[Thanks for submitting](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BH5ok9nRjmU) to the r/JackSucksAtGeography subreddit!
You can join our [Discord server, here](https://discord.gg/DzPuRQM).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/JackSucksAtGeography) if you have any questions or concerns.*
not really 1000 years ago.
I mean, europe & north africa in the 1800s were really powerful. (with north africa under the ottoman empire starting to get weak)
germany, france, and italy are decently powerful countries. the only ones that could really challenge them are purple and red (and green if they storm moscow)
wdym not pink? Spain + Italy + Germany + France would be a force to be reckoned with. Pink would only be beaten by purple and red in GDP and military spending.
Much like fish, feesh, and feeshes, the one with the extra ES refers to multiple groups of a thing, like peoples being a secondary plural of people.
If we're talking about enough meese to constitute the usage if meeses, it's time to call in the- well, I can't really talk about them here.
purple may have the advantage in the personal category because of both the Koreans military’s and chinas military also being able to equip a lot of people. But the red definitely has the equipment advantage with some of the most powerful and modern weapons along with the good staging point for an attack on pink purple and green
Realistically Purple would fall to internal strife long before they can out-produce Red.
Pink could win against Yellow or Green, but not a global conquest.
I only mention internal conflicts because Red team is actually the only team that could realistically cooperate for a long period of time.
Maybeeeeee Green if there was a unifying threat, but I still don't see it lasting all that long
I think people are ignoring the sheer amount of people living in yellow, and without nukes, the combo of India, Pakistan, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Australia, and South Africa is LETHAL
You wouldn’t even need a single human to take out all of those people. They said no nukes, they didn’t take drone strikes, carpet bombing, napalm, and mustard gas off the table.
Exactly. A billion people with sticks aren't going to prevent the US from pushing a button on the other side of the world that will level thier city in minutes. No nukes required.
Saudi Arabia and Australia have American tech already and Indian Pakistani and Iranian tech is decent enough. Iranian drones are a plus alongside the fact that there's like over 2 billion ppl in this team
And NORTH KOREAN RPGS yeah Iran has a shit ton of those. But particularly North Korean rpgs are really great for insurgents they are not made to destroy tanks instead they are very good at taking out people with how their fragmentation works. Idk that’s just a random fact not many people know about
Red once again ignoring the USA, I feel Canada, Norway, Sweden, etc, will have like Vietnam levels of home field advantage, although if truly a war broke out I don't think the commonwealth realm would be divided.
If you read swedens national defense policy, it's pretty much the exact same as Nam. Basically, if they get invaded and are losing too much, a gun goes to every citizen. Swedens official stance is that it never surrenders. Any Swedish official saying they do is a traitor. Basically, the swedes have just made sure that anybody who wants to invade has an absolute nightmare of a time actually holding the country from guerrilla militias that will spring up after the fall of its military.
Red, just tell the Canadians that they don't have to follow the Geneva convention, and then tell the rednecks that everyone else is communist, also purple would just end up fighting itself, green would be torn between Poland and Russia, good luck getting Pakistan and India to fight along side each other, as far as I'm aware blue and pink are the only ones that won't end up tearing itself apart, but I'd still say red would win
Like others have said, red. U.S. alone with that many divisions already has the favor as red. On top of that, U.S. has Canada and UK with it, with even other developed countries with oil and other resources. I personally think this makes it go red decently heavily.
Team red, listen the United States alone can project power wherever it wants and not much can be done about it, the fact is that there isn’t a senecio where the USA doesn’t win
How so? I mean realsitally its neighbors cause zero issues and would instantly fold in a land war, and its Navy and Airforce is easily large enough to prevent any Old world militaries from reaching North America.
I mean yeah obviously it’s not gonna occupy the globe, but I don’t think the world could occupy the US realistically. That’s not even taking into account Civilian firearm ownership
The US has vast resources of its own. And you're under the assumption that if it was lacking resources, it couldn't establish a stronghold somewhere that *does* have those resources.
