Could mainland U.S. be invaded by a conventional military?

reply to post by SUICIDEHK45


Notice how people quote others from a century ago?

One of the things that makes me chuckle the most about this subject is that so many Americans think they are somehow invincible.

First off, there is not a gun behind every blade of grass. Check out the statistics of gun ownership to begin with, then consider how many people would actually know how to use their gun or wouldn't hesitate to do so. Then consider that an invading force does not encounter the entire population of America. There would be numerous front lines.

There are not billions of "heroic Americans" who would die to defend their country. This is not a Hollywood movie you're writing here. Many would gladly give up for an easy life. If you need any proof of this just look at what Americans have allowed their own government to get away with over the last 20 years, with little protest and no change.

Many millions in the UK were prepared to give up and live under Nazi occupation if they had ever managed to invade. There were small groups of "resistance" supported by Churchill's government with instructions to kill as many Germans as possible through any means, but the vast majority of the population would have had no real choice but to accept it. Regardless of heroic imaginings, the reality of war and invasion are far different.

Secondly, nations are far more militarily advanced than they were a century ago. Any invasion of the USA would or could involve various forms of weaponry from virtual attack to biological warfare. Using the element of surprise, a foreign force could wipe out vast swathes of the US within a week just by starting an outbreak in a couple of places.

You seem to think that the USA is the only country developing new weaponry and tech. You couldn't be more wrong. China, Russia, UK, Israel, Iran, N.Kora, Japan... all major powers continue to develop new weaponry and technology. America is not the only power in the world, and physical might is not the only requirement. The USA might have a couple of top secret jets and some drones to use, but how do you know that China hasn't already done that? How do you know they haven't gone one step further? They have the advantage of having plenty of highly trained technology designers and manufacturers, with a manufacturing infrastructure unlike any other nation on Earth - they can copy and produce an iPod and have it on the market within a day of its release, and America can make... cars, financial instruments, burgers?

Remember what happened at Pearl Harbor, 9/11, USS Liberty... It seems that every time America has actually been attacked in any notable way, America has been unprepared and responded like a wild animal in a corner.
If America is so prepared, mighty, powerful and brave, why is it that in each notable attack in history America has not seen it coming, has responded with panic and confusion, and then lashed out and attacked whatever it thinks is the most profitable option?

War is complex and complicated. No person here can simply say that America would win, or that no invasion would be possible. Only arrogant fools would think that.
Unfortunately, if your military are those arrogant fools, it could very well happen one day.

No one expects the unexpected - until it happens.

It should also be noted that this is not a verbal assault on the US. We in the UK are in a similar situation. If we were facing an invasion we would have the same things to worry about, and we could be overtaken within just a few months.
I'm just hoping I can point out the insane arrogance of the idiot American cheer-leaders here who can't see reality and think life is like the cheesy American hero movies. It's not.

Yes, we can! ™

U.S. girls got instant climax seeing these boys ashore:


and GLBTs turned on offshore by Kim Jong Un
The rest of U.S. continue to play fallout in mom's garages.

Originally posted by bokonon2010
Yes, we can! ™

U.S. girls got instant climax seeing these boys ashore:

and GLBTs turned on offshore by Kim Jong Un

The rest of U.S. continue to play fallout in mom's garages.

Those are guys?

Are you SURE?

reply to post by detachedindividual


Well said. It is a fantasy, one played out on forums like these, gun forums, and video game chat rooms..especially the FPS crowd. One bullet fired in anger and all these "armchair rangers" would # themselves. It's a shame, because America has actually regressed as a society while everyone else has progressed. We're not #1 at anything, these days, unless invading countries that never attacked us [snipped]as progress.

Oh, sorry, we are really good at dropping hellfire missiles on civilians, and our own citizens(like al-alawi and his teenage son). We're THE BEST at that.

Next to the Israelis, of course.

Not one single person on here has provided a logical way for a foreign power to move all of their troops and equipment to the mainland US.

reply to post by detachedindividual

There are not billions of "heroic Americans" who would die to defend their country. This is not a Hollywood movie you're writing here. Many would gladly give up for an easy life. If you need any proof of this just look at what Americans have allowed their own government to get away with over the last 20 years, with little protest and no change. 

No there are not billions because America only has 300 million in population. However there are millions of Americans that would stand up. If just 3% stood up as did in the American revolution, today that is about 9 million. With 150 million guns and people that can make just about anything in their garage or shop plus our military and all their toys. No country would stand a chance invading America. They'd be picked off from every rock tree door and window.

Millions of Americans hunt dear elk bear lion and turkey etc. every year not to mention many veterans who would train others trust me there is enough Americans who know how to use a rifle that will reach out and touch someone! The American military still can't control a few thousand insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan. The most well trained well armed resourceful guerrilla army in the history of the world is right here in America. This would not be a fight against peasants in robes with AK's!

Trust me if a foreign army ever invaded our shores millions would stand against them. People will let family walk all over them fight like cats and dogs etc but when someone challenges the family they will shore up ranks and fight together against a common enemy. It has always been a small percentage who did the heavy lifting.
No modern army has ever defeated an indigenous population on their own soil. Which is why we left Vietnam, and are still in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The American land mass is too large to control no country has the logistics to do it. Not even the American military. They could control maybe a few coastal cities at best that is if they could manage to gain a beach head which is highly doubtful.

Remember what happened at Pearl Harbor, 9/11, USS Liberty... It seems that every time America has actually been attacked in any notable way, America has been unprepared and responded like a wild animal in a corner. 

And kicked their asses all the way back to Japan despite such a severe blow to our navy whats your point?

If America is so prepared, mighty, powerful and brave, why is it that in each notable attack in history America has not seen it coming, has responded with panic and confusion, and then lashed out and attacked whatever it thinks is the most profitable option? 

What the hell are you talking about? There is only one surprise attack on us in history and that is Pearl Harbor are you saying we attacked Japan back because it was profitable? Your not making any sense. How did we respond with panic and confusion? We shored up ranks and and fought methodically for 4 years to complete victory how the hell was that panic and confused? You are sounding like just another irrational America hater here with this non-sense.

And if your going to bring up 9/11 that was not a foreign surprise attack that was an inside job by enemies within the gate not Muslim insurgents.

Even if they managed a surprise attack of some sort again that is just one battle they'd have a long way to go to defeat America.

America has many things to be angry at her about but our actions in WWII are not one of them they are one of our finest hours!

the problem with all this sort of theorycrafting is that everything starts from a point for example if i can cripple america's fuel production i gain a major tactical advantage in a large country since suddenly the country thats used to being able to travel large distances gets stuck being very close to home since you cant replace the fuel you have used so you save it and if i cause some problems on major traffic intersections and train systems so the flow of fuel to the power grid is compromised suddenly you lose the ability to pass information to the masses and things start to descend into chaos

obviously the starting point is hard to achieve but once everyones staying close to home and theres no fresh food supplies then people will get scared and then it'll get nasty and when most people are fighting each other over food/fuel etc it makes it very easy for someone else to drop in and take over management

reply to post by hawkiye


Most of your Vets are heavily medicated or suffer from PTSD, they wouldn't be able to train anyone and the ones that are capable wouldn't have time to train any sizeable insurgency force. It would fall to whoever had the trottle to sit behind that blade of grass with his rifle.
Also, having a huge stockpile of small arms doesn't count for anything unless you know how to strip, clean and assemble the weapons to stop jamming and you have to know how to actually fire the weapon; putting it on spray isn't going to do anything against a trained army.

So when you factor the above in the chances of the US actually fielding any sort of 'Guerrilla' army quickly drops dramatically. Yea, you have 250m plus weapons but that doesn't count for anything against a chemical or biological weapon now does it?

Millions of Americans hunt dear elk bear lion and turkey etc. every year not to mention many veterans who would train others trust me there is enough Americans who know how to use a rifle that will reach out and touch someone! The American military still can't control a few thousand insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan. The most well trained well armed resourceful guerrilla army in the history of the world is right here in America. This would not be a fight against peasants in robes with AK's!

Yea... No. The US isn't the beat trained or most resourceful guerrilla army there is. That medal falls to the IRA and to a lesser extent, the Taliban.

Over 40 years of fiighting against 3 different paramilitaries and one of the worlds best trained armed forces turned the IRA into a well honed, ready for war at a moments notice - force.
Sure the US has an abundance of weapons but can you honestly say your 'Most resourceful' army can make a highly explosive weapon out of fertilizer and shrapnel? I doubt it.

reply to post by Trajan


While i agree with most of what you say, the IRA where not the worlds most effective Gurrilla Army. That honour goes to The Gurkas:-

en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by alldaylong


Im going to vote for the Vietnamese as the best guerilla fighters.

reply to post by alldaylong


Hell to the naw.

During four decades of fighting the RA only suffered 300-320 casualties whereas the Loyalist lost 3,500 and the British lost 1,700.
And that was when the RA was at their weakest (The RUC and British army arrested tens of thousands KD them before the fighting began in full).
If you saw what they are packing today (and this is only from a single shipment from Gaddafi.. It doesn't count the ones from US, Russia, Italy and Czech) you would see they are an army in their own right.

When the Gurkhas take barely 17% of the casualties over the longest war in Europe then we can has a real debate :-)
Lol, i am joking of course but if you pit the RA (in it's entirety, including all members and supporters) against the Gurkha I would have to back the IRA.. Who are the only militant force never to be defeated once might I add :-)

(Statistics courtesy of U.S. Dept. of Health Human Services)

Guns
(A) The number of gun owners in the U.S. is 80,000,000. Thats 80 million for you kids out there. Thats roughly 1 in 4 persons.

In the south the concentration is much higher. I only have two. I know LOTS of folks who have several. Not all shotguns and rifles either....im talking AR-15's that are semi-automatic or modified to become completely automatic.

In short, foreign troops (STILL DONT KNOW HOW YOU WILL GET HERE!) but come if you want. There are more guns amongst the civilian population than the military. You wont be fighting just one army but two.

reply to post by hawkiye


Obviously I completely disagree with you.

I see this argument as one between realists and the kind of American who chants "USA! USA! USA!" mindlessly.

It's that jock mentality of "we're better than anyone in the world because... well, because we're raised to think that! USA! USA! USA!"

When it comes to the invasion scenario, it's all "what if's". Neither you nor I can guess at what strategies and military plans there are out there (and you can bet at least two nations have a plan in a file somewhere detailing an invasion scenario). My point is that Americans are deluded if they think it's not possible. You don't know what weapons China or Russia has developed in their own versions of Area 51. You don't know what nasty little biological agents they've developed or the bugs only they have a vaccine for - just as the US has.

Here's a great example - look at the last Swine Flu outbreak. Neither the USA nor the UK were prepared to deal with that. They estimated it would take more than six months in the UK for a vaccine to be produced to inoculate the vulnerable. In the USA, with your population, this would take years.

Now imagine that has been done in China already, and they have developed both the vaccine and a virulent strain of a virus. They drop it, the outbreak starts, they close their borders and wait six months. By that time your nation is in chaos, various cities are in quarantine and your military are busy dealing with processing millions of people every day. Would they even notice the planes overhead?

How do you presume the US government would create a vaccine for that with limited lab space, even after the months of research into a solution?

That's just one plausible scenario that people often don't consider; an invasion doesn't have to start with choppers landing and troops marching in formation into a firing line.

How about another plausible scenario where a nation deliberately plans to sink their enemy into insurmountable debt, feeding them a lifeline every year as the money mounts up and up. All the while they're busy building new cities for their people to evacuate to when the end game comes - for survival of course. Then they start the ball rolling with a few well placed little economic troubles, the global economy slides, and when their enemy is almost on it's knees they pul their financial lifeline. They sit back and feed the economic chaos within the country, all the while becoming more powerful and replacing them as the global superpower.

Then, when their enemy its 30% unemployed, rolling protests on the streets, $18 Trillion in debt, fighting wars in several nations, they hit with a cyber attack and take the entire country off-line... minutes later their suicide pilots are attacking every major landmark. Then the invasion begins.

My point is, people think of this like it's the 1800's, like men standing and facing each other in a field with rifles. And that leads me to think they are also being "romantic" about it, imagining the heroism and good old American pride.

Once again, this is not a movie script. Nothing is predictable, there are thousands of strategies and plans just as there are thousands of potential acts being defended against on paper. It is by no means impossible.

Originally posted by LightsideAssassin
reply to post by detachedindividual

 

Well said. It is a fantasy, one played out on forums like these, gun forums, and video game chat rooms..especially the FPS crowd. One bullet fired in anger and all these "armchair rangers" would # themselves. It's a shame, because America has actually regressed as a society while everyone else has progressed. We're not #1 at anything, these days, unless invading countries that never attacked us [snipped]as progress.

Oh, sorry, we are really good at dropping hellfire missiles on civilians, and our own citizens(like al-alawi and his teenage son). We're THE BEST at that.

Next to the Israelis, of course.

edit on Sun Jun 17 2012 by DontTreadOnMe because: We expect civility and decorum within all topics - Please Review This Link.

Funny how closely- monitored and edited comments re: Israel and Zionism are vs. other topics. Just sayin

It is very very unlikely to ever happen

but anything is possible

Mexico and Canada are allies and the Chinese are not enemies and Europe is filled with allies and South America is controlled by the world trade organization, IMF and world bank just as all the world bank groups control the African continent putting down any threats there. The middle east has no nation capable of delivering troops to the US and furthermore most of the middle east is either an Ally, Subordinate or a puppet state. However hypothetically speaking a land invasion in the US is possible as anything is possible just about. The enemy would have to come through Canada or Mexico but likely they would come from Mexico and the Caribbean. However invading the US would be stupid now a days in a war! you only invade for 3 reasons

1) To set up and install a puppet government or a subordinate state. However that can only occur if the population of the place you are invading LIKES you, you need to have at least half the country's populace to support you. Furthermore you need to have a provisional government ready to take over once you overthrow the current government that can only work if you have people who are Americans and who are liked ready to take the throne.


2) Your goal is to eliminate a good portion of the population but not everyone and you wish to colonize the country yourself and have your own government and people rule it. If that is the case than it could be done but by and large given today's weapons it would be a purely aerial and sea based campaign to kill off most Americans than take charge and remove resources and than colonize with your own population of people as its far to hard to rule when you have a huge population that opposes you.

3) You wish to install a dictator of your own and not kill off most of the population or you want to install someone else as dictator who has zero support but rules with an iron fist. This is stupid as it only lasts for so long.


If #2 happened than they could rule because if that happened and the US was invaded it would signify that the US and its allies were defeated! it would also likely have involved nukes and somehow the US lost that war along with its allies. So of course than you could rule rather easily... #1 would never happen and would involve huge casualties for the Enemy as they would never have support and the ground enemy forces would eventually have to exist their armored vehicles and would be dealing with a large % of the population that has small arms. #3 option is stupid and always fails.

Originally posted by Trajan
reply to post by hawkiye

 

Most of your Vets are heavily medicated or suffer from PTSD, they wouldn't be able to train anyone and the ones that are capable wouldn't have time to train any sizeable insurgency force. It would fall to whoever had the trottle to sit behind that blade of grass with his rifle.
Also, having a huge stockpile of small arms doesn't count for anything unless you know how to strip, clean and assemble the weapons to stop jamming and you have to know how to actually fire the weapon; putting it on spray isn't going to do anything against a trained army.

So when you factor the above in the chances of the US actually fielding any sort of 'Guerrilla' army quickly drops dramatically. Yea, you have 250m plus weapons but that doesn't count for anything against a chemical or biological weapon now does it?

Millions of Americans hunt dear elk bear lion and turkey etc. every year not to mention many veterans who would train others trust me there is enough Americans who know how to use a rifle that will reach out and touch someone! The American military still can't control a few thousand insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan. The most well trained well armed resourceful guerrilla army in the history of the world is right here in America. This would not be a fight against peasants in robes with AK's!

Yea... No. The US isn't the beat trained or most resourceful guerrilla army there is. That medal falls to the IRA and to a lesser extent, the Taliban.

Over 40 years of fiighting against 3 different paramilitaries and one of the worlds best trained armed forces turned the IRA into a well honed, ready for war at a moments notice - force.
Sure the US has an abundance of weapons but can you honestly say your 'Most resourceful' army can make a highly explosive weapon out of fertilizer and shrapnel? I doubt it.

You do not know what you are talking about

The Iraq war was a success a new government installed old government and all enemies destroyed and the old Iraqi military destroyed and a new western friendly Iraqi military that is largely shia or kurdish based and filled with men who hated Saddam are in it. Their military is also US trained and supplied

Afghanistan- is about maintaining a military presence in a combat war type environment in the middle east and Afghanistan is unlikely to ever be a full puppet or subordinate state as the populace is not happy like the Iraqi populace was. The quality of life between an Iraqi and the amount of western friendly people and those with TV and exposed to western world was huge in Iraq and thoughts of democracy lured in the shadows. In Afghanistan none of that exists so Afghanistan is to remain a nation state that will be forever unstable as long as the population continues to fight among-st themselves and not unify. NATO powers are in Afghanistan for many many reasons and the military interventions the US and NATO allies launch are rarely ever failures that is the cold hard truth yet some remain in denial.

reply to post by alldaylong


The French did not extend the line along France's border with Belgium and did not not extend through the Ardennes Forest The Germans just went around the line meeting little resistance.

www.militaryhistoryonline.com...

Most of the Maginot Line forts were captured by the U.S. Army with little or no fighting required. For the most part, the Germans chose not to and/or were unable to mount an effective defense of the fortifications. However there were several notable occasions when the Germans had both the means and the will to mount an effective defense. On these occasions, the thick fortifications combined with determined defenders made the capture of the Maginot Line forts a difficult and time-consuming affair for the U.S. Army.

reply to post by Papagrune


You are correct in what you say regarding The Maginot Line. In fact that was the point i was making. The French thought it was their protection against invasion. It wasn't. Like the people who think the US cannot be invaded, they too could be living under a false sense of security.

In short: NOPE!!!

Originally posted by SUICIDEHK45
I keep seeing people say that they don't think the U.S. could be invaded by a conventional military. I agree with that statement, but I wanted to hear what all of you thought. People always say "you cannot invade the mainland United States, there will be a rifle behind every blade of grass" which is often misattributed to Isoroku Yamamoto.

I think now days you would have a much better chance of a successful invasion because of a few things.

I think the biggest one is the pussification of America. What I mean by this is that kids have grown up playing videogames and on the computer more than playing outside. When I was a kid, I constantly was playing some sport outside. We used to settle things on the playground with scuffles instead of telling the teacher or parents.

Another big thing is lack of work ethic. I am a steel erection foreman, and I have a lot of kids straight out of high school working for me. I can't believe the lack of work ethic some of these kids have. I've seen a lot of kids quit after a 12 or 14 hour day. It seems to me that a lot of kids now days are protected so much and don't see the "real world" until they are in their mid 20s.

Another thing that would be a big determining factor is that today's youth lack general skills. A lot of people have never fired a gun, or even held one for that matter. Some people have never operated hand or power tools in their life.

Some things that would help us out if the U.S. were invaded

There are a lot of civillian owned weapons in the U.S., but it seems to me that it is getting to the point that they will soon just kind of dissapear and very few people will have the knowledge to use them. So yes there may be a rifle behind every blade of grass. It just worrys me that if it ever came down to it, a lot of people wouldn't have the guts or determination and skills to stop an attack.

The U.S. has arguably the best military in the world, and a lot of military vets, some battle hardened. The thing that worries me about this, is that our military is relying so much upon technology and if they ever lost it, it would make things much more difficult for them. I don't think an invasion force of a conventional military could ever get close enough to even attempt an invasion because of our military and tools they have at their disposal.

Will to live/ survive. Although many people haven't had their will to survive tested, it is a part of the human condition. People will fight for what is theirs tooth and nail, sometimes to the death if need be. The people of the U.S. have had it relatively easy compared to a lot of countries, but when push comes to shove I think all Americans would be willing to fight and die to try to preserve their way of life for them and their friends and family.

I have just been thinking about all this and thought I would share. I'm sure my opinions differ a lot from others here on ATS and I'm sure this will be a hate fest, but I wanted to hear your opinions.

Originally posted by Trajan
reply to post by hawkiye

 

Most of your Vets are heavily medicated or suffer from PTSD, they wouldn't be able to train anyone and the ones that are capable wouldn't have time to train any sizeable insurgency force. It would fall to whoever had the trottle to sit behind that blade of grass with his rifle.
Also, having a huge stockpile of small arms doesn't count for anything unless you know how to strip, clean and assemble the weapons to stop jamming and you have to know how to actually fire the weapon; putting it on spray isn't going to do anything against a trained army.

I see you know nothing about PTSD. A vet with PTSD is one of the most dangerous people you would ever meet if he is P**SED
And if he is protecting his family you or a invader would find out very quickly. and after a invasion likely he will not be able to get his medications and that would only make him more dangerous.

So when you factor the above in the chances of the US actually fielding any sort of 'Guerrilla' army quickly drops dramatically. Yea, you have 250m plus weapons but that doesn't count for anything against a chemical or biological weapon now does it?

Against a invader i will be using chemical or biological weapons and IEDs more then a gun.
poisons and chemicals in the invaders food and water supplies are a lot more cost effective then bullets and can take out a invader in larger numbers without direct contact.

i always wanted to see how the radioactive element from a smoke detector would work as a slow acting poison in food.