NationStates Jolt Archive

I have wondered about this for a long time and would like some outside opinions on the matter. My theory is that through manipulation and military superiority, America could come to dominate the world if it saw fit. There are a few steps for them to reach this goal according to my theory.

1. Either invade or persuade Canada to join the take over.
2. Invade Mexico.
3. Establish nuclear silos on both poles of the Earth.
4. Work eastward gathering allies, and crushing opposition.

While very flimsy to say the least, with some fine tuning, I feel this could be a serious plan of attack if America and it's citizens were willing. However, therein lies it's ultimate weakness. Most Americans would never go along with such a movement and it would crumble from the inside. Again, just my wacky theory. Respond if you'd like to add, agree, or tear apart!

This belongs in General.

Noone would support the USA, Canada wouldn't want to go along with it, the East would steadfastly resist the Americans, Europe will step in and use a huge coalition, invades the USA, USA becomes an EU colony and Europe becomes the new world power, China doesn't like Europe, China nukes Europe and then Europe nukes China back, everyone else launches nukes.

World Ends.

Your probably right except for the Euro invasion part. However, such a brash military action on the US's part would most likely result in the extinction of most if not all of humankind.

I merely suggest you read the Book "What if?" By Robert Crowley, and "...More What if?" by the same author.

Plenty of essays in there with lovely theories to read.

Your probably right except for the Euro invasion part. However, such a brash military action on the US's part would most likely result in the extinction of most if not all of humankind.

The EU is quickly becoming a world power despite what many may think, the Euro is rising in value and Europe is becoming an economical power.

The EU is quickly becoming a world power despite what many may think, the Euro is rising in value and Europe is becoming an economical power.
Europe is an economic power, but spends too little on military to be a serious conventional threat to the US. Europe's armed forces combined are a far second best compared to the USA.

Everyone who hasn't read it, read the Pax Americana document written up by the PNAC.

That is our current administration's plan for securing world domination.

Of note is its plan to secure Iraq and Iran before China becomes a superpower as both a military and economic leverage peice. They noted that they would not be able to enact such a plan without "another Pearl Harbor".

I thought we already were taking over the world with mass media, political influnece, economic influence, and now military action. As homer simpson T-shirt once said,(i think its when they went to Brazil) "Try and stop us" and had a picture of Uncle Sams head devouring the world. I want it! :D (the T-shirt)

Actually the Iran/Iraq takeover is like a beta (test) version of the Pax Americana. It is pretty much a budget take over of the world.

China will be the next superpower though, no doubt about it. Europe just doesn't have the miltary and finances at the moment. They are growing but not at a rate to counter the Chinese as the next power.

I thought we already were taking over the world with mass media, political influnece, economic influence, and now military action. As homer simpson T-shirt once said,(i think its when they went to Brazil) "Try and stop us" and had a picture of Uncle Sams head devouring the world. I want it! :D (the T-shirt)
I want it now...

just put ppl like bust in power and the countrys inhabitants will turn into mindless zombies that will invade other countries at random to kill the "evil doers" and stop that "group of folks" from taking away our "freedoms"

America already dominants every aspect of the world.. plain and simple

For all practical purposes, America already controls the world, first economically and second, when necessary, militarily. And the gap is widening.

For all practical purposes, America already controls the world, first economically and second, when necessary, militarily. And the gap is widening.


Right except on the gap part. The US is quickly loosing influence in the economical aspect (The EU is already strong enough to push the US around in major trade deals, it still lacks the financial strenght, but it as been gaining it, consistently).

Militarily.. well, the US cant control Iraq... :p
Yes, it is the most powerful army in the world, but in time, that can go too. European armies are weak because they are fragmented, but that is changing also. The EU battlegroups are already being formed, check out Kosovo.

America already does dominate the world.

America is losing a war in Iraq.

If America is going to dominate the world it needs a whole new strategy for making war.

America is losing a war in Iraq.

If America is going to dominate the world it needs a whole new strategy for making war.
You're in serious need of a reality check.

You're in serious need of a reality check.

America isnt losing the war. Its losing the peace, which can be worse.

You're in serious need of a reality check.

So the war in Iraq is a win?

I mean if it takes 140 000 troops to sort of suppress a small 3rd world country, how many troops will it take to suppress Canada 500 000 or a million?

At least that many. We fight dirty. ;)

Though they'd just give up after awhile, go home and claim it as a victory.

Again.

So the war in Iraq is a win?

I mean if it takes 140 000 troops to sort of suppress a small 3rd world country, how many troops will it take to suppress Canada 500 000 or a million?
And Mexico. With it's 104 million people. Plus the millions of Mexicans who are already in the US.

America isnt losing the war. Its losing the peace, which can be worse.

Don't you just hate it when you invade somebody's country, and they, you know, resist? Gotta suck, that.

Don't you just hate it when you invade somebody's country, and they, you know, resist? Gotta suck, that.
Yes. How dare they? Unpatriotic jerks. :p

At least that many. We fight dirty. ;)

Though they'd just give up after awhile, go home and claim it as a victory.

Again.

:)

Plus America only fights 3rd world countries.

:)

Plus America only fights 3rd world countries.
And they have trouble keeping them under their thumb.

I think America theoretically dominates the world, but it needs to take steps if it wants to go past theoretically(which it does).

