Possible US Invasion??
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 21

Thread: Possible US Invasion??

  1. #1
    Senior Member VicE$DoS$'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    209

    Possible US Invasion??

    i was thinking seen as the US and the Brits are all over in iraq having a war maybe Russia would slyly slip in over the top while no one was looking and forces were down and take over Britain and the US??

    We could all be speaking BMW very soon!
    I remember when Nihil was ickle. Does that mean I'm old?

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    106
    I think thats a leftover cold war fantasy , Russia can barely afford to feed their own people ,much less take over the world . Now China ,aren't we supposed to be shaking in our boots over the commies ?, oh yeah its terrorists now, i frogot

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    251
    and don't forget the anti-patriots, they are the terror within, the moral sucking leaches that ask <gasp/> QUESTIONS!!! Jiminy, who'd have thought people would get the gumption to question leadership in the US of A...

    dhej
    The owl of Minerva spreads its wings only with the falling of dusk. -Hegel

  4. #4
    AO übergeek phishphreek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    4,325
    i was thinking seen as the US and the Brits are all over in iraq having a war maybe Russia would slyly slip in over the top while no one was looking and forces were down and take over Britain and the US??


    Thats great! I rarely get involved with political threads... we have much better members who know it way better than I.
    I do know my history though and I do pay close attention to what is going on in the world...

    I SERIOUSLY doubt that something like that would happen.
    They'd have to have brass balls... which is kind of hard to move with such heavy balls. I think that was saddams problem...

    Then again... a couple of years ago, it was unthinkable that we'd never see a terrorist attack on US soil... everyone is wrong once in a while.

    BTW: What brought up this? U have an article that you were reading that you wish to share with the rest of us?
    Quitmzilla is a firefox extension that gives you stats on how long you have quit smoking, how much money you\'ve saved, how much you haven\'t smoked and recent milestones. Very helpful for people who quit smoking and used to smoke at their computers... Helps out with the urges.

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Yes
    Posts
    4,424
    Taking over the US? No way.

    It'd probably won't happen, but IF there is one country that might actually be capable of "destroying" the US, it IS Russia, just like the US is capable of destroying any country on this world.

    In the shadow of the war in/on Iraq, the Missile Shield is being discussed again by the neo-cons. They are working on a shield that should stop attacks from North-Korea or other countries with limited nuclear power. Even Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz are not that naive to think the shield could stop a massive Russian attack. But they do believe, and they're probably right, that an atomic war with Russia is higly unlikely.



    Two cruisers meet, Russian and American. The Russian cruiser is panic-struck, the captain cries: "Who threw Valenki down on the control panel? Who threw Valenki down on the control panel????"
    Americans only shake their heads wondering at the disorder at the Russian cruiser. "You would never see such things in America", they say.
    The Russians respond: "There is no America any more! Who threw Valenki down on the control panel???"

    This joke must date back to the Cold War, but it still is a possibility...

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    central il
    Posts
    1,779
    Thanks Vice I needed a good laugh today. Russia has a war of there own to deal with (Chechnya) and they can barely pay there troops as it is (in fact a lot of them are supplementing their pay by selling guns to the Chechnyans J ) So unless Russia wants to prove the mutually assured destruction theory they will leave the US alone. Besides now that they have given up on Stalinism they need our investors.
    Who is more trustworthy then all of the gurus or Buddha’s?

  7. #7
    Priapistic Monk KorpDeath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    2,628
    I won't hesitate to add that Russia hasn't exactly had the money to keep all of their missile silos in "working" condition so a nuclear atack from them is quite unlikely, also. I'm sorry to upset all of you anti-American AO'ers, I know how you look to the day when the U.S. gets it ass handed to it.....Oh wait... that already happened, didn't it?

    M.A.D. Ever heard of it? Nobody wins. Everybody just goes away.
    Mankind have a great aversion to intellectual labor; but even supposing knowledge to be easily attainable, more people would be content to be ignorant than would take even a little trouble to acquire it.
    - Samuel Johnson

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    70
    Sorry if I'm naive but what is M.A.D. ?

    Anyways I just wanted to ask ViceDos do you really think that Germany would do something like that? Do you really beleive that they would ever even try to do that? And did you put any thought into this post before you made it? Sorry if I'm coming off harsh on this but I mean COME ON!!!!

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    405
    Sorry if I'm naive but what is M.A.D. ?
    Mutual assured destruction (MAD) is the doctrine of a situation in which any use of nuclear weapons by either of two opposing sides would result in the destruction of both the attacker and the defender. The doctrine assumes that each side has enough weaponry to destroy the other side and that either side, if attacked for any reason by the other, would retaliate with equal or greater force. The expected result is that the battle would escalate to the point where each side brought about the other's total and assured destruction - and, potentially, those of allies as well.

    Assuming that neither side would be so irrational as to risk its own destruction, neither side would dare to launch a first strike as the other would launch on warning (also called fail deadly). The payoff of this doctrine was expected to be tense but stable peace.
    http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual...ed_destruction

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    central il
    Posts
    1,779
    MAD basicly worked...see the cold war. But insted of a total peace we had small brushfire type conflects in the third world. If not for MAD we may very well ahve gone to war with the USSR over Cuba or Afganistan or Vitenam ect. so in the end the fact that we could whipe each other off the map kept us civil.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •