JavaScript is required to use Bungie.net

Forums

originally posted in: How Modern Warfare is fought!
1/31/2013 7:06:38 AM
11
Any invasion of the mainland US without nuclear bombardment, a high altitude EMP burst weapon, or an heavy conventional explosives barrage would be ill advised at best, and a complete and total disaster at worst for the invading party. Unless Canada decides it doesn't like being America's Hat anymore or Mexico decides it needs to get revenge for the Battle of San Jacinto, any other country would need to cover vast tracts of water in order to even reach the mainland US. Should any country elude/or take out the US Navy ( [i]not happening[/i]), they still have to land on the beaches. Then they'd have to deal with not only the world's most technologically advanced military, but they'd also have to contend with the ~175 million or so armed civilians. ([i]Should Obama and the liberal Goon Squads have their way, we can forget about this part. [/i]) Last thing any country needs is to be on foreign soil fighting with literally every living breathing soul they encounter. Any landing party would be greatly outnumbered with respect to both man power as well as firepower. Germany had a field day with the surrounding countries because they were readily accessible by land and air, over relatively short distances. China, Russia, or any other country would have a helluva time moving vast amounts of men, equipment, and supplies across thousands of miles of open sea to get at the mainland US.
English

Posting in language:

 

Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • [quote] ~175 million or so armed civilians. (Should Obama and the liberal Goon Squads have their way, we can forget about this part. )[/quote] Really? F­ucking really? You're really going to dilute this thread with your fear mongering, outright lies, and propaganda? If you even look at what Obama proposed for gun control it says nothing about taking away peoples guns. It's a bunch of tightening up bits, filling holes in the current system we have, and addressing mental health issues. Democrats aren't even liberal anyway so I don't even know why you're calling them that. They're center right on the political scale.

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • LOL i'm not sure how my small opinion inside of 3 paragraphs about war amounts to 'propaganda , fear mongering, or lies', but I'll bite anyway. The above video shows the ever vigilant, ever misguided Sen. Diane Fienstein, who for the past 20-30 years has pushed for the ban of rifles because they are [b]scary[/b]. '[b][i] Mr. and Mrs. Amerika, turn them all in[/i][/b]". IDK about you, but her words are pretty damn clear that in her inate fear of an inanimate object, she wished to impose on the millions of Americans her will that we do not 'need' these weapons. This is the same woman, and she is not alone among both democrats and republicans, who is sponsoring a bill to ban certain weapons based on '[b]cosmetic features'[/b]. Banning anything based on looks and not function is pants-on-head retarded. This same woman wasted no time after the SH massacre, as she readily jumped on the backs of the dead children proclaiming that she will ban the gun that 'caused' the shootings. Sad thing is,. she's not alone up there in congress. In short, no , the 'right' to own guns won't be taken away anytime soon, they'll just slowly ban everything else 'for the sake of the children' until we're left with nothing more than single shot bolt action .22's.

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • >implying the shit Fienstein has been trying to pull for years will actually go anywhere. >implying members of congress haven't proposed and rallied behind equally stupid measures in the past >Implying the NRA and other pro-gun organizations didn't also jump on the backs of these dead children to promote their own agendas. The entire "derp gunnuh take our guns away" argument is a complete crock of shit. The only options that have even seriously been considered by the administration (see Obamas executive orders) had nothing to do with taking away peoples guns or banning cosmetic upgrades. However if we're going to take a minority opinion and plaster it onto the majority then I guess all republicans are a bunch crazies that want to bomb abortion clinics and make the US a white only christian country.

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • [quote]>implying the shit Fienstein has been trying to pull for years will actually go anywhere.[/quote] [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban]It's happened once before.[/url] [quote] >implying members of congress haven't proposed and rallied behind equally stupid measures in the past[/quote] Implying other measures have actively infringed on constitutional rights and people cared about them. [quote] >Implying the NRA and other pro-gun organizations didn't also jump on the backs of these dead children to promote their own agendas.[/quote] The NRA waited a week to talk about anything other than condolences and offerings of support to the communities. The first time they did, they were defending themselves and other gun-owners from the emotionally driven garbage spewing out from the mouths of democrats and republicans who were proposing knee-jerk reactions. Sen. Feinstein and her ilk didn't waste a moment in proposing new legislation after the shooting. The President even had the tact to not delve into politics for a while, acknowledging that mourning should come before reaction. [quote] The entire "derp gunnuh take our guns away" argument is a complete crock of shit. The only options that have even seriously been considered by the administration (see Obamas executive orders) had nothing to do with taking away peoples guns or banning cosmetic upgrades. [/quote] Have you even taken the time to glance at the new AWB that is trying to be shoved through congress? Ban all future manufacture of all manner of semi-automatic weapons, banning the manufacture of magazines of greater than 10 round capacity, and also banning the sale or transfer of some magazines and firearms [b]permanently[/b]. The whole bill, and the older one, all rely on the presence of cosmetic features that determine weather a weapon fits their definition. Nothing takes into account the actual function of the weapons, which in independent of whatever features may be on the firearm. [quote] However if we're going to take a minority opinion and plaster it onto the majority then I guess all republicans are a bunch crazies that want to bomb abortion clinics and make the US a white only christian country.[/quote] I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. Those who wish to uphold the second amendment are not a minority in any way.

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • What? Democrats are left, Rebuclicans are right. Center right is moderate republicans.

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • lolno The political spectrum in the US is skewed to the right. In the real political spectrum Republicans would be classified as far right and Democrats would be classified as center right. For example Canada is currently headed by a conservative administration, however the conservative party in Canada (and most "first world" countries) is more akin to the Democrats than republicans.

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • I love how many Americans seem to think it's impossible for us to be defeated in a war...Then goes on to mention how Civilians are supposed to fight as well...are we Soviet Russia now?

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • I never stated that the US was unbeatable. I simply stated that based on the unique geographic location relative to any potential aggressors , the ability to defeat any enemy under such conditions would be arduous at best.

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • I never said you did I meant it toward the insane patriotic Americans that think no other country has a chance at scratching ours yet, seem to think they'd need guns for that reason...even though they act as though that would never happen...

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • Russia could pass through Alaska. *BC 2 FTW

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • Bad company 2'scampaign was meh...

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

You are not allowed to view this content.
;
preload icon
preload icon
preload icon