Could the United States conquer the planet?

Arg...er, I mean, discuss nao.

The answer is simple,no.

No, especially now that we're arguably over extended.

Not at all, especially with how spread out our millitary is now.

No, unless we bomb everyone... wait no we'll only end up destroying ourselves too.

By themselves no. And if they did, it would't last long. No single government could possibly keep the entire planet under control without something going horribly wrong.

No

Conquer North America? No

Even remain as the leading world power for much longer? No

Manifest Destiny? No

NO

The world is entirely too large to conquer.

Simply, put.

Define conquer.

If you mean kill all human life on Earth by unleashing nukes on every major city then the answer is yes (you might get a few on some island who may survive but everybody else will eventually die).

If you mean march through every other country until the planet is the 21st century version of Futurama without using nukes then no. Eventually other countries will combine and will build forces in Canada and Mexico to invade the mainland on both sides. The US can only fight for so long with over a hundred enemy countries combining to resist.

No, it requires money we simply don't have.

If they wanted to just destroy everything and stand on the smoking heap afterwards, then sure. Otherwise, they'd get stopped pretty quickly by the wall that is China.foxhound_fox

with modern weaponry its impossible for any 1 country to take over

Um... no. Why the hell would we? Who would want to be in charge of the entire planet (other than complete egomaniacs with no business being in charge of a bathroom stall, much less a world government)?

Conquer North America? NoFundai

Not all at the same time.

With the US position right now I don't think so.

[QUOTE="Fundai"]Conquer North America? NoSilverbond

Canada is way too spread out to occupy all at once. By the time force would be consolidated properly in one province, we'd run out of land forces. :P

Not all at the same time.

nintendofreak_2

we can't control many places, yet alone the whole world at the same time :P

It's tough to say with all these immensely powerful nuclear weapons we have these days. I mean any country with significant nuclear capabilities could potentially disable a lot of the worlds superpowers with some well aimed nukes.

No, the US doesn't have nearly the manpower to conquer the planet. The US could severely depopulate any nation or much of the planet.

Arg...er, I mean, discuss nao.

-Tish-

Is everybody drunk tonight, or do I just think that 'cause I am?

[QUOTE="nintendofreak_2"]

Not all at the same time.

mirgamer

If they were to incementally try to conquer over ground, that just wouldn't work, and by the time they got into their third or fourth target, the infantry would be so reduced it just wouldn't be feasible anymore unless we cranked up the sexy times between now and then and had a bunch of new little warriors ready to fight. :P

[QUOTE="-Tish-"]

Arg...er, I mean, discuss nao.

Palantas

Is everybody drunk tonight, or do I just think that 'cause I am?

Umm sure. Because no one has the navy to match the U.S. and the airforce. But on land however, it could be close. But because the U.S. has the number manufactoring power in the world, they could have unlimited supplies. So, it's very possible. LOL@ ppl who said no. THey clearly don't know the strength in the American millitary and manufacturing power. They have alot of secret weopons and even modules in the abrams m1 tank. They are pretty far ahead, at least a generation ahead than everyone else.

EDIT: Also to people who doubts this. Seriously, they have been spending 10 times more than anyone else in military for a decade, since 9/11. But before that, we still spended so much more than everyone else. So, why doubt such thing? I mean, ever wonder why U.S. is considered "Rome of the modern day"? Its still debatable who was the most powerful country in history, its either U.S. or Roman Empire. So, tell me again why be skeptical about this? Just because it isn't happening (that they arent conquering)or what?

[QUOTE="scorch-62"]lol nosethman410

No.SilentFireX

[QUOTE="sethman410"][QUOTE="scorch-62"]lol noLiftedHeadshot

With me as an evil dictator the skies the limit....LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]With me as an evil dictator the skies the limit....SilentFireX

Its so sad to see people underestimating the U.S. military so much. Look at death comparisons in the U.s war with Iraq or any other wars in recent history. 3k to 500k in Iraq war. Hmmm.sethman410

[QUOTE="SilentFireX"]No.sethman410

Conquering the planet, militarily, then holding the acquisitions is completely unfeasible for practically any terrestrial entity. If you're specifically hypothesizing U.S. conquest of Earth, we are nowhere near powerful enough militarily or economically to defeat all opposition, and then hold the newly acquired territories for any amount of time. Sure, we could launch all of our nukes, and effectively wipe out the planet, ourselves along with it, but what's the point of that? Even our cultural influence has been in a moderately steady decline, with our preeminence reaching its height in the late 80s to mid 90s or so. Our current fiscal and foreign policies are grossly ineffective, and that, coupled with the insurmountable task of conquering the entire planet, and neutralizing any and all opposition makes "global conquest" a madman's piped dream at best.

