- 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
Posted on 3/27/14 at 11:00 am to Tchefuncte Tiger
quote:
We would have too much of an insurgency because of our diverse population to fight any external enemy.
This is what would worry me more than tanks rolling in from canada. We can hold off anyone from coming in. But what do we do about those who are already here and in hiding?
Posted on 3/27/14 at 11:04 am to USMCTiger03
quote:
USMCTiger03
It's nuts how all of last night and even after I went to bed people still 1) think that we are fighting the entire world's population including the old, sick, women, and children 2) they think that these people are just gonna jaunt over to Canada/Mexico no problemo 3) that the logistics for feeding this massive army is easy as pie 4) don't know diddly shite about geography. I'm not saying the other side doesn't have an argument but the arguments that keep coming up in this thread despite being completely refuted are fricking mind boggling

Posted on 3/27/14 at 11:23 am to Damn Good Dawg
I think most aren't reading through the thread and are oblivious to the details.
I think access and logistics have to be ignored to even have the discussion.
I think access and logistics have to be ignored to even have the discussion.
Posted on 3/27/14 at 11:27 am to Riseupfromtherubble
quote:
Outdoor Board would wreck house.
TRUTH 2nd Amendment allows for the largest standing army in the world. Over 300 million firearms in the hands of US citizens. Even if a small fraction of total gun owners took up arms you would have by default the largest armed ground force in the world.
Not saying it would be organized but no army in the world could handle street to street fighting across our entire landmass.
This post was edited on 3/27/14 at 11:28 am
Posted on 3/27/14 at 11:34 am to bayoudude
quote:
street to street fighting across our entire landmass.
You really think they will stop in Mississippi?
Posted on 3/27/14 at 11:42 am to pensacola
This may have been posted... didn't read the whole tread...
This scenario will never happen.
The world won't attack the US, not because they are scared of our might... but because other countries owns significant amounts of property and financial investments in the US.
This scenario will never happen.
The world won't attack the US, not because they are scared of our might... but because other countries owns significant amounts of property and financial investments in the US.
Posted on 3/27/14 at 11:46 am to USMCTiger03
quote:
I think most aren't reading through the thread and are oblivious to the details.
I think access and logistics have to be ignored to even have the discussion.
Exactly they really have to suspend reality for this to work. Roll a massive army of 1 billion or so through the mountainous deserts of northern Mexico? Where will the launching point from Canada be? British Columbia? Have fun navigating through the Canadian Rockies. Maybe come in through the Hudson Bay (isn't that usually frozen anyway? I don't know.)? They'd still have to traverse hundreds of miles just to reach the nearest point of the US. They could try the St. Lawrence River, but I imagine our navy could take care of that narrow entryway. I would also have to imagine that in preparation of an invasion we'd knock out any forward base that the rest of the world would use: namely airfields and seaports in Canada, Mexico, Cuba, Bermuda, and Iceland. Oh yeah and as someone else mentioned, we'd take out the Panama Canal as well.
Posted on 3/27/14 at 11:49 am to Tchefuncte Tiger
quote:
We would have too much of an insurgency because of our diverse population to fight any external enemy.
Weren't we pretty unified after 9/11?
Posted on 3/27/14 at 11:50 am to pensacola
The sheer numbers alone with no nukes/WMD allowed would make this a pretty easy victory for the rest of the world.
US population vs. Rest of world
Just a numbers game at that point, even with our superior military.
US population vs. Rest of world
Just a numbers game at that point, even with our superior military.
Posted on 3/27/14 at 11:52 am to btwnthehedges91
quote:
The sheer numbers alone with no nukes/WMD allowed would make this a pretty easy victory for the rest of the world.
US population vs. Rest of world
Just a numbers game at that point, even with our superior military.
Once again, how would they invade?
Posted on 3/27/14 at 12:08 pm to OFWHAP
quote:
Once again, how would they invade?
They wouldn't need to, you can collapse a nation without invading.
Posted on 3/27/14 at 12:22 pm to Dam Guide
quote:
They wouldn't need to, you can collapse a nation without invading.
the US would be able to do this to a good number of the world's nations
The US navy and air force would be able to cripple the world's infrastructure in a number of hours
This post was edited on 3/27/14 at 12:23 pm
Posted on 3/27/14 at 1:17 pm to TigerBait1127
(no message)
This post was edited on 10/20/21 at 4:25 pm
Posted on 3/27/14 at 1:26 pm to Dam Guide
quote:
They wouldn't need to, you can collapse a nation without invading.
There are plenty who are already thinking:
Posted on 3/27/14 at 1:38 pm to lsutiger2010
quote:
Also, people are claiming that the world would just march through Alaska and invade through Canada.
When they take over the Panama Canal, things get really interesting down South too. Takes a long time to get around the Cape. How many assets can you allocate to babysit the canal when the people on both sides are hostile? All while you're busy holding off all these rowboats heading directly to our coastlines. And, oh darn, we can't use our bases in the Pacific, except for the brief time we could hold onto Hawaii. The Pacific would be a mess. Don't even want to think what will happen to our places in Europe when everyone turns the weapons we have pre-positioned there against us. Or are they just going to let us pull all that stuff out during the one year buildup? The more I think about it, it wouldn't take The World long to shitcan us.
This post was edited on 3/27/14 at 1:40 pm
Posted on 3/27/14 at 1:49 pm to btwnthehedges91
quote:
US population vs. Rest of world
Just a numbers game at that point, even with our superior military.
Read the thread. This is everything but a numbers game.
The numbers actually hurt the other side
Posted on 3/27/14 at 1:57 pm to pensacola
This would make an awesome movie.



Posted on 3/27/14 at 2:07 pm to lsutiger2010
quote:
Do you really think the president would just let this happen with the world sitting on our doorstep?
Uh........
It's honestly a lose lose scenario if it came down to citizens having to protect the US from a takeover. You either have only a minority of citizens who are able to somewhat protect themselves, or you provide citizens with arms so a majority would be able to defend.
In the first scenario you have chaos in that the ones who are armed will be able to protect themselves and the ones who are not will attempt to arm themselves so they can adequately protect themselves. Without assistance from the government literally handing out guns and ammo the prices would be far to high for a vast majority of people to purchase arms.
In the second scenario (assuming the government is arming people for free) you now have a majority of your citizens armed in what most people would consider to be a SHTF scenario. There would be absolute chaos. You would have more civilians killing each other than the world killing our civilians. It does not take much to cause chaos, and the potential for the end of life as we know it coupled with the government arming every able bodied person would be plenty to tip the scales.
Popular
Back to top
