How many countries will it take to conquer the USA?

Any currently existing country in the world can be used. If need be, you can use all 190 states within the United Nations against the United States. Nuclear weapons are not allowed, obviously.

For the purpose of this battle, their militaries are perfectly stable, and all terrorist cells are in full cooperation with their original nation's governments.

Both the United States and the countries you have chosen get one year to stockpile war supplies and prep. In order to win, the anti-American countries must force Obama into signing an unconditional surrender, similar to how Nazi Germany was defeated.

All of them

Eh. If Zimbabwe, Ethiopia, or Bangladesh are more advanced and overall more powerful than the United States, then I say one country alone can conquer the U.S.

@mysticmedivh: Current versions of all countries.

Current versions? Then either Zimbabwe, Ethiopia, or Bangladesh stomp.

I can think of one country that can take on 'Murica, and that's Europe.

Hopefully you don't think I'm serious...

@retconcrisis: Lol

Only one...

The United State's only weakness... kindness!

Still not being serious for those of you with sensitive bums

If Russia and China teamed up.....

Not a lot actually.

The most intelligent cities of the America are northern (in terms of ideology), coastal cities. You take down NY and California and you've won half the battle. The south is full of stupid people, they'll fall faster than wet paper.

@nefarious: too bad the Chinese trust the Russians about as far as Putin can see over a basket ball team(he can't).

China would rather work with the U.S. than Russia.

@superguy1591: True.

Just Mexico.

Depends. The combined forces of China, Russia, and the UK could do it, but those are superpowers. If we're talking about Iraq level countries, like 20 TBH.

@petey_is_spidey: Any country can be used

Wow that was a subjective, broad, and ignorant comment.

@thatguywithheadphones: if it were up to me, the American south would be allowed to secede. Starting with Alabama, Mississippi and Texas.

@petey_is_spidey: first, Russia and the U.K. aren't superpowers. Secondly, I know it is ignorant. I don't like the South.

china through debt collections

Israel has already done it.

BB

Please explain to me how those aren't superpowers???

@petey_is_spidey: I think you conflate regional (or mid-tier)powers to superpowers. There are only two superpowers in the world: The United States and China. Then there are a series of mid-tier regional powers--most of Europe.

Is Russia a superpower in comparison to Jamaica? Yes. Is Russia on par with the United States? Hell no.

@superguy1591:

I would argue China is not at America's level, either. Economically, maybe, but militarily they are a joke, consisting of a mass of barely trained, poorly equipped, and underfunded and supplied conscripts backed up by technology WE were mass-producing 40 years ago. They have a numbers advantage, but that's about it.

@timanosaurusrex:

A superpower is a state with a dominant position in international relations and is characterised by its unparalleled ability to exert influence or project power on a global scale

The United States is the most powerful military the world has ever known with the ability to dominate in air, land and sea battles.

China is the most powerful economy in the world: they can cripple the U.S. economy(technically the largest buying force) in minutes if they wanted to. No other country in the world could survive going without America.

Russia can dominate the countries in it region, but Russia can't project power on par with the U.S., same goes for the UK, France, Germany(most powerful country in Europe) and the Japanese.

No country has an economy on par with China. Only two superpowers in the world with plenty of mid-tier powers.

@superguy1591: Germany is the most powerful in Europe?

Russia solo, China solo

@superguy1591:

Not arguing with you on the definition of superpowers. In fact, I mostly agree with you. China taking down our economy cannot happen, at least at this point, because they rely too much on it for their own survival. They own a big chunk of our debt (although not very far ahead of the Japanese, French, and British; it's not like they control a solid majority share), but to crash our economy crashes their own. Nobody buys more of those crappy Chinese products than the United States, and despite China's booming economy, nobody drives global markets like the U.S. I'm also still not convinced that China has the economic staying power to last; those Communist, state-run, exploitative economies tend to collapse on their own rotten structure. That said, I am willing to grant you that China has, by definition, superpower status. My point was more along the lines of head-to-head, rifle-to-rifle, the United States kicks China's butt all day every day.

