NationStates Jolt Archive

Ok, all the continents in the world have allied together and formed 7 Super-armies. (well....maybe not Antarctica) They all wage war against each-other...so...who wins?

Antarctica of course. Fear the penguins!

Ok, all the continents in the world have allied together and formed 7 Super-armies. (well....maybe not Antarctica) They all wage war against each-other...so...who wins?
North and South America separate, or together?

Middle East by itself, or with perhaps Africa?

Eurasia, or Europe and Asia separately?

If Europe and Asia separately, Russia with Europe or Asia?

Australia with whom?

North and South America separate, or together?

Middle East by itself, or with perhaps Africa?

Eurasia, or Europe and Asia separately?

If Europe and Asia separately, Russia with Europe or Asia?

Australia with whom?


Please go by normally accepted boundaries: NA and SA are separate, Middle east with Asia which is separate from europe and Australia as well as the Pacific isles will be considered their own continent: Oceania. And Russia is separated into 2 continents....again draw the line by using normally accepted continental boundaries.

Asia.

Please go by normally accepted boundaries: NA and SA are separate, Middle east with Asia which is separate from europe and Australia as well as the Pacific isles will be considered their own continent: Oceania. And Russia is separated into 2 continents....again draw the line by using normally accepted continental boundaries.

The thing is that there are no normally accepted boundaries. You list the US-accepted boundaries, but people in Europe and South America have different definitions.

How do we count Russia?

Most of the population lives in Europe, but more russian landmass is in Asia.

mE conFuZZeD?1?!^$?

Depends who gets Russia.

Though nobody would really win. First agressor would get nuked, and the agressor would nuke back, destroying the world.

Antarctica of course. Fear the penguins!

Antarctica wins because they never went to war in the first place.

North America: From the Aleutian Islands to Greenland to Bermuda to Trinidad & Tobago to Hawaii and back to Aleutian

South America: Venezuela to the Galapagos to Teirra del Fuego to South Sandwich Islands to the East of Brazil and back to Venezuela

Europe: Svalbard to Iceland to Gibraltar to Istanbul (including) to the Caucasus Mtns. to the Caspian to the Kama river and back to Svalbard

Asia: Sinai Peninsula to Istanbul (not including); borders Europe along Caspian and Russia; to the tips of Siberia to Japan to the border between Indonesia & Papua New Guinea (takes the Left side) to Sri Lanka and back to Sinai

Africa: Tunisia to Sinai to Somalia to Seychelles to Mauritius to the South of South Africa to Cape Verde to the Canary Islands and back to Tunisia

Oceania: Papua New Guinea to West of Australia to Tasmania to New Zeland to French Polynesia to Midway to the Marshall Islands to the Northern Mariana Islands to Micronesia and back to Papua.

Antarctica: South Shetland Islands to Amundsen Sea to Balleny Islands to South Magnetic Pole to Prydz Bay to Queen Maude Land to Weddel Sea and back to South Shetland Islands

those are the boundaries im using

Depends who gets Russia.

Though nobody would really win. First agressor would get nuked, and the agressor would nuke back, destroying the world.

America would withdraw from any war, sitting down to eat burgers and watch tasteless TV. That is unless oil was involved...

The scenario, although approaching improbability zero as a limit, is intriguing.

I suspect the outcome would depend upon several things:

1. How much prior warning of the impending war each continent had.

2. Whether nations were willing to exercise the nuclear option.

3. How the term "win" is defined.

4. Etc.

I suspect it would play out something like this:

War begins with an initial nuclear exchange between China and NA, between Europe and NA, with some other, comaratively minor exchanges thrown in: Russia with China, Korea with Japan, virtually the entire Middle East with Israel.

North America conducts second strike against both Europe and China, both of which cease to exist as effective military and industrial bases. Russia and NA form alliance. Japan joins the alliance. Australia joins the alliance. Most of SA joins the alliance.

Israel and most of the Middle East revert to the stone age.

Africa sits on the sidelines making disgusted noises.

The alliance declares victory, threatens to nuke anyone who gets out of line.

Due to rising levels of radioactivity, the alliance devotes all remaining energy and resources to moving into space, creates massive bases at all three Lagrange points and on the moon.

America would withdraw from any war, sitting down to eat burgers and watch tasteless TV. That is unless oil was involved...


*sigh*

Newbies....

*sigh*

Newbies....

How do you get to be called a Cybersheep Farmer?

The scenario, although approaching improbability zero as a limit, is intriguing.

I suspect the outcome would depend upon several things:

1. How much prior warning of the impending war each continent had.

2. Whether nations were willing to exercise the nuclear option.

3. How the term "win" is defined.

4. Etc.

I suspect it would play out something like this:

War begins with an initial nuclear exchange between China and NA, between Europe and NA, with some other, comaratively minor exchanges thrown in: Russia with China, Korea with Japan, virtually the entire Middle East with Israel.

North America conducts second strike against both Europe and China, both of which cease to exist as effective military and industrial bases. Russia and NA form alliance. Japan joins the alliance. Australia joins the alliance. Most of SA joins the alliance.

Israel and most of the Middle East revert to the stone age.

Africa sits on the sidelines making disgusted noises.

The alliance declares victory, threatens to nuke anyone who gets out of line.

Due to rising levels of radioactivity, the alliance devotes all remaining energy and resources to moving into space, creates massive bases at all three Lagrange points and on the moon.


1. 0 days, 0 hours, 0 minutes, 0 seconds
2. if ye got em ye can use em
3. last continent standing
4. cool

How do you get to be called a Cybersheep Farmer?


By being wise...and just...and good.


And kissing alot of mod ass.

By being wise...and just...and good.


And kissing alot of mod ass.

Well, I should be a CyberSheep Farmer too then

Well, I should be a CyberSheep Farmer too then


Erm...you're a n00b!

Erm...you're a n00b!


Jey...me too!

Jey...me too!


A newb is more a state of mind. Asking stupid questions, etc.

One can be a noob without being new to the forum.

It's all in how you act.

North America in a heartbeat.

Me thinks any Russian-Indian-Pakistani-Iranian-Chinese-Japanese coalition would instantly kick anyones ass, at the start.

North America could hold out the longest because of our industrial power. We can wait out the war and continuously bomb Asia in the comfort of our own contienent.

Africa would simply implode on itself. No way it can possibly win. It would get run over by either Europe or Asia very quickly and only has its size as an advantage over any invader.

Australia, well, :D

South America would most likely be invaded from the coastal areas, but can take refuge in Chile and in the Amazon rainforest for a gorilla warfare tactic.

Europe also has some good industrial power rivaling North America.

In the end I'd guess whoever can hold out the longest in either Asia, NA, or Europe wins.

All humans die and cockroaches take over. The big American cockroaches quickly eat the puny European ones. And then are promptly eaten by the humongous Africans.

Then somebody passes the vacuum cleaner...

South America would most likely be invaded from the coastal areas, but can take refuge in Chile and in the Amazon rainforest for a gorilla warfare tactic.
But gorillas live in Africa :confused:

But gorillas live in Africa :confused:
LOL!!!

This should really go into someone's signature...

Due to rising levels of radioactivity, the alliance devotes all remaining energy and resources to moving into space, creates massive bases at all three Lagrange points and on the moon.


sounds like a preface to gunnm/battle angel alita :D

America would withdraw from any war, sitting down to eat burgers and watch tasteless TV. That is unless oil was involved...

When has the United States not participated in at least some way with every major war for like the past 100 years?

When has the United States not participated in at least some way with every major war for like the past 100 years?
Don't.get.sucked.in.

EDIT: Haha, I realized you two sound like two Anti-Americans arguing over whether or not Americans are more fat and useless or that they are war-mongerers. Though you just look it, I'm not implying anything.

