Started By
Message

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

Posted on 3/27/14 at 4:25 pm to
Posted by Scream4LSU
Member since Sep 2007
1140 posts
Posted on 3/27/14 at 4:25 pm to
I haven't read about the Red Ball in a long time. We still outran our logistics. I don't think a lot of people realize just how big the United States is. Has anyone discussed what the general populus would do? You think the French resistance was a problem for the Germans what do you think a bunch of well armed Texans will do.
Posted by DoUrden
UnderDark
Member since Oct 2011
25965 posts
Posted on 3/27/14 at 4:25 pm to
quote:

Outdoor Board would wreck house.


LINK NSFW
Posted by Scream4LSU
Member since Sep 2007
1140 posts
Posted on 3/27/14 at 4:27 pm to
Exactly, see my last. These guys aren't gonna just sit around. I have 3 safes full of response to an invasion myself.
Posted by OFWHAP
Member since Sep 2007
5416 posts
Posted on 3/27/14 at 4:34 pm to
quote:

to give you an idea of what we're talking, Operation Overlord used 6,939 ships. That's everything from the battleships giving fire support, to troop transports, to supply ships. All that was required to land 130,000 ground troops on a beachhead spanning an area (if I remember correctly approximately 60 miles wide.

The invasion force you describe would be over 100,000 bigger than the Operation Overlord force. Thus, you'd need approximately 800,000,000 vessels to have an Overlord type land force on the scale being discussed here.



And that convoy moved our troops from southern Great Britain to northern France, not a very long distance. It'd be quite a shite show having Team World move a larger convoy all the way across the Atlantic or Pacific. We'd have to agree to let them stage in Bermuda/Cuba/Bahamas/Iceland first, which of course we'd never agree to unless we had some kind of gentlemen's agreement in place to make this a fair fight.
Posted by Darth_Vader
A galaxy far, far away
Member since Dec 2011
68929 posts
Posted on 3/27/14 at 4:49 pm to
quote:

And that convoy moved our troops from southern Great Britain to northern France, not a very long distance. It'd be quite a shite show having Team World move a larger convoy all the way across the Atlantic or Pacific. We'd have to agree to let them stage in Bermuda/Cuba/Bahamas/Iceland first, which of course we'd never agree to unless we had some kind of gentlemen's agreement in place to make this a fair fight.



Hell, even if we agreed to let them stage in the Caribbean, imagine how long it would take them to just unload the millions of ships they'd need.
Posted by dukke v
PLUTO
Member since Jul 2006
213341 posts
Posted on 3/27/14 at 4:55 pm to
quote:

If the entire world attacked the USA...... And we had 1 year advance warning


A YEAR????? How stupid are you????? Give the U.S A. three days and its OVER...............
Posted by LSU fan 246
Member since Oct 2005
90567 posts
Posted on 3/27/14 at 5:09 pm to
/thread
Posted by OFWHAP
Member since Sep 2007
5416 posts
Posted on 3/27/14 at 5:10 pm to
quote:

A YEAR????? How stupid are you????? Give the U.S A. three days and its OVER...............



Welp, time to learn every language =/= English...
Posted by USMCTiger03
Member since Sep 2007
71176 posts
Posted on 3/27/14 at 5:19 pm to
quote:

The world. Maybe not easily, but the sheer numbers of soldiers fighting against us would be too much to overcome IMO.

So you're assuming the troops and equipment will be able to be magically transported in theater and not need food or water?

If that, maybe there's a discussion.
Posted by CXSteve
Member since Oct 2012
873 posts
Posted on 3/28/14 at 6:40 am to
USA should, we spend more on Military than rest of world combined. But history shows we have enough trouble with small poor countries like Vientnam & Iraq, that i think the World takes it.
Posted by Mike da Tigah
Bravo Romeo Lima Alpha
Member since Feb 2005
60784 posts
Posted on 3/28/14 at 6:55 am to
As in China, Russia, North Korea, South Korea, Great Britain, France, Germany, Iran, Canada, Australia, Israel, the Entire Middle East, all of South and Central America and all with a year to prep and cut our oil supply off attacking us from bases in Canada, Soutth, and Central America?

Yeah... The world wins, and it wouldn't take very long.



Posted by USAF Hart
My House
Member since Jun 2011
10273 posts
Posted on 3/28/14 at 7:07 am to
We would easily win. Air Force/Navy covering the skies, Navy also covering the water, Army/Marines covering the ground..We recruit the gangs of America (Bloods,Crips (sp?), MS13, etc.) and give them immunity on any killings of the enemies (not to include other gangs).
Posted by MDTiger 13
Member since Nov 2010
1032 posts
Posted on 3/28/14 at 7:09 am to
We have tons of oil in the gulf and off west coast. I'd say Alaska but that and Hawaii are pretty much sacrificial lambs at this point. Were the world to get close enough to take those out, hope is lost. No matter though, with the outdoor board, Texas having to move their Air Force to Louisiana (I see this as a mandatory tactical considering the large size and overall vulnerability of Texas), and a year to prepare defenses, the Battle of the South will still be taught in schools for centuries
Posted by Wtodd
Tampa, FL
Member since Oct 2013
68122 posts
Posted on 3/28/14 at 7:28 am to
quote:

But history shows we have enough trouble with small poor countries like Vientnam & Iraq

Only because we didn't go into either place with the gloves off.....we try to kill the enemy without killing civilians and that usually doesn't end well.
Posted by Mike da Tigah
Bravo Romeo Lima Alpha
Member since Feb 2005
60784 posts
Posted on 3/28/14 at 7:35 am to
quote:

We have tons of oil in the gulf and off west coast. I'd say Alaska but that and Hawaii are pretty much sacrificial lambs at this point.


Oh, it's there, but even if we were to start drilling, and then refining, i don't know that a year would be long enough to make a real difference. If we were completely cut off overnight tonight, it would cripple us temporarily because were not prepared for it.

Truth is, if the world decided to take America out in a joint effort, without nukes to consider, America would be in trouble, first in our bases scattered overseas, and then finally on our own turf. I think America is as foolish as Hitler was if it thinks it can fight that many enemies on that many fronts at one time. China alone would be a very daunting task if they decided to unleash their hordes on us. Getting to this part of the world would be a real challenge, because of our navy, but as you're trying to prevent Russia from taking Alaska, you'd also have to prevent foreign militaries from making their way to Soith America, Europe from making their way to Iceland, Greenland, Canada, others from setting up bases in the Carribean, Cuba, Bermuda, Hawaii, etc. it would be a frickin mess, make no mistake about that.

Now, when you factor in Obama cutting our military, you have that to consider as well.



This post was edited on 3/28/14 at 7:39 am
Posted by pensacola
pensacola
Member since Sep 2005
4734 posts
Posted on 3/28/14 at 9:12 pm to
I wonder what a modern sea battle would look like. The Brits fared poorly with the Exocet in the Falklands, but their boats effectively ended the threat of troop or supply reinforcements via ships. Could we keep our sub bases open for redeployments?
Jump to page
Page First 15 16 17
Jump to page
first pageprev pagePage 17 of 17Next pagelast page
refresh

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