Who would win in a war between United Kingdom and the United States?

Question

Cubus · Accepted Answer

By far USA. Second biggest army in the world (only after China), the most spendings for army in the world, and USA has a lot more fighting spirit (there was a survey done after Russia attacked Ukraine, in different countries, asking "if your country was attacked, would you fight for your country" - only 27% of British people said "yes" - one of the lowest in Europe. On the other hand in USA the percentage was 55%) and USA is a lot bigger and harder to conquer (you may conquer New York and California but you still have to conquer all deserts in the Midwest and all the icebergs on Alaska - so it would be very exhausting and time consuming), while Great Britain is much smaller and has a lot more pleasant climate.

OlderAndWiser · Accepted Answer

Based on historical precedent, the US wins! :) :) :)

nightdrot · Answer

There is little doubt that the United States would win. However, that does the UK an injustice as by global standards it is not an inconsiderable force.

The UK lacks the numbers that it once had, and during its' stint in the EU it - an island nation - has allowed its' navy to atrophy. However, the quality of its training and manpower, as well as the technological sophistication of its equipment is substantial. Throw in that the UK has the world's 5th largest industrialized economy to sustain those forces.

Quantity the UK does not have, quality it does. This is not to be discounted.

Against the overwhelming majority of nation's on Earth, the UK has a decisive advantage. To then compare the UK to a continental sized power with a many times larger population is something of a misnomer.

The historical precedent would be Japan in the late 1930s. In terms of equipment, training and leadership, the Japanese armed forces were formidable. Thus was Pearl Harbor born and Japan swept much of the Pacific.

However, the war dragged on and the USA was able to bring its larger population and economy to bear. Throw in the technological innovations born of wartime necessity and the USA was ultimately able to prevail. This not lessening Japan's formidable accomplishments.

For a comparable contemporary comparison, see also my reply to this question: Iran vs the UK?

That the United States could defeat the UK in a hypothetical war - absent allies (in the hypothetical like China and/or Russia or perhaps India) - is not surprising. Indeed, even at the height of the empire, the essence of Britain foreign policy was "splendid isolation." Standing aloof from other powers until the balance turned against the UK, in which case - again even at the height of its' power - the UK needed allies.

The limits the UK and its armed forces labor under today are not all that different from those it labored under before. Grant that they are proportionately larger in their dimensions.

Do not underestimate the UK. As Argentina can attest, circa 1982, or Iraq circa 1990-1991 in a coalition context, the UK brings far more formidable resources to bear than a superficial analysis suggests. It is true that it was not what it once was. However, that does not suggest that it is not anything at all.

Anonymous · Answer

Europe knows we would walk them. We know where all their shit is, we have better hackers then they do.

The hardest part would be getting the equipment there. It would be pretty fucked up, but we live in such a material society right now, I would do drone strikes in less densely populated areas first. They wouldn't seem like they're accomplishing anything so eventually they would become "normal" that's when I would start moving them closer to cities.

As they feel the pressure of danger closing in, I would have troops and equipment air-dropped in while a navel battle takes place nearby but still far enough to keep them separated.

Troops would be given fake passports and the government would issue a bullitin for closed boarders, including for Americans.

I would have the news channels cook up a bunch of sob stories about Americans left behind in Europe so that the soldiers could plant bombs in important places like sewers, municipal buildings, banks, historical monuments etc.

They would all have basically cell phones strapped to them so that if anyone touches it, it will blow and the approximate location of each one can be shown for the final move.

The spys have not only planted bombs but they are gathering Intel about the general sentiment of the news stations, people etc. This will be what tells us how hard we have to be until they're ready to hear our demands.

By now we are taking over small towns and areas and militerizing them. Rounding up all the people and displaying them for our next negotiation. Multiple base camps would be necessary for two crucial reasons.

It would be very difficult for the enemy to cut communications between say 30 or more camps our technology is advanced to the point where in order to jam it, they would likely have to compromise their own systems too, but its very easy to just drop a bomb on one, even if there are hostiges.

Having many camps where the ratio between hostiges and soldiers is as even as possible increases negotiating power and also increases our ability to set up guided missiles which will flank our navel efforts and destroy their fleets and depots from behind.

