World War 3

Discussion in 'Something For All' started by MonsterPK, Mar 2, 2014.

World War 3
  1. Unread #41 - Jun 14, 2014 at 12:42 PM
  2. nodnarbusn
    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2012
    Posts:
    3,248
    Referrals:
    1
    Sythe Gold:
    214
    Sythe's 10th Anniversary Two Factor Authentication User Village Drunk Not sure if srs or just newfag... UWotM8?

    nodnarbusn Grand Master

    World War 3

    I agree, there would certainly be no "winner". However if the US were to ever be attacked on our soil I believe our military would virtually double over night (if not moreso..) every gun toting country boy (myself included) would be chomping at the bits for a fight should it hit home. The worlds strongest military force would be supplemented by millions of angry gun toting civilians, most of which are competent with said weapons (maybe not to a military standards but with each state averaging ~1,000,000 hunting licenses id say there are a lot of skilled marksman). I just dont see anyone running that risk in the state of current affairs.
     
  3. Unread #42 - Jun 16, 2014 at 6:13 PM
  4. SuF
    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2007
    Posts:
    14,211
    Referrals:
    28
    Sythe Gold:
    1,234
    Discord Unique ID:
    203283096668340224
    <3 n4n0 Two Factor Authentication User Community Participant Spam Forum Participant Sythe's 10th Anniversary

    SuF Legend
    Pirate Retired Global Moderator

    World War 3

    People generally agree it would be nearly impossible to take and hold the US with a conventional army. The best way would be come down through Canada and divide the country in two away from the US navy. But there would be such a massive insurgency that occupying it would be extremely difficult.
     
< Privacy in the modern era | Pantheism >

Users viewing this thread
1 guest


 
 
Adblock breaks this site