If your country was invaded.....
- Thread starter demoman_chaos
- Start date
Australia is VERY likely to be invaded in WW3.Bobbity said:
We (Yes I am an Australian myself) Have a tiny population in very dense locations or completely spread out. We would offer no resistance (Though our soldiers are the best in the world, they only work well when combined with a larger force) and if, say, China invaded us good luck getting the US to help without a MAD scenario.
We also have the half the worlds coking coal (Another reason for, say, China to invade) incredibly large untapped nuclear materials deposit (For weapons and power purposes, a double handed blow to our chances of privacy) huge coastal resources, large opal and diamond deposits, potential for development of hydrogen resources using geothermal pockets in the outback, like how they're doing in Scandinavia...Cheap, incredibly lightweight fuel, great for military vehicles...
So we have tons of natural resources (Also a lot of iron, gold, copper etc to what I mentioned) a tiny population in dense pockets and our extremely qualified though durastically outnumbered military has no chance for help.
Why wouldn't they invade?
Damn you ninjas!
Yeah, like everyone I would only rebel if I didn't like how they new government wanted to run the place. If it's somewhere like Sweden I'd be fine with it, but if it's somewhere that wants to impose a theocratic government then I'd definitely have to fight back, but more in a guerrilla style since there's no possible way I (and whoever else) could achieve a plausible victory otherwise.
Still, I live in the U.K. if we were invaded then we've got Australia, America and Canada to help out.
Yeah, like everyone I would only rebel if I didn't like how they new government wanted to run the place. If it's somewhere like Sweden I'd be fine with it, but if it's somewhere that wants to impose a theocratic government then I'd definitely have to fight back, but more in a guerrilla style since there's no possible way I (and whoever else) could achieve a plausible victory otherwise.
Still, I live in the U.K. if we were invaded then we've got Australia, America and Canada to help out.
If provoked enough ie. the opposing army had killed my loved ones then yes. Otherwise I'd probably just try to escape, I've got a boat and we do live on an island, I'm sure I could make it to Ireland or France
You bet your ass I would. I'm not the most patriotic guy in the world, but I still love my country. I'd take whatever I needed/could carry, leave everything else behind and take out as many of the bastards as I could before they got me. My country isn't perfect, but it's still my country, and it's the only one I got.
Everyone should be willing to fight for their country under this situation. It's perfectly understandable that some might not want to sign up for military service and be shipped over seas to fight in foreign lands, but if your homeland is under direct attack and you won't take up arms to defend your country and countrymen, you're selfish, and a coward.
Everyone should be willing to fight for their country under this situation. It's perfectly understandable that some might not want to sign up for military service and be shipped over seas to fight in foreign lands, but if your homeland is under direct attack and you won't take up arms to defend your country and countrymen, you're selfish, and a coward.
Although, to be picky, if Sweden chose to invade, wouldn't that suggest we had abandoned our civilised demeanour?Serenegoose said:
Anywho, personally, I hold no belief in nationality as a separating factor. If my home was set upon by values which I disagreed with, I'd object to the extent I reasonably could.
Violent conflict however, absolutely not.
I'll grab my imaginary gun and head to the hi-
Oh wait.
As I live in the UK where the civilian ownership of guns is treated in much the same way as the rest of the world treats civilian ownership of weapons-grade plutonium I guess I'll brush up on my Chinese and open a B&B - Special discount for commissioned officers in the People's Liberation Army.
Oh wait.
As I live in the UK where the civilian ownership of guns is treated in much the same way as the rest of the world treats civilian ownership of weapons-grade plutonium I guess I'll brush up on my Chinese and open a B&B - Special discount for commissioned officers in the People's Liberation Army.
Probably not. Why? Being invaded worked pretty well for us on the long turn.(except for the east)
If WW3 happens, you aren't going to see much in the way of invasions for the time being. Nobody is equipped to invade anywhere after a nuclear exchange.Mr.Numbers said:
No, that makes the territory impossible to hold. Australia is a whole continent, there's no way to tie it down.Mr.Numbers said:
That's true, the ADF is on the small side.Mr.Numbers said:
True, although these are spread over a vast area, meaning the invaders have to police a massive region.Mr.Numbers said:
Hydrogen...no. You can make hydrogen using any power source, and it's not going to be a viable fuel source for vehicles without a serious change in infrastructure.
Logistics.Mr.Numbers said:
China flat out can't do it, they have a massive military, but no way of getting it outside China. They don't have any deep water navy, certainly nothing to launch and supply an invasion with. Added to that, for all the yellow menace stuff, China is firstly Australia's biggest trading partner, and doesn't tend to go round invading places.
Invading an entire continent is not a small matter, Australia has more landmass than Western Europe. And it's not on the doorstep of any hostile large powers.
Added to this, Australia has strong military ties to a number of important allies. The US and UK come to mind.
It also doesn't hurt that a number of nations nearby would be much easier to conquer.
Private gun ownership isn't that important, if the UK was threatened with invasion they'd be mass producing Stens again and issuing them to volunteer groups.Treblaine said:
Yes.
Especially if it was Norway or Danmark. No scandinavian country fucks with Sweden, Biaatch!
Except Finland. Because Finland has bigger guns.
Especially if it was Norway or Danmark. No scandinavian country fucks with Sweden, Biaatch!
Except Finland. Because Finland has bigger guns.
You have piqued my interest thalukahiajhahahofuian....Sorry...Let me try that again without mashing the key pad: thaluikhain sorry, it's a tad difficult to spell hahaha
WW3: Invasion is the ONLY option for WW3, as a MAD scenario blocks all other possibilities if said war occurs.
Holding us down: We occupy mostly the East coast, and anything else...Besides Tasmania, I guess, would be so small that Guerrilla warfare for a few years is inevitable but, I guess, inevitable to fail as well. We're not talking about every person at once, we're talking about a crippling majority in the urban sprawls.
Agreement: HOORAY XD
Hydrogen: I totally agree, it would take a vast shidt in infrastructure, but then again, doesn't an invasion also require that as well? Hydrogen from geothermal works (EXTREMELY SIMPLIFIED) that: Big bottomless pit drilled, water goes in, steam comes out and collected, steam produces power, power used on steam to turn into Hydrogen and Oxygen, hydrogen used in fuel cell or just burnt with Oxygen. Since this is non-fossil-fuel dependant and available in the centre of a large land mass I see the occurance of this probable, if not likely.
Logistics: China would probably invade other countries first, yes, but Germany conquered countries on it's way to Poland did it not? I see a very likely scenario revisiting the "Island hopping" strategy of WW2 Japanese soldiers and the supposed domino theory prediction line making Australia still a very logical target. And again, with MAD and the amount of Industry, America would have to bow down before China in this matter.
WW3: Invasion is the ONLY option for WW3, as a MAD scenario blocks all other possibilities if said war occurs.
Holding us down: We occupy mostly the East coast, and anything else...Besides