Using Iraq to say the US military isn't all its cracked up to be is a horible argument. The military tradtional kills people and break things. Doing that is in how the past wars have been won, in Iraq they are protecting people and building things. So here's my point: The US could militarily ravage anyone and everyone in the world if the political leadership existed. Huzah for blowing things up!

Using Iraq to say the US military isn't all its cracked up to be is a horible argument. The military tradtional kills people and break things. Doing that is in how the past wars have been won, in Iraq they are protecting people and building things. So here's my point: The US could militarily ravage anyone and everyone in the world if the political leadership existed. Huzah for blowing things up!

Russia can nuke any country on the planet into oblivion within 1 hour if it wants to. Yippee for Russia.

Russia can nuke any country on the planet into oblivion within 1 hour if it wants to. Yippee for Russia.
But the US can nuke the whole world more times then Russia!!!!
So if the Russians nuke the world and they run out of nukes then the US can nuke the planet all over again!!!!

You are missing the point. In order to win the "hearts and minds," Bush is being nice.

THis is one of the few points I disagree with him.

Personally, Fallujah (sp?) should not be a real problem. It should have been carpet bombed a long time ago.

The world hates America already, no point in trying to make them happy -- it won't work unless America collapses.

Also, polititions -- specifically on the left -- have something to do with it, too. With their ignorance on the battlefield, and their ultimate hatred of Bush clouding what intelligence they might have (considering they're brainwashed polititions), they will critisize everything for any reason.

SITUATION A: Bush carpet bombs Fallujah. Left wing yells for killing civilians.

SITUATION B: Bush does what he does now. Left wing yells at him for wasting troops' lives.

See my point?


Also, A lot of these people protesting this war should honestly be shot for treason. Not because they dont' like the war, but because they are demonizing America. Like the media. Just about all of the media, save a few, should be lined up against the wall and shot for treason. They WANT America to lose this war, and as American citizens, that is not only unpatriotic, but treason. (Just as those Vietnam protestors waving the Viet Kong Flag should have been gassed)
=================
On a side note, Russia couldn't. It isn't even sure if their missiles WORK anymore, they're so damn old. Besides, the whole nation is in shambles. It was doomed to hell since Lenin's Revolution.

Actually, Russia has about ten thousand more nuclear weapons than the US. Only about twentyfive percent of them work, though.

We start employing everybody in the world. And once they go to war with us, we cut off our job line so they all have an economical collapse.

Thats how we can take over the world.

This is the thing:

If America wants to it can nuke any country it likes into dust. FACT
In return America get nuked into dust FACT
No winner in Nuclear war FACT

America invades China. 1'000'000'000 people take up arms against them. I don't think in an outright conflict the USA could beat China I think you could get a Viet Nam repeat and no one wants that.

China will be the next world superpower I have no doubt about this. They can produce things more quickly and cheaply than anyone else. they have no minimum wage and if a worker gets killed they get another one. We cannot compete with that!

Europe is growing in strength and may eventually be as strong as the USA, but that won't be for a while yet. They keep on letting ex-USSR countries in that need their economies and infrastructure sorting out.

Now this is just something that I read in a repected national newspaper so I assume it's true.
High ranking British military personel are concerned about the reduction in Britains armed forces. They consider Britiain to have one of the best armies in the world. It concerns them that in these times of trouble only Britain and France have functional and competant armies in Europe and that both are being reduced.
Make what you will of that, but it bothers me that we are reducing Britains armed forces every year and asking them to do more things for more people. So in term of military in a straight war as it stands currently America would wipe the floor with Europe.

Europe is growing in strength and may eventually be as strong as the USA, but that won't be for a while yet. They keep on letting ex-USSR countries in that need their economies and infrastructure sorting out.

So far only 3 tiny ex-USSR countries have been admitted to the EU. Not realy a big problem.
The rest of them are former Warsaw pact countries. Now they are a problem. In my opninion shouldn't have been admitted for at least another 10 to 15 years. But the sudden admission of so many countries was a pure political decision. To prevent another Bosnia or Kosovo.

We start employing everybody in the world. And once they go to war with us, we cut off our job line so they all have an economical collapse.

Thats how we can take over the world.


Problem is: once they go on strike, our economy tanks.



Economics is really the most pertinent reason that one country cannot dominate all the rest.

The american consumer economy is so integrally linked with the global economy that america is at the mercy of the rest of the world.

Recall, we dont manufacture much of anything anymore.

In regards to a post about brit and european military decreases:


They are learning that a large, strong military is not an asset anymore, it is a liability.

Maintaining a large conventional army is simply a money sink, such an army has no practical purpose anymore.

World war is impossible because of atomic weapons and M.A.D., and conventional war is now soley in the realm of the third world.

America's government is co-opted and corrupted to the core with the military-industrial-complex so we still go on wasting untold fortunes.

You are missing the point. In order to win the "hearts and minds," Bush is being nice.

THis is one of the few points I disagree with him.

Personally, Fallujah (sp?) should not be a real problem. It should have been carpet bombed a long time ago.

The world hates America already, no point in trying to make them happy -- it won't work unless America collapses.

Also, polititions -- specifically on the left -- have something to do with it, too. With their ignorance on the battlefield, and their ultimate hatred of Bush clouding what intelligence they might have (considering they're brainwashed polititions), they will critisize everything for any reason.

