If people think the US will be invaded any time soon...

[Le Pere Duchesne]

In the Code Lyoko forums some time ago, someone asked whether anyone would invade the US. There were many stupid relpies, and a few serius ones... and then someone mentioned the allies of the US.

Just so people here know the situation in the world and in these countries in particular, I repost it here:

----------

Quote:

Canada, GB, Poland, France, Australia, Ireland, Iceland, and Germany.

Ok... Canada? what would Canada be able to contribute to a defence against an invasion of north america? If the situation is such that the US is caught on the back foot, then nothng Canada can mobilize would be useful, as it would also be caught by suprise.

Brittain: The days of Brittania ruling the waves are gone, the situation there is much the same as with Canada, though because of its distance, it would be able to coordinate and reinforcements it supplies, so later on it may help a bit.

Poland: Poland is in the middle of central europe. Not only is it in such an out-of-the-way possition, but its economy, dispite all the cheering wall street has made over the past decade, is in no condition to wage a major war.

France: the french economy is such that it may be able to help, though with the political situation in europe, it would most likely see this as a chance to break free of the US completely, and challenge Germany for easter europe.

Australia: Have you been here? it is a country near enough in size to the US, though it has a population of only 21-odd million. Not only that, but while the country is reputed to have the best standard infantry on the planet, such an armed force is only about 5000 strong I think. Not very useful. For all the 'friendship' between these two countries (and I wonder how this 'friendship will change after the next ellections, both here and in the US) the actuall commitment of the Australian military is small (there have been 3 deaths in Afghanistan... one of them was either friendly-fire, suicide or an idiot playing with his gun without the safety on... they do not know which).

Ireland? I know almost nothing about Ireland, so I will not comment there.

Iceland... Come on, Iceland? I have no idea about the country or its people, but the worth of such an ally seems more political than military.

Germany: Germany and France are currently in competition for the EU, that is, who gets eastern europe as its private domain. In any situation I think this will be the main factor. If France is not in a position to use its nuclear weaopnry, Germany would most likely side with the Non-French side. France would lose.

Now, the main question: would the US be able to take an invasion?

The economy of the US is going down. Increasing foreign debt while decreasing the domestic manufacturing sector is something that would play . the US if it were attacked. (who would attack? I have no idea, and that question is not important for this part of the post) The US, while still the only superpower in military strength, is declining economicaly. Unless US capitalism is able to rectify this, it is actually only a matter of time untill someone comes along with the ability to breat it.


Who would attack?
China? most people would say this, just as most people would say that the SU would have been the one to attack first if the cold war were to have turned hot. But both are wrong. The SU didn't attack and the PRC won't attack for one reason: Socialism in one country. This stalinist dogma seeks 'peaceful co-existence' with western capitalism in order to create the socialist paradise. What this means in practice is that either capitalism will be restored in mainland China as in the SU, or the PRC is to turn in on itself, deny western capitalism and its technological advancements and resources and go the road of Cuba: ecologically sustainable, but hella poor. However, that much is irrelevant, what is important is that the CCP needs a stable capitalist world if it is to catch up technologically to the west and be able to justify its existence to the chinese people. It is no threat in the offence. Defensively? well, that is not part of the question, so I shall leave that be for now.

Russia? Russia's economy is slowly becoming to be something that could be called 'in existence'. Russian capitalism almost completely destroyed the industry built up under the SU. The military capablities of Russia are similar to the US in that they are disproportionate to the economic base. However, though russia actually has a decent military, it is not one that could stand up to the US. At the most it would be able to make a decent attempt at eastern europe or the former soviet republics south of it.

Europe? no country in europe would have a chance against the US as things currently stand, though a Franco-German unified state would be able to at least pretend. Though there is no question of a peaceful unification as the two are historically enemies, if there were a war in which Germany won rather quickly, such a case might arise, though if it were France that won it would be through the use of nukes, so that would end any hopes of having a decent economy.

