U.S.A could take over the world if they wanted to. Could they???

Originally posted by Maddogkull
With all the "So called underground bases" the weapondry, the military spending. Why does any other nation bother in fighting america? how could they win. Imagine the weapons the US will release when a major war happens. no nation even spends 1/6th the amount America does. The wepons they have must be unimagineable. If Dulce, or other bases exist and the stuff thats happening down there is really real it would even be more terrifying. Could Russia even compete with the U.S.A??? Could all of Europe even compete with them?


[edit on 16-9-2009 by Maddogkull]

I rarely post on ATS, these days I just read. I cannot pass up this chance though - and not because the discussion started by the OP stirs me.

I'll answer on the topic quickly, so that I can proceed to what really caught my attention here.

Someone on the first page of this thread pointed out quite rightly that the US could achieve such a feat theoretically, but whatever it is that the US would be taking over afterward - it wouldn't be the "world" as we know it. It also would do no harm to one's awareness to notice that global conquest or global destruction (whichever floats your boat) is not out of limits to a number of nations around the world.



What really caught my attention in this thread is the tone of the original post. Flame suit - check!

I could not have asked for a better example of the average American's way of thinking on this subject. Be honest with yourself. Unrivaled funds, secret underground bases, super duper technology generations ahead of it's time.

The above observation is relevant to the topic. How?

A Russian friend of mine once told me a joke about the times of the cold war:

In an effort to ease the tension between the two sides, the US generals invited the Soviet generals over for a trip around America. While touring the Grand Canyon, one of the Soviet generals corrected their guide on the characteristics of the land mark (depth, rocks etc.). Surprised, the guide complemented the Soviet general on how much he knew about the US. The general replied "I really know little of America. But this Grand Canyon, as you call it, is well know to us as site 17.456.XR (whatever) and if we were to drop a small nuclear bomb between the tectonic plates here, it would cause the entire southern US to collapse in earthquakes."

I am using this joke to point out two things ONLY:
1. The contrast between how Russians and Americans think. This is what caught my attention to begin with - I find the contrasts to be really interesting.
2. Whatever "unimaginable weapons" Maddogkull is imagining, I bet the real answer is far simpler and more practical.

Lets not argue about facts and stats, as it is only a joke. Yet this joke gets you thinking. The world is technologically advanced enough to to blow itself up a million times over with the resources at hand. That is simple reality.

Regards,
Maestro

EDIT: quote brackets

reply to post by Remixtup


The Americans may have better technical capability than any other country worldwide but their military is heavily flawed by human inabilities.

America's Delta Force's training is equal to that of Australian and NZ soldiers and are no where near trained to deem themselves equal to that of our superior SAS units whom ARE the very best in the world. In fact, even the NZ SAS unit is even far more desciplined and superior to that of the Australian SAS.

Originally posted by maestro46
1. The contrast between how Russians and Americans think. This is what caught my attention to begin with - I find the contrasts to be really interesting.

You're right though. One of Lenin's key political points was to dismember religion from politics and the military (he saw it as another drug to control peoples' minds). The Soviets were hardcore atheists and always saw things scientifically. The Americans, on the other hand, have always claimed to be under God. Everything from Operation Crimson to invade Canada per "manifest destiny" to George Bush claiming that God told him to invade Iraq. I'm sure most Americans brush it off as superficial talk, but the rest of the world kinda sees religious violence as a serious thing (especially when "God" is apparently sending US soldiers to kill Islamic terrorists).

reply to post by Maddogkull


If the US wanted to take over the world, wouldn't we have done it already? We were the first country to even have nukes. Now other countries have them and can use them at any time. I mean we have tanks turning invisible but what about the tank shells? Are they invisible too? Anyways other countries probably have semi- nuclear pistol bullets... I'm just saying other countries like China are making holograms, and who knows what else they have to erase us off the map.

Judging from Vietnam & Iraq I highly doubt that the USA could take over the world.

reply to post by glevel


I agree that yes, in the past we were viewed as the "Superpower" of the world. Now? I'm not so sure. I think America is viewed as oppressors of the world and the enemy, which really kind of makes me sad. China scares me a bit, to be honest. They seem to be the new "Superpower" of the world, just by their economy. We sold out to them and rely upon them heavily. That in and of itself scares me a bit.

Originally posted by ac3rr
Judging from Vietnam & Iraq I highly doubt that the USA could take over the world.

usa is impossible to take over the world.

America has already taken over the world, not militarily but economically. Albeit sometimes under the barrell of a gun for example Iraq. The United States is the empire that dare not speak its name. It is an empire in denial, and US denial of this poses a real danger to the world. An empire that doesn't recognise its own power is a dangerous one. With military bases in three-quarters of the countries of the world, and 31% of all wealth.

America's critical weakness, however, was its fatal lack of self-knowledge, When you talk to Americans about empire they say, 'but we came into existence to fight imperialism.'

US defence secretary Donald Rumsfeld famously told al-Jazeera 'we don't do empire'. But how can you not be an empire and maintain 750 military bases in three-quarters of the countries on earth? The Americans simply don't believe they are there. But since they annexed the Philippines in 1898, they have acted as an imperial power

Furthermore, the people who were in charge of the defence department have grabbed September 11 as a chance to push through the imperial agenda. But only a few, on the neo-conservative right, were prepared to use the e-word publicly.

The concept of empire isn't necessarily a bad thing. In all kinds of ways the British empire from the 1850s onwards was an incredibly liberal one. For all the warts on its face it created a free enterprise global economy, protected women and stopped infanticide in India, and ultimately brought representative democracy. I believe a liberal empire can do good.

Depending on what you view as take over the world yes the united states can.
First option Destroy all superpowers with nukes but doing this with support of nato countries. propaganda is what will start a war like that. Third and neutral countries are not to be worried about so generally north Korea, Iran, china and maybe Russia/India. South America doesn't have any notable superpowers nor Africa.

Second It's simple really we already indirectly own the world with westernization. Hollywood movies, coke/pepsi, mcdonalds(fast food in general), MTV, the american way of life as pictured on television. Were shoving it down all your childrens throats. Yes you may not like justin bieber or lady gaga but do your kids? Did we fail in Iraq/Afghanistan no. We won by doing two things westernizing those locked countries and forcing decromacy. I honestly believe these countries were simply tests. Look at how each was invaded, one by mass occupation the other by covert activities. Both achieved there goals overthrow the government, and install a new government both done fairly quickly . Now look at North Korea and Cuba we sanctioned them down to beyond poverty and now they can barely sustain life these are also tests to see if simply starving a country to death will bring the same results.
Also i saw a posting about obesity running rampant in America although this is completely true i just saw recent stats about Europe and looks like there getting just as bad if not already in the same jam we are with obesity. Id also like to find statistics on male to female obesity rates because alot of the males i work with although im in the military are not obese even the majority of civilians are not obese majority being either underweight or healthy now women are a entirely different matter ive noticed a large increase in female obesity.

Originally posted by jeffmarble
Depending on what you view as take over the world yes the united states can.
First option Destroy all superpowers with nukes but doing this with support of nato countries.

And NATO countries will just blindly tag along with nuking the world, right?

That's about the time when the rest of NATO, along with the world, turns on the US: when it becomes a clear threat to the world, especially through nuclear warfare.

reply to post by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi

oops looks like it already happened right NATO supported the war on terror look at all the countries providing support. Propaganda is the greatest tool in war it sways the populace into believing what a country doing is right. Look at the toppling of saddams statue this is success in propaganda using iraqi's to demonize there own leader. This was a pys ops event and that seemingly crowded square was actually quiet empty they used special shooting techniques to create the look of a crowded town square. Look at the current weapons of mass destruction fiasco so these two countries iran and north korea cant have a single nuclear weapon but the united states can have 1000's because were more "responsible". Open your mind alittle and actually see what the United States is doing. You seriously dont think we couldnt fabricate a justification to invade any country in the world at any moment. hell all they have to do is buy a iranian nuke posing has a third world country slap iranian flags all over it. Hire a Iranian president look a like to take videos of him with it and say some ridiculous i hate the Zionist Israel and launch a nuke into Israel. BAM american forces all sitting at the broder of Iran in 48 hours ready to take down the insane evil leader of iran. While single-handedly dupping all NATO nations into believing at least for a time that the nuke was actually launched by Iran.