SITUATION A: Bush carpet bombs Fallujah. Left wing yells for killing civilians.

SITUATION B: Bush does what he does now. Left wing yells at him for wasting troops' lives.

See my point?


Also, A lot of these people protesting this war should honestly be shot for treason. Not because they dont' like the war, but because they are demonizing America. Like the media. Just about all of the media, save a few, should be lined up against the wall and shot for treason. They WANT America to lose this war, and as American citizens, that is not only unpatriotic, but treason. (Just as those Vietnam protestors waving the Viet Kong Flag should have been gassed)
=================
On a side note, Russia couldn't. It isn't even sure if their missiles WORK anymore, they're so damn old. Besides, the whole nation is in shambles. It was doomed to hell since Lenin's Revolution.

Heres a theoretical for you. You are attacked by a suicide squad from one country, from an organisation funded by that same country, led by a citizen of that country and spouting the state religion of that same country. If your leader then attacks that country's worst enemy and then uses the best army in the world as policemen so that insurgents sponsored by the same country can attack and kill your troops.

When does it become treason to accept campaign funds from that country? Does a leader commit treason by not attacking that country? Does that leader deserve to be lined up against a wall?



On an aside to your side about disrepair of Russian nukes - the only way to find out for sure is to drop an ICBM on Russia and count how many are fired back.

there is an even better agument.
the U=.S. cannot rule the world because there are more people that hate the U.S. then will fight for something so stupid. if they did try and take over there would be too many people fighting back, compare the U.S.'s population, then place them beside China's armed forces. if every man woman, and child took up arms in the invation of the world there would be such a gape that they would loose out of numbers alone.
yes they might get help form other countries, but then would it be a U.S. domination?

no

there is an even better agument.
the U=.S. cannot rule the world because there are more people that hate the U.S. then will fight for something so stupid. if they did try and take over there would be too many people fighting back, compare the U.S.'s population, then place them beside China's armed forces. if every man woman, and child took up arms in the invation of the world there would be such a gape that they would loose out of numbers alone.
yes they might get help form other countries, but then would it be a U.S. domination?

no

Like it or not, The USA does rule the world; it has its proverbial tenticals stuck in almost every nation on the planet. First off, the USA great economic power. Nearly every nation wants to trade with it and if they have to put up with some of the USA policies they dont like to profit they will do it.
Another factor would be the USA has a very powerful military. Not only is it relitively large, it is argueable the most advanced in the world. The Chineese military although larger, does not have even close to the logistical capabilties to the USA's. It has the capibilty to move very large amount of troops nearly anywhere rather quickly, something China could never do.
The USA's Mass Media industry dominates the world scope. American Tv shows are seen all across the world slowly altering the cultures and views of many countries.
The USA has very strong influence over the world, so deal with it.

If the U.S tried it (or if someone tried the same on the U.S), the entire world would go up in a nuclear winter.

America has enough nuclear firepower to depopulate the earth 5 or 6 times over...

I'd imagine other countries have fair amounts too....

Yeah... we'd be back on the dark age... except we'd still have some technology.

I would hope, before it got to the point of Putin & Bush pushing their respective red buttons, that the people of the world would rise up and yell "STOP THAT!" and smack their respective leaders on the hand.

A pipe dream, I know, but it would be nice...

You are missing the point. In order to win the "hearts and minds," Bush is being nice.
[snip]
Also, polititions -- specifically on the left -- have something to do with it, too. With their ignorance on the battlefield, and their ultimate hatred of Bush clouding what intelligence they might have (considering they're brainwashed polititions), they will critisize everything for any reason.
[snip]
Also, A lot of these people protesting this war should honestly be shot for treason. Not because they dont' like the war, but because they are demonizing America. Like the media. Just about all of the media, save a few, should be lined up against the wall and shot for treason. They WANT America to lose this war, and as American citizens, that is not only unpatriotic, but treason. (Just as those Vietnam protestors waving the Viet Kong Flag should have been gassed)


OK, one thought on this "Wanting US to lose the Iraqi War"...

If the US lost this war, it loses face, not much more, since it's so far from US shores. This might prompt a re-think of the war itself, and discourage further wars of the same nature, hence a better image for the US in the global theatre. And before you reply with how the US shouldn't care, if it's sticking its nose into the rest of the world, yes it should.

Personally, I hope they don't back out, simply cause it would leave the region in a mess. And the Iraqis don't deserve that.

So the war in Iraq is a win?

I mean if it takes 140 000 troops to sort of suppress a small 3rd world country, how many troops will it take to suppress Canada 500 000 or a million?
More because once we grabbed the back of their shirts and yarded them over their heads they'd be at our mercy.... It would be even better if they invaded in winter so that we could fight on ice!

Really all Amercia has to do to dominate the rest of the world is set up Krispy Kreme & starbucks franchises throughout the world. Oh wait....

Using the mass media and flood the cinema's with dumb teen movies.

Besides, the whole nation is in shambles. It was doomed to hell since Lenin's Revolution.

The crap had hit the fan a long time before that....

Right except on the gap part. The US is quickly loosing influence in the economical aspect (The EU is already strong enough to push the US around in major trade deals, it still lacks the financial strenght, but it as been gaining it, consistently).