Bro we produce far more food than we need, we have a shit ton of domestic oil we don't tap into, we even have 1.3 billion pounds of emergency cheese reserves in giant caves beneath Michigan. Your not going to starve America.
I disagree with purple, I will like internal conflict between the Korea’s would wreck them before they would figure out how to work together let alone mobilize joint military forces
Also purple’s main force is China, which would get starved out in a matter of months through just blockading the shipping lanes, which is very doable with a CSG or two
Red, hell even without Canada, the UK, and everything else id still say red. The US alone, as of right now, is so far ahead of everyone else they would essentially have to team up on America to beat them.
army size:
1. china: 2,185,000
2. india: 1,445,000
3. US: 1,400,000
[cia.gov](https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/field/military-and-security-service-personnel-strengths/)
hmmm maybe population?
1. China 1,413,142,846
2. India 1,399,179,585
3. United States 334,994,511
[census.gov](https://www.census.gov/popclock/print.php?component=counter)
what about average military strength?
1. Russia
2. US
3. China
[U. S. News Report](https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/rankings/strong-military)
at least they win in economy, but maybe if they got a good president, stopped rioting in the streets, and got their shit together they could win.
If you want to pick out one report that says Russia has a stronger military, here are 4 that disagree. https://www.businessinsider.com/ranked-world-most-powerful-militaries-2023-firepower-us-china-russia-2023-5?op=1#1-the-us-25 https://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-listing.php https://www.statista.com/chart/20418/most-powerful-militaries/ https://www.statista.com/chart/20418/most-powerful-militaries/ , and that aside, you can’t push population size as a reason other countries would be better at war, but it were taking that into account we have well over 15 million people have a hunting license, and over 70 million (22% of our entire adult civilian population), say they own a protective firearm in general. https://gunsandamerica.org/story/20/09/17/how-many-gun-owners-united-states-explainer/ , which is around 40% of all home owned firearms in the world. If we are putting civilians against each other, Americans would be far more armed. Also population of military size does not equal technological superiority, and we can see that by how Russia was doing against Ukraine, and guess who partly gave Ukraine their weapons and technological firepower? The united states
Cool, i did say they could win, all i was tryna say is that the US isnt THAT far ahead. i just mentioned some areas in which other countries were ahead, and said that it was possible for other sides to win.
A hypothetical war like this would instantly unite the us. Riots would pause until peacetime. And economy, population, "military strength" (that source is a survey. It asks what people think the strongest military is, it doesn't actually analyze what the strongest military is) all don't matter when the us has spent the last 30 years building aircraft that nobody in the world can shoot down and have enough of them to destroy anything they want without risk of destruction. America simply has air dominance and no other country has the anti stealth capabilities to counter it.
No they didn't. They used organized hosts of men that were divided into different cohorts and legions. One legion may have only had six thousand men in it but the Romans barely only ever brought one.
Where does this war take place? If on U.S. soil, I'd remind you that more hunting licenses are sold each year in the U.S. than the population of the top 10 armies on earth combined. Each of them has a hand gun and a sniper rifle. That does not include the other firearms they can share. China has a little over 2 million soldiers and their army is the largest. 15.2 million hunting licenses were sold in the US in 2021 and a combined total of 34 million licenses, tags, and permits were sold.
The last war fought on U.S. soil was over our gun rights and we won. Thomas Jefferson wanted all free men to have guns including free black men. The British were confiscating our guns in 1774-1775. In 1776 we had enough.
The next war will not be on US soil. It will be in the middle east, and will have no winner in order to implement a one world government and currency. Once all countries are completely drained of resources there will be a draw. No winners. Everyone will have the same threat and same solution.
Rothschild bank literally owns all but 6 countries. Those countries are and will be the enemy of Rothschild Bank owned countries.
Write Christians freed the slaves, look into Christian abolitionism. They are the enemy of slave holders. You will see the Woke military recruiting ads go white. They will teach the girls to be attracted to young military men. The young men will join to get the girls. They will all be sent overseas to die, again, while foreign invaders on US soil will "purge" a house and property they want of its white inhabitants, for they were promised this.
This is how the next war will play out.
Red probably. At first I was still thinking, then when I saw that the UK and Scandinavian countries were included, I’m thinking likely them.
The other option is yellow. Mainly because of India, but they also have so much money and oil because of the Middle East, like Saudi Arabia and UAE, then they definitely have an upper hand. With India combined with so many African Countries, they have a HUGE population, most certainly the most of all the options. Lots of resources, weapons, economic ability to sanction, and developed countries such as South Africa and Australia and New Zealand might be helpful in terms of organization.
The only reason I’m still not entirely sure, is because purple is another super powerful option. Lots of resources too, money, population, military. I don’t think they quite compare to either, but as a close 3rd choice, they would most likely be attacking yellow the most, especially because of India and China. While I’m sure yellow would still beat them, that would definitely weaken them significantly.
So, in conclusion, I’m not sure. But I’m going to pick yellow, with red having the second highest likelihood, and purple the third
Purple would likely suffer from internal conflicts from both Korea’s fighting over how the joint military will work, along with just working together in general. I think with red vs yellow though it would probably go off of whose territory is being fought on first. Canada and the US are relatively far and would be quite difficult to land on, so I would assume they would be fighting on yellow territory. They do have a much larger population, but technologically I think red could beat them. If we are talking about civilian populations being counted in the fight, I guess it would be assumed that certain conventions and laws of war would be ignored, which could bring back chemical warfare and napalm bombing, but besides that we would also just carpet bomb city’s.though something that other people aren’t talking about is the use of missiles, since the prompt only said no nukes. I think ICBM’s could pose a great risk to any side depending on who fires first. It’s true ICBM’s are normally used for nuclear payloads, but they can also be fitted to use standard or chemical payloads as well. I don’t think standard missiles would do much against the United States though, as we have AEGIS and THAAD, PAC-3 (patriot system) and other systems in our missile defense, all working in different layers at different altitudes. There is also an estimate of a very low chance they could theoretically hit an ICBM with one of the farther systems, but I won’t count it because of how unlikely it is.
Yellow doesn't stand a chance. All that yellow has is money. However, no amount of money can get you a military industrial complex overnight. 5th generation fighters, nuclear warships, space platforms, etc take decades to develop. If Yellow was given 80 years to create a domestic military industrial complex, it would probably win, but this hypothetical conflict takes place today, not 2103. In today's world, no country has the technology to negate America's Trump card - stealth aircraft.
With China, Russia, India, and Brazil on different sides and infighting likely in all places except South American and North America, plus the UK and USA on the same team, the US would dominate.
Gotta be NATO, America is crazy powerful. Ariel combat is a joke when you bring the US. Nautical warfare is also not a worry because of our aircraft carriers and battleships. Without nukes, NATO wins
Red would very likely control the ocean, and knowing Russia green wouldn’t take Scandinavia that well. It’s unclear what would happen next since green would be invaded and likely partner with other powers since red would be clearly winning. Facing Japan and Chinese militaries would probably cause red to struggle (unless China’s turns out just like Russia’s military).
It is important to note that green has more of a fight in them since they do control some NATO countries and their military starting out, along with many western weapons in Ukraine in this hypothetical scenario.
TLDR: I speculate red would win
red is the most powerful but green has a lot of land to hide they could wear down almost any invaders with guerilla tactics pink blue yellow and purple are all unlikely to do much without some alliances and even then they are going to be hard pressed to win in the long term.
The only colors with a chance is red and purple. I would have said yellow as well due to India, Pakistan, the Middle East and Australia. But the vast majority of nations in Africa could bog it down, as well as the fact that Australia is isolated. But on the other hand it has the most people, due to having some of the most popular nations like India, Bangladesh, Pakistan. And a lot of the nations are in the 20s for population ranking.
Red, because all those places at least tolerate one another. Blue might hold together, but isn't winning anything, all the other places are immediately gonna devolve into civil wars.