A calculated, covert effort over multiple decades to undermine all foreign national governments, and perpetuate a global dependency on the United States would ultimately cripple our own existence, and never succeed in creating any lasting global empire. There are far too many contingencies for that to ever occur.

Its so sad to see people underestimating the U.S. military so much. Look at death comparisons in the U.s war with Iraq or any other wars in recent history. 3k to 500k in Iraq war. Hmmm.sethman410

[QUOTE="sethman410"][QUOTE="SilentFireX"]No.SilentFireX

Conquering the planet, militarily, then holding the acquisitions is completely unfeasible for practically any terrestrial entity. If you're specifically hypothesizing U.S. conquest of Earth, we are nowhere near powerful enough militarily or economically to defeat all opposition, and then hold the newly acquired territories for any amount of time. Sure, we could launch all of our nukes, and effectively wipe out the planet, ourselves along with it, but what's the point of that? Even our cultural influence has been in a moderately steady decline, with our preeminence reaching its height in the late 80s to mid 90s or so. Our current fiscal and foreign policies are grossly ineffective, and that, coupled with the insurmountable task of conquering the entire planet, and neutralizing any and all opposition makes "global conquest" a madman's piped dream at best.

A calculated, covert effort over multiple decades to undermine all foreign national governments, and perpetuate a global dependency on the United States would ultimately cripple our own existence, and never succeed in creating any lasting global empire. There are far too many contingencies for that to ever occur.

Its so sad to see people underestimating the U.S. military so much. Look at death comparisons in the U.s war with Iraq or any other wars in recent history. 3k to 500k in Iraq war. Hmmm.sethman410

Its so sad to see people underestimating the U.S. military so much. Look at death comparisons in the U.s war with Iraq or any other wars in recent history. 3k to 500k in Iraq war. Hmmm.sethman410

500,000. 500,000? You should explain that figure?

With me as an evil dictator the skies the limit....LJS9502_basic

I reconsider my opinion, then. Palantas would like the following job title:"DeputyQuartermaster Chief ofStaff, Alcohol and Female Uniforms."

[QUOTE="LiftedHeadshot"][QUOTE="sethman410"] Ok, why not? For real, its so sad to see many people saying no without reasons. Just because it hasn't happend doesnt mean its not possible.sethman410

Conquering the planet, militarily, then holding the acquisitions is completely unfeasible for practically any terrestrial entity. If you're specifically hypothesizing U.S. conquest of Earth, we are nowhere near powerful enough militarily or economically to defeat all opposition, and then hold the newly acquired territories for any amount of time. Sure, we could launch all of our nukes, and effectively wipe out the planet, ourselves along with it, but what's the point of that? Even our cultural influence has been in a moderately steady decline, with our preeminence reaching its height in the late 80s to mid 90s or so. Our current fiscal and foreign policies are grossly ineffective, and that, coupled with the insurmountable task of conquering the entire planet, and neutralizing any and all opposition makes "global conquest" a madman's piped dream at best.

A calculated, covert effort over multiple decades to undermine all foreign national governments, and perpetuate a global dependency on the United States would ultimately cripple our own existence, and never succeed in creating any lasting global empire. There are far too many contingencies for that to ever occur.

[QUOTE="Fundai"]Conquer North America? NoSilverbond

No. If both Canada and Mexico worked together, plus the Islands in the Caribean, and we got to call in favours (I'm fairly sure the comonwealth would support Canada).

Imagine a two front war where on one side you had a country with dangerous armed criminals with a grudge against the states (so if you ocupied them there would be recistance), and on the other side a country that could be likened to russia in the way you'd be forced to conquer it...

[QUOTE="sethman410"][QUOTE="LiftedHeadshot"] The simple answer is no. The more complicated answer is also a resounding "no."

Conquering the planet, militarily, then holding the acquisitions is completely unfeasible for practically any terrestrial entity. If you're specifically hypothesizing U.S. conquest of Earth, we are nowhere near powerful enough militarily or economically to defeat all opposition, and then hold the newly acquired territories for any amount of time. Sure, we could launch all of our nukes, and effectively wipe out the planet, ourselves along with it, but what's the point of that? Even our cultural influence has been in a moderately steady decline, with our preeminence reaching its height in the late 80s to mid 90s or so. Our current fiscal and foreign policies are grossly ineffective, and that, coupled with the insurmountable task of conquering the entire planet, and neutralizing any and all opposition makes "global conquest" a madman's piped dream at best.

A calculated, covert effort over multiple decades to undermine all foreign national governments, and perpetuate a global dependency on the United States would ultimately cripple our own existence, and never succeed in creating any lasting global empire. There are far too many contingencies for that to ever occur.

SilentFireX