Militarily.. well, the US cant control Iraq... :p
Yes, it is the most powerful army in the world, but in time, that can go too. European armies are weak because they are fragmented, but that is changing also. The EU battlegroups are already being formed, check out Kosovo.

Kosovo was NATO..and even then those airstrikes were carried out by USN and USAF planes.

Slow it up here!!!!

If america wanted to take over the world it would happen.(meaning the citzens to) Plain and simple. If not sure if all of you are into history but if you look back into the 40's, citzens of US basically had one job help the war effort. Most people had a job that in some way was helping the americans win the war.

Plus if we did want to take over the world we would just nuke all the capitals of Russia, England, France, China, Japan, North Korea, S Korea, India, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Mexico, Germany, and Switzerland. We would then have control of the world. We certainly have enouh nukes for it.

Silly Americans. They've been dominating the world since 1945 and they've forgotten all about it. Could be Alzheimer's, could be they're hopped up on goofballs. Either way, we're in for a Helluva time..

Am I the only one who finds this thread to be nothing more than a shining example of American arrogance (and occassionally ignorance)? Besides, if you tried to invade Canada we'd just smoke them stupid with our awesome weed and they'd forget why they came.

Slow it up here!!!!

If america wanted to take over the world it would happen.(meaning the citzens to) Plain and simple. If not sure if all of you are into history but if you look back into the 40's, citzens of US basically had one job help the war effort. Most people had a job that in some way was helping the americans win the war.

Plus if we did want to take over the world we would just nuke all the capitals of Russia, England, France, China, Japan, North Korea, S Korea, India, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Mexico, Germany, and Switzerland. We would then have control of the world. We certainly have enouh nukes for it.

Unbelievable. IF you nuked all the world capitols there would be a nuclear winter in which the Americans would all die. Get with the times...America is on the way out. Its all about Russia China and Japan. This "war" is a total desperate act by a desperate country. Get informed. America may have a strong army, but countries like China would wipe America off the face of the planet in miliseconds.

And WWII?? Where were YOU in history class? The Americans didn't enter the war until it was basically over. It would have been won without them. Read ANY history book that was printed outside of the United States of Arogance and you will realize this.

Unbelievable. IF you nuked all the world capitols there would be a nuclear winter in which the Americans would all die. Get with the times...America is on the way out. Its all about Russia China and Japan. This "war" is a total desperate act by a desperate country. Get informed. America may have a strong army, but countries like China would wipe America off the face of the planet in miliseconds.

And WWII?? Where were YOU in history class? The Americans didn't enter the war until it was basically over. It would have been won without them. Read ANY history book that was printed outside of the United States of Arogance and you will realize this.

I do not call 1941 the end of the war. Plus on top of that the Brits were getting thier butts beaten by the nazi's and france was taken over. Then on top that it was the fault of the brits and france's not to end hitler's rein when he took over austria and czec. I suggest you read a few history books before you come to me and say it would be won by france and brit had not the US came in.

Now about the Nuke thing. This is all theoritcal. But if we did want to take over the world we would use the best bombs on the capitals and if they were to reist then we would use a atom bomb. We would win any war that could possibly go on in the world today or in the future. We are so technologically advance I cannot even begin to tell you the things that we could do to a country.

And WWII?? Where were YOU in history class? The Americans didn't enter the war until it was basically over. It would have been won without them. Read ANY history book that was printed outside of the United States of Arogance and you will realize this.
Okay. So we wouldn't have sent any aide to England or Russia then? Alright. So England would have quickly run out of resources. Same with Russia. Hitler would have plowed over them.

...Plus on top of that the Brits were getting thier butts beaten by the nazi's...

Hey, you read any history books recently? If you would kindly check, you would see that in 1941, Hitlers planned invasion of the UK had failed, and he no longer had air superiority over the UK. It was pretty even by then, apart from of course the supply problem naturally, but still, Britain had survived the Nazi onslaught by then. They were rebuilding and beginning to fight back. Granted they could not ourselves have invaded the continent and liberated France from the occupiers alone. For that only a country of Americas strenght could have helped them.

Noone would support the USA, Canada wouldn't want to go along with it, the East would steadfastly resist the Americans, Europe will step in and use a huge coalition, invades the USA, USA becomes an EU colony and Europe becomes the new world power, China doesn't like Europe, China nukes Europe and then Europe nukes China back, everyone else launches nukes.

World Ends.


USA launches war of world conquest. Allies are UK, Australia and Italy. France, Germany, Russia, Japan and China unite against the onslaught. All these countries nuke each other. The world does not end, just the big powers finish each other off. The little powers led by the leading countries of NAM India, Indonesia and Brazil now take charge of world affairs and the same story will repeat after a generation.

Okay. So we wouldn't have sent any aide to England or Russia then? Alright. So England would have quickly run out of resources. Same with Russia. Hitler would have plowed over them.

actually the germans failed in Russia because it was too vast to use Blitzkrieg (which is how they conquered most of europe and how they tried to conquer england), and because the troops were ill-prepared when winter hit.

they failed against england because england dominated the seas and they're air-raids failed to demoralize the populous.

