. did not in itself benefit at all from Russian aid. Russia was an ally of opportunity fighting alongside the other allied nations only because it stood little chance of fighting off Germany by itself without aid, allied nations joined with Russia only because they had something to gain, a second allied front. The U.S. was never in danger of being defeated by the Axis as they were fighting battles abroad, indeed the Axis intended not to even attempt to defeat the U.S. only make the conflict so costly for her as to secure a separate peace. They realized they would not be able to defeat the U.S. but they could defeat Britain and Russia. The U.S. was not in any real danger. To claim that Russia was necessary to counter axis aggression and save american democracy is to display an arrogance and ignorance of untold magnitude. What I'm saying is that it was never truely america's war, it was russia's, they were the one with everything to lose. Furthermore to assume that if Russia had never joined the allies that World War 2 would have ended in an Axis victory is not true. Russia would have still had to fight Germany, only it would have been without help, remember Russia only joined after being invaded by Germany and Hitler had no intentions of making peace after that point.

 

[jakeEHTlovless]

ireland, when the shit hits the fan, my american ass is goin to the place with the most alchyhol.... just kidding or am i???

 

[firedfns13]

In all seriousness. Who do you want with you in the trenches. And please do take into consideration past grievences. Americans, Russia is pretty much out, for example.

Realistically, if we somehow were a bit more linked economically, by say, some huge oil/mineral deposit being found and exploited by an American company (since a Russian one would likely be less advanced or have the capital to find or exploit said deposit) America and Russian could be on the same side.

That said, I'd definitely expect the British to help us out. We speak the same language, operate a very similar military, have the same root of our government. And their accents are awesome for war. "The men are knackered, sir!"


Fictionally, I'd want either ISAF, Osea, or Belka to come to my aid. ISAF and Osea are basically America, except one boasts a set of like 8 giant railguns, and the other a giant space shuttle with huge ass laser beams. Belka just because they invented the laser beams and put them into advanced aircraft wielding giant fuel-air bombs that wipe out 10 square miles of map in a second. Oh, and Belka is basically WW2 Germany without the genocide.

 

[ygetoff]

As an American, I would want the UK as my first choice, followed by Canada and Australia (sorry guys, but the US and the UK have some serious national bromance going on and I don't want to spoil that). HOWEVER, if we were fighting France in any capacity, I would want the Germans on our side, because let's face it, at the first mention of Germany the French Army pisses it's collective pants.

 

[real life potato]

Once again, the reason the French did so poorly in WWII was because there was a traitor in the French government that sold them out.

Sorry to just jump in, but I have to side with Mucinex here. There were plenty of traitors in governments throughout history. Communists in the American government during the Cold War. Loyalists during the revolution. Hell, people have been selling out their countries since war was first thought out.

Face it, they were poorly prepared. End of story.

I will concede to that point; they were poorly prepared in thinking that the Ardennes region was a good natural barrier against the war machine that was Germany. And yes, there have been many traitors in governments throughout history, but quite a large contributing factor in the downfall of France was the stab in the back. They had a huge military force available for use, but it was all for naught due to the ill prepared legions as well as the betrayal.

 

[signingupforgames]

American says China or U.K.

 

[KissofKetchup]

Definitely not the French I can tell you that. In America I'd count on the UK, possibly the Germans. Oh and Canada too probably

 

[KissofKetchup]

American says China or U.K.

The Chinese wouldn't help us out at all!

 

[signingupforgames]

God, there's too much patriotism in this thread...

Did you expect otherwise?

 

[Blue Musician]

I'm not supposed to start a flame war, but I'm from Mexico and I'd love to declare war on the USA, and ask support from EVERY other country in the world.
If you want to know why, try to learn a little more history about the relations between the USA and Mexico and you'll understand me why.
Still, I'd doubt that will happen, and I do not really want to declare war on anything, but the USA is the one which I would like more, every other country is fine to me.

 

[Shock and Awe]

We are waaaay bigger than the entirety of Europe

well not in terms of economy, military, or population...

heh, not anymore it seems

? sources?

economy in terms of GDP, Europe is larger, so is military numbers and population. Granted the US has more dirt, I'll give you that one

Well, I would say that in general the US military is of higher quality than the collective militaries of the EU. While I will always be the first to say that the UK's army has superior training than the US army, I would say it is more or less on par with the US Marine Corps, but of course the Royal Marines are in turn better trained then their American counterparts, but that being said, the Royal Marines are more like a Special Forces group, not a military branch. I can't comment much on the training of the militaries of other western European countries, I do know that many of them have conscripted militaries, which in general are not quite as effective as volunteers, though this is not always true.

The United States also have unprecedented force projection compared to any other countries. The US could conceivably put troops in, and fight a war in Europe, but I do not see anyway that the EU could do the same with the US. Seeing as the US Navy is larger than all of the EU's combined, and the US Air Force would also be a very formidable opponent for all of the EU's Air Forces combined.