Answer :-
Opinion 1:-
The key weakness of the US and Russia is the amount of territory they would need to command if there a conventional war.
The extent of Russia's borders is huge. If Japan, China and Turkey (3 of ten) were all engaged simultaneously, Russia would struggle to know how to defend it's own territory let alone take over the world.
The US has a similar problem. Say it had to occupy both Canada and Mexico because they were part of an enemy alliance(5 of 10), both countries havibg long borders and huge land masses. That occupation would be a vast drain on the US military (imagine a Mexico full of IEDs) without providing huge advantage in taking over the world. If those territories were not occupied, and were aggressive, the US would be vulnerable to continuous infiltration that could terrify the civilian US population into peace.
If you add the UK, France and Germany (8 of 10) you have access to a large population and technologically advanced economies. Assuming their European neighbours were neutral these three countries would be hard to get at. The US would have to stage a vast amphibious assault or rely on airpower. Failure in a vast amphibious assault would be so costly that the US population would prefer peace. Relying on airpower wouldn't likely achieve much.
If the Russian's attempted to threaten Western Europe their own borders would be exposed to attack by the first three countries mentioned.
Finally the alliance would need to include two oil producing nations (10 of 10) to fuel the war economies.
This alliance would not be, apart from Japan, entirely dependent on command of the sea, but that would be the crucial weakness the US would attempt to exploit.
The outcome? Bloody stalemate.
No country could win unless others self destructed as was the case with Germany under Hitler.
Seems like a great illustration of the importance of diplomacy and trade!
Opinion 1:-
China, India, The UK, France, Germany, Japan, Turkey, Brazil, Indonesia, Vietnam.
The
first two are a deep reservoir of both manpower and manufacturing. The
middle four are fonts of high advanced technology. The last four are
just serious headaches and godawful terrain in which to fight.
Incidentally,
in a one on one fight with no nukes, China on her own could almost
certainly take out Russia. Today's Russia is not the USSR. Without
nukes, she's just the sickly skinny scared gangsta boy acting tough on a
street corner only because he's packing heat. Take away that heat,
and...
And today's China is not the primitive human wave military of Mao's days.
So
Russia in this scenario would likely turn out to be more of a liability
than an asset to the US, requiring America to divert resources to prop
her up. Thus the real situation wouldn't be whether the US and Russia
could conquer those ten countries, but whether the US on her own, and
hobbled with the need to divert massive resources to protect her Russian
ally from the Chinese, could conquer those ten countries.
EDIT: I was asked to justify the conclusion that China could readily defeat Russia on her own. Here goes:
Attrition. On the Russo Chinese border, China would prevail in no small part
because the Chinese military would be far closer to its bases, supply lines, and center of power than would the Russian. So there goes Eastern Siberia, and most likely all of Siberia past the eastern tip of Kazakhstan in the initial Chinese surge. At that point, both the Russians and Chinese would be roughly equidistant from their centers of gravity, and it would come down to a war of attrition and supplies.
because the Chinese military would be far closer to its bases, supply lines, and center of power than would the Russian. So there goes Eastern Siberia, and most likely all of Siberia past the eastern tip of Kazakhstan in the initial Chinese surge. At that point, both the Russians and Chinese would be roughly equidistant from their centers of gravity, and it would come down to a war of attrition and supplies.
In
a war of attrition, I think it is reasonable to conclude that a country
of 1.4 billion people and a GDP of $20 trillion could defeat a country
of 144 million people and a GDP of $1.1 trillion. A 10 to 1 Chinese
advantage in manpower and 20 to 1 advantage in economy. Those are far
better odds than Napoleon or Hitler had when invading Russia.
And
I would submit that the Chinese have a great track record of
constructing roads and railroads - Chinese contractors are doing it all
over the world, in difficult terrain ranging from South America to
Africa to the Middle East and various points in Asia. And they have
been doing that for decades. So their supply situation would not be
that difficult as they advance - if there are no roads, they'll just
make them.
Finally, Russian technology
is not that advanced today. Russia is not the US - there might be a
slight technological edge in some aspects vis a vis the Chinese, but
nothing as leaps and bounds ahead of the field as US military
technology.
Opinion 2:-
The phrase ‘to take over the world’,
I believe, indicates a sustained structured joint concerted military
campaign to destroy, decimate, disable and/or defeat the military
machinery of all other countries and station occupation forces in all strategic locations to prevent future insurgencies in occupied/vassal states.
In
order to mount such a successful joint military campaign in complete
harmony USA and Russia will first have to arrive at a clear prior
agreement on the core areas of influence that both parties expect to
carve out during the course of conflict either as exclusive zone or as a
shared zone.