I admit the USA sped things up a little in the retaking of Normandy and soforth, but the tides had turned in WW2 before the USA came into it. In fact, had Japan not bombed Pearl Harbour the USA would just have been sitting on it's fat ass the whole time, so even when it did enter the war it was an entirely selfish act.

actually the germans failed in Russia because it was too vast to use Blitzkrieg (which is how they conquered most of europe and how they tried to conquer england), and because the troops were ill-prepared when winter hit.

they failed against england because england dominated the seas and they're air-raids failed to demoralize the populous.

I admit the USA sped things up a little in the retaking of Normandy and soforth, but the tides had turned in WW2 before the USA came into it. In fact, had Japan not bombed Pearl Harbour the USA would just have been sitting on it's fat ass the whole time, so even when it did enter the war it was an entirely selfish act.

Not quite, remember Germany declared war on the US, so it wasn't their descision to make.

Not quite, remember Germany declared war on the US, so it wasn't their descision to make.

That is true. Now Lumani once they got done with the brit.'s who do you think they were going after next, or did you actually think they were going to stop there?

Not quite, remember Germany declared war on the US, so it wasn't their descision to make.

Germany declared war on the USA only because it was allied with Japan, so I reiterate: had Pearl Harbor not happened, the USA would have sat on it's fat ass.

Slow it up here!!!!

If america wanted to take over the world it would happen.(meaning the citzens to) Plain and simple. If not sure if all of you are into history but if you look back into the 40's, citzens of US basically had one job help the war effort. Most people had a job that in some way was helping the americans win the war.

Plus if we did want to take over the world we would just nuke all the capitals of Russia, England, France, China, Japan, North Korea, S Korea, India, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Mexico, Germany, and Switzerland. We would then have control of the world. We certainly have enouh nukes for it.


You will be nuked back in turn. D.C. New York, LA, Chicago, Houston and 40 or so other major cities would be wiped off the face of the earth; you missle shield will not save you. I see you didn't think it worth nuking Cannada, big mistake. With 80% of its population killed, the US will be conquered by Canada.

We are so technologically advance I cannot even begin to tell you the things that we could do to a country.

Hmmm SO advanced...what does that even mean? Are you more advanced than Canada, The UK, or Japan or China...hell even Russia? The US has the most Bombs but that doesnt mean that the US is more advanced...just more paranoid. It takes a truly terrified and paranoid mindset to create munitions en-masse when there is no problem. This is not preparing for the enivitable. It is panic and paranoia.

The US could do a lot of damage. But a bio weapon could destroy the us in under a month. And ANY country could develop bioweapons. So you feel secure with your big gun (obviously compensating) and I will feel safe with my healthcare.

As an example that force is not everything I cite the war of 1812. The Canadians beat the crap out of the americans and BURNED the white house. We handed them their collective butts with not even half the supplies or forces.

You will be nuked back in turn. D.C. New York, LA, Chicago, Houston and 40 or so other major cities would be wiped off the face of the earth; you missle shield will not save you. I see you didn't think it worth nuking Cannada, big mistake. With 80% of its population killed, the US will be conquered by Canada.


Don't take me as a fool.

How would you think we would get nuke if we bombed the capital's of all the other nucular powers? (We used bunker busters if you were thinking about getting me on that.)

Then once we bombed all the capital's we immedatley invade canada.

That simple.

That is true. Now Lumani once they got done with the brit.'s who do you think they were going after next, or did you actually think they were going to stop there?

They could not have invaded Britain. Its that simple. No air superiority and complete lack of naval capability = no chance of invasion.

Don't take me as a fool.

How would you think we would get nuke if we bombed the capital's of all the other nucular powers? (We used bunker busters if you were thinking about getting me on that.)

Mainly caus the nukes and control centres of other countries are not in their capitals...

Well if this thread has taught me anything it's that dumb people+weapons=doom

Hmmm SO advanced...what does that even mean? Are you more advanced than Canada, The UK, or Japan or China...hell even Russia? The US has the most Bombs but that doesnt mean that the US is more advanced...just more paranoid. It takes a truly terrified and paranoid mindset to create munitions en-masse when there is no problem. This is not preparing for the enivitable. It is panic and paranoia.

The US could do a lot of damage. But a bio weapon could destroy the us in under a month. And ANY country could develop bioweapons. So you feel secure with your big gun (obviously compensating) and I will feel safe with my healthcare.

As an example that force is not everything I cite the war of 1812. The Canadians beat the crap out of the americans and BURNED the white house. We handed them their collective butts with not even half the supplies or forces.


JUST GIVE IT UP!!!!

The US is the most technologically advance country on the face of the planet. Do you actually think any country would be a match for our supierority? Let's be real with the current state of Europe and Asia we could win without the nukes. That easy.

But that will never happen because it just wouldn't. There would be nothing to be gained at all. I am a supporter of peace in the world and a supporter of a global democratic government. But when someone says the US cannot take over the world by it's self that person need's to catch up to today's current event's.

I hope you don't actually think that all those satellite's that are in orbit are just for Global Positioning?

We can attack from ground, water, air, and space. No other country has all those capabilites. So...
GIVE IT UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!

P.S. You don't see canada running the US do you?

JUST GIVE IT UP!!!!

The US is the most technologically advance country on the face of the planet. Do you actually think any country would be a match for our supierority? Let's be real with the current state of Europe and Asia we could win without the nukes. That easy.