@superguy1591: Germany doesn't even have nukes...

To answer the original question:

There is no single country with a very high chance of taking us on alone. It's not inconceivable that disaster could strike we could lose, but for my money it'd take something along the lines of the whole EU, or maybe the rest of NATO combined. Our military capabilities and power projection are so vastly beyond what anyone else possesses it's almost unbelievable. It would take a strong combination of economies and military might, and to force an unconditional surrender one would think an invasion of CONUS (Continental United States) would be necessary. This would be the major sticking point: The combined navies of the EU and remaining NATO member states can barely match our naval power by itself. Even with aid and asylum from Canada and Mexico, gaining entrance to the United States would be extremely difficult.

Um, by far. Are you guys nuts? German has the most powerful economy and, if they weren't worried of looking like Nazis, their military would exert their might.

@mandarinestro: Germany does not want nukes, but they are more than capable of making one. N. Korea made a nuke, but you think Germany would struggle?

@benvolio:

Easily. Germany dictates pretty much everything that happens in Europe these days. While the rest of Europe crumbles into bankruptcy, Germany looks on with contempt.

@superguy1591: Well you're probably right. Kim Jong Un's missiles are a joke though; they're barely accurate let alone sufficient to find its way past Western nuclear defense system.

@timanosaurusrex: technically, the United States could take on everyone in a fight--minus nukes--and dominate the playing field.

as far as China, I said the United States has the largest buying force and I was kidding about being able to cripple our economy in minutes, though they could cripple our economy. The Chinese military hasn't rapidly expanded their capabilities because, as of now, they are happy with the regional hold on Asia and the South China Sea. If they wanted to turn their wealth into might, they coould.

Russia, China, EU, Canada & Mexico might be enough. Having Canada and/or Mexico is the most important thing since it allows the Alliance to relatively bypass US's Navy and such, which is its main defence.

@mandarinestro: Germans were the first to master nukes though. German scientists helped play a pivotal role in the Manhattan project and, after WW2, the Soviets kidnapped Nazi scientists and forced them to build them nukes.

Germany has the capability and intellect to build nukes, they just know it is useless to have one.

No it's not

@jonny_anonymous: then who, pray tell, is?

All of em. Plus aliens and itachi uchiha

I would like to point out that the single largest contingent of British Armed Forces over overseas is smack dab in the middle of Germany not only that but Germany has been sanctioned up the ying yang as to what they can or cannot do ever since WW2, they don't have a military infrastructure to win a war.

The problem with defeating the US is that its protected on both sides by the world's two largest bodies of waters and the country has far and away the most powerful navy in the world.

There isn't even a single navy in the world right now built for force projection like the US' is. And even the US cannot field millions of men (what it would take) across the world.

The 2 countries that share a land border with the US, really have no incentive to ever go to war with the US either.

do you have any idea how hard it would be to take NYC or Los Angeles? It would take millions of men a decade to win those sieges.

Besides. Something tells me in a total war scenario you'd have to occupy Chicago before the US would give up. This isn't 1944 anymore, the midwest has enormous amounts of industry power it didn't have back then

I somehow agree with this. Bc I'm from Canada lol.

A googolplexian.

@fallschirmjager: Well let's just imagine a scenario where Canada and Mexico do have incentive to take over the US. Maybe the entire US population has been mind controlled by Mephisto or some alien whacko and the entire world is being threatened a nuclear war or whatever.

@fallschirmjager: Similar to what I said, the only chance an alliance have of even remotely conquering the US is if Mexico/Canada are members.

@superguy1591: Germany doesn't have the biggest economy anymore, due to the Euro Zone Crisis they have been stagnating. At current the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland has the fastest growing economy in Europe

It takes one. The USA and it's already doing a fine job of it.