Would it be possible to invade the US?

[ahurtt]

Originally posted by: Amplifier

Originally posted by: Taggart
Well, there is a difference btwn 'invasion' and 'conquered.' You mean conquered? Invaded, yes, conquered, yes, if nuclear weapons and/or other WMD's were involved.

Conquered would be asking too much for the invaders. I'll give them credit if they can hold California for over a year.

They can have California for all I care.

 

[TallBill]

lol.. if you voted yes, your a moron. Nobody could get past our navy/air force, let alone get down to fighting against our army or citizens.

 

[ahurtt]

Originally posted by: Mr N8
Could we be invaded? Yes, of course, but the invading party wouldn't last very long. The attack would have to be done and over with quickly, because once it happened, getting reinforcements in would be nearly impossible.

No it wouldn't. They could just walk over from Canada and Mexico and amass by hiding amongst our population like they are doing now.

 

[43st]

Originally posted by: RadioHead84
Any force that would try to invade the US would need a massive amount of people. Do you think that a army of that size could equip their soldiers and vehicles with the best of the best? No a army of that size would not be very well equiped and rely on the sure numbers of people. So iI dont think it would be modern warfare where guns that we have wouldnt matter it..it would be a bloody fight.

Who needs troops if your enemy is immobile? Just bomb the fsck out of them until you need a shop vac to bury the dead.

EDIT: horrible spelling

 

[Eli]

Originally posted by: ahurtt

Originally posted by: Mr N8
Could we be invaded? Yes, of course, but the invading party wouldn't last very long. The attack would have to be done and over with quickly, because once it happened, getting reinforcements in would be nearly impossible.

No it wouldn't. They could just walk over from Canada and Mexico and amass by hiding amongst our population like they are doing now.

:shocked:

But seriously, if mexicans can make it across the boarder... Well, frankly I'm shocked we haven't seen a briefcase nuke over here yet.

 

[RadioHead84]

becuase its not like everyone has a nuke in a breifcase.

 

[Spike]

Originally posted by: Eli

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Russia and Canada would be extremely hard to take over. They have the inhospitible weather on their side. They don't need to wipe out the invaders, all they have to do is stall them and block their supply lines. Then let the brutal winter take over.

I think Canada would be very easy to conquer. It would take about 2 days.

Canada is the other half of NORAD. You don't really think that the US is just going to sit there while somebody takes over Canada, do you? Attacking Canada would be just as easy as attacking the US, since we'd be right there.

Well I was talking about it in more isolated terms - without the US being involved. If Canada has its big brother coming in to protect it then it would be hard to conquer it.

Canada by itself would probably be conquered within a day or two.

LOL... do you realize how big Canada is?

They may only have 32 million people, but they're spread out over 4 million square miles....

Not only that but Canada can play the "land for time" game giving up huge amounts of land to an invading army and then hitting it while it is streched thin to cover all the space. Canada may have a small armed force but they are well trained (US and Canada to joint training all the time) and they have been in their fair share of conflicts.

Though the land for time thing is hard for a country to do, I bet most of them would not be very upset if the land in question was Quebec...

-spike

 

[Spike]

Originally posted by: sjetexas

Originally posted by: Cleaner
You don't take over a country by defeating its army. You take it over by delegitimizing its government. Without a central gov. all hell will break loose. No control. Then they just take over the rest of the country at will. First strikes to all of the 50 state capitals and washington would do it. Then mopping up exercises after that.

Except thats just not possible. At BEST, an enemy is looking at mutally assured destruction. Annhiliate all of the government, you're still dead. Think of all the nuclear subs out there whose purpose is to make sure nothing is left of an enemy if we are hit with the force you describe. We will get that order out before our chain of command goes down....ICBMs aren't invisible.

Actually if the US is under nuclear attack then the subs (ohio class SSBN's) will go to their pre-determined launch sites, program the warheads, and lauch at the established time if they are not recalled. No actual launch order is required though this does require the country to be at DEFCON 1

-spike

 

[scorpmatt]

I voted and broke the tie?

 

[PanzerIV]

First, intelligence sources would pick up that an invasion force was building up through spys, satellite imagery and listening posts around the globe. Even if somehow by a miracle nothing was ever known of this event the geographical isolation that has served us so well over the centuries would again help our cause. It would take a very long time for any appreciable force to arrive on our shores in which time they would be detected and trigger a reaction.

Secondly, our allies such as Canada, Great Britian and Austraila, to name but a few, would come to our aid. No foreign country at this point has a military force strong enough to fend off the combined powers of our allies. Now, in this scenario if we were to believe that one of the aforementioned countries was to initiate the invasion which in itself is preposterous, they would still face the other factors I mentioned.

Third, never underestimate the power of the people. Think back to Afghanistan, Vietnam's Viet Cong, partisan fighters in WWII and currently Iraq. Controlling all of the continental US would be all but impossible and provide countless hiding places for rebel forces to operate from and fight. History has shown a determined force fighting for their homeland can defeat a foreign invader.

Ultimately the US will crumble like all great powers have over history but at this time we are the most powerful nation on Earth and it's unthinkable that an invader could occupy our lands.

 

[DougK62]

Originally posted by: scorpmatt
I voted and broke the tie?

I don't know, did you?

(for future reference, a question mark is only used to ask a question)

 

[FoBoT]

Originally posted by: DougK62

Originally posted by: scorpmatt
I voted and broke the tie?

I don't know, did you?

(for future reference, a question mark is only used to ask a question)

did you see that commercial where the guy gets fired for answering everything with a question? it is funny ?

 

[Fenixgoon]

HELL NO. you try occupying 9.1 million square miles

 

[imported_Salvatore]

Yes. I've ran through the simulation in my head a million times, finding a new way each time to make it more efficient. Definetly yes. Would I like to see it? I would like to be part of a true Resistance, but I don't think I would sacrifice people for my fantasy.

 

[bootymac]

Tie breaker vote

 

[computeerrgghh]

Originally posted by: Tsaico
Well, hold on to it, probably not, it would be like the Iraq situation where there were armed resistance everywhere, especially with your point that you made about 2nd amend. But assuming there was a problem with our response time concerning the military, the general population here is not equiped mentally or physically to handle an effective resistance. Besides, we already have a semi-military groups that would be everywhere, ie: police, SWAT, ATF. Not to mention, the US is a pretty good size country, so holding anything that size would be difficult, just based on coverage.

Agreed. Heck, the bloods and the crips would be enough to wipeout a small occupying force that would hold a city.

 

[GagHalfrunt]

Originally posted by: PanzerIV
First, intelligence sources would pick up that an invasion force was building up through spys, satellite imagery and listening posts around the globe. Even if somehow by a miracle nothing was ever known of this event the geographical isolation that has served us so well over the centuries would again help our cause. It would take a very long time for any appreciable force to arrive on our shores in which time they would be detected and trigger a reaction.

What invasion force? That's the point of this that you guys are all missing. There are only 2 countries on earth that could muster enough manpower to even consider an invasion of that scale and neither one can get them here. The only countries with modern airlift capabilites and blue-water navies don't have enough manpower to invade Burkina Faso. The countries that do have the manpower would have to get them here by sticking them on a raft and hoping for a favorable current.

 

[imported_takuma]

Personally I think The us would have to be taken over by some kind of small secert group like al qaida. My reason being In normal conventional warfare the US currently owns anybody so forget about china and stuff. Also thing like nuclear weapons and other military powers end up being much less usefull when there isnt enemy bases and targets and stuff to bomb. Like how in Iraq the iraqi gov and republican gaurd was destroyd quickly but the US simpily cannot wipe out the insurgents. If they can pull off a few more 9-11's and the gas supply is crapped then the US is going to be in a very bad position. Also I daont think there would be that great resitance from the US pop because there really isnt that many automatic gun owners, and plus I doubt the avarage overwieght McDonalds american wont be doing much fighting. Also are un trained citizens with guns really better than people with carbombs who are willing to die for there cause?

 

[iversonyin]

Damn, the Mexicans are coming!

 

[RobCur]

The US is the most techonlogical advanced civilization. Invasion from weak country such as China, Russia etc is futile at best

 

[tooltime]

i hope we don't get invaded anytime soon!

 

[ultimatebob]

Originally posted by: Phoenix86

Originally posted by: CRXican
is Rome Total War a good game?

Yes, if you like Civ type games it's VERY good. Combat actually has meaning vs. in Civ where you attack and it resolves the combat immediately. In Rome, you actually fight out the battle with thousands of troops on the field at once.

Good game, but the AI is pretty stupid. It doesn't seem to be able to adapt to your tactics, and you can totally crush almost every nationality in that game with good flanking maneuvers using lots of cavalry.

Now, the seige missions... Those can be fun.

As for the parent topic... I don't think that any invading army would last more than a week if they attacked this country. Sure, there are lots of holes in our borders, but we have enough bombers and cruise missiles in this country to blow most of the invading force into bite size pieces before our tanks and troops even got a chance to fight. Remember how the FIRST Iraq war went... Air power is where the real killing is done now, and you just need the ground forces to mop up the leftovers

 

[PanzerIV]

Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt

Originally posted by: PanzerIV
First, intelligence sources would pick up that an invasion force was building up through spys, satellite imagery and listening posts around the globe. Even if somehow by a miracle nothing was ever known of this event the geographical isolation that has served us so well over the centuries would again help our cause. It would take a very long time for any appreciable force to arrive on our shores in which time they would be detected and trigger a reaction.

What invasion force? That's the point of this that you guys are all missing. There are only 2 countries on earth that could muster enough manpower to even consider an invasion of that scale and neither one can get them here. The only countries with modern airlift capabilites and blue-water navies don't have enough manpower to invade Burkina Faso. The countries that do have the manpower would have to get them here by sticking them on a raft and hoping for a favorable current.

I am not missing any points. This was a hypothetical question and I answered it on the basis that a country could even make an attempt at doing this. I am perfectly well aware that no country does in fact have this capability and we have nothing to worry about for now.

 

[Locut0s]

It would be hard but with the right impetus there is no doubt it could be done. I certainly don't see it happening any time in the near future but in some kind of hypothetical WWIII scenario with the US vs a number of countries at once, say China, Russia, some of the rest of Asia and the middle east I could see it. All it takes is enough people feeling that their backs are to the wall.

 

[Kadarin]

Originally posted by: ahurtt

Originally posted by: Taggart
Well, there is a difference btwn 'invasion' and 'conquered.' You mean conquered? Invaded, yes, conquered, yes, if nuclear weapons and/or other WMD's were involved.

Wrong. Nobody can win a nuclear war. At least not with the USA or any other country that also posesses nuclear arms. Retaliation would be on a scale sufficient to probably "defeat" human existence on earth. You would have to smuggle all your nukes in and detonate them without us knowing. Possibly a couple of few nukes could be smuggled in but not enough to "conquer" the US without drawing notice.

"Nobody can win a nuclear war." Another ridiculous thing to say.

In a nuclear scenario between Russia and the United States, where each side has in play enough nuclear weapons to ensure MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction), you are very likely correct (but are not providing evidence nor proof). On the other hand, were the United States to have a "nuclear war" with North Korea and/or China, it is entirely possible (and very likely in the case of NK) that the United States would be the decisive victor. And this without the destruction of human life on Earth.