But that will never happen because it just wouldn't. There would be nothing to be gained at all. I am a supporter of peace in the world and a supporter of a global democratic government. But when someone says the US cannot take over the world by it's self that person need's to catch up to today's event's.

I hope you don't actually all those satellite's in orbit are just for Global Positioning?

We can attack from ground, water, air, and space. No other country has all those capabilites. So...
GIVE IT UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!


You can't. Its that simple. Of course you have the second largest conventional army on the planet, and the most technologicaly sophisticated, but since when does that make any difference? If you want to take over the world you would have to do it via conventional means with tactical nukes (so as not to destroy the planet), but seriously, you really don't have the capability, conventionally speaking to do that. No-one has. If you can't win the peace in Iraq, one medium advanced country with a few funded terrorists and local resistance, then how would you plan to conquer the rest of the world, where you would meet equal resistance?

Strategically, if you wanted to wipe out the world, you could, nor arguements there, but the US itself would also have a counter strike against it, therefore rendering all meaning of 'victory' as a joke. No-one with any power would survive a nuclear winter. So it would make no difference.

You can't. Its that simple. Of course you have the second largest conventional army on the planet, and the most technologicaly sophisticated, but since when does that make any difference? If you want to take over the world you would have to do it via conventional means with tactical nukes (so as not to destroy the planet), but seriously, you really don't have the capability, conventionally speaking to do that. No-one has.

Strategically, if you wanted to wipe out the world, you could, nor arguements there, but the US itself would also have a counter strike against it, therefore rendering all meaning of 'victory' as a joke. No-one with any power would survive a nuclear winter. So it would make no difference.

True true.

But who do think will be the first to develop tactical nukes?

True true.

But who do think will be the first to develop tactical nukes?

I thought you already had. The sort than can be fired from modern artillerly pieces, those you certainly do have. Still, those would have negative effects for both sides. I mean, you fire one of them, you gonna have radiation on your battlefield, which will be hell for both sides.

And WWII?? Where were YOU in history class? The Americans didn't enter the war until it was basically over. It would have been won without them. Read ANY history book that was printed outside of the United States of Arogance and you will realize this.


Umm..the war was in no way near over in 1941..what are you smoking? Africa was looking bad. The Japanese were moving in the Pacific..without the US, how long do you think it would have been before the Japanese managed to get their empire in the Pacific and completely humilated the the RN in the Pacific?(Or wasnt losing the Repulse and Prince of Wales bad enough).

Even Europe would have been an uncertainty..for all you RAAARG Motherland Soviet fanboys, a lot of the drives Stalins armies managed to get away with were because Hitler had to deal with multiple fronts. The Italian Campaign and soon the Normandy campaign..then you had the battle of the buldge where Hitler wasted ever bit of his reserve forces to fight in the west. The supplies given to the allies from the US may not have been as gigantic as history made it out to be..but it was definately a strong contributing factor to keeping Britian alive while the US remained neutral throughout the first two years of the war.

Umm..the war was in no way near over in 1941..what are you smoking? Africa was looking bad. The Japanese were moving in the Pacific..without the US, how long do you think it would have been before the Japanese managed to get their empire in the Pacific and completely humilated the the RN in the Pacific?(Or wasnt losing the Repulse and Prince of Wales bad enough).

Even Europe would have been an uncertainty..for all you RAAARG Motherland Soviet fanboys, a lot of the drives Stalins armies managed to get away with were because Hitler had to deal with multiple fronts. The Italian Campaign and soon the Normandy campaign..then you had the battle of the buldge where Hitler wasted ever bit of his reserve forces to fight in the west. The supplies given to the allies from the US may not have been as gigantic as history made it out to be..but it was definately a strong contributing factor to keeping Britian alive while the US remained neutral throughout the first two years of the war.

Agreed.

Only have two points,

1. I am still amazed the U.S. did not learn from the british in the construction of aircraft carriers. The british ones had decks of steel, where as many of the US ones had wooden surfaces, which meant that when Kamikazi pilots hit, the US carriers burned badly, where as the british one (i think it was one or two) took the damage. I might be wrong, i seem to remember reading this somewhere.

2. Also, Hitler was a crappy strategist. :D

JUST GIVE IT UP!!!!

The US is the most technologically advance country on the face of the planet. Do you actually think any country would be a match for our supierority? Let's be real with the current state of Europe and Asia we could win without the nukes. That easy.

But that will never happen because it just wouldn't. There would be nothing to be gained at all. I am a supporter of peace in the world and a supporter of a global democratic government. But when someone says the US cannot take over the world by it's self that person need's to catch up to today's current event's.

I hope you don't actually think that all those satellite's that are in orbit are just for Global Positioning?

We can attack from ground, water, air, and space. No other country has all those capabilites. So...
GIVE IT UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!

P.S. You don't see canada running the US do you?

That is insane. Alright lets say *theoreticly* the US bombs all the capitals of the world. The world doesnt surrender (do you really think it would?), following your plan the US now nukes some countries. Russia, China, France, England heck maybe even north korea nuke the US. The world is over. Follow this link it will explain it all http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/end.php

Agreed.

