It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Report: Military not ready for US attack

page: 2
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in


posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 06:44 PM

Originally posted by cyberdude78
Even if they could take key airports they don't have an air force capable of moving their army to the US, and they have no way of getting past our air force.

Oh? Then how was it that 4 men with boxcutters managed to do it not too long ago, according to our official record? When you really think about that thought, just that one, right there, if the official story is true every single person in command of the US military should have been court martialed or fired, or hung.

The official story itself is evidence that our government pays way too much attention to what is happening abroad and nowhere near enough at home.

posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 06:47 PM

Originally posted by NWOmaskedman
China army = 350 million US army around 1 million to 1.5 total.

So just how do they get 350 million here in America, then how do they support 350 million? America is the only country that can project a large forward presence.

posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 06:52 PM
You know what report I'd like to see any one of us here reporting?

"US withdraws forces from entire planet, consolidates to protect and defend its homeland."

Viva Ron Paul.

[edit on 31-1-2008 by TrueAmerican]

posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 07:00 PM
350 Million? Wow...

We Canadians took over and burnt the Whitehouse to the ground with 5 men, and a matchstick. The white house was originally teak... go figure.

What's better, we got away with it... you don't see the American history books mentioning that too often, last time I saw one of their history books, it was a tiny mention hidden somewhere off to the side.

Of course, the world was allot different back in 1812... but we still pushed the yanks all the way back to New Orleans before we gave everything back.

Point is, when the US think of military, they don't think of an invasion. Their entire arsenal is designed to attack, not defend.

In a defensive situation, you will notice the US military fail as soon as the first city becomes occupied. They have no way to take the city back without bombing it to the ground along with their own citizens.

[edit on 31-1-2008 by johnsky]

posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 07:41 PM
reply to post by NWOmaskedman

First, The U.S. has an all volunteer force of about 2.5 million. China does not have any way to move their army over the sea or air to a point. They can not feed or supply that many troops for any long period of time. They did not beat India in their wars and they are right next door. While China is a growing threat in its might, They would never beat the U.S. in a war and I'm sure everyone knows why. It would be very foolish to invade a country were just about every man owns a gun or two or three. Most of Chinas nukes are in tactical nukes and funny enough most of them are still aimed at and sitting on the border with Russia
. Most of your popular prophets all say that they have seen the whole of China on fire in the war of end times.
The article in the original OP post is flawed. Almost all of our National guard troops are fresh out of combat in Iraq. We have one very big division of regular army here at home for defense besides the guard and Marines that are here at home and not on deployment. Beside as stated before our Navy and Air force would stop any aggressor in their tracks. End of story, Goodnight all.

posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 08:12 PM

Originally posted by TrueAmerican

Originally posted by cyberdude78
Even if they could take key airports they don't have an air force capable of moving their army to the US, and they have no way of getting past our air force.

Oh? Then how was it that 4 men with boxcutters managed to do it not too long ago, according to our official record? When you really think about that thought, just that one, right there, if the official story is true every single person in command of the US military should have been court martialed or fired, or hung.

The official story itself is evidence that our government pays way too much attention to what is happening abroad and nowhere near enough at home.

There's a big difference between hijacking four airplanes and crashing them and actually transporting an army sizable enough for a conventional invasion. I understand your feelings that we should be more focused on what goes on at home, and I agree. However we have more than enough conventional military forces here at home to deal with any conventional threat. Simply pulling out of Iraq, Afghanistan, and every other corner of the world won't fix any openings availible to a non conventional force.

posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 10:22 PM
As an emergency services provider (firefighter/EMT), I am very concerned about the results of this report. Should a major enemy attack every take place on American soil, especially one involving WMDs, we will rely a lot on the National Guard to provide emergency medical care.

Now, for the irrelevent questions that have changed the direction of this thread. Can other nations invade us? No, and they are smart enough to know that. However, it is highly irrelevent. A single enemy attack, particularly one that involves a nuclear weapon, would wreck America for years to come.

