Who would win?

Outline World Map

You might be interested


Reply Attach
  • 4

    Depending on is nuclear weapons were used I would have to say red if they weren't and blue if the were and heres why. red has more people that can either be forced into battle china has billions of people and that paired with all the other nations like Saudi Arabia and many middle east countries where the blue gets their oil blue would be screwed. Also most of those countries already have a military force that is not afraid (for the most part) of killing innocent non-military personnel.

    However if blue was able to get a nuke into major areas in red before any action can be taken place casualties will be minimum to blue's side.

    Finally, I would have to say the real loser would be everyone mainly because so many countries have nuclear weapons and once a major war starts between these countries the nukes will be a flyin'.

    I hope you understand my reasoning...good post, very thought provoking. +3

    • gemie89
    • January 19, 2011, 7:04 pm
    words of a true genius
    - hightec January 20, 2011, 9:51 am
  • 4

    I guess the blue team wins. They have more people and we have more money except the Chinese they are different. The Dutch, French, English, American(the biggest) have very advanced weapons. And we have the germans and we know how they can fight(WW2). So the blue teams wins and the African terrorist fail and all that asian countries.

    Terrorist fails :

    A bit harder :

    To them... we're the terrorists... I hope you realize that.
    - Disco January 21, 2011, 2:41 pm
    one mans freedom fighter is another mans terrorists
    - Weichert506 January 22, 2011, 11:45 am
  • 2

    I would have to go with blue. The area that is red has a higher population but most of the countries in this area haven't even become developed countries yet, they are working on their infrastructure and not so much on have a developed armed forces.

    Plus the blue area has way more money for advanced weapon systems so they would out equip the enemy not out man them.

    • dreed34
    • January 19, 2011, 7:11 pm
  • 2

    no one would win because the theory of MAD would be inevitable and would cause omnicide and would make us a dead planet

    toke the words right out of my mouth
    - castlewarsisawsome January 19, 2011, 8:12 pm
    Wanted to say the exact same thing. Blue starts their nuclear missiles and red starts it an hour later. So what? We will still all die...
    So I would have to say white wins. Since they are the only ones surviving :D
    - Curuba January 20, 2011, 5:52 am
    i think the red would do it first, because i dont think amrica would just randomly nuke someone
    - castlewarsisawsome January 20, 2011, 7:58 am
    That depends on who is president^^
    Imagine some Redneck like Sarah Palin is running the country... And when it comes to Communists most American patriots like to stop thinking :D
    - Curuba January 20, 2011, 12:06 pm
    OMNCIDE all life on earth is fucked
    - triclebickle January 20, 2011, 1:07 pm
    nukes, not a meteor but yoo get the point...

    - BlurrySours January 20, 2011, 2:11 pm
  • 2

  • 1

    India actually has much closer ties to Russia whilst Pakistan is closely allied to the US. Amateurs...

    My first thought was why is Brazil red while Venezuela is blue?
    - Ruleb January 20, 2011, 7:09 am
    Havent you heard? Chavez invaded Brazil this morning, then Venezuela revolted and became a functioning democracy
    - poopiteepoop January 20, 2011, 7:12 am
    That weasely bastard! Just like him to go for our nuts. Brazil nuts that is. Now our exotic bird regiments will be grounded due to lack of food and we'll have to find something else to ignore in the bowl in the middle of the table over Christmas.

    Fucking war man.
    - Ruleb January 20, 2011, 8:14 am
  • 1

    Blue would win because the only useful red countries are China and Russia

    • Pharmon
    • January 19, 2011, 7:24 pm
    Read mo post and you will see why I would disagree. :)
    - gemie89 January 19, 2011, 7:39 pm
    north korea...
    - DENISG123 January 19, 2011, 7:46 pm
    north korea would be screwed if it went toe to toe with south korea
    - triclebickle January 19, 2011, 8:06 pm
    i really dout that....
    - DENISG123 January 20, 2011, 4:56 am
    The most advanced weapons the NK's have are 20-40 year old hand-me-downs from Russia and China (nuclear weapons were first made in the 40's and 50's). The only way NK wouldn't get its ass kicked is if China helped them out. A fight between NK without any allies vs. SK without any allies, would end in a SK victory.
    - BobTheJanitor January 20, 2011, 6:39 am
    didnt you read the news last week??
    how north koreas bombs are freaking good ass hell thats why usa secutary of defense went to japan china and russia to ask for help??
    - DENISG123 January 20, 2011, 12:36 pm
    I- w- Huh? What source did you get that from? What do you mean by "freaking good as hell"? I highly doubt that the USA "secutary" of Defence would be asking for help from China or Russia, other than to tell them something along the lines of "Keep your bitch on a leash."
    - BobTheJanitor January 20, 2011, 12:45 pm
    the south korean military has access to the most technologically advanced weapon on the market. and NK could only hold a full out war for about a week and china has already said that if full scale war in korea re-ignited they would not support NK. frankly the nuclear capability of NK is retarded and could be snuffed by bombing runs made by the US from bases in turkey, japan, and south korea. the sec. of defense was not asking for help he was asking for support in the 6 party talks for reunification of north and south korea because of the fact that the red cross line between north and south has been reopened. one of our nukes could wipe Pyongyang off the face of the earth and one of NK's nukes could take out maybe about half of Seoul. North Korea wouldn't have a snowballinist chance in hell to even consider full scale war.
    - triclebickle January 20, 2011, 12:58 pm
    I hope you realize hell is a very bad place, so being as good as it wouldn't really be desirable.
    - casper667 January 21, 2011, 10:50 pm
  • 1