Russia will initially claim the
complete Eurasian landmass including the island countries in Pacific
ocean & Indian Ocean as well as Greenland as her exclusive zone;
offer Americas, Australia, New Zeeland & Indonesia as exclusive zone
for USA and propose Africa & Antarctica as shared zones.
USA
will balk at ceding control over the advanced economies of Western
Europe and oil rich Middle East. Realizing that the petroleum sources in
Middle East are far more important for her, she will negotiate for
control in Middle East and India in lieu of Western Europe. Russia will
finally accept Saudi Arabia, Oman, Yemen and India as part of exclusive
zone for USA.
After reaching the secret agreement the two countries will commence coordinated military campaigns.
Phase-I
Russia will attack and capture the Central Asian countries while USA does the same with Latin American countries.
Phase-II
Russia will next invade Eastern Europe, Afghanistan and Mongolia.
Ignoring
the European cries for help against Russian aggression, USA will launch
her own offensives against Canada, Australia and New Zeeland. This move
will finally reveal the neo-imperial designs of the duo to the entire
world. India will hastily cobble together an Asian Alliance with South Korea and Indonesia.
Phase-III
Russian invasion of the Nordic countries will be countered by an ex-NATO Euro Alliance of UK, Germany and France. Russian forces will win after a bloody battle.
The Asian Alliance will give battle to the invading US naval forces in Indonesian waters.
After
a short sharp battle US forces will overwhelm the Indonesian forces on
account of higher number of naval combat assets. Indian and South Korean
navy battle group will withdraw to their own waters to regroup. US
armada will now split into two with a section each heading towards the
Bay of Bengal and Arabian Sea. Andaman and Nicobar Command, the
tri-service theater command of Indian Armed Forces, based at Port
Blair. will first engage the invaders in the Andaman seas.
After
a short sharp battle Indian naval forces will withdraw to take up
defensive positions in the Indian waters closer to her peninsular
coastline.
Phase-IV
As
Russian forces prepare to launch their offensive against Western
Europe, Turky and Italy will come in to further strengthen the Euro Alliance. Alarmed by Russian presence in all the Central Asian countries, Mongolia and Afghanistan, China too will join the Euro Alliance
and open another front against Russians to reduce pressure on the
European countries. China will also be leery of major US presence just
across her southern borders. Since the Euro-China Alliance
will be primarily engaged in a land war with Russia, under China’s
urging the Alliance will move some of the combined naval assets to the Asian Alliance. Bolstered by their support South Korean Navy will return to the Indian Ocean to relieve pressure on India.
The comparative might (refer www.globalfirepower.com) of the two sets of combatants – ignoring the attrition in earlier stages – at Phase-IV would be as under:
Similarly the comparative manpower strength of the two sets would be as under:
Interestingly
the manpower figures additionally reveal that US will also have to
contend with potential fifth column strength of 7.2 million (the Indian & Chinese diaspora) on US soil itself.
Obviously the USA-Russia combine will meet its match in the Phase-IV
of the campaign in the two alliances of 3-plus-6 i.e. 9 countries only
and all plans for world domination will come to a juddering halt.
Even
if we were to completely discount all technological capabilities of
India & China, Euro Alliance countries, Israel and Japan already
acknowledged at technology levels similar to that of USA will seriously
negate possibilities of any edge to USA-Russia combine on account of technological superiority.
Opinion 3:-
The key weakness of the US and Russia is the amount of territory they would need to command if there a conventional war.
The extent of Russia's borders is huge. If Japan, China and Turkey (3 of ten) were all engaged simultaneously, Russia would struggle to know how to defend it's own territory let alone take over the world.
The US has a similar problem. Say it had to occupy both Canada and Mexico because they were part of an enemy alliance(5 of 10), both countries havibg long borders and huge land masses. That occupation would be a vast drain on the US military (imagine a Mexico full of IEDs) without providing huge advantage in taking over the world. If those territories were not occupied, and were aggressive, the US would be vulnerable to continuous infiltration that could terrify the civilian US population into peace.
If you add the UK, France and Germany (8 of 10) you have access to a large population and technologically advanced economies. Assuming their European neighbours were neutral these three countries would be hard to get at. The US would have to stage a vast amphibious assault or rely on airpower. Failure in a vast amphibious assault would be so costly that the US population would prefer peace. Relying on airpower wouldn't likely achieve much.
If the Russian's attempted to threaten Western Europe their own borders would be exposed to attack by the first three countries mentioned.
Finally the alliance would need to include two oil producing nations (10 of 10) to fuel the war economies.
This alliance would not be, apart from Japan, entirely dependent on command of the sea, but that would be the crucial weakness the US would attempt to exploit.
The outcome? Bloody stalemate.
No country could win unless others self destructed as was the case with Germany under Hitler.
Seems like a great illustration of the importance of diplomacy and trade!
source :- quora.com