Japan? Hah! Japan is in the same situation it was in the '30s, though this time it has no colonial holdings. The situation I mean is this: per unit of population, per unit of territory, it has a bigger economy. The thing is that while its economy may be proportionately larger than the US economy, the US economy is absolutely bigger. That and the JSDF are teh suck. High tech, but suck.

Right now, the US is in no danger of being attacked by a compotent enemy, its only danger is of being bled white in one foreign theatre after another.
----------

Any thoughts?  

[Monsieur Rosebud]

I think you pretty much summed it up. The only possible nation/nations I see even attempting an invasion would be some Islamic alliance of some sort. Im only basing that off of the instability of the middle east, and teh alliance would more than likely just be informal  

[Lady Merewyn]

Pretty much that. There's really no point in any country actually invading the US, because none are in a position that it would actually benefit them. Letting it sit and stagnate with it's culture of excess consumerism seems more efficient.  

[Le Pere Duchesne]

Rosebud: How would an islamic country attack the US? they are not rich enough to take it on.

Mere: There is a ;ot of point to attacking the US, it is that noone is able.
America is not overrun with consumerism, or at least that is not harmful to an economy, in normal circumstances it is actually beneficial to a capitalist-- and for that matter, a socialist economy as well. The problem the US bourgeoisie faces is that it has destroyed the local industry, moving it to china... And the imperialist bourgeoisie is scared of china...  

[UF6]

Gracchvs

Rosebud: How would an islamic country attack the US? they are not rich enough to take it on.

Mere: There is a ;ot of point to attacking the US, it is that noone is able.
America is not overrun with consumerism, or at least that is not harmful to an economy, in normal circumstances it is actually beneficial to a capitalist-- and for that matter, a socialist economy as well. The problem the US bourgeoisie faces is that it has destroyed the local industry, moving it to china... And the imperialist bourgeoisie is scared of china...

If China can get a fleet in the Gulf Coast without nobody taking notice I think they could get a foot hold, though the west coast is quite bad for fighting. The worst place to fight in this country. The east coast is quite bad also seeing how it's just as hilly with few flat regions. Not to mention the whether here changes so fast due to it's placement. The planes region of the United States is the best place fot large scale war, though that's were most of the bases are located for the army and air force. Also the navy can strike you from Fallon and other bases in the area if called upon. I think you will find that they would need a force very large in order to get a foot hold since casualties will be high. Supply routes has to be open and with the navies of England, Dutch and US in the region you will find it will be hard to get the needed supplies. A West Coast attack is better, though your going to get more losses for America, just the population won't like you as much.

They could get Mexico to help out if they would. Not sure if they would dare to attack or not.  

[Le Pere Duchesne]

um, no. The chinese fleet at the moment is in no shape for offensive amphibious assaults. So that is out of the question. Simple.  

[UF6]

Gracchvs

um, no. The chinese fleet at the moment is in no shape for offensive amphibious assaults. So that is out of the question. Simple.

That is why they need Russia, and Russia is not going to commit to this at all. Right now x number of ships are under commission for launch. I'm not sure what class or type i will have to get back to you on that though the Japanese and American navy they fear the most.  

[LiberoLombardi]

Gracchvs

Rosebud: How would an islamic country attack the US? they are not rich enough to take it on.

The UAE. The country is rich, large, and has the political influence to turn surrounding non-middle eastern countries against the US.

If the middle east led an invasion of the US, it would most likely involve north african terretories, and south korea, and MAYBE (slight chance) Russia.  

[Monsieur Rosebud]

LiberoLombardi

Gracchvs

Rosebud: How would an islamic country attack the US? they are not rich enough to take it on.

The UAE. The country is rich, large, and has the political influence to turn surrounding non-middle eastern countries against the US.

If the middle east led an invasion of the US, it would most likely involve north african terretories, and south korea, and MAYBE (slight chance) Russia.

even if they didnt do a physical invasion of the US, teh fallout from cutting off oil reserves would send us into a frenzy, thus more than likely leading to the US starting some sort of regime change operation as we tend to do  

[LiberoLombardi]

Monsieur Rosebud

LiberoLombardi

Gracchvs

Rosebud: How would an islamic country attack the US? they are not rich enough to take it on.

The UAE. The country is rich, large, and has the political influence to turn surrounding non-middle eastern countries against the US.

If the middle east led an invasion of the US, it would most likely involve north african terretories, and south korea, and MAYBE (slight chance) Russia.

even if they didnt do a physical invasion of the US, teh fallout from cutting off oil reserves would send us into a frenzy, thus more than likely leading to the US starting some sort of regime change operation as we tend to do

oh yeah i was about to say,

They would only have to cut-off the US oil reserves, and they have severely mained the US forces. it costs 10 cents for a litre of gasoline in the Middle East. Compared to a ~dollar here.Note: LITERS.
They basically can fuel themselves and anyone they want to the US at basically no cost to themselves.  

[UF6]

LiberoLombardi

Monsieur Rosebud

LiberoLombardi

Gracchvs

Rosebud: How would an islamic country attack the US? they are not rich enough to take it on.

The UAE. The country is rich, large, and has the political influence to turn surrounding non-middle eastern countries against the US.

If the middle east led an invasion of the US, it would most likely involve north african terretories, and south korea, and MAYBE (slight chance) Russia.

even if they didnt do a physical invasion of the US, teh fallout from cutting off oil reserves would send us into a frenzy, thus more than likely leading to the US starting some sort of regime change operation as we tend to do

oh yeah i was about to say,

They would only have to cut-off the US oil reserves, and they have severely mained the US forces. it costs 10 cents for a litre of gasoline in the Middle East. Compared to a ~dollar here.Note: LITERS.
They basically can fuel themselves and anyone they want to the US at basically no cost to themselves.

We could supply ourselves with oil if we diden't ******** ourselves over with Alaska. This makes sense lets import oil for ourselves and sell are oil. What's wrong with this picture?  

[La Veuve Zin]

Wow, ignorant AND insulting. I'm sorry, where did you get your data on these countries? You even admit you know jack about Ireland and Iceland. Just so you stop making an a** of yourself, you also know jack about the rest of the countries you mentioned.

Without Canada, Australia, the U.K. and--yup--Poland, Iraq and Afghanistan would have been even bigger disasters for the U.S. than they are. Their aid has been invaluable.

You sound like a typical Bush-worshipping neo-con ugly American. Read a ******** book.  

[LiberoLombardi]

La Veuve Zin

Wow, ignorant AND insulting. I'm sorry, where did you get your data on these countries? You even admit you know jack about Ireland and Iceland. Just so you stop making an a** of yourself, you also know jack about the rest of the countries you mentioned.

Without Canada, Australia, the U.K. and--yup--Poland, Iraq and Afghanistan would have been even bigger disasters for the U.S. than they are. Their aid has been invaluable.

You sound like a typical Bush-worshipping neo-con ugly American. Read a ******** book.

Amen  

[Le Pere Duchesne]

Hmm, Zin's post was rather amusing. Yes, I said I didn't know about them, and I said little. The other countries, well, I would venture to say I know a decent amount, learnt from all over the place, however if you think I am wrong, do tell, where have I gone wrong? you want me to read a book, fine, which book?

Now as to the help the allies have made in Iraq, I didn't say anything about that, you may notice that the post was dedicated to a military invasion of the mainland of the US. Nothing about Iraq was mentioned there except bloodletting.

Now, as to the line at the bottom of the post: please, be a grown up, here we call people 'renegades', 'stalinists', and 'lackeys of the bourgeoisie'. WE DO NOT however, hurl racial or national slurs. Doing such identifies the proletariat of a given nation or state with the bourgoiesie, which is manifestly wrong.

Next,I can assure you I have no fond thoughts for Bush, though I do not have any fonder thoughts for any of the other candidates in the next election in the US. I am, as you will see, a consistent communist, as any of the longtimers here will be able to tell you. And, as the longtimers that have posted in this thread(Rosebud, Mere, Gallenger) have said: I am largely correct.

Are they "Bush-worshipping neo-con ugly Americans" who should "Read a ******** book"?...
Wait, don't answer that...

Please, think before you type...  

[Koon]

The Third Mexican Empire.