I don't think any continent could win on its own. Asia is the only one that would have the population to get an invasion going, though they lack the technological edge to beat N. America or Europe. I think everyone but Africa and Australia could defend themselves indefinitely. Africa has too many problems and Australia lacks the population to maintain a defence against whole continents.
But this is assuming no nukes come into action.

sounds like a preface to gunnm/battle angel alita :D
Um ... not familiar with that. [ mystified look ]

"1. China nukes Seattle or LA. 3 million dead.
2. US nukes every other village in China. 500 million dead.
3. Kim Jong-Il jumps on bandwagon and nukes Alaska. 8500 die, several hundred more sick with radiaton poisoning, including 4 ptarmidgans.
4. US & UK invade North Korea in the morning and do WW2-style firebombing at night.
5. Middle Eastern terrorists fly a plane into Space Mountain at Disney Land, killing both Mickey AND Goofy (oh no).
6. US & Israel surround Jordan and Syria etc., close in and kill everyone.
7. France gets nuked by Russia.
8. We use N. Korea as a base of operations and conduct raids on Russian outposts, then invade the capital and take their leader hostage.
9. Russia kicks the US out, who responds by sending a 100 megaton H-bomb towards Moscow.
10. France tries to send a nuke towards the UK, but there is a problem and it explodes in its silo, taking out part of France.
11. Australia finishes off France; Germany sends an army to fight Australia.
12. German fleet is slaughtered by the USN.
13. At this point in time, 40% of the planet is undergoing a nuclear winter, most of the world's major cities are in ruin, and the world's population is less than 1 billion.
14. US finishes off any lingering enemies.
15. And they all lived happily ever after.

the end"

My view on a gigiantic continental war.

12. German fleet is slaughtered by the USN.
All three boats? Oh no!

All three boats? Oh no!

The only good U-boat is a sunk U-boat. Besides, Germany's one cruiser could have done what? $250k in damages, maybe kill 70 or 80 people? Whoop-dee-do!

The only good U-boat is a sunk U-boat. Besides, Germany's one cruiser could have done what? $250k in damages, maybe kill 70 or 80 people? Whoop-dee-do!
There's more ships than that! We have a maritme hospital ship too! :p

There's more ships than that! We have a maritme hospital ship too! :p

And the US has the largest navy in the world.

Europe GDP 12 trill
Asia GDP 12 trill
NA GDP 12 trill
SA+Africa+Australia+Oceana < 4 Trill

Financially, Europe, Asia, and America are all on even footing. Nukes depend on Russia (who has more nukes than even the US [ukrain is #3]). so if nukes get launched, not a single nation would have enough combined GDP to support an army and what little rebuilding is possible. in this way, Australia would probably win a nuclear war as they dont have very many nuke target, and as the smallest continent (though technilogically supperior to SA and Africa) in force, they would be ingnored by the big 3 continents. Australia + Oceana could then swoop in and take out Africa. SA vs. australia would end out in australia's favor as SA doesn't have the force to get past a guarded oceana, and Australia can then just bombard SA until they agree to a surrender (conditional, with good terms, not unconditional).
If nukes arn't involved, then it turns out quite different.

Asia, being able to match any of the other 2 continents in GDP, and supporting the largest population, and the only growing one of the 3 (thus fastest birth rates of the 3), (china 13/1000, india 22, japan 9.5), they would be able to replace soldiers at the fastest rate (26,565,971 draftable soldures avalible every year out of just the 4 largest nations in asia.) this would then be amplified by imidate control of almost all oil in the world. Technilogically, 1/4 of their technoloigy would be fully advanced, and most of the rest would then be avalible with semi modern technology (about soviet level +5-6 years). With a weapon stance, an AK-47 and an SVD and a PKM can hold their own against technilogically better guns, and the chinese tank is one of the only ones left that is economically effiecent to purchase. So land forces will lose man for man, but is strongest due to numbers. Airforce is not in any way the strongest, and their navy is also quite pathetic (with exceptions to israle aircraft). Asia populations have been historically dedicated, and ready to fight to the last man in case of war. However the chances of Nations being able to stick together for the greater good (ME not attack israle, india not attack pakistan, China and Korea and Japan not attacking each other) is questionable.
Europe has a population of around 500 million (and own west istamble), all of ukraines and western russia's nukes (siberia, however, has many of russia's nukes). They get to have the 2 best gun manufacturers (H&K/AK), and boasts the best trained special forces (and possibly army) in the world. they can replace soldures at a rate of 3.5 million a year. Though their machinary is not produced in the numbers of the US, the equipment is every bit as good as the US's, and they also boast, for a small part of their airforce and navy anyways, the best trained soldures in teh world (Royal Airforce and Navy best forces man for man). However, europe is also the most depleated in resources and will need to move quickly if they are to stay in the game, however, if they do, they stand in a good spot with 500 million, and with part of it being best trained in the world (if not most of it).
North america has a population of around 300 million. It has many industries, Resources, and some of the best equipment in the world. they can replace soldures at a rate between 2.5 and 3.5 million a year. [note, all replacement figures are maximums, based on population entering the age of 16]. They start with the most military equipment, the largest navy, and airforce. With pleanty of cash, and resources, they dont need to move too quickly to get hold of more resources, however they do need to move quickly if they are to capitalize on their pre-built advantage.

what this turns out to be is asia with a huge advantage if they can keep their populations together, and with the large cities of moscow and istamble right next to their boarders, they could claim them or hold still and use their oil advantage. Europe, urgantly would have to move down and take africa, capitalizing on the rich mines of africa, and the oil of east africa, then while they may attack the oil fields of the middle east, they could also afford a movement on the easier to hit Americas (to challenge the american navy would and cross the sea would be no harder than to challange the asian population and cross siberia/the deaserts of iran). America would have to move towards South America. Being the richest of the 3 southern continets, it would give them an advantage economically, however it would also require the most effort, considering the huge population of brazil. this would then allow the rest to catch up in military numbers. Asia of course eats up australia, the smallest of the 3 southern continents. Then basicly it depends on who the continents attack to see which of the 3 can take advantage. The breaker is probably if Asia disinigrates back into internal conflict or not. if it does, than asia will die off and it will be a race to grab as much of it as they can. if not, then asia might beable to march over europe than take the americas with 2x the money of america.

Asia. Because:

1. We have the numbers. Asia boasts hosting two of the world's most populous countries, India and China. These people can overrun Europe - *click* - just like that.

2. We have the oil. The Middle East can shut down its oil exports and voila, thus ends the European and North American war effort.

3. We have the technology. Japan, South Korea and Taiwan are the three technological forerunners of the world. America and Germany fall behind.

4. We have the fanatics. Muslim fundamentalists, rogue North Korean leader etc.

5. We have the roughest terrain in the world, from deserts in Arabia, to the Himalayas, and the waterways of South East Asia.

6. We have the largest network of migrants to overseas countries, who are very patriotic and will make life very hard for the enemies of Asia. There are East Asians everywhere in America, and Middle Eastern people in Europe.

Asia controls so much of Europe's and North America's resources they would be forced to negotiate. Oceania, excuse me, is a joke. Africa and South America won't be able to get their act right, let alone wage war. The penguins in Antarctica would be awed by Mongoloids and thus surrender immediately.

Asia wins all.

Asia. Because:

1. We have the numbers. Asia boasts hosting two of the world's most populous countries, India and China. These people can overrun Europe - *click* - just like that.

2. We have the oil. The Middle East can shut down its oil exports and voila, thus ends the European and North American war effort.

3. We have the technology. Japan, South Korea and Taiwan are the three technological forerunners of the world. America and Germany fall behind.

4. We have the fanatics. Muslim fundamentalists, rogue North Korean leader etc.

5. We have the roughest terrain in the world, from deserts in Arabia, to the Himalayas, and the waterways of South East Asia.

6. We have the largest network of migrants to overseas countries, who are very patriotic and will make life very hard for the enemies of Asia. There are East Asians everywhere in America, and Middle Eastern people in Europe.

