- 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 11:41 pm to Deactived
Posted on 3/26/14 at 11:41 pm to Deactived
quote:
Didnt think of this.
Would this be allowed in this hypothetical?
Hell if I know. The biggest problem we are all having in this debate is we are trying to bring sense and tactics into an operation that would basically throw all of that into the wind
1
Posted on 3/26/14 at 11:46 pm to Deactived
quote:
and how exactly are these billions of people getting here?
and who the hell both has an army of 1.5 billion?
Even more important for the folks in this equation would be how in the hell they would actually manage to feed and supply an army of 1.5 billion, either on our shores or getting them to us. The logistics would be completely impossible, even if they could manage to get across the ocean. They would starve out before they could even get into our country. And the folks saying we would run out of energy are insane, we'd have enough resources to easily last 30-40 years with no outside imports, even oil. The only possible issues would be the rare metals for electronics depending on how big our stockpile was.
We could lose a war of attrition over a decade if the entire world put their economies together to build fleets and come after us, but nobody would have the stomach for that sort of war.
This post was edited on 3/26/14 at 11:47 pm
Posted on 3/26/14 at 11:48 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
SlowFlowPro
If the entire world attacked the USA...quote: By the time it got to shootouts the US would be fricked.
we, as America, cannot adequately hold backwater, poor countries like Iraq and Afghanistan
Different war entirely with non traditional force and without the entire might of the military brought to bear. Also America will have home court advantage and the positioning of troops to Canada and Mexico by opfor limited by lack of modes of transport and sustainability.
Posted on 3/26/14 at 11:49 pm to LaFlyer
US would be screwed. It would be no contest.
Posted on 3/26/14 at 11:51 pm to auyushu
quote:
And the folks saying we would run out of energy are insane, we'd have enough resources to easily last 30-40 years with no outside imports, even oil.
No.
Posted on 3/26/14 at 11:52 pm to UpToPar
quote:
quote:Those that survive our air force and ground to air attack would then face those 300 million+ privately owned firearms and the military
quote:.
You are giving far too much credence to the armed civilians. This would be a war primarily fought from the air and in the water. By the time it got to shootouts the US would be fricked.
quote:
UpToPar
I disagree, the ability to handle firearms and a basic knowledge of them is a distinct advantage versus other countries.
Air and water have never won a war, they have provided support for infantry and armour on strategic and tactical basis, but it always comes down to ground forces to seize, hold, and annihilate.
Posted on 3/26/14 at 11:53 pm to RogerTheShrubber
Look at Germany in WWII.
They started out with a superior Air Force and army and if not for an inept leader Europe would be speaking German.
They started out with a superior Air Force and army and if not for an inept leader Europe would be speaking German.
Posted on 3/26/14 at 11:53 pm to Damn Good Dawg
Yea this whole notion of oh the world would have a year to move a shite ton of people to our north and south neighbors.
Well I guess I can say that within that year we can station forces where as soon as the "go" button is pushed, every major industrial corridor and city along the borders would be blown to bits. And this would be done with the minimal amount of military as possible.
This hypothetical is fun though because we really have zero idea how it would play out
Well I guess I can say that within that year we can station forces where as soon as the "go" button is pushed, every major industrial corridor and city along the borders would be blown to bits. And this would be done with the minimal amount of military as possible.
This hypothetical is fun though because we really have zero idea how it would play out
Posted on 3/26/14 at 11:54 pm to UpToPar
quote:
No.
Yes. Now if you want to talk about a magical scenario where they are destroying our ability to refine and produce then that's one thing. But as far actual supply we can easily make do. Our coal and natural gas reserves are huge. And if we are in a full fledged war with the entire world it's not like people are going to be living the same lives anyway, rationing of some sort would be happening.
Posted on 3/26/14 at 11:54 pm to RogerTheShrubber
The way that I'm seeing it is that the way that we would lose would be a slow strangling of our economy by draining our resources and being cut off from importing more resources. This is assuming that the war was able to be sustained for a long period of time and no one ever lost resolve. After that maybe an attack would work. And even after that the only way that an occupation would last would probably be genocide.
ETA: The way to drain our resources would be to force our offensive movement. Attack American forces abroad. Force us to try to occupy the world.
ETA: The way to drain our resources would be to force our offensive movement. Attack American forces abroad. Force us to try to occupy the world.
This post was edited on 3/27/14 at 12:00 am
Posted on 3/26/14 at 11:55 pm to BurasTigah
quote:
BurasTigah
quote:
Lol, as a person that has been employed in the generation side of the energy sector, we would be fricked. Only people with it would be factories and anything else necessary for war. Be too expensive for the average person. Our lives would be sent back in time. Say goodbye to smart phones and the internet. Everything would have to be sacrificed to keep the war machine going
I disagree, the War Powers Act will nationalize certain sectors and with a year to prepare to boot.
Posted on 3/26/14 at 11:57 pm to theunknownknight
quote:How would the 3 billion fricking troops get there?
If the latter, I could see a scenario of two 1.5 billion + armies marching in from Mexico and in from Canada. That's right...Our neighbors would be our worst enemies. In that event, the USA gets creamed easily.