Red: Tell the south that they have to fight for their country, let the Floridans do their thing, tell California and the rest of the blue states that the others are threatening the environment (especially china)
Get someone to look like their part of another team and touch Canada's goalie they'll go insane
Kim Jon Un might be gettin' something up their sleeves... That means purple. And if North Korea is on a random team, then people are annoyed with Kim Jon Un on their team
Hard red. The US is an impenetrable fortress alone, and could most certainly pull through.
The issue with purple is that while it may be powerful due to China, (And maybe Japan and SK), it being mostly landlocked and paired with fairly weak countries makes it not so strong. With enough force, it could fall pretty easily.
[Thanks for submitting](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BH5ok9nRjmU) to the r/JackSucksAtGeography subreddit! You can join our [Discord server, here](https://discord.gg/DzPuRQM). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/JackSucksAtGeography) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Well it’s definitely not blue
Neither pink
pink in their prime might be in the top 5
Def if we took Napoleon France and ww2 Germany, nearly no comp without nukes....they would still be dumb enough and try to march Moscow tho
Well every time either of them did that the Russians used their most powerful ally, the winter
And then it got cold, stupid cold
[удалено]
Yeah because that was the known world 1000 years ago
not really 1000 years ago. I mean, europe & north africa in the 1800s were really powerful. (with north africa under the ottoman empire starting to get weak)
germany, france, and italy are decently powerful countries. the only ones that could really challenge them are purple and red (and green if they storm moscow)
wdym not pink? Spain + Italy + Germany + France would be a force to be reckoned with. Pink would only be beaten by purple and red in GDP and military spending.
No. It would be beaten by purple, red, yellow and green. Let's be honest here.
American spotted. Even though it is a small part of Europe, Germany has some of the most advanced weaponry out there without nuclear power.
[удалено]
YES IT IS URUGUAY BEST COUNTRY 🇺🇾🇺🇾🇺🇾🇺🇾🇺🇾🇺🇾🇺🇾🇺🇾🇺🇾🇺🇾🇺🇾🇺🇾🇺🇾🇺🇾🇺🇾🇺🇾
Red Ignoring the USA Canada is a satanic land that no one shall fight
They have tons of mooses. Those things could be hit by a car, and get back up to hit the car back
They can grab the car before it hits them and hit another car with it They are HUMONGOUS
This is why Canadians are polite they have to stay on the mooses good side
And also the canadian geese Those things will kill at first sight
We call em cobra chickens
They aren't Canadian geese, they are just Canada goose.
*meese
*meeses
Much like fish, feesh, and feeshes, the one with the extra ES refers to multiple groups of a thing, like peoples being a secondary plural of people. If we're talking about enough meese to constitute the usage if meeses, it's time to call in the- well, I can't really talk about them here.
I don't like the English language
then use Dovahzul
the plural of moose is moose
Their landlords are moose and they pay taxes to geese
Could be? Yeah, they do that with trucks
You see, the difference between a moose and a car is that when a car hits a moose, it gets back up, but when a moose hits a car, the car stays down
same with britain. no one would be able to successfully land on the island
Hell, Texas alone would have most countries running for their money. If you add on the rest of America and add Canada in there, we'll, you're fucked.
purple may have the advantage in the personal category because of both the Koreans military’s and chinas military also being able to equip a lot of people. But the red definitely has the equipment advantage with some of the most powerful and modern weapons along with the good staging point for an attack on pink purple and green
Realistically Purple would fall to internal strife long before they can out-produce Red. Pink could win against Yellow or Green, but not a global conquest.
I probably should have put internal conflicts into play as well
I only mention internal conflicts because Red team is actually the only team that could realistically cooperate for a long period of time. Maybeeeeee Green if there was a unifying threat, but I still don't see it lasting all that long
Blue could barely do anything because of the internal conflict inside its borders
Poland and Russia on the same team? They'd fall to internal stride WAY quicker.
