If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
Essential support for under 25s
Essential support for under 25s
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
For the world to stand a chance of winning against the US, we would have to relied heavily on the aspect of surprise, But its not like the US wouldn't hear about the rest of the world declaring war on it!!
I've been playing "Command & Conquer"'s Red Aler2 too much!!
Oh come off it...The idea of the world vs the USA is laughable enough but the idea of the world getting organised within a couple of days?
You really need to think this through mate...They cannot be attacked by land..They have the panama canal to the south and the fuckin north pole up top. Nobody could land any sizeable amount of troops on US soil. Nobody can attack from the air simply because of the distance involved. Remind me again who all the B52s and B1/B2 bombers belong to? Who else has planes that can fly all over the globe without refuelling? Go take a look at the numbers to see how good the navies of the world are...
Exactly Harmless, its not as though the USA is going to somehow miss the entire world ganging up on her and then somehow miss the buildup of forces until the day of the attack.
I hear we're ready to strike on Tuesday
Fact is, there would be no winner. America is far stronger than any other single country, and also most of them put together. If all the others rallyed together I'm sure the 4 (odd) billion could beat the 250 million. But basically... everyone would die.
But could we not station ourselves in surrounding areas, the carrabian, mexico, canada, even south america ? Oh sod it, your probably right, never really considered it before :rolleyes: I just can't comprehend how a population of billions upon billions couldn't somehow defeat a population dwarfed by its rival and with the comprable land masses/resources to attack/defend, how many troops does the US have in comparison to the rest of the world combined ? How many more necular heads compared to the rest of the world ?
Mate, you need to understand the logistics of the situation...The caribbean is maybe 100 miles off the coast of the US, anything put there would be flattened in seconds. Mexico would be immediately taken over by US forces in days, Canada would be the same. Neither have an army which could stand against US forces.
Even if there were 50 billion vs the USA, it wouldnt make a damn bit of difference if those 50 billion soldiers couldnt get to the US in order to fight.
The US probably has more working nuclear warheads than the rest of the world put together...and then some.
Military strikes? While the US has been proven vulnerable to terrorist attacks, in that even though the script for jet airliners as the weapon had been written a decade previous, no one in power had given enough credence to the scenario being employed, and we all know the result. A MILITARY strike however...
Let us observe this. Thanatos Jr's MOS is signals and intelligence. His job is to monitor the world. While most of what his job entails is HIGHLY CLASSIFIED, what is not is sufficient to give cause to believe that NO ONE is going to surprise the US militarily. It AIN'T a gonna happen. :rolleyes:
Now... let us say - for the sake of argument - that the "Red Dawn" invasion comes, and somehow, you sneak past, blast your way past the US military (a marvelous wetdream, if there ever was one). Please remember... while all "civilised" nations of the world are disarming their civilian populations, which country is resisting most vehemently?
Consider the military experience of those "old farts" who served in Vietnam, and other "imperialistic" actions... and their numbers. If you think we fought hard in places like Bastogne or Khe Sanh - on someone elses patch of real estate - what do you think it would be like on our own?
Ready for your "edification"? It is waiting for you to come searching for it...
You REALLY want to "bring it" to the US?
{btw ~ this should NOT be construed as a "threat" of violence, but interpreted as a PROMISE of the consequences resultant to a delusional act...
I'm not sure exactly how this topic got onto the world vs the USA, strange but anyway. We all know the only people who could beat the USA are the Soviets in Command and Conquer Red Alert 2. And they used pyschics and nukes
However the above quote does strike me as overconfidence.
Do you seriously think, that if the combined armed forces of a few countries could destroy your military, a few thousand civilians armed with nothing more than rifles and handguns will be enough to do what the US military couldn't??? lmao. How many SAMs are in the hands of civilians, how many anti-tank missiles, how many armoured vehicles?
The image of a US citizen armed to the teeth with nothing more than an AK-47 trying to hold off a few armoured platoons just makes me want to laugh.
I'm sorry, that would be to big an operation to keep secret!!
The US FBI would hear about it, because it would take months to get a plan like that ready!
No, no it wouldnt...Your scenario is just silly. This kind of situation could not arise overnight. If the USA was at the point of war with the rest of the planet, you can be damn sure they wouldnt be maintaining their commercial flight plans. The entire political structure of the world would have changed, its stupid to simply come up with these scenarios and use the current political climate, it just couldnt happen.
There would be years of buildup before any large war. Think of WW2, Hitlers buildup went on for almost a decade before he went to war...He didnt surprise anyone, well except the french apparently
Yamamoto didnt think it was that funny a concept....
There are something like 80,000,000 armed Americans..That totally eclipses the armed forces of every military in the world combined...The idea isnt that they face of with the armoured platoons or whatever, its the idea of the entire population being armed and able to work as guerillas...
As Balddog states, it isn't thousands, it is untold millions.
It is not simply owning rifles and handguns, but consider the millions of ex-military service veterans who were trained in the use of tactics, explosives, etc, and then the millions of veterans of actual war. Yeah, those of us who were in Vietnam are now in our 50's and 60's, and are not the physical equal of what we were. But... do you think we have forgotten? Do you think that if our homeland were invaded, we could not / would not teach and lead the hundred million who would follow us?
As the saying goes, if you want to occupy US soil? "Best bring your lunch." But don't worry about eating it... we will be the ones eating your lunch, after having dispatched you.
Overconfidence? Naw... just a non-delusional comprehension of reality. Doubt it? Come and get some...
You take such great glee in reminding us that we are the most murderous nation on earth. Even our own police cannot subdue us. You think an occupying military could long survive when there are ten Indians to every Cowboy.
Consult General Custer upon the concept. You can share the laugh together, after we dispatch you to join him...
Given that military grade plutonium is traceable in a rather precise way, all that would accomplish besides killing millions of civilians is to turn your country or countries into smoking holes. The US policy for dealing with nuclear attack is still retaliation, and your Airbuses won't get anywhere close to the facilities that launch that retaliation.
Whowhere,
Training people to do just that is what I do. Believe me, a few million (not thousands) armed citizens are any military forces worst nightmare. All you have to do is look at Chechnya to get the idea.
SAMs? Take them.
AT weapons? Make them (not difficult).
Armored vehicles? Aren't necessary. Seen that big armored deployment in Afghanistan? Why is that?
AK-47's are close quarters weapons, as are handguns.
The FAL that I posted the photo of literally CAN perform the circumcision without the amputation at 100 meters, groups 3" or less at 200 meters, and will easily hit and kill a man at 500 meters.
Then we get to hunting rifles... MUCH more powerful rifles with optics. Even our own gun-grabber political sheep have taken to calling them "sniper rifles". My own 7mmRemMag bolt gun? Well... I ain't a gonna tell you.
Box cutters are not exactly the same as nuclear weapons. Think about "signature".
When y'all start believing that video games represent reality... well... it be YORE skivvies be descending below yore knees.
The real world does not always play out like the video games. Some of us are veterans of the real world...
I think that was the point he was trying to make, to an extent. Note that he said the "only" forces capable were in a video game...
Guys, this thread is really turning moronic. The US is better prepared, better armed and a harder target than any of you give credit. Any soldier (and some people who aren't) knows that someone defending homesoil is gonna be well prepared, fight more keenly and is going to be better motivated (Iraqis excluded
Fuckit, they nearly always manage to do it on other people's homesoil too :rolleyes: