Could the United States conquer the planet?

lol :lol:

america couldnt even conquer afghanistan in 10 years let alone the planet.

blaze_adeel

[QUOTE="blaze_adeel"]

lol :lol:

america couldnt even conquer afghanistan in 10 years let alone the planet.

LJS9502_basic

Oh yeah, it's the guerrillas in it...

Nah, that whole "Mutually Assured Destruction" thing kinda screwed that all up.

[QUOTE="blaze_adeel"]

lol :lol:

america couldnt even conquer afghanistan in 10 years let alone the planet.

LJS9502_basic

Nope, although I'm sure a lot of American's believe that they could.

History has showed several times that any country or empire trying will eventually crumble and be forced to give up it up, Rome, Persia, France, England etc.Treflis

This thread hurts my head, but I will humor the TC. I have 3 simple starting rhetorical questions that illustrate the nature of the problem of one country, no matter how powerful and advanced their military, defeating all others combined without resorting to some sort of suprise nuke, or biological attack.

1. How powerful is the economy of the US compared to the rest of the world combined and what happens to that relationship when suddenly no one trades with the US anymore?

2. How dependent on satellite and other critical communications technologyis the US military (ie: how much of the technological advantage is dependent on these systems) and how are you going to stop the other world nations from taking those assets out in the first day, week or month of this hypothetical conflict?

3. How is the US going to secure its borders from the many and willing suicide attackers that will be equipped by the other world powers to strike at every piece of important infrastructure/military industrial complex within the US?

If these rather straightforward questions cannot be answered then there is no point in even contemplating how one would move the resources required and conduct the actual fighting against the rest of the world.

This thread hurts my head, but I will humor the TC. I have 3 simple starting rhetorical questions that illustrate the nature of the problem of one country, no matter how powerful and advanced their military, defeating all others combined without resorting to some sort of suprise nuke, or biological attack.

1. How powerful is the economy of the US compared to the rest of the world combined and what happens to that relationship when suddenly no one trades with the US anymore?

2. How dependent on satellite and other critical communications technologyis the US military (ie: how much of the technological advantage is dependent on these systems) and how are you going to stop the other world nations from taking those assets out in the first day, week or month of this hypothetical conflict?

3. How is the US going to secure its borders from the many and willing suicide attackers that will be equipped by the other world powers to strike at every piece of important infrastructure/military industrial complex within the US?

If these rather straightforward questions cannot be answered then there is no point in even contemplating how one would move the resources required and conduct the actual fighting against the rest of the world.

SUD123456

Rome Wasn't built in a day, If the US tried to conquer the entire world in a single instance then they would be wiped out but if they did it incrementally over hundreds of years through many means and not just war then it's theoretically possible but highly unlikely.

Rome Wasn't built in a day, If the US tried to conquer the entire world in a single instance then they would be wiped out but if they did it incrementally over hundreds of years through many means and not just war then it's theoretically possible but highly unlikely.mattisgod01

So, I'm ill-informed about this, so it's all offshoots with no citations and substance, but wasn't the US in a huge debt now as it is? So pretty much America as we see it today is based on borrowed money, no? I'm pretty sure the only thing keeping it alive is the investors of interest not wanting a global economical collapse, so if US adopted a Jingoist policy, of capturing, annexing, and conquering, I'm pretty sure investors' confidence will significantly drop by the first country the US declares a war on.Victorious_Fize

[QUOTE="mattisgod01"]Rome Wasn't built in a day, If the US tried to conquer the entire world in a single instance then they would be wiped out but if they did it incrementally over hundreds of years through many means and not just war then it's theoretically possible but highly unlikely.LJS9502_basic

But those times are long past. You can't conquer anyone these days without everyone else knowing it and interested in the results. You can play around with beating up fringe players and get away with it a few times if you have enough allies and what not, but you can't make any meaningful in-roads towards conquering the planet that way.

This isn't Rome or Mongolia beating up its neighbours and no one else knows or cares. This is a modern interconnected world where we apparently care about what Paris Hilton is wearing, let alone that someone is out conquering someone else.

And conquering is by definition through the use of force. Surely without force the planet could be unified over hundreds or thousands of years based upon a dominant culture/values set, but me thinks that is a different topic then this thread.

[QUOTE="blaze_adeel"]

lol :lol:

america couldnt even conquer afghanistan in 10 years let alone the planet.

LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="blaze_adeel"]

lol :lol:

america couldnt even conquer afghanistan in 10 years let alone the planet.

weezyfb

[QUOTE="mattisgod01"]Rome Wasn't built in a day, If the US tried to conquer the entire world in a single instance then they would be wiped out but if they did it incrementally over hundreds of years through many means and not just war then it's theoretically possible but highly unlikely.LJS9502_basic

The easiest way to conquer wouldn't be through use of the military, rather employing some insidious james bond villian-esque scheme to draw in, then subjugate world leaders. What exactly I haven't a clue. Rupert Murdoch was doing a pretty good job of it - maybe media/religion - something along those lines. Conquering through the back door so to speak.

I don't think the world would allow that to happen.

No..no it doesn't.LJS9502_basic

Guerrilla war is still war.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="mattisgod01"]Rome Wasn't built in a day, If the US tried to conquer the entire world in a single instance then they would be wiped out but if they did it incrementally over hundreds of years through many means and not just war then it's theoretically possible but highly unlikely.SUD123456

But those times are long past. You can't conquer anyone these days without everyone else knowing it and interested in the results. You can play around with beating up fringe players and get away with it a few times if you have enough allies and what not, but you can't make any meaningful in-roads towards conquering the planet that way.

This isn't Rome or Mongolia beating up its neighbours and no one else knows or cares. This is a modern interconnected world where we apparently care about what Paris Hilton is wearing, let alone that someone is out conquering someone else.

And conquering is by definition through the use of force. Surely without force the planet could be unified over hundreds or thousands of years based upon a dominant culture/values set, but me thinks that is a different topic then this thread.

I'm not sure how to go about it or how to sell it to the world but it would take alot of time. The Likely way the world will be unified is through the merging of Continental/Regional Unions. People have to want it, Force will never unite the world.

No, and we wouldn't be able to pool the resources required to maintain stability. Military and police would be spread thinly. And try managing currencies...*shudder*

No way in hell could the US take over the world.

america cant even manage to get its own house in order much less conquer the entire planet LOL LOL:lol::lol:

Playing video games and watching the History Channel doesn't make one an expert. Hell, neither does reading a few dozen books on WWII. Everyone has done that. How many degrees have you earned relating to your alleged field of expertise? How many years have you spent researching source material, writing systematic analyses and documenting historical events? How many years have you worked in the field you claim to be established in?

coolbeans90

Remember this thread:

http://www.gamespot.com/forums/topic/28572258/what-are-you-an-expert-at

There are a horde of experts on OT.

Palantas

thanks to one simple rule i am an expert of " < 3 a cat " surrealnumber5

you already cornered the ass market right? i wonder if humbuggery market has been called, if not i masted it and i takes all of the humbug for my self.surrealnumber5

I don't think so, but we, along with Russia could make a good run at wiping most life from its surface. I suppose that's a twisted kind of conquest, but I doubt that's what any sane person wants. If you assume that an attempt at world conquest would lead to a nuclear exchange then the answer becomes, "definitely not".

not even, no one has the resources for that weezyfb

The United States could destroy the planet using its nuclear weaponry, but there's no way they could conquer it. There would just be too much involved in trying to keep control.

The bigger question is...what country actually has the desire to conquer the planet? I'm sure it's not the United States. I'd say it's China. They're already trying with India. They keep walking into the northeastern Indian states, and the Indian government is too afraid to face the situation. They make friends with India's enemies, such as Pakistan, and keep building bases in key locations around the subcontinent in order to try and diminish India's influence in that region.

I don't know,although they do have a extremely well funded military and the US navy seals.They would probably get only far though.Conquering us in England and other smaller countries but would struggle with taking on bigger countries like China and Russia at the same time.

The United States could destroy the planet using its nuclear weaponry, but there's no way they could conquer it. There would just be too much involved in trying to keep control.

The bigger question is...what country actually has the desire to conquer the planet? I'm sure it's not the United States. I'd say it's China. They're already trying with India. They keep walking into the northeastern Indian states, and the Indian government is too afraid to face the situation. They make friends with India's enemies, such as Pakistan, and keep building bases in key locations around the subcontinent in order to try and diminish India's influence in that region.

The world has already been conquered, say hello to the IMF and international banking cartel.

it already happened. it's why your children are buying crap music, watching brainless movies and drinking carbonated poision.

you're welcome.

it already happened. it's why your children are buying crap music, watching brainless movies and drinking carbonated poision.

you're welcome.

Riverwolf007