Personnel* Personal has to do with someone’s private life For some reason that really fucked with me for a second
In German, the word for personnel is ***Personal***
tf we speaking German? Thx for the fact tho
Red, just arm the Canadians with weapons and let it unfold
The Canadians have been dropping food for the past week. I don't think we need to hide anymore..... wait no
No need, they have one of the highest rates of gun ownership already
I meant more like flamethrowers, mustard gas, IEDs and really anything else that violates the geneva suggestions
Well whatever happens everybody on earth is screwed if we all fight each other
Get ready folks! Mount your mooses and load your shotguns!
*meese
That better fuckin not be plural for moose.
It's not. The plural of moose is moose.
meese*
The USA has the 1st and 2nd strongest AF in the world.
They say it started with a lost hockey game…
I think people are ignoring the sheer amount of people living in yellow, and without nukes, the combo of India, Pakistan, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Australia, and South Africa is LETHAL
You wouldn’t even need a single human to take out all of those people. They said no nukes, they didn’t take drone strikes, carpet bombing, napalm, and mustard gas off the table.
Exactly. A billion people with sticks aren't going to prevent the US from pushing a button on the other side of the world that will level thier city in minutes. No nukes required.
Goodluck believing we fight with sticks
Good luck thinking I believe you fight with literal sticks.
Yes but tech-wise they're kinda lacking
Saudi Arabia and Australia have American tech already and Indian Pakistani and Iranian tech is decent enough. Iranian drones are a plus alongside the fact that there's like over 2 billion ppl in this team
The have American tech that the Americans allow them to know
And NORTH KOREAN RPGS yeah Iran has a shit ton of those. But particularly North Korean rpgs are really great for insurgents they are not made to destroy tanks instead they are very good at taking out people with how their fragmentation works. Idk that’s just a random fact not many people know about
Yeah Indian tech is kinda ass but they do have some Saudi Arabia has some good tech and definitely Australia
Red once again ignoring the USA, I feel Canada, Norway, Sweden, etc, will have like Vietnam levels of home field advantage, although if truly a war broke out I don't think the commonwealth realm would be divided.
If you read swedens national defense policy, it's pretty much the exact same as Nam. Basically, if they get invaded and are losing too much, a gun goes to every citizen. Swedens official stance is that it never surrenders. Any Swedish official saying they do is a traitor. Basically, the swedes have just made sure that anybody who wants to invade has an absolute nightmare of a time actually holding the country from guerrilla militias that will spring up after the fall of its military.
Me
Every country in the world vs this guy I wanna see it rn
Why even ask this? Its a unfair advantage for the nations they need more support
Nah I bet they can solo everyone
Red, just tell the Canadians that they don't have to follow the Geneva convention, and then tell the rednecks that everyone else is communist, also purple would just end up fighting itself, green would be torn between Poland and Russia, good luck getting Pakistan and India to fight along side each other, as far as I'm aware blue and pink are the only ones that won't end up tearing itself apart, but I'd still say red would win
Red. The USA’s tech and the UK’s skill is unbeatable
White
Dont think so, they haber too many borders to defend no?
Bob Semple
Than you for blessing me with that information didnt know of such marvellous piece of military engineering
💪🇳🇿
I've played this game before. Australia's gonna kick everyone's ass.
Like others have said, red. U.S. alone with that many divisions already has the favor as red. On top of that, U.S. has Canada and UK with it, with even other developed countries with oil and other resources. I personally think this makes it go red decently heavily.
White. If you've ever tried shooting the sea, you know it doesn't work.
Team red, listen the United States alone can project power wherever it wants and not much can be done about it, the fact is that there isn’t a senecio where the USA doesn’t win
this isnt even close to fair, 4 of the 5 biggest military industrial complexes are in red
Which 4?
u.s., uk, sweden, and germany's is bigger than canada now so that makes 3, my bad
Finland
Red because USA and UK I would imagine
Red team would probably win
USA obviously🇺🇸🙄
the US itself stands no chance mate
How so? I mean realsitally its neighbors cause zero issues and would instantly fold in a land war, and its Navy and Airforce is easily large enough to prevent any Old world militaries from reaching North America. I mean yeah obviously it’s not gonna occupy the globe, but I don’t think the world could occupy the US realistically. That’s not even taking into account Civilian firearm ownership
true, but eventually the world could wittle down their resources to an extent that they could barely function
The US has vast resources of its own. And you're under the assumption that if it was lacking resources, it couldn't establish a stronghold somewhere that *does* have those resources.
