- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: If the entire world attacked the USA...
Posted on 3/26/14 at 9:58 pm to heartbreakTiger
Posted on 3/26/14 at 9:58 pm to heartbreakTiger
quote:
we have to sure up the borders
You shore about that?
0
Posted on 3/26/14 at 9:59 pm to pensacola
We would, hands down.
Half the world would show up in boats with outboard motors and Nissan pickup trucks.
Half the world would show up in boats with outboard motors and Nissan pickup trucks.
Posted on 3/26/14 at 10:00 pm to pensacola
quote:What are you classifying as WMD's? What are we allowed to use? One year is a long arse time.
No nukes or WMD
Posted on 3/26/14 at 10:00 pm to pensacola
I'm no expert but I've played Command and Conquer: Generals, and I like our chances.
Posted on 3/26/14 at 10:00 pm to Riseupfromtherubble
The gangs and Mafia in America would thrown down on those Chinese midgets.
Posted on 3/26/14 at 10:00 pm to Riseupfromtherubble
It would have to be a extremely long and sustained attack to do it, but the world could do it. They could slowly eliminate our resources and just hold us hostage while they strategically attacked our food and resources from Canada and Mexico. No need to invade when you can starve out the country. Just too much of the rest of the world for us to attempt to do the same if literally everyone was against us. Europe, China, and Russia could easily arm everyone enough to do it. Would just take a long time to eliminate our resources to where we couldn't replace them fast enough. Especially when we are very dependent on other countries for some resources.
This post was edited on 3/26/14 at 10:03 pm
Posted on 3/26/14 at 10:03 pm to pensacola
MERICA lead by Obama -NO
MERICA lead by anyone else-Yes
MERICA lead by anyone else-Yes
Posted on 3/26/14 at 10:04 pm to pensacola
We would assemble all of the police together and form militias and just own everyone 
Posted on 3/26/14 at 10:06 pm to BurasTigah
quote:
y attacked our food and resources from Canada and Mexico. No need to invade when you can starve out the country.
starve out our country?
do you mean as in actual food?
quote:
Especially when we are very dependent on other countries for some resources.
we are dependent on other countries for luxury, not the bare essentials to survive
Posted on 3/26/14 at 10:07 pm to BuddyLAM
quote:
We would assemble all of the police together
Are we getting attacked by all of the world's dogs now?
Posted on 3/26/14 at 10:07 pm to pensacola
I don't know but I'd feel fairly safe in Pensacola.
Posted on 3/26/14 at 10:08 pm to BurasTigah
quote:
It would have to be a extremely long and sustained attack to do it, but the world could do it. They could slowly eliminate our resources and just hold us hostage while they strategically attacked our food and resources from Canada and Mexico. No need to invade when you can starve out the country. Just too much of the rest of the world for us to attempt to do the same if literally everyone was against us. Europe, China, and Russia could easily arm everyone enough to do it. Would just take a long time to eliminate our resources to where we couldn't replace them fast enough. Especially when we are very dependent on other countries for some resources.
bullshite!
We'd go on the offensive. And not to roll into a country and set up a new government or train police, I'm talking rolling up and wrecking shop! Raping horses, riding off on the women. Really crushing spirits and shite.
Posted on 3/26/14 at 10:12 pm to BurasTigah
quote:
It would have to be a extremely long and sustained attack to do it, but the world could do it. They could slowly eliminate our resources and just hold us hostage while they strategically attacked our food and resources from Canada and Mexico. No need to invade when you can starve out the country. Just too much of the rest of the world for us to attempt to do the same if literally everyone was against us. Europe, China, and Russia could easily arm everyone enough to do it. Would just take a long time to eliminate our resources to where we couldn't replace them fast enough. Especially when we are very dependent on other countries for some resources.
You can't starve a country that's self-sufficient. We have enough coal to produce all of our electricity for over 200 years. If the U.S. takes over the Bakken Tar Sands from Canada, than they have a near unlimited supply of easily refineable oil. We have more natural gas than the rest of the world combined. We produce enough food to feed ourselves multiple times over. Millions, perhaps over a billion people would starve to death without U.S. food exports. We have all of the ingredients necessary to produce all the weapons we could ever use and we are the leading weapons exporter to the world. The only thing we actually need from the rest of the world (outside of Canada whom we would quickly and easily conquer) are rare earth metals from China which are critical components in many electronics.
