• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Canada Vs. Australia. South Korea Vs. Japan. Who will win these two scenarios?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Canada and Australia are both big ass empty countries that don't rely on hard power so I think that they'd just end up signing an armistice because they can't invade each other.

SK vs J I think SK wins because Japan is completely dependent on americans and has no decent military, while SK plans everything with a war with NK in mind.
 
Canada has a lot of oil. And Australia is very mineral rich. South Korea without trade and outside help is not going to last long on its own .

Say every other land mass on earth disappears or was radioactive and uninhabitable and all three of these duked it out... then Canada wins. Better water supplies . Plenty of land and lumber tons of oil.
 
Neither Canada nor Australia could really lead an offensive war against the other, but in some hypothetical conflict, I'd probably give Canada a small edge - Australia has a larger standing military, but Canada has more hardware and a larger population to draw from. Interesting to note they are the top two uranium producers by a fairly large margin - both could reasonably be nuclear states by the end of any reasonably prolonged war. At any rate, close enough that a difference in strategic command could likely sway it the other way.

Japan vs SK is no contest, in my mind. SK is the well-prepared next door neighbor and number one target of what is probably the craziest and most militarized country on earth. Japan's military isn't hugely different in size, but SK needs to be badasses. It's probably a closer contest in reality, but I prefer my version.
 
Newbian said:
You have to remember that Japan's military is not all that still because of the terms at the end of WW2 so they mainly focused on defensive and have little offensive power compared to what you would expect.

Also the defense force is not even close to what SK has as last I checked SK has almost 3 times the number then what the defense force is in active service alone.
Click to expand...

err, Japan dropped the defence stance some years ago. You should check out their hardware. SK will still win, but it won't be as one sided as you think.
 
South Korea, and it's really only kind of close considering they have similar technologies. Their military is far far better trained, one of the best in the world.
 
Without US support, Canada has no means to project it's forces across the world. Given that Australia is an island, they would need a Navy to do that, and I hardly think whatever Navy Canada has is up to the task. Neither Canada nor Australia could win the war, because neither has the means to fight it.
 
sdifox said:
err, Japan dropped the defence stance some years ago. You should check out their hardware. SK will still win, but it won't be as one sided as you think.
Click to expand...

And thus why I said what it should be but it still is mostly defensive.
 
Newbian said:
Australia has about twice the size navy and working submarines but neither are that large enough to really be able to pull off a huge invasion.
Click to expand...


I bet Australians are not bad ass enough to set their own submarine on fire to do a drill :colbert:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top