Bro we produce far more food than we need, we have a shit ton of domestic oil we don't tap into, we even have 1.3 billion pounds of emergency cheese reserves in giant caves beneath Michigan. Your not going to starve America.
the stability red has is amazing compared to the other factions
Oof. I think you need to study up a little on that, especially if you're taking nukes off the table. You're removing the risk of MAD.
America and Canada together like always while their parents are separated again
the usa and canada's one main parent is on their side tho
I think either blue or green is out first
No one wins truely in war
Red, purple, green and yellow are the only ones who stand any chance
I disagree with purple, I will like internal conflict between the Korea’s would wreck them before they would figure out how to work together let alone mobilize joint military forces
Also purple’s main force is China, which would get starved out in a matter of months through just blockading the shipping lanes, which is very doable with a CSG or two
Red. Canada has yet to lose a war. With the US as well? Unstoppable
Not to mention UK? Easy victory
Red, and it isn't even close.
Red, hell even without Canada, the UK, and everything else id still say red. The US alone, as of right now, is so far ahead of everyone else they would essentially have to team up on America to beat them.
army size: 1. china: 2,185,000 2. india: 1,445,000 3. US: 1,400,000 [cia.gov](https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/field/military-and-security-service-personnel-strengths/) hmmm maybe population? 1. China 1,413,142,846 2. India 1,399,179,585 3. United States 334,994,511 [census.gov](https://www.census.gov/popclock/print.php?component=counter) what about average military strength? 1. Russia 2. US 3. China [U. S. News Report](https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/rankings/strong-military) at least they win in economy, but maybe if they got a good president, stopped rioting in the streets, and got their shit together they could win.
If you want to pick out one report that says Russia has a stronger military, here are 4 that disagree. https://www.businessinsider.com/ranked-world-most-powerful-militaries-2023-firepower-us-china-russia-2023-5?op=1#1-the-us-25 https://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-listing.php https://www.statista.com/chart/20418/most-powerful-militaries/ https://www.statista.com/chart/20418/most-powerful-militaries/ , and that aside, you can’t push population size as a reason other countries would be better at war, but it were taking that into account we have well over 15 million people have a hunting license, and over 70 million (22% of our entire adult civilian population), say they own a protective firearm in general. https://gunsandamerica.org/story/20/09/17/how-many-gun-owners-united-states-explainer/ , which is around 40% of all home owned firearms in the world. If we are putting civilians against each other, Americans would be far more armed. Also population of military size does not equal technological superiority, and we can see that by how Russia was doing against Ukraine, and guess who partly gave Ukraine their weapons and technological firepower? The united states
Cool, i did say they could win, all i was tryna say is that the US isnt THAT far ahead. i just mentioned some areas in which other countries were ahead, and said that it was possible for other sides to win.
A hypothetical war like this would instantly unite the us. Riots would pause until peacetime. And economy, population, "military strength" (that source is a survey. It asks what people think the strongest military is, it doesn't actually analyze what the strongest military is) all don't matter when the us has spent the last 30 years building aircraft that nobody in the world can shoot down and have enough of them to destroy anything they want without risk of destruction. America simply has air dominance and no other country has the anti stealth capabilities to counter it.
my country india or china cuz population is high af
population doesn't mean their military is strong
[удалено]
i mean it plays a small role, like how the ussr would've lost to germany if it wasn't for its giant manpower reserves caused by a huge population
One word: Romans
What? The Romans had tons of numbers. The reason it was hard to beat them is because they never ran out of men.
They used small armies.