Only have two points,

1. I am still amazed the U.S. did not learn from the british in the construction of aircraft carriers. The british ones had decks of steel, where as many of the US ones had wooden surfaces, which meant that when Kamikazi pilots hit, the US carriers burned badly, where as the british one (i think it was one or two) took the damage. I might be wrong, i seem to remember reading this somewhere.

2. Also, Hitler was a crappy strategist. :D

Hittler was a public figure. Nothing more.

JUST GIVE IT UP!!!!
But when someone says the US cannot take over the world by it's self that person need's to catch up to today's current event's.


And I think someone needs to catch up on his/her daily pills... No, but seriously, the USA might be the strongest nation on earth, and we'll say by a long way for the sake of argument... but there's no way that it could "take over the rest of the world" militarily.

Besides the fact that this would almost certainly lead to a large nuclear war, yes and taking out all the worlds capitals with nukes would be pretty damn smart, (and kill millions of people...well done), don't you think there might be some kind of a retaliation involving killing millions more people...that would lead to a retaliation killing millions more people...overall the whole idea would kill billions of people - pretty stupid. But fine, you win, America can kill pretty much everyone if it wants ;).

In terms of a fully conventional war...well the odds are better there. If it did it in small parts and the whole world didn't get angry, (see paragraph above), it could maybe, maybe happen - doubt it. I still think that America would be absolutely screwed over by the sheer number of people in other countries...well let's face it .3 billion vs just under 6 billion and the odds aren't too good.

Consider this: in 2004 the US military is said to have a size of 2.6 million, (this includes reserves)...China is at 2.8 million, Russia is at 3.2 million and even the humble UK has 450 thousand. Seriously, all at once, the USA would be screwed: consider also they would be fighting off their home soil; against local militias; and don't pretend acts of terrorism wouldn't suddenly increase in the USA.

I seriously doubt the USA could take over the world militarily. But it could definitely destroy it. And hey, you're already dominating the world economically...maybe you should try buying the world instead, (ps. you may well claim this has been done already, oh well heheh).

I have a question that might spark up some argument. The outcome of a conventional war where the rest of the world attacked the US...any thoughts on that?

I have a question that might spark up some argument. The outcome of a conventional war where the rest of the world attacked the US...any thoughts on that?

At very least, some much needed humbling on the part of the Americans.

At very least, some much needed humbling on the part of the Americans.

Hear hear.

"The outcome of a conventional war where the rest of the world attacked the US...any thoughts on that?"

Clearly the main problem would be reaching the US. I guess it would've been better if the rest of the world had made a proposal to spend 7.5 million dollars on "Psycic Teleportation"... that way we could just zap ourselves there - that would make life a lot easier!! (NB. not my spelling error.)

well eu's economy is already bigger than usa's.. give it good 10 years and eu's military will be bigger as well.. well it's bigger already, but we've got some pretty lowtech nations like poland..

Yeah that's true. But in terms of ability to deploy troops and so on, the USA is still far ahead. Being a single nation it's far more organised than the EU...who knows what the future will bring? Nevertheless, I maintain my point that the USA could not win this war.

As an example that force is not everything I cite the war of 1812. The Canadians beat the crap out of the americans and BURNED the white house. We handed them their collective butts with not even half the supplies or forces.
Allthough I think it was the British, but still. Good times. :)

Hittler was a public figure. Nothing more.
Eeh..no. He was supreme commander of the armed forces.

Eeh..no. He was supreme commander of the armed forces.

...still a crappy strategist :D

...still a crappy strategist :D
No argument from me.

How could America dominate the rest of the world?
By hoarding all the nuclear weapons.

Allthough I think it was the British, but still. Good times. :)

Yes, it was the British. lol. If the Canadians had burned the white house, we wouldn't make fun of Canada as much as we do.

Well, I don't make fun of Canada - in fact I've met quite a few pleasant Canadians online who were surprisingly conservative for such a liberal country.

But you know, many Americans tend to refer to Canada as America's 51st state. Heh. :P

But seriously, I don't think America could dominate the entire rest of the world. Why would we want to? That'd be suicide. You can't just dominate the world without making a few people angry. lol.

I don't think we'll ever be dominated either. Hell, we beat the British didn't we? We weren't an army, we were just a couple of angry farmers - and we beat a professional army. lol.

We can never conquer the rest of the world.

But you know, many Americans tend to refer to Canada as America's 51st state. Heh.
Europeans prefer to think that "honor" falls to the UK.

Yes, it was the British. lol. If the Canadians had burned the white house, we wouldn't make fun of Canada as much as we do.

Well, I don't make fun of Canada - in fact I've met quite a few pleasant Canadians online who were surprisingly conservative for such a liberal country.

But you know, many Americans tend to refer to Canada as America's 51st state. Heh. :P

But seriously, I don't think America could dominate the entire rest of the world. Why would we want to? That'd be suicide. You can't just dominate the world without making a few people angry. lol.

I don't think we'll ever be dominated either. Hell, we beat the British didn't we? We weren't an army, we were just a couple of angry farmers - and we beat a professional army. lol.

We can never conquer the rest of the world.

If Americans wonder why the rest of the world dislikes them, then this thread is illustrative....they've made a lot of people angry in the world because of their desire to dominate the rest of the world economically and culturally. They like to think that everyone in the world wants their version of "freedom" which just isn't true. That's where the "51st state" concept must come from. Militarily don't be so sure that America could dominate anyone. They certainly couldn't in Vietnam where they were beaten by a "couple of angry" peasants. Doesn't look like they are doing much better in Iraq.

