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

page: 19
10
<< 16  17  18   >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 6 2011 @ 11:05 PM
link   
The USA can and has taken over the world and your TV sets.
Want proof?
Look at how screwed up the world is today!
Need i say more.




posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 12:54 AM
link   
Why is this lame conversation still taking place? The OP is a year old.

This thread is about an hypothetical that will not happen. It serves as nothing more than a place for prejudiced minds to over simplify a reality they can not understand and fear, for the sake of their own egos.

It's ignorant hate worship at it's finest.

The US can't take over the world, it's not going to nuke everyone and it doesn't make decisions for you or your banks or your governments... You all F'd up your own deals. Face it...

When things were cruising along you were happy and now that the global systems are in trouble you're acting indignant and looking for a boogyman to blame.. Like a 4 year old caught with his hand in the cookie jar.



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 02:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Fiberx
The US can't take over the world,


Proven in history and agreed


it's not going to nuke everyone

Well lets hope not, and why everyone?

The USA is the only country to ever use nuclear weapons, and even used an entire city as a scientific killing experiment on the biggest in history event, Nagasaki, lets just hope they dont use just one every again eh?



and it doesn't make decisions for you


Tell that to someone coming into an American airport from abroad!

Tell that to an resident woman or child in Baghdad when "Shock & Awe" happened.

Tell that to the Palestinians, etc etc etc



or your banks


The recent banking crisis and bailout um have proven that is total nonsense.

You are right they they cant even "tell" their "own" "federal reserve" what to do really... strange that eh?



or your governments...


You seriously cannot even begin to be a little bit serious with the above can you?

Really?



You all F'd up your own deals. Face it...


Really Lehman Brothers was my fault?
The Triple AAA backed securities allowed when the Fed and Treasury were watching over them?

that's why the local people in my area the elderly, are not getting hot meals now, that's why about 1 in 3 of the state,government,council,health service,police etc jobs are being cut in my area?

WE F'd UP? really the honest normal working person in another country, the banking crisis and bailout that has its seeds, roots and branches in New York and Wall Street are our faults?



When things were cruising along you were happy


Really was I or were we?

I think you will find since before Bush got in certainly afterwards there has been a growing hatred, fear, and action against the Americans (only those in power doing this and bankers), I can assure you outside of the 2Bubble" most of the world has not been happy for decades in any way at all with the USA what it does, stands for or forces on the rest of the world, with culture, media and bullying.



and now that the global systems are in trouble you're acting indignant and looking for a boogyman to blame..


Were not looking as above the EVIDENCE daily happening and long term consistent approach in these matters by the big old U s of A is very clear and the "boogeyman" has been identified, known about and brought into light by many for many many many years.


Like a 4 year old caught with his hand in the cookie jar.


I don't think the emotional intelligence of the political aspects of the U S of A is even close to that of a four year old, we wouldn't mind if it was YOUR cookie Jar but youve had your hands in everyone elses for ever!

I agree with the thrust of your post, yes this thread is stupid and some of the comments show the real dangers we have in society as that is an accepted norm on moral grounds in the US and other countries, this murder has been hollywoodized and the entire culture rewards, espouses and even rewards violence and domination of differing levels according to the medium it is acted out in.

HOWEVER

I do find also your post comes across as an intelligent version of the kids my dad is bigger that yours kind like the posts we dont like in this thread, it is hypocritical, so I thought I would respond in kind!

Kind Regards,

Elf



posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 06:37 AM
link   
Let's face it, the US is about to collapse soon since empires don't last forever.
edit on 13-9-2011 by Hexen because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 7 2011 @ 04:50 AM
link   
Doubt USA could take over the world invasion wise...they can't even end Afghanistan.

But they've took over the world financially, which is a form of colonialism.



posted on Oct, 7 2011 @ 04:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Maddogkull
 


Not to overstate the obvious here mate, but the US cannot even win in a backwards country like Afghanistan...10 years and counting.

I dread to think how quickly a war with the old Soviet Union would have been, and how quickly we would have been learning Cyrillic spelling, and Mandarin at school as kids.

High tech equipment and an inflated opinion of one's superiority is not an indication of military strength...another case in point would be Vietnam.

If the USA was attacked and fighting for survival on it's own soil, that would probably be a different story...i think you'd probably wipe the floor with an invader...just as in Vietnam and Afghanistan is more or less doing to you/us now.

When your home and families are at risk and being put in harms way, people tend to fight ferociously and never give up, there's no choice.



edit on 7/10/2011 by spikey because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 7 2011 @ 04:59 AM
link   
the normal US stratagy is to send in wave after wave of troops till they win, so theyd take a few countries and then run out out of soldiers



posted on Oct, 7 2011 @ 05:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by ac3r88
Doubt USA could take over the world invasion wise...they can't even end Afghanistan.