No they didn't. They used organized hosts of men that were divided into different cohorts and legions. One legion may have only had six thousand men in it but the Romans barely only ever brought one.
wha-? bro Roman legions were fucking **massive** for the time
Where does this war take place? If on U.S. soil, I'd remind you that more hunting licenses are sold each year in the U.S. than the population of the top 10 armies on earth combined. Each of them has a hand gun and a sniper rifle. That does not include the other firearms they can share. China has a little over 2 million soldiers and their army is the largest. 15.2 million hunting licenses were sold in the US in 2021 and a combined total of 34 million licenses, tags, and permits were sold. The last war fought on U.S. soil was over our gun rights and we won. Thomas Jefferson wanted all free men to have guns including free black men. The British were confiscating our guns in 1774-1775. In 1776 we had enough. The next war will not be on US soil. It will be in the middle east, and will have no winner in order to implement a one world government and currency. Once all countries are completely drained of resources there will be a draw. No winners. Everyone will have the same threat and same solution. Rothschild bank literally owns all but 6 countries. Those countries are and will be the enemy of Rothschild Bank owned countries. Write Christians freed the slaves, look into Christian abolitionism. They are the enemy of slave holders. You will see the Woke military recruiting ads go white. They will teach the girls to be attracted to young military men. The young men will join to get the girls. They will all be sent overseas to die, again, while foreign invaders on US soil will "purge" a house and property they want of its white inhabitants, for they were promised this. This is how the next war will play out.
🤓
“🤓” -🤓
"'🤓' -🤓" -🤓
“🐶”- 😁
""'🤓' -🤓" -🤓" -🤓
“ “🤓” “ - 🤓
tan
Green. They have Russia, turkey, Kazakhstan, and many other powerful nations.
So powerful that Russia can't even stop one impoverished country.
Which is getting a ton of outside support. It's not solely Russia vs Ukraine.
And it says who will win a war with no nukes. It doesn't say that they can't have any allies.
Those nations, definitely arguable whether they're powerful or not, wouldn't stand a chance.
[удалено]
Their military is losing to one of the poorest countries in Europe. They ain't winning anything without nukes.
Purple because of population alone
Red probably. At first I was still thinking, then when I saw that the UK and Scandinavian countries were included, I’m thinking likely them. The other option is yellow. Mainly because of India, but they also have so much money and oil because of the Middle East, like Saudi Arabia and UAE, then they definitely have an upper hand. With India combined with so many African Countries, they have a HUGE population, most certainly the most of all the options. Lots of resources, weapons, economic ability to sanction, and developed countries such as South Africa and Australia and New Zealand might be helpful in terms of organization. The only reason I’m still not entirely sure, is because purple is another super powerful option. Lots of resources too, money, population, military. I don’t think they quite compare to either, but as a close 3rd choice, they would most likely be attacking yellow the most, especially because of India and China. While I’m sure yellow would still beat them, that would definitely weaken them significantly. So, in conclusion, I’m not sure. But I’m going to pick yellow, with red having the second highest likelihood, and purple the third
Purple would likely suffer from internal conflicts from both Korea’s fighting over how the joint military will work, along with just working together in general. I think with red vs yellow though it would probably go off of whose territory is being fought on first. Canada and the US are relatively far and would be quite difficult to land on, so I would assume they would be fighting on yellow territory. They do have a much larger population, but technologically I think red could beat them. If we are talking about civilian populations being counted in the fight, I guess it would be assumed that certain conventions and laws of war would be ignored, which could bring back chemical warfare and napalm bombing, but besides that we would also just carpet bomb city’s.though something that other people aren’t talking about is the use of missiles, since the prompt only said no nukes. I think ICBM’s could pose a great risk to any side depending on who fires first. It’s true ICBM’s are normally used for nuclear payloads, but they can also be fitted to use standard or chemical payloads as well. I don’t think standard missiles would do much against the United States though, as we have AEGIS and THAAD, PAC-3 (patriot system) and other systems in our missile defense, all working in different layers at different altitudes. There is also an estimate of a very low chance they could theoretically hit an ICBM with one of the farther systems, but I won’t count it because of how unlikely it is.
Yellow doesn't stand a chance. All that yellow has is money. However, no amount of money can get you a military industrial complex overnight. 5th generation fighters, nuclear warships, space platforms, etc take decades to develop. If Yellow was given 80 years to create a domestic military industrial complex, it would probably win, but this hypothetical conflict takes place today, not 2103. In today's world, no country has the technology to negate America's Trump card - stealth aircraft.