    assuming no nukes it would be red even discounting the population difference which would be a huge factor red could simply fight a war of attrition forcing blue to waste its recourses repelling attacks cause china has a lot of untapped resources along with Africa which has extremely productive copper mines so sooner or later blue would just simply run out of bullets to fire back at red while red could just simply start firing rounds into blue Territory's till they drown in bullets. in fact the only way i could see blue winning is through some sort of extreme action to force a stalemate

    • Jabori
    • January 19, 2011, 8:14 pm
    True, except that alot of the red countries are very politically divided. Blue could use those divisions to it's advantage (IF it was being smart about it) by using its money to improve certain conditions in reasource rich red areas like Africa and southeast Asia.
    - BobTheJanitor January 20, 2011, 6:45 am
    thats a very good point bob
    - Jabori January 20, 2011, 11:30 am
  • 1

    The white team, FTW!

  • 1

    Definitely Blue. The whole of western Europe, The USA, Japan and India. Plus Russia, China and Brazil, the red's biggest powers, are pretty messed up countries. No contest.

  • 1

    Blue man, you got the Aussies on your side, we will kick some ass

    Invade this?

    I'd like to see them try
    - poopiteepoop January 20, 2011, 6:46 am
    Sharks with frickin' lazers!
    - BobTheJanitor January 20, 2011, 7:01 am
    Especially now them sharks can get righ up Brisbane highstreet :P
    - Ruleb January 20, 2011, 7:07 am
    Nothing to invade, so why invade, problem invaders?
    And those angry natives... well heres what they will say if anyone came close to em,

    He'll get his super petrol powers and choke em with his giant fukken rainbow snake
    Man-eating Koalas? more like fucking drop bears, picture this, you're walking in the bush, just a nice quiet day, when some fucking mini bear cunt drops onto your head and starts raping your face with no mercy and extreme magnitudes of rape, Shit will scar any invaders off for life, problem China?
    Poisonous snakes? Hoop snakes aside (I'll get to those in a minute), we have a snake thats venom is more deadly than that of a rattlesnake or cobra. Not to mention we have about 4 others on the top 10 most lethal snakes, most of which are timid in nature but pack a fucking hell of a bite.
    Yes hoop snakes, crafty cunts these ones, they, as the name suggests, curl into a hoop by placing their tails in their mouth, then rolling down steep hills at great velocity, knocking over any dumb fuck that gets in its way, it then proceeds to rape the victims face.
    And dont get me started on those fucking sharks.... they fire their LAAAAAASSSSOOOORRRRR so fucking huge it has already destroyed the world.
    Baby Killer Dingoes...... fucking hell was that a lie, we have babies that rape the faces of dingoes daily, man you do NOT want to fuck with babies down here, they gank any dingo or any other animal for that matter, that comes within a 5 Kilometer radius of it, and yes, they are, and will always be, the most feared creatures in history.
    SO let em come, they wont last, and with Steve dead all the crocs started a revolution and have enslaved most of the western side and are slowly progressing across the continent, so we wont live much longer anyway, as they intend to rape our faces, good day.
    - Dragkyre January 20, 2011, 7:13 am
    The natives are bad, but the bogans aren't much better
    - poopiteepoop January 20, 2011, 7:19 am
    yes but the bogans are all on the western side, which i remind you all had their faces raped by crocodiles =]
    - Dragkyre January 20, 2011, 7:21 am
    :P I resent that
    - poopiteepoop January 20, 2011, 7:23 am
    - Math January 21, 2011, 1:36 pm
    hahah, to the untrained eye one might think that the only safe places are darwin and tasmania, but little do they know darwin is invaded by crocodiles and in tasmania its weird if you dont do your siblings
    - poopiteepoop January 21, 2011, 2:09 pm
  • 1