Lastly the united states can conquer the world. Which it secretly is and not call it the united states. Ever seen the fifth element. Remember the president of the federated territories its main office being based in New york city. Think of the US like the parents of the world and the other countries as children. Although the parents do not own the children the children can do as they please. In the end if there bad or it doesn't meet the parents agenda or goals for the children there swiftly taken care of time out(sanctions) or a spanking(removal of current political party through buyouts/war/assassination/rebellion)
All i ask is to open your eyes. Your on ATS and you can't see this yet? You cant see factual evidence of the CIA using rebel groups to overthrow governments that don't meet our agenda's? What about disinformation provided by media?
below is a image of US bases around the world please add south Africa to the list because there's a small base there as well although its not shown. This does not include where all military personnel are located or training foreign military/rebels

Also how many nations are teaching there children English? hopefully your young enough to see the world in 50 years when westernization completely turns into globalization heres some facts
the most popular first language is Mandarin (845 million speakers) followed by Spanish (329 million speakers) and English (328 million speakers).[29] However the most popular second language is undoubtedly English, the "lingua franca" of globalization:

* About 35% of the world's mail, telexes, and cables are in English.
* Approximately 40% of the world's radio programs are in English.
* English is the dominant language on the Internet
Most famous person in the world? Micheal Jackson studies have shown him to be more recognizable than any other person on earth
Are you currently using a Windows operating system or Mac OS oops American
hmm.... sounds like conquering to me

We dont have to go to war to take over the world. Other then Russia and a few others, pretty much all nations do what we ask them to anyhow. Why did NATO support our wars on terror? Really think about why? obviously their in pocket too. If we have piratically the whole world in our pocket and no one is willing to stand up to us, then do we not already own the world?

"Take over the world" lol! The USA can't even manage it's own domestic finances. The Anglo-USA "ruling class" are trying to prop up the bankrupt dinosaur of corporate consumer capitalism by waging endless attacks on the undeveloped world. They are not wars (in the general definition of the term) as "war" implies a certain equality. The nations & people that are attacked like Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Somalia, etc, etc, are incapable of waging any credible organised resistance. They are effectively peasant populations, relying on what the Pentagon would lable "Asymetric Warfare". To resist the armed rape of their natural rescources.

The USA spends something like 70% of it's GDP on "defence". This consists of everything from packaged meals, toothbrushes, uniforms, buttons, batteries, bandages & parachute cord. To F16s, tanks, aircraft carriers & nuclear submarines. Without the arms trade & all the attendant allied sundries. There would be mass unemployment & US economy would collapse. Even further than it currently has. They rail against the "evils of Communism" while forcing it's own population to bail out the excesses of corporate bankers. Subsidising the "free market" with public money in a way that would have made the Lennin blush & they say "Americans don't do irony!"

The USA can't take "over the world". Well only in it's own collective hyper-inflated Hollywood imagination. But it's determination to maintain it's failing economy means it will continue & accelerate it's need to wage aggression against anyone it sees as a convenient target. Anyone who does not have the capacity to fight back & wage war within the continental USofA. Like most brash bullies, the USA can dish out punishment. But can they take it? 9/11 proved that the USA is a nation with a collective glass jaw. The flag draped coffins of conflict victims sinve Vietnam, have been sneaked home under the cover of darkness lest the population catches on & loses it's collective stomach for the fight. As Sun Tzu said over 2500 years ago " It's not those who can inflict the most suffering. But those who can endure the most who will prevail!"

So no! The USA won't "take over" the world. But it will continue to inflict misery, suffering & poverty on it's population!

If they could they would

Currently No-
see: China.

The only reason we won WW2 is because we were able to convert our massive manufacturing capability to a war machine.
We no longer have the manufacturing capability nor the minerals needed for the batteries/power systems and technology needed. China is buying all of that through contracts with Multinational and American companies.

Originally posted by mdnw2009
If they could they would

What about the four years following the end of WW2? The US was the only nation with nuclear weapons and presumably could have back then, yet didn't.

reply to post by Maddogkull


In a conventional war? Not the slightest chance.

The only way they could dominate or 'claim' the entire Earth would be to utilise the rumoured massive underground 'cities', attack every major population zone on the planet with nukes or more likely Beam and RF weaponry, mop up the survivors with conventional forces, then sit out the fallout for a decade or two, in said underground cities.

A straight war with the USA on one side and the 'rest of the planet' on the other would result in the USA being annihilated fairly quickly, militarily speaking.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but the USA, with UK and a host of others cannot conventionally manage to even put down the Taliban in Afghanistan in what..a decade of trying?

What make you think they'd be more effective against everyone, including the enemies they cannot eradicate now?

reply to post by Stratus9


You didn't win WW2 you helped it was the Russians that broke the back of the wehrmacht

And on a side note you bankrolled both sides of the war

reply to post by MortlitantiFMMJ


Different times different people different nation

reply to post by mdnw2009


Americans didn't bankroll Hitler - some of our corporations did. Just like some of our corporations are bankrolling China currently. What are you going to do about that?