Europeans prefer to think that "honor" falls to the UK.

And the people of the UK go :upyours: to people who say that! :p :D But i do get your point. Especially after there was a film called 51st State set in the Uk, in Liverpool of all places.

And the people of the UK go :upyours: to people who say that! :p :D But i do get your point. Especially after there was a film called 51st State set in the Uk, in Liverpool of all places.
Liverpool? I thought it was Glasgow.

Liverpool? I thought it was Glasgow.

Ah, you're right, apologies. hmmmm the Scots being the 51st state, i don't even think the english (or those who claim to be '100% english') would want to give the scots to the yanks... i certainly wouldn't! We would be screwed for cheap whisky!

I have wondered about this for a long time and would like some outside opinions on the matter. My theory is that through manipulation and military superiority, America could come to dominate the world if it saw fit. There are a few steps for them to reach this goal according to my theory.

1. Either invade or persuade Canada to join the take over.
2. Invade Mexico.
3. Establish nuclear silos on both poles of the Earth.
4. Work eastward gathering allies, and crushing opposition.

While very flimsy to say the least, with some fine tuning, I feel this could be a serious plan of attack if America and it's citizens were willing. However, therein lies it's ultimate weakness. Most Americans would never go along with such a movement and it would crumble from the inside. Again, just my wacky theory. Respond if you'd like to add, agree, or tear apart!


Heres the problem. You couldnt build Slio's in the South Pole, because its illegal and china just wouldnt let them, And you couldn't build them in the north because theres no solid ground and because the U.S doesnt want to do anything about global warming they'd sink sooner or later.

What your plan fails to take into account is that the U.S already dominates the world in everything but name. The U.S owns teh world. Even China and Russia bows to them. The U.S has an oldschool empire, Roman style. Which is ironic since the U.S system of government is based on the Roman stye.

The first step of this domination is an error. The English Canadian are half loyalist to the England, and the French Canadian have too much problem with the English Canadian to be a part of the state no 51. The majority of French Canadian are opposed to the USA. The "Québécois" have never stop to be against everybody. And it's not tomorow this fact will change.

The only way anyone or anything could ever dominate something else is through love. Any other way is abomination not domination. As we will and have seen, force and violence just don't work for long.

Why bother with love when you just dont let anyone realsie they are being dominated. Thats just what happens now. Its passive.

Ok, here's how I see it playing out:

- America allies with England (and Poland!) in a war against "the terror of foreign lands"

- They start bombing Euro countries (starting with France) in a continental shock and awe campaign

- Russia and China decide to stop this and launch nukes at the major American cities, crazy North Korea (never one to miss a party) joins in

- Realizing America's doom, Bush presses The Button and nukes the major world capitals

- Nuclear winter, killing off most of the survivors

- Forgetten through the conflict, Canada emerges past the winter, not having realized the difference from a typical winter. Now ready to act in the war after the usual extended period of decision making, they take over what's left of the world, often having to stop to repair its military vehicles (some of which were hand-made by the Orwells). Eventually the world is conquered and hockey becomes the new world religion. Nothing much of importance happens for the rest of time.

Ok, here's how I see it playing out:

- America allies with England (and Poland!) in a war against "the terror of foreign lands"

- They start bombing Euro countries (starting with France) in a continental shock and awe campaign

- Russia and China decide to stop this and launch nukes at the major American cities, crazy North Korea (never one to miss a party) joins in

- Realizing America's doom, Bush presses The Button and nukes the major world capitals

- Nuclear winter, killing off most of the survivors

- Forgetten through the conflict, Canada emerges past the winter, not having realized the difference from a typical winter. Now ready to act in the war after the usual extended period of decision making, they take over what's left of the world, often having to stop to repair its military vehicles (some of which were hand-made by the Orwells). Eventually the world is conquered and hockey becomes the new world religion. Nothing much of importance happens for the rest of time.

Here here!

Heres the problem. You couldnt build Slio's in the South Pole, because its illegal and china just wouldnt let them, And you couldn't build them in the north because theres no solid ground and because the U.S doesnt want to do anything about global warming they'd sink sooner or later.

What your plan fails to take into account is that the U.S already dominates the world in everything but name. The U.S owns teh world. Even China and Russia bows to them. The U.S has an oldschool empire, Roman style. Which is ironic since the U.S system of government is based on the Roman stye.

And they wonder why everyone dislikes america? No you do NOT dominate the world. When American troops patrol my country and your flag flies above my parliment then I will admit it. Until then, go fuck yourself.
"Give a little man a little power"

Heres the problem. You couldnt build Slio's in the South Pole, because its illegal and china just wouldnt let them, And you couldn't build them in the north because theres no solid ground and because the U.S doesnt want to do anything about global warming they'd sink sooner or later.

What your plan fails to take into account is that the U.S already dominates the world in everything but name. The U.S owns teh world. Even China and Russia bows to them. The U.S has an oldschool empire, Roman style. Which is ironic since the U.S system of government is based on the Roman stye.

*Bursts out laughing*
You just keep telling yourself that. :D