Into the Night
Verified User
Straw man fallacy.
What happens if an enemy gets on America's soil and attack?
- Thread starter AProudLefty
- Start date
Straw man fallacy.
AProudLefty
Black Kitty Ain't Happy
Drink man fallacy.
Into the Night
Verified User
Nah. You just don't want to read those documents. You would rather wallow in ignorance and mock people and make random comments.
AProudLefty
Black Kitty Ain't Happy
Random incoherent babbles. Dismissed.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
Use the militias to kill them. It'd be a twofer.
Plus put Ginsu slasher drones on the leaders who ordered the attack.
AProudLefty
Black Kitty Ain't Happy
Use the militias to kill them. It'd be a twofer.
Plus put slasher drones on the leaders who ordered the attack.
That would be awesome. But still that leaves the untrained civilians. And the usage of the whole military.
For reference, see the Boston Marathon Massacre. Or, as Celtic Guy said, Waco.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
Those were police, not military. A state might activate their national guard.
Still, in a nation that has more guns than people, I think we'll be fine.
Of course, drones will help.
As is the case in any war setting, efforts are made to warn/remove/avoid civilians where possible. Of course there are times (see Afghanistan/Iraq) where it is impossible to tell who is civilian and who is not (guerillas). They wont likely engage with civilian fighters for several reasons. Not trained, no communication, no chain of command. Clearly some situations could occur where they do but that would be the exception not the rule. Martial law will help avoid this.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
Many would be defending their neighborhoods against all enemies, both foreign and domestic.
More likely than foreign invaders are domestic terrorists. Killing them would be a public service.
...but drones would be nice too.
AProudLefty
Black Kitty Ain't Happy
Exactly. It shows how easily the civilians submit to the police authority without question. It was discussed at length, especially about Martial Law and Posse Comitatus. They even cheered and clapped at them as they leave. It's concerning.
Still, in a nation that has more guns than people, I think we'll be fine.
Of course that's true. But are they militarily trained? A group of 10 battle worn experienced soldiers can easily wipe them out.
Of course, drones will help.
Who would have them? LOL
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
Who would be attacking us? The Cartels? The Chinese?
Look at 1/6. A thousand angry Americans can take on a hundred police....at least until the machine guns and napalm arrives, but there are 330M Americans. I doubt all would easily submit to an invasion.
AProudLefty
Black Kitty Ain't Happy
It does not matter who. North Korea, China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Iraq/Iran, whatever.
9/11 was an act of war by the Saudis.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
Sure it matters since it goes to the quality of invading soldier. Look at the US invasion of Iraq compared to the Russian invasion of Ukraine. The Russians are running out of body bags. LOL
Disagreed on 9/11.
AProudLefty
Black Kitty Ain't Happy
I had a friend who once told me that the Chinese can easily overwhelm in sheer number. He was well studied in politics and warfare.
It still does not matter who. The question still stands. If, somehow, they invaded America with full arsenal military arms, what will the government do then? As President Biden said, you gotta have F-16s to actually defeat the USA military.
Since you disagreed on 9/11, disagreed on what? You think it wasn't done by the Saudis?
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
A billion Chinese? Sure, but it's a loooong fucking swim both to get here and to swim back.
We'd fight. Would Americans die? Yes, but we'd still fight. Like Ukraine, I expect 80% of the population to run, but the remaining 20% would fight.
To attack a position, it usually takes a 3 to 1 advantage, meaning it'd take at least 3000 invaders to take one 1000 man defending position. Then there's both the advantage of home turf and guerrilla warfare.
It wasn't done by the Saudi government so I disagree it was an act of war by Saudi Arabia on America. If it was, we'd kick their ass too. I've trained their pilots. It's a backward culture.
AProudLefty
Black Kitty Ain't Happy
A billion Chinese? Sure, but it's a loooong fucking swim both to get here and to swim back.
We'd fight. Would Americans die? Yes, but we'd still fight. Like Ukraine, I expect 80% of the population to run, but the remaining 20% would fight.
To attack a position, it usually takes a 3 to 1 advantage, meaning it'd take at least 3000 invaders to take one 1000 man defending position. Then there's both the advantage of home turf and guerrilla warfare.
It wasn't done by the Saudi government so I disagree it was an act of war by Saudi Arabia on America. If it was, we'd kick their ass too. I've trained their pilots. It's a backward culture.
Most of those terrorists were Saudis.
As to the rest, good post. But there's always carriers and planes.
The Chinese are good at cramming soldiers, just like what USSR did. ;D
Name them, and show us their posts saying Ukraine should surrender.
Controlled Opposition
Note my apathy
Agreed on Boston, except that it was not an invasion.
It is unrealistic for anyone to invade. Its just not possible to move enough people onto our soil to matter.
Thank back on Gulf War I, how many months did it take to ferry an invasion force to Kuwait to invade Iraq ? Months and months and thats wit loads of massive transport aircraft and naval. THey would have to stage from Canada or Mexico and that would simply not be allowed.
As Napoleon and Hitler discovered going after Russia, its painfully hard to invade a massive country.
If the US goes down there wont be a shot fired.