Posted on 3/26/14 at 10:12 pm to tigerman03
quote:
bullshite!
We'd go on the offensive. And not to roll into a country and set up a new government or train police, I'm talking rolling up and wrecking shop! Raping horses, riding off on the women. Really crushing spirits and shite.
Exactly you don't have these to play defense
This post was edited on 3/26/14 at 10:18 pm
Posted on 3/26/14 at 10:13 pm to kingbob
Yea I was hoping he wasnt talking about actual food. We are the largest producer and exporter of food in the world.
Like Moe Green kinda once said, "You dont starve me out, I starve you out"
Like Moe Green kinda once said, "You dont starve me out, I starve you out"
Posted on 3/26/14 at 10:18 pm to heartbreakTiger
quote:
The only problem we would have is if other countries marched up from mexico. we have to sure up the borders
Well, unless it's only Latin American countries those knuckleheads would still have to ship over there troops and I don't like their chances with our naval fleet and air force.
As for those pesky latin Americans we can just reinstitute carpet bombing with B 52s! And basically make Mexico a giant no man's land
Sure, that answer wreaks of "murica" sentiment but logistically invading the US is a nightmare and an occupation is damn near impossible
This post was edited on 3/26/14 at 10:19 pm
Posted on 3/26/14 at 10:20 pm to Yat27
quote:
Even if the world were able to magically teleport their troops/equipment here, it wouldn't be easy.
Plenty of different ways to fight a war. The combined forces of the top 10 countries alone could be enough. One suicide bomber alone, in a strategic strike, can kill up to hundreds. It's not like the world would need to send all of their forces across the seas. Small, strategic strikes can cause plenty of damage.
[quote]Since they can't do that, most of the world would have to get here by air/sea. Good luck with that. U.S. Naval superiority is truly staggering.
Yes they are easily the top navy in the world. But you're forgetting the cumulative effect of having the remaining top 10 navies combine their forces. That evens out the playing field by a lot. The US would still have an advantage, but it wouldn't overpowering. Lots of other countries had great navies even before the U.S. became a powerhouse. One on one it's barely a challenge, but when they combine it's a whole different war.
Posted on 3/26/14 at 10:24 pm to kingbob
quote:
The only thing we actually need from the rest of the world (outside of Canada whom we would quickly and easily conquer) are rare earth metals from China which are critical components in many electronics.
I thought that one of the only significant resources that we don't have a plentiful amount of is aluminum. I could definitely be wrong, and I don't know how that would effect us in the long term.
Posted on 3/26/14 at 10:26 pm to whodidthat
quote:
But you're forgetting the cumulative effect of having the remaining top 10 navies combine their forces. That evens out the playing field by a lot.
It levels the playing field a little but "a lot" is far fetched.
quote:
Lots of other countries had great navies even before the U.S. became a powerhouse.
We arent talking about the past.
Posted on 3/26/14 at 10:26 pm to whodidthat
quote:
Plenty of different ways to fight a war. The combined forces of the top 10 countries alone could be enough. One suicide bomber alone, in a strategic strike, can kill up to hundreds. It's not like the world would need to send all of their forces across the seas. Small, strategic strikes can cause plenty of damage.
Sure but they'd have to get past American air/missile defenses. And if they did that they'd then have to go against F 15s, F 22s, and the like
quote:
Yes they are easily the top navy in the world. But you're forgetting the cumulative effect of having the remaining top 10 navies combine their forces. That evens out the playing field by a lot. The US would still have an advantage, but it wouldn't overpowering. Lots of other countries had great navies even before the U.S. became a powerhouse. One on one it's barely a challenge, but when they combine it's a whole different war.
While they'd have numbers that may not be enough considering the quality of the US fleet. And, I believe, the US submarine fleet is far and away superior in both numbers and quality. It'd be a battle of attrition that favors the US IMO.
And even with all other nations fleets combined they still have 12 carriers to the US's 10 active and 2 in reserve. And their carriers are not the size or quality of the Nimitz class and ESPECIALLY the Ford class Carriers
This post was edited on 3/26/14 at 10:27 pm
Page 2 of 17
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News