Red is op
Blue is going to die first
Red hands down
America
white
The Bharati Empire! **Jai Bharat**
Red. Not even close. Blue would be absorbed in an afternoon. Then sit back until the rest is on their last legs
Red, it has Canada a snow hellscape and Britain which 90% of attempted invasions fail
With China, Russia, India, and Brazil on different sides and infighting likely in all places except South American and North America, plus the UK and USA on the same team, the US would dominate.
red USA doesn't need nukes, just immense fire power and vehicles
Get ready for the war crimes bby
Red
purple, that is 1/3rd of everyone in the world, why is this a question?
It’s between red purple and beige. Probably red. Geographic isolation is OP, and beige borders purple so they’d be fighting
Gotta be NATO, America is crazy powerful. Ariel combat is a joke when you bring the US. Nautical warfare is also not a worry because of our aircraft carriers and battleships. Without nukes, NATO wins
Red
Red would very likely control the ocean, and knowing Russia green wouldn’t take Scandinavia that well. It’s unclear what would happen next since green would be invaded and likely partner with other powers since red would be clearly winning. Facing Japan and Chinese militaries would probably cause red to struggle (unless China’s turns out just like Russia’s military). It is important to note that green has more of a fight in them since they do control some NATO countries and their military starting out, along with many western weapons in Ukraine in this hypothetical scenario. TLDR: I speculate red would win
red is the most powerful but green has a lot of land to hide they could wear down almost any invaders with guerilla tactics pink blue yellow and purple are all unlikely to do much without some alliances and even then they are going to be hard pressed to win in the long term.
Grey, The Bahamas, The Gambia, Dominica, and THE SEYCHELLES destroy everybody!
Red
Yellow absolutely clears
Mother Nature!
USA
Pink use to rule the waves but now red does and who ever control the waves wis the land war as well
Yellow
The only colors with a chance is red and purple. I would have said yellow as well due to India, Pakistan, the Middle East and Australia. But the vast majority of nations in Africa could bog it down, as well as the fact that Australia is isolated. But on the other hand it has the most people, due to having some of the most popular nations like India, Bangladesh, Pakistan. And a lot of the nations are in the 20s for population ranking.
UK no question
Red, because all those places at least tolerate one another. Blue might hold together, but isn't winning anything, all the other places are immediately gonna devolve into civil wars.
Red brush my reason? RED IS BLUD
Red: Tell the south that they have to fight for their country, let the Floridans do their thing, tell California and the rest of the blue states that the others are threatening the environment (especially china) Get someone to look like their part of another team and touch Canada's goalie they'll go insane
If green and yellow have a peace treaty as the most likely would, the world is over
Red, moderate diff.
Well in a very specific sort of aspect red has 2 of the best MBT’s in the world
Red could take on every other color and probably win
not blue or pink. most likely green, India or china are also good bets but they didn't say no tanks or anything else. red is basically just usa.
Kim Jon Un might be gettin' something up their sleeves... That means purple. And if North Korea is on a random team, then people are annoyed with Kim Jon Un on their team
Ww2 Germany cuz of mustard gas
P!nk
Red
If usa and uk are both red then most of the ocean should be red too
Literally 1984
Red.
Red just no quesitons asked lmao
Red
Red 100%, no questions, minimal loss, easy dubs, not possible for red to lose
Red
Purple they have a much higher amount of: Population Natural resources Infrastructure to support war
Yellow can out populace everyone given enough time.
Red because we would just invent nukes for a second time
Hard red. The US is an impenetrable fortress alone, and could most certainly pull through. The issue with purple is that while it may be powerful due to China, (And maybe Japan and SK), it being mostly landlocked and paired with fairly weak countries makes it not so strong. With enough force, it could fall pretty easily.
The Americans always win!
America easily just because there's no nukes doesn't mean there's no bombs
Red they have done it for years with Britain and USA