The worst thing that can happen, however, is if the attack leads to totalitarianism, which would be very likely in any national emergency.

We need not worry about other countries that won't attack us. We may have to worry more about the U.S. state.

[edit on 31-1-2008 by sweatmonicaIdo]

posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 10:38 PM
What if our enemies many of whom are friends with other countries south of our borders , what if they massed down there slowly or better yet cut a deal with venezuela to actually build weaponry in that region of the world and slowly amassed their army up to suitable numbers and then just marched across the
southern border that we still leave unprotected.

Yeah I know it is far fetched but don't think that our enemies have not noticed this weakness in our defenses granted we would see things first but we are sometimes so slow to respond to threats..

and yes I realize that you would have every gun toting american there in a heart beat myself included though I don't own any assault rifles or even deer hunting rifles but I am sure that I could find one..


posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 10:49 PM
Why am I just learning this now ~ I've just laid off half of my flying monkey invasion force due to budgetary concerns, there's no way they will come back to me now... they've tasted freedom - and beer.

My prediction: Iceland will declare that the USA has weapons of mass destruction and has proven that they will deploy them, a coalition of the willing will invade starting at one coast and march to the other quashing all resistance encountered. Resistance is expected to be light as all the troops are on holiday in the middle east and almost no one owns their own musket any more

posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 11:21 PM
I worked with a guy from Some-Salvador once, I was a lowly cook and he was a even more lowly dishwasher. He barely spoke English but he and I hit it off fairly well and we had a billingual friend who helped us communicate.
Well to make a long story short, I once asked him what he did back home before came to America, and he told me that he was a Soldier in the Army there. Joking around, I asked him if he was a Sandanista or something, and holy crap that guy lit up like a rocket.
Interestingly enough asking him that seemed to scare him and he spent the next five or so minutes asking me why I had asked him that and if somebody had told me to ask him that, and where I had heard that, and who I had talked to about that. I think he scared me about as bad I had scared him.
Never really put much thought into it until just now actually, is it possible that with god knows how many undocumented immigrants a year comming here that we might have managed to allow a few militants in, in the process?

posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 11:31 PM
If a large scale attack should occur on US soil, you will have time to prepare because the invading country have to go through a NATO or an allied soil.
Plus, you have the Canadian forces who will help if US should get attacked, you also have the Mexican army. How much help are they? I do not know, but hopefully enough to foil an attack plan.

posted on Feb, 1 2008 @ 12:20 AM
reply to post by sweatmonicaIdo

Thanks for staying focused on what this report is intending to deliver. It's not about a US invasion really, although to an extent it can be applied to that. Especially in light of other concerns here, such as an attempted forceful invasion by either forces south of our border, or inside operatives already here, or both.

It simply points out exactly what you should be concerned about as a first responder: in the event of a one-off terrorist nuclear or biological attack on a major urban area (a more probable scenario), will there be enough available manpower and preparedness to deal with it effectively. Or will we be facing another Katrina- or worse.

Unfortunately, your concern may be compounded by the fact that there is a noticeable pattern here, as per the OP. And the pattern is not limited in scope to just those previous reports I mention in the OP. Similar patterns of irrational policy from this administration appear elsewhere:

1) The mismanagement of Katrina;
2) The recent under supply of our own troops in theater combat, compared to excesses and apparent greed of the military/industrial complex;
3) Decreased public desire to participate in the military/guard with current administration policy and ethics, thus affecting recruiting;
4) The appalling difficulty of veterans to obtain reasonable care;
5) Continual, and intentional suppression or manipulation of intelligence in both the military and civilian sectors to suit political and/or monetary agenda;
6) Reduced morale;
7) The continued and increasing excessive spending on foreign affairs in the direct face of more imminent, serious issues such as this at home.

There's more, but I think you get the point.

The situation is not good. The tendency to relate this to an all out attack on the US is an easy escape route. But it does nothing to conceal the real issues in my mind.

posted on Feb, 1 2008 @ 12:51 AM
I was about ready to ask if most of you had even read the article in the OP at all.. It's extremely unlikely that anyone would try to invade us, brute force like that is the least likely to be successful - if you were actually to plan an attack against the US, there are far smarter ways to completely wreck a country, at much lower risk levels, and the simple fact of the matter is we are unprepared for basically anything.

posted on Feb, 1 2008 @ 12:59 AM

he uninvited guest: Chinese sub pops up in middle of U.S. Navy exercise, leaving military chiefs red-faced

When the U.S. Navy deploys a battle fleet on exercises, it takes the security of its aircraft carriers very seriously indeed.

At least a dozen warships provide a physical guard while the technical wizardry of the world’s only military superpower offers an invisible shield to detect and deter any intruders.

That is the theory. Or, rather, was the theory.

American military chiefs have been left dumbstruck by an undetected Chinese submarine popping up at the heart of a recent Pacific exercise and close to the vast U.S.S. Kitty Hawk - a 1,000ft supercarrier with 4,500 personnel on board.

By the time it surfaced the 160ft Song Class diesel-electric attack submarine is understood to have sailed within viable range for launching torpedoes or missiles at the carrier.

Ok so 4500 man sub if china made 5000 subs which is plausable. they would have a force of 22,500,000 22 million it is possable.

even 2500 subs is 11 million.

1250 subs 6 million man invading force. your going to tell me this is not possable.

surely 625 subs is possable 3 million man invading force.

plus didnt i just read a report on ats a few days ago about china attack plan for us involving nucluer sky bombs to knock out sats and electronics.

coupled with that ya were screwed. and that just china alone if russia join ouch.

The us isnt invincable just cause you feel safe in your home or neighborhood watch does not mean things are not crumbling around you.

we live in constant fear GWB might nue us to stay in power according to some.

or some other country will nuke in response to whats going on everywhere.

I do see an invasion of the US in my lifetime.

[edit on 1-2-2008 by NWOmaskedman]

posted on Feb, 1 2008 @ 02:33 AM
reply to post by biggie smalls

Throughout history, superior forces have been defeated by lesser equipped forces. As we all know, history does repeat itself.

posted on Feb, 1 2008 @ 02:37 AM
reply to post by Xtrozero

Dont flatter yourself,it wouldnt take the combined might of Europe,Russia and China to attack your country.Sure you have great gear,but that doesnt mean other countries dont also.Hardest part would of course be getting to your soil!

I think a civil war might be on the cards in your country,and that might be your greatest threat.Not the world outside your window but the problems inside brewing over many years

posted on Feb, 1 2008 @ 02:44 AM
reply to post by noangels

Correct. Not to mention half of the Arab world, various terrorist organisations and any other 3rd world country that wants to jump on the bandwagon.

posted on Feb, 1 2008 @ 03:24 AM
reply to post by geocom

I would hardly say that your theory is far fetched. In all honesty, it is quite realistic considering the political climate in a few South American countries, of whom distance themselves from Mexico.

posted on Feb, 1 2008 @ 03:41 AM
Food for Thought......................

[edit] Reserve units have been taxed by repeated deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan, but the commission said the inadequacies were not solely the result of the wars. Overall, it said, the Pentagon has failed to provide adequate funding, on the "flawed assumption" that current training for military operations overseas would suffice for domestic duties as well.

posted on Feb, 1 2008 @ 04:37 AM
reply to post by NWOmaskedman

I've said this quite a few times now, the way the US government works, is that if it looked like we were going to "lose", as in total loss. They would not hesitate to take the rest of the world out with them. Looking at how our military spending goes, and the people with their fingers on the buttons, loss is not an option. Nukes are a horrible horrible thing, however when it comes to the US government and military, there are probably much worse things that the general public is not aware of.

I think war, in the conventional sense is just not going to happen. As others have said, there are far smarter ways to go about things, i.e. economical and political, that could cause far worse damage. Also the possibility of civil unrest/war in the US would be a devastating blow. However I don't see the majority of people caring enough to make such a thing happen, more than a few brave souls who would die for what they believe.

new topics

top topics

<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in