answersLogoWhite

0


Best Answer

Add your opinion:

  • Overall it would be total no victor, even without nuclear weapons. The united states Army, marines air force and navy would easily take Belfast and northern Ireland. Making it a simple BoO into Scotland. Once around London and Sheffield. It would get extremely bloody on both sides. If the United states got close to achieving victory in London however, the Vanguard subs stationed of England, assuming the bases have not been destroyed, would launch tactical nuclear warheads into London, causing extreme civilian and military deaths on both sides. It would bring up to America launching a ICBM from the silos in Colorado, North, South Dakota and Missouri. The Russians would most likely let UK and the US duke it out with war heads. Overall victor. None. 150 some million injured and dead in the US and about 2 1/2-15 million killed instantly in the United Kingdom. Overall winner: None. Forces decimated, population dead. UK protect and survive broadcasts may lower deaths, but not enough to be acceptable. This scenario is assuming that no other countries getting involved.
  • The United States would probably win, reasons well the United Kingdom's tanks guns and aircraft are mostly produced in the US the United states has 10,000 some troops already stationed in the UK the population difference is HUGE and the UK is a small island and the US is bigger than half the North American Continent also both in both world war France and the UK were losing until the United States rolled onto the beaches of Normandy, guns a blazin'. any one who disagrees can look up pictures of London in 1940 ;) it was a rubble town and shortly after the war ended the UK went bankrupt. (They spent too much money paying United States for weapons.
  • So many things to take in to account...Britain has remained uninvaded since 1066 and when Britain tucks up its Royal Navy,Air Force,Nuclear subs,sea defenses etc,nobody would be invading Britain in a hurry. America would have to attack from Aircraft Carriers and try to keep the Royal Navy and Airforce,nuclear subs from destroying their carriers., Britains nuclear subs are the most advanced in the world and would probably pick off Americas carriers from miles away. Much of Americas Militarys arms actually come from Britain as Britain is the worlds largest Military Arms exporters with its "BAE Systems" so they would be cut off.

    Britain and France joined Militarys last year so if it happened now France would be fighting alongside the British. The Queen of England is still Queen of 17 countries,Canada,Australia,New Zealand to name a few, their Militarys are "Royal" Militarys and swear their allgeiance to the Queen of England,so they couldn't sit back and see people attack their Queen as their Militarys have sworn their allgeinace to her for centuries. Both could also just nuke each other off the map easily. People can ignorantly say " USA has bigger military and funding so USA would win" is EXTREMELY IGNORANT as History has proven many times bigger does not equal better. Take England and look how tiny they are but still took over and ruled most of the world. Or Iraq and Afghanistan the Taliban don't even have 1% of the USA's Military funding or equipment but the Taliban are still taking on half the world.

User Avatar

Wiki User

12y ago
This answer is:
User Avatar
More answers
User Avatar

Wiki User

12y ago

UK.

The UK is part of the EU and is part of the european defense initiative which means if the UK is attacked the EU mobilizes all troops to assisted the UK.

So the US would be fighting to EU not only Britain.

So the EU: It has the largest army combined. and has the European defence initiative to defend against outside threats. It is also a stronger economy. it is also home to 3 of the 10 united nations security council members.

In terms of technology, EU. Germany in an industrial powerhouse so can produce on a scale much larger than the US. The US would not be able to compete in terms of new technology, a UK company is already started work on power Armour. whereas the US would not be able to have technological advancements because Americans can't think outside the box. Americans lack imagination there innovators not inventors. British people can adapt unlike any other race, for example Barnes wallace and RJ Mitchell.

also the EU is home to 2 of the best MBTs the challenger 2 and leopard 2.

also EU has good fighters that can simply outrun and outmaneuver the f22.

its all very well and good having a stealth fighter. but it has to spend 24 hours in the hanger after flying it and 30 mins on the runway before takeoff doing checks. the EF 2000 spends 5 mins in the hanger per hour of flying and takes 1 min to rearm and refuel and 2 mins from hanger to 60,000 feet.

Also 82% of the US munitions are made by British company BAE systems so the US would run out in an all out war.

the US armed forces are not the best trained army either and on fighting terms a British soldier could possibly kill them on a 5:1 kill ratio (based on NATO exercises averages) a British Para/ commando could possibly kill them on a 8:1 ratio, a Gurkha on a 21/1 kill ratio, a German soldier is on a 3:1 ratio a french soldier on a 4/1 average and a french foreign legionary on a 9:1 ratio.

british special forces are the best in the world and train US forces so would possibly go on a barracks killing spree.

So to sum up the US would loose because:

lack of imagination

interventions of the EU

better training

This answer is:
User Avatar

User Avatar

Wiki User

12y ago

Canada, America has a lot of weapons and technological advancement of war but the war wouldn't just be Canada vs US. Canada a Commonwealth Realm so The United Kingdom would enter the war Australia and New-Zealand might enter the war other Realms might be asked to participate but would only do so in a symbolic way so the war would actually be :

United States of America vs Canada, UK (maybe Australia and New-Zealand)

For previous war between Canada and the US (The Revolutionary War - American invasion, 1775-1783, The War of 1812, 1812-1815) Canada won the war with the help the British Empire.

But it would be much more complicated today regarding the current relation between US and other countries and Canada and other countries.

Correction: canada did not win the war of 1812 because nobody actually won that war

This answer is:
User Avatar

User Avatar

Wiki User

13y ago

I should front this by stating that such a war is extremely unlikely to occur. Britain and the USA have one of the friendliest inter-state relationships on the planet.

However as the US spends roughly 10 times on defence as the UK, it seems inevitable that the US would prevail. If nuclear weapons were engaged then both countries would not come out well (to say the least!), but the UK would in all likelihood be utterly annihilated.

This answer is:
User Avatar

User Avatar

Wiki User

12y ago

well if it was just Britain v Canada and no interference then i would have to say that whoever invades first will lose. this is because the canadians have a population of 30 million and they are very widespread in some areas meaning that the occupation would probably cost more than the invasion. getting to Canada would take a while to and when the british get there they would have to expierence a tough time trying to take the 2nd largest nation in the world because of nature.

on the other hand if the canadians attcked Britain first they would have less troops on the ground for starters and since the UK is small then airbases and military bases are closer together not to mention the UK concentrates largely on fighters and the Canadian task force ships would probabaly all sink or surrender meaning that the canadians would have to surrender as supplies wouldn't be able to get through.

in event of war the canadians could last longer as they sit on more Natural Resources and could sink much shipping too.

in this scenario then i think that canda would have the upper hand in a war where no one really attacks the other. and the invader would lose in the event of a large scale invasion.

if allies were involved then the nation which starts the war will lose. i shudnt need to explain this one because it is obvious that allies will stick up for the defendant

also if ur wondering im british and also this would never happen as Canada is still British through crown and some of the population no matter what the government sustem in Canada is

This answer is:
User Avatar

User Avatar

Wiki User

12y ago

UK will win because they have better weapon's then Germany they like war but we like winning

This answer is:
User Avatar

User Avatar

Wiki User

11y ago

the US.

This answer is:
User Avatar

Add your answer:

Earn +20 pts
Q: Who would win in a war between US and Canada?
Write your answer...
Submit
Still have questions?
magnify glass
imp
Related questions

Which country would win in war Canada or America?

america will have vectory


Who would win America or Canada in civil war?

Chuck Norris.


Who would win in a war Canada or Greenland no allies?

Canada because they have allies and green land don't


Why were the border lakes between the U.S. and the Canada of strategic importance during the War of 1812?

The Americans planned to win the war by conquering Canada and needed control of the lakes to do so.


Why were border lakes between the U.S. and Canada of strategic importance during the war of 1812?

The Americans planned to win the war by conquering Canada and needed control of the lakes to do so.


Why were the border lakes between the U.S. and Canada of strategic importance during the War of 1812?

The Americans planned to win the war by conquering Canada and needed control of the lakes to do so.


Who would win a war between Britain and Argentina?

Britain.


Who would win in a war between Europe and US?

Neither.


Who would win a war between america and australia?

america


In a war between Vietnam and Laos who would win?

vietnam


Who would win a war between Israel and the EU?

depends


Who would win a war between Poland and Ukraine?

ukraine.