    Personally, i think the white areas will get their asses trashed

    I'm saying blue, for a few fundamental reasons. I don't think any of the nukes that are available will actually be used, as a nuclear war would clearly cause MAD - mutually assured destruction - of everything.
    Therefore I believe that the war would have to be conventional in order to utulise arms effectively without radiating the planet into oblivion.
    Western Armies, in particular those of Britain, the US and Germany, are famed for being highly professional, well trained, well equipped and hugely experienced to boot.
    Yes, the west seems to have run afoul of guerrilla warfare over the last decade or so, and damned effective ones at that. Guerrillas seem to have a history of giving the professionals a good kick, certainly true with Napoleon in the Iberian Peninsula, and more recently, The Soviet army in Afghanistan.
    HOWEVER - pitched battle in this form of war would be utterly inevitable, if the Reds would want to utilise their numbers effectively - otherwise, it's a waste of 2 billion soldiers. And of course, as many of us know, this is where western armies deal a fucking great hammer blow. Very few 'red' forces have ever managed to beat 'blue' ones in pitched battle before - even through bad odds, western armies are undeniably the very best at conventional warfare. Up that, china.
    i also think Sri Lanka should be on the blue side, as the Indian government has been helping out theirs recently

    • Bekenel
    • January 20, 2011, 6:49 am
    I agree , aswell as that western armies have far more experience in modern warfare, about 50 years in fact =). china and other countries like it rely mainly on the masses, although china is modernizing its millitary, I belive that this is very limited by it's isolation and lagg in modern technologies
    - suckots January 20, 2011, 8:03 am
    It would be one hell of a long war though if one side is to be utterly triumphant
    - Bekenel January 20, 2011, 8:06 am
    very true indeed, I think it would have to start soon, because china is overtaking USA in terms of economy ...
    only a few years and it will be superior
    - suckots January 20, 2011, 9:25 am
  • 1

    Chuck Norris.

    • Ertrov
    • January 20, 2011, 9:54 am
  • 1

    180a0fbd c4fb 4546 - who would win?

    • c8r15
    • January 20, 2011, 9:57 am
  • 1

    BLUE, because blue is my favorite color and everyone would forget about Iceland and we would survive without any harm also because we are harmless and a big source of fish and natural energy and... stuff XD
    and we're a small nation so who would win by destroying us?
    NO ONE
    so blue (iceland) wins

    Bwahaha ill be sure to write into my congressmen about the possibility of nuking Iceland when it all goes down Bwahaha
    - Reddeath195 January 20, 2011, 11:14 am
    but you just lose expensive nukes, lots of energy that doesn't pollute AND lots of fish=food resources which i think will be very little of in wars, at least a lot less food, for nothing?
    - Icelandgirly January 20, 2011, 1:15 pm
    XD well we cant have any survivors now can we its called MAD for a reason *evil laugh*
    - Reddeath195 January 20, 2011, 1:20 pm
  • 1

    I don't see why Switzerland is colored They would be the ONLY ones in the Nuclear war standing around going "What was that noise?"

  • 1

    Can i just ask - why is the black sea coloured blue - unless atlantis is buried there somewhere waiting for a nuclear war.

    • Bekenel
    • January 20, 2011, 11:38 am
  • 1

    Blue, because it contains the USA.

    • Albane
    • January 20, 2011, 12:59 pm
    So just by that response, I'm going to guess you're one of those typical Americans that think that they are the best.
    - DarkHunter January 20, 2011, 2:00 pm


    I hate the fact that America has so many guns and spends so much money on the military. But this would be the moment that our government has been waiting for.
    - Albane January 21, 2011, 12:57 pm
    Yes but there are other places that would easily beat the USA. It is not the best place in terms of power.
    - DarkHunter January 21, 2011, 1:39 pm
    What country in the world could attack the USA and win?
    - Albane January 24, 2011, 5:09 am
    China probably could with all of their soldiers, and russia with all of their nuclear devices.
    - DarkHunter January 24, 2011, 6:00 am
    China doesn't have the equipment to transport their army across an ocean. Russia doesn't have the means of getting their Nuclear weapons to America.
    - Albane January 25, 2011, 11:16 am
    - DarkHunter January 25, 2011, 11:45 am
  • 1

    id say blue even tho red has the population idk if the red can auctually suplly all of their people with guns AND ammunition and besides the most worlds superpowers are on one side

  • 1

    I think the blue tema would win because they would have more firepower than the red (germans and americans have a lot of nukes)

    • peace
    • January 20, 2011, 5:27 pm
  • 1

    Blue dumb @$$'s. USA,USA,USA,USA!!!!!

  • 1

    I failed geography so if china is blue (no nucular wepons envovled) blue would win beacause china is the main manafacturing plznt of all wepons used in the world lol

    Uhh... First off You are retarded and second well I have nothing else, you are just retarded.
    - buddyfoeva January 21, 2011, 2:47 pm
    yeah well eat the cake
    - wobbilybob January 22, 2011, 9:58 am
  • 1

    I honestly feel that the while would win. 2 reasons. Merfolk and penguins.

  • 1

    Blue b/c they get a continent bonus of +5 troops right off the bat. :)

Related Posts