There are a lot of working parts to this scenario, but the most essential thing is getting boots on the ground, which there is a 1000% chance our intel is going to detect the troop movements of 3 billion. I can't even fathom how long, how many trips, etc that would require.
As soon as the movement is detected, shite will get real very quickly, leading to a naval/air confrontation, which will prevent, one way or another, the buildup.
No matter what way you slice it, it's virtually impossible to succeed, as in it couldn't even get to a beginning point...and you have some in here saying the US would lose hands-down.
I guess I shouldn't be surprised.
But OKAY, let's magically transport those 1.5B troops to Mexico and Canada. Can you fathom the logistical support needed for 1.5(3) billion frickING troops??
What are they going to eat? Where are they going to shite/piss? You're talking about another degree of impossibility. How many troops would it take to occupy Houston? Consider every large city on the peripheral of the US and the number of boots to secure that. Inconceivable!!!
I could go on, but hopefully have shed some light on the many degrees of impossibility.
Posted on 3/26/14 at 11:59 pm to LaFlyer
quote:
I disagree, the ability to handle firearms and a basic knowledge of them is a distinct advantage versus other countries. Air and water have never won a war, they have provided support for infantry and armour on strategic and tactical basis, but it always comes down to ground forces to seize, hold, and annihilate.
If it got to the point where armed citizens were protecting our boarders there would be chaos. What about the people that don't have arms? Would they just rely on the armed citizens or would they attempt to arm themselves? Surely they wouldn't be able to purchase arms or ammunition as all of those resources would be funneled to the military.
If it came down to that the US would implode from within. There would be chaos in all major cities.
Posted on 3/27/14 at 12:01 am to SmackoverHawg
quote:Just reading through now. Cool to see others with the same thoughts.
Imagine the resources wasted just to get them here. Then you'd have to feed, water, house and train them. Not to mention sanitation. shite, they'd be circling the drain before it started. They'd be like locusts in Mexico and Canada.
Posted on 3/27/14 at 12:01 am to pensacola
No nukes or WMD means it will ultimately boil down to a war of attrition.
USA: 314,000,000
World: 6,838,000,000
Regardless of air force and navy advantages, the US would be outmanned roughly 22:1
World wins hands down
USA: 314,000,000
World: 6,838,000,000
Regardless of air force and navy advantages, the US would be outmanned roughly 22:1
World wins hands down
Posted on 3/27/14 at 12:02 am to bulldog95
quote:
LSUBrad5277
If the entire world attacked the USA...Look at Germany in WWII. They started out with a superior Air Force and army and if not for an inept leader Europe would be speaking German
Germany was fighting a war on at least three fronts originally from an offensive posture. Their technological advantage was overcome in time. Also their armed forces were tactical in nature with no ability to project power other than on the ground. Hitler was certainly not inept in a planning of battle role, however I agree his flunkies, Goering, Himmler, and political General staff certainly were. The distrust of Wehrmacht Prussian Professional officers was his major downfall.
Posted on 3/27/14 at 12:02 am to Peazey
quote:
This is assuming that the war was able to be sustained for a long period of time and no one ever lost resolve
See thats where I think we prevail. I dont think the world could keep up the attack.
If they bring most of their "troops" for the initial attack, I think our military and our population can hold that off. They are also trying to invade us on our homeland.
If they dont bring the majority of their troops here initially, the logistics of getting any sizable force here for a legit attack is next to impossible.
Posted on 3/27/14 at 12:04 am to UpToPar
quote:
If it got to the point where armed citizens were protecting our boarders there would be chaos. What about the people that don't have arms? Would
YOU underestimate our people. Some would panic. And many of our attackers would shite themselves and desert. It happens. We'd also have a year to train.
Another thing is they would have to amass and feed these troops without our exports. I believe we are now a net exporter of oil. And America feeds the world. We'd stockpile our shite while they depleted theirs just getting here.
Posted on 3/27/14 at 12:05 am to auyushu
quote:
Now if you want to talk about a magical scenario where they are destroying our ability to refine and produce then that's one thing.
What good are they if you can't use them?
quote:
But as far actual supply we can easily make do. Our coal and natural gas reserves are huge.
Sure, we have tons of natural gas, but currently we are not capable or producing that natural gas at the drop of a hat. That would take infrastructure and resources, which in a time like this would be stretched thin.
quote:
And if we are in a full fledged war with the entire world it's not like people are going to be living the same lives anyway, rationing of some sort would be happening.
Obviously, but the question is to what extent? If you ration too much you run the risk of complete chaos from within. Times like this would only highlight the division of the economic classes and probably spark a civil war between the classes.
Posted on 3/27/14 at 12:06 am to USMCTiger03
The transportation of 1+ billion troops here is just not possible.
Sorry but this doesnt come down to a numbers game.
quote:
USA: 314,000,000
World: 6,838,000,000
Regardless of air force and navy advantages, the US would be outmanned roughly 22:1
World wins hands down
Sorry but this doesnt come down to a numbers game.
Page 8 of 17
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News