Started By
Message

re: If the entire world attacked the USA...

Posted on 3/27/14 at 10:45 am to
Posted by Tchefuncte Tiger
Bat'n Rudge
Member since Oct 2004
60704 posts
Posted on 3/27/14 at 10:45 am to
We would have too much of an insurgency because of our diverse population to fight any external enemy.
Posted by SundayFunday
Member since Sep 2011
9632 posts
Posted on 3/27/14 at 11:00 am to
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 by Damn Good Dawg
Member since Feb 2011
47325 posts
Posted on 3/27/14 at 11:04 am to
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 by USMCTiger03
Member since Sep 2007
71176 posts
Posted on 3/27/14 at 11:23 am to
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.
Posted by bayoudude
Member since Dec 2007
25541 posts
Posted on 3/27/14 at 11:27 am to
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 by CadesCove
Mounting the Woman
Member since Oct 2006
40828 posts
Posted on 3/27/14 at 11:34 am to
quote:

street to street fighting across our entire landmass.


You really think they will stop in Mississippi?
Posted by Lokistale
Member since Aug 2013
1238 posts
Posted on 3/27/14 at 11:42 am to
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.
Posted by OFWHAP
Member since Sep 2007
5416 posts
Posted on 3/27/14 at 11:46 am to
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 by OFWHAP
Member since Sep 2007
5416 posts
Posted on 3/27/14 at 11:49 am to
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 by btwnthehedges91
Athens
Member since Sep 2008
8214 posts
Posted on 3/27/14 at 11:50 am to
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.
Posted by OFWHAP
Member since Sep 2007
5416 posts
Posted on 3/27/14 at 11:52 am to
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 by Dam Guide
Member since Sep 2005
16286 posts
Posted on 3/27/14 at 12:08 pm to
quote:

Once again, how would they invade?


They wouldn't need to, you can collapse a nation without invading.
Posted by TigerBait1127
Houston
Member since Jun 2005
47336 posts
Posted on 3/27/14 at 12:22 pm to
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 by lsutiger2010
Member since Aug 2008
14790 posts
Posted on 3/27/14 at 1:17 pm to
(no message)
This post was edited on 10/20/21 at 4:25 pm
Posted by CadesCove
Mounting the Woman
Member since Oct 2006
40828 posts
Posted on 3/27/14 at 1:26 pm to
quote:

They wouldn't need to, you can collapse a nation without invading.


There are plenty who are already thinking:

Posted by CadesCove
Mounting the Woman
Member since Oct 2006
40828 posts
Posted on 3/27/14 at 1:38 pm to
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 by LSU fan 246
Member since Oct 2005
90567 posts
Posted on 3/27/14 at 1:49 pm to
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 by olemc999
At a blackjack table
Member since Oct 2010
14540 posts
Posted on 3/27/14 at 1:57 pm to
This would make an awesome movie.

Posted by YouAre8Up
in a house
Member since Mar 2011
12792 posts
Posted on 3/27/14 at 1:57 pm to
Posted by UpToPar
Baton Rouge
Member since Sep 2008
22284 posts
Posted on 3/27/14 at 2:07 pm to
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.
Jump to page
Page First 12 13 14 15 16 17
Jump to page
first pageprev pagePage 14 of 17Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram