It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

If every nation in the world allied and invaded the United States, would they succeed?

page: 3
10
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 10 2016 @ 07:59 PM
link   
Considering the current global economy every country would fall apart due to massive depression, starvation, rioting, and revolution before a sea invasion even had a beach head.
Most western nations rely on US leadership for matters of military. It would essentially eliminate half the leadership leaving their forces unorganized and lost.
These 2 things alone would lose it for the world.

The US would come out stronger and put the world back together after depression, unrest and starvation have devastated the world.




posted on Mar, 10 2016 @ 08:00 PM
link   
But Why would they?

What reason is there for Invasion?

No need if they just want to collapse it economically it can be done and is being done.

the only reason to take it over is to exploit the natural resources that the EPA and Federal Govt restricted its citizens from getting.
edit on 10-3-2016 by ChesterJohn because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 10 2016 @ 08:02 PM
link   
If the rest of the world were able to achieve the level of cooperation it would require to invade America, there would be no need to do it.

This could never happen. It doesn't matter who has nukes, who has more of this or that. The level of cooperation to make an invasion achievable is completely impossible. NEVER gonna happen, so the point is moot.



posted on Mar, 10 2016 @ 08:05 PM
link   
a reply to: RadioRobert

It's a good question, I presume the soviet plans were to hit the center of power, cripple the maximum amount of population to eliminate support to US troops invading USSR.

I guess the idea was if you hit me I hit you back so we return to status quo,lite MAD

But it is clear the soviets operatives were real, they where in most countries and they had caches all around to destabilize



posted on Mar, 10 2016 @ 08:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sargeras
It is all logistics, and nobody but us have what it would take.

I think we are safe.


"I don't know what the hell this 'logistics' is that Marshall is always talking about, but I want some of it."
Admiral E. J. King



Mounting any kind of CONUS invasion would be the world's greatest logistical accomplishment/nightmare since Alexander marched East.



posted on Mar, 10 2016 @ 08:10 PM
link   
a reply to: nito92

One word, MAD. Mutually Assured Destruction. There's a reason why countries who have nukes have a nuclear arsenal. It's a huge deterrent. Would the U.S. even think of invading Russia, not in their wildest dreams.



posted on Mar, 10 2016 @ 08:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: lonegurkha
If the rest of the world were able to achieve the level of cooperation it would require to invade America, there would be no need to do it.

This could never happen. It doesn't matter who has nukes, who has more of this or that. The level of cooperation to make an invasion achievable is completely impossible. NEVER gonna happen, so the point is moot.

It wouldn't happen but play along as if the unthinkable became the thinkable, OK what if the USA became a super fascist state ,pissing off even her closest allies, they decide they need to save the world and America from itself .



posted on Mar, 10 2016 @ 08:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Spider879

Exactly.



posted on Mar, 10 2016 @ 08:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: Indigent
a reply to: RadioRobert

It's a good question, I presume the soviet plans were to hit the center of power, cripple the maximum amount of population to eliminate support to US troops invading USSR.


The Soviet plan was to overrun Europe in short order. And really there was little chance of stopping them. Throwing the US into disarray was their best bet to divert US momentum/energy towards stabilizing western Europe.

Honestly, it would probably be counter-productive. The great unwashed masses in the US would lose interest in sustaining a war far quicker without moving toward any sort of total war against the populace. If I was Soviet, I'd do my best to avoid arousing bloodlust in the populace. Americans don't have much heart for foreign wars or losses, it's true, but attacking the population sort of turns the mindset on it's head. It would become a fight for survival.



posted on Mar, 10 2016 @ 08:14 PM
link   
a reply to: nito92

Only if thats how we choose to destroy our civilization and possibly our planet.



posted on Mar, 10 2016 @ 08:21 PM
link   
I've always thought that the United States won't be defeated by being invaded by outsiders. I've thought, that if it were to ever happen, that we would be defeated from within.

People from all over the world are moving here on a continuous manner, getting into positions of power and influence and within time, it's easy to see how it could happen. I'm sure it's a strategy of many nations. it would take time, but the best offense is one you cannot see surround you little by little and in time, consume you.

Or, perhaps, some kind of disaster, man made or otherwise, that produces riotous behaviors and the U.N. puts troops from all countries from around the world to help with our "safety and security." A phrase we are hearing more and more of.



posted on Mar, 10 2016 @ 08:23 PM
link   
a reply to: Spider879


Spider, first allow me to state that I enjoy your posts and threads very much. That said, debating the impossible is like blowing smoke in the wind. It serves no purpose.



posted on Mar, 10 2016 @ 08:24 PM
link   
a reply to: OneNationUnder

I think you are right, but hell no, imagine the world run by communists.



posted on Mar, 10 2016 @ 08:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: tadaman
a reply to: nito92

Only if thats how we choose to destroy our civilization and possibly our planet.


In my scenario the USA is a Super fascist state , that would mean a lot of simmering internal tensions perhaps an impending civil war or terror /freedom fighter attacks, depending on the side you find yourself on , it is not without reason that disgruntled generals and Admirals would break away and help with the invasions, history is replete with acts WWII Free French forces Vs Vechy fascist as an example.
The problem is not any clearer if the rest of the world were the evil fascist and the only free state left is the United States , there is bound to be internal rot that can be exploited.
edit on 10-3-2016 by Spider879 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 10 2016 @ 08:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Spider879

Internal rot would not really exist in a meaningful measure if a fully authoritarian state existed and was in the military lead.

The world would first need to get rid of its own rot that a purely fascist state could exploit.



posted on Mar, 10 2016 @ 08:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: tadaman
a reply to: Spider879

Internal rot would not really exist in a meaningful measure if a fully authoritarian state existed and was in the military lead.

The world would first need to get rid of its own rot that a purely fascist state could exploit.


True but in this case it is the United States being besieged that means a lot of pressure on top Generals/Admirals for a solution, remember the German officers almost succeeded in offing Hitler when the heat was turned up. and during many mini conflicts a strongman or general almost always flips when the heat was on and turned on his former colleagues.



posted on Mar, 10 2016 @ 08:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed
An attack by the rest of the world upon the USA would only result in the death of the entire planet.
Nukes would definitely be used against attacker countries if we were being attacked by everyone. There is no way that nukes would not be used in such a scenario.
And everyone would lose.


Mutually
Assured
Destruction

While it is a somewhat disturbing strategy, you gotta admit that it works very well.

America is only as strong as her leader's testicles, IMO. That unfortunately means we have ebbs and flows. Presently, a global invasion *might* be successful. If tried with a leader cut from the cloth of, say, Eisenhower... no chance in hell it would succeed.



posted on Mar, 10 2016 @ 08:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Spider879
remember the German officers almost succeeded in offing Hitler when the heat was turned up. and during many mini conflicts a strongman or general almost always flips when the heat was on and turned on his former colleagues.


Good point. Along those same lines, had Hitler not believed his own BS and actively listened to the advice of his generals, Germany would have very likely taken Moscow and the war would have played out quite differently.



posted on Mar, 10 2016 @ 09:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed
An attack by the rest of the world upon the USA would only result in the death of the entire planet.
Nukes would definitely be used against attacker countries if we were being attacked by everyone. There is no way that nukes would not be used in such a scenario.
And everyone would lose.


Mutually
Assured
Destruction

While it is a somewhat disturbing strategy, you gotta admit that it works very well.

America is only as strong as her leader's testicles, IMO. That unfortunately means we have ebbs and flows. Presently, a global invasion *might* be successful. If tried with a leader cut from the cloth of, say, Eisenhower... no chance in hell it would succeed.


Ike would hand their asses to them, and a napkin and ointment, to wipe their tears and apply to the burned areas.

Warning, butthurt is hard to treat!!
edit on 10-3-2016 by Sargeras because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 10 2016 @ 09:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: Spider879
remember the German officers almost succeeded in offing Hitler when the heat was turned up. and during many mini conflicts a strongman or general almost always flips when the heat was on and turned on his former colleagues.


Good point. Along those same lines, had Hitler not believed his own BS and actively listened to the advice of his generals, Germany would have very likely taken Moscow and the war would have played out quite differently.


It all comes down to Stalingrad, they didn't even need it, but Hitler demanded it.

His hubris cost him the war!!




top topics



 
10
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join