Could the U.S have conquered earth? - Page 3




 
--
 
September 30th, 2004  
battery
 
I've got to go for a bit. Be back soon...
September 30th, 2004  
godofthunder9010
 
 
Don't know that it would matter where you start the world conquest, results would be the same.
September 30th, 2004  
A Can of Man
 
 
I think you can get people to believe anything.
--
October 1st, 2004  
battery
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by godofthunder9010
Don't know that it would matter where you start the world conquest, results would be the same.

I don't believe that. If for instance, we took out U.S.S.R first, and said it was "To eliminate soviet communist threat" it might not be taken as another world conquest effort as hitler attempted... Then, nuke europe to hell... And later on asia / south america / canada and so forth
October 1st, 2004  
godofthunder9010
 
 
If a United States bent on world conquest went after the Soviet Union back then, it would have been one helluva fight, atomic bombs notwithstanding, but I can see using that sort of conflict as the best start to try world conquest. Keep Chaing Kaishek in power in China through direct intervention and manipulate "military assistence" into "occupation" and then outright control over time. That eliminates the two biggest opponents. The war against the Soviet Union would work towards setting the stage for a hostile takeover of Europe and would catch the UK and France in a very weak state. So, the hypothetical situation could work. Success in China and the USSR would be the most important points in determining success.

All in all, its a pretty far-fetched scenario. The United States is a historical oddity. A nation that is the most powerful in the world (one of the two most powerful in Cold War era) that does the most illogical thing imaginable. It does not seek to guard the technologies and systems that have made it so successful. No, they actively push them on the world. Kindof silly if you think about it.
October 1st, 2004  
Big_Z
 
 
Not really, whats more powerful than 1 country? That one country and 10 of his best friends.
October 1st, 2004  
sunb!
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by battery
Then, nuke europe to h**l... And later on asia / south america / canada and so forth
The nuke Europe to h**l interests me. In other words you either a) have to pull all US soldiers out of the theatre - nuke the place - and get them back in? Or b) nuke Europe with the soldiers present and hope the megatons didn't kill to many of your own soldiers?

Never the less generally speaking if the US had to use nuclear weapons in order to conquest the world - the pollution don't differ friend of foe - what would you do with the pollution problem? The nukes on Canada would generate a serious problem for the United States hours after the blast if the wind and weather conditions turns. The same with South America and especially Latin America.

But sticking to the topic - if world conquest was an US issue the attack on USSR should have taken place in the aftermath of World War 2 - the personell and equipment already present in the European theatre and the war in the pacific could generate a second front on the USSR in the region. What China would to is another matter.
October 1st, 2004  
godofthunder9010
 
 
Well, we've already pointed out that a rather sizable list of impossibilities would have to have occurred before such a conquest could have been attempted. Its a brain teaser, but what I stated above is what I would have done if I was in control 1946 United States - one that spontaneously became a fascist police state with instantly brainwashed citizens and a complete loss of all memory of American ideology. Soooo ... we're in PURE FANTASYLAND. I'm just having fun with it.

China and the Soviet Union would be the pivot points to the whole concept. If you can swing those, it might actually work. And remember that both of those fronts are done through careful manipulation of the nations of Europe and the allied forces in China to assist. If the US can dominate those two and use them, the rest of the world is ill-equipped to resist.
October 1st, 2004  
sunb!
 
 

Topic: Forces...


In the 1980s the Soviet Union alone provided 73 of the 126 Warsaw Pact tank and motorized rifle divisions...

http://memory.loc.gov/frd/cs/soviet_union/su_appnc.html

Anyone who knows the strenght of the USSR in 1945/1946?