Asia controls so much of Europe's and North America's resources they would be forced to negotiate. Oceania, excuse me, is a joke. Africa and South America won't be able to get their act right, let alone wage war. The penguins in Antarctica would be awed by Mongoloids and thus surrender immediately.

Asia wins all.
maybe, but then asia will had no outsider enemies, and it will fall in inside wars.

maybe, but then asia will had no outsider enemies, and it will fall in inside wars.

Then we will use our spare time to enslave all the other peoples of the world. :D

J/k.

Antartica, they can nuke us and win, we can nuke them and everyone loses. PENGUINS WILL RULE THE WORLD! :eek:

Then we will use our spare time to enslave all the other peoples of the world. :D

J/k.
there is no place to everybody on the world on asia. many asian will have to go from asia to control the new "slaves".
after some hundreds years they will be euro-asians or afro-asians or american asians, and the world will have many differnt "races" again. than the ex-asian will attack asian and them selves for continental victory, and we will be back in the beggining.
it is continueing circle.

there is no place to everybody on the world on asia. many asian will have to go from asia to control the new "slaves".
after some hundreds years they will be euro-asians or afro-asians or american asians, and the world will have many differnt "races" again. than the ex-asian will attack asian and them selves for continental victory, and we will be back in the beggining.
it is continueing circle.

Well, nobody said I was going to offer a permanent solution to war in the world. :)

Well, nobody said I was going to offer a permanent solution to war in the world. :)
yes, I guess you don't.

asia has the clear advantage, but i reckon we have a good chance in oceania/pacific:
-we have a dispresed population so we arent an easy target for nukes
-what wolud anyone want to invade us for anyway? whales? possums? sheep?
-with such a small area of developed land we could take to the hills and fight and insuregnt war for hundreds of years
-we can make cruise misiles for $5000. w00t!!!
-we have plentiful supplies of blacksand(for hydrogen) and natural gas.(not sure is aussie has oil)
-australia has lots of steel(if we can mine it without being nuked)
- we have the access to antarctica (south america isnt prepared with airports etc) so we can use it as a troop base
-we have nutters like 'horse' and steve irwin

Asia. Because:


2. We have the oil. The Middle East can shut down its oil exports and voila, thus ends the European and North American war effort.




I disagree. The United States is the third largest producer (http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/rankorder/2173rank.html) of oil in the world, at 7,800,000 barrels a day. Its not like the United states doesnt have oil. Just reduce consumption,and you have more than enough to fight a war.

Asia would win, because of sufficient resources and manpower. Industrial might maybe something europeans or north americans can boast but i don't think that every other nations lags that much in that area compared to the western powers. Furthermore, Asia has Japan, which is in fact a very highly developed country in terms of technology.

Well, what is the definition of winning? Is it invasion? Destruction?

I can tell yo one thing, Asia does not have the shippage to launch an invasion of the North American continent.

Well, what is the definition of winning? Is it invasion? Destruction?

I can tell yo one thing, Asia does not have the shippage to launch an invasion of the North American continent.


i told you the definition of winning before: last continent standing

asia would be able to ship into america just as easily as america can ship into asia, they each have equal GDP, and equal capacity to build naval forces. Plus, since they own korea, they also own the world's largest ship manufacturer. and china+india+japan+korea would have a decent holding force to hold off the US navy (which will act on its own, and will have its hands full with europe's combined navy). Then the GDP's would garentee equal production.

Watch the movie "War Games". The answer is there. :)

Watch the movie "War Games". The answer is there. :)
Yes ... no one wins. Not in a nuclear exchange. Everyone loses.

See? We do agree on some things! :D

another point to add an oceania/pacifics favour:
-we would be the last to die in a nuclear fallout, and certainly the last to be affected by radiotion, so we would have time to build a lead sheilded bunker to hide in for 75 years or so.
chances are that the area down near the auckland islands wolud probably not be affected at all, so we could launch attacks on the mutants from a naval base there