It would have to be very carefully planned out, but I think you could get to this point in around a week.

purplepoppy · Answer

The russia/Ukraine war shows things don't always go the way of the larger more powerful force. A lesson America learned in Vietnam, Korea etc. The last war of between usa and uk was the 1812 one started by America to take advantage of the fact Britain was tied up fighting napoleon. Although it ended in a treaty it's generally considered a British victory by independent observers as their losses were a lot less.
So how would a war play out now. Americas big advantage would be it's ability to impose trade sanctions so probably wouldn't even need to fight. A few favourable trade deals could see the UK isolated. Similarly they could split the union by offering support to Scotland to break free. Nicole sturgeon would happily let you use Scotland as a base to bomb London for a can of irnbru and a deep fried Mars bar.
The UKs best hope would be to play on deep divisions in America and rely on divide and conquer tactics, perhaps we've already started.

ChrisMaster69 · Answer

It’s not the US v UK, it’s potentially US v UK and commonwealth and anyone else that wants a go at the US.

the UK has very rarely fought a war without having other countries involved.

the UK would just offer encouragement to various countries and also States within the US.

We never play fair.

military wise, it’s mainly down to numbers only.

I have been on a lot of military exercises with the US and other NATO countries, it’s fairly well known the US get upset if they start losing and just change the rules lol.

there is not actually a lot in it other than numbers,

however in reality, air power would win it, as in about 2 days the Uk would have zero operational air bases.

DaveJord · Answer

So as a Soldier I have to tell you there is no winners or losers in war, only the living and dead... and some will tell you the dead got a better deal out if.

So there are only 60 million Brits compared to 330 million Americans, and the United States has like 12 times more the fire power. We both have the same level of technology so the chances are we could equally destroy each other. But a war on that scale could destroy the planet... so the United States would have a better chance of survival... but surviving something like that doesn't mean you won.

TwoToTooTutu2 · Answer

I'm an American, I serve in thr US military, and I think the UK would win. Here is why... England has a very special history and skill that is never accounted for in military comparisons. Diplomacy, specifically shadey, and manipulative Diplomacy to gain an advantage in war.

USLegionary · Answer

America. Pretty sure one us navy carrier has more fighters than the entire RAF, the US Marine Corp alone has an entire inventory larger than the entire British military.

Smoke-n-Growls · Answer

I'm pretty sure Canada would just have to invade the US again and burn the White House a second time. Not because we're British. Just because we're done with America's bullshit.

NaultD · Answer

Who ever is the aggressor will probably lose. Neither country produces enough to sustain itself so allies is the deciding factor.

jshm2 · Answer

The UK probably. The reason being the Commonwealth nations would support the UK over the USA.

FunkyMonkee · Answer

Right now? Probably the UK. If the Girl Scouts ever decide to go to war with us, we're done for!! All they have to do is throw cookies!!

NamerOfStars · Answer

China. Nuclear powers going to war is NEVER going to end well.

EnglishEuropean · Answer

That would never happen unless the UK suddenly decided they didn't want to be a vassal state of the US and turned to Communism. In which case the UK would be invaded and converted to "US democracy".

cth96190 · Answer

The USA would win, because of overwhelming military force.

exitseven · Answer

The US. They already have a track record of winning.

Anonymous · Answer

The UK is a far smaller land mass with far fewer resources. It's a poor match. Why do you ask?

Dargil · Answer

We've already won twice. That should be a hint.

Jamie05rhs · Answer

You can go to hell. Stop sowing discord. This question has been reported.

Waldoe · Answer

The U. S. won the 1st time, and would the next time... be we are allies now...

OddBeMe · Answer

The US’s military is larger than the 10 largest countries put together, 9 of which are allies.

In_Trance · Answer

The US would destroy them

AviatorTom · Answer

Been there, done that. US (former colonies) won.

joeldalton · Answer

lol, US... again.

andreasderjuengere · Answer

Lockheed, Rolls Royce, Google, Exxon and Israel.

JohnK123 · Answer

Depends who the allies are

IsoUser · Answer

The survey says " USA" we have more resources

enocheli · Answer

US right now until god destroys it

Luckycharms12 · Answer

Not going to happen

msc545 · Answer

Probably the UK.

Who would win in a war between United Kingdom and the United States?

Most Helpful Opinions

Most Helpful Opinions

What Girls & Guys Said

Who would win in a war between United Kingdom and the United States?

Most Helpful Opinions

Most Helpful Opinions

What Girls & Guys Said

We're glad to see you liked this post.