But they've took over the world financially, which is a form of colonialism.


Don't you mean China is financially taking over the world?

America has been toppled in the money stakes, it's China who is now the worlds dominant economy and rising 10% a year.



posted on Oct, 7 2011 @ 05:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Fiberx
 

It's not ignorant hate mongering mate.

It's hypothetical postulating.

A what if?

And why are you contributing a post to a year old thread telling people they shouldn't be contributing a post to a year old thread anyway?

Post or don't post, we'll decide the same for ourselves, ok mate?

BTW...it's actually a 2 year old thread, not a year old.






edit on 7/10/2011 by spikey because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 7 2011 @ 02:53 PM
link   
No!

There aren't any force on the world which could repel insurgency of hundred of countries.
It's just impossible.
The willpower is the most important thing to consider. Even super modern army can't defend highly motivated militia which outnumber occupation force by 30 to 1.

But if it would been done by using propaganda, that's another perspective. But it would have to be a really good lie.


Sorry for my english, i have written it after i drank 3 beers.



posted on Oct, 10 2011 @ 03:37 PM
link   
who says we have to take them over, or even put one foot on the ground there? We can simply nuke their major cities and military groups, and leave em to GLOW, man. We have 20,000 nuke warheads, and we wouldn't need even 200 of them before everyone would be helpless before us. Let them rot, all that's needed is to eliminate the competition of the better ones, and the pestholes of the worst off ones, to create 50 years or so of peacetime, with about zero need of any military at all.



posted on Oct, 10 2011 @ 08:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by linkedbelts
who says we have to take them over, or even put one foot on the ground there? We can simply nuke their major cities and military groups, and leave em to GLOW, man. We have 20,000 nuke warheads, and we wouldn't need even 200 of them before everyone would be helpless before us. Let them rot, all that's needed is to eliminate the competition of the better ones, and the pestholes of the worst off ones, to create 50 years or so of peacetime, with about zero need of any military at all.


And you think that the US can just launched 200 nukes without consequence, resulting in world domination?


One biological weapon is all that is needed to destroy the US. Design it to target the majority population who usually rely on easily accessable cheap food and other common supplies. The US government would face a choice: bankrupt itself by coming to the population's aid and deploying vast contingency measures, or fortify themselves while the population dies (which would result in anarchy).



posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 03:46 AM
link   
reply to post by Maddogkull
 


The Ruskies could still vaporize the US if they so chose.



posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 03:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by OzWeatherman

How did America go in the Vietnam war?



yep like was done on Laos & Cambodia, its about learning to drop 100s of Nukes & DU and other assorted stuff indiscriminately to nip a few token vietcong or whatever, but mostly the entire civilian pop, next time around.

where there's a will, theres a way and by jolly sure seems like America's determined as heck to take over the world or bring it down tryin.



posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 04:02 AM
link   
reply to post by Maddogkull
 


Look at every empire in history that has expanded beyond their direct sphere of influence.



posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 01:41 PM
link   
nobody in history ever had nukes, or anything like our missiles, missle subs, backpack nukes, etc. I'ts a totally new ball game. Russia aint diddly any more, and barely ever was, at her best. Nagasaki was the SMALL nuke,Hiroshima was the biggie, and at 70,000 killed, was less than the fire bombing of Tokyo, which killed 100,000 people.



posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 02:02 PM
link   
reply to post by wonner
 


The Soviets and later Russia has developed many more efficient types of WMD than the US has. I'm talking everything from backpacks to space-bourne delivery systems. Their ballistic missile technology has always surpassed US models. The only major American advantage is that it is the keystone of NATO and can place delivery systems all over the globe while Russia is mostly restricted to within its borders.



posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 03:59 PM
link   
BS, man. their ICBM's were liquid-fueled, and our satellites could detect their attempts to fuel them. Their missile subs never ONCE left port without our being aware of it and having an attack sub following her. That is how efficient our SOSUS acoustic devices were. If one had even opened her missile doors, she'd have been blown out of the water before she could launch. Russia couldn't even beat Afghanistan, guys. She was never, ever a realistic threat to the US. If she had been, we'd have nuked her in 1947, when we had such bombs and she didn't, or before she had a plane that could fly a nuke to the US, which didn't happen until the late 1950's. I'ts all been a big like, to "justify" the horrendous amounts of our tax money wasted on the military and spy orgnanizations. Who didn't even know that the Berlin wall was coming down, so wtf good are they, hmm?





new topics
top topics
 
10
<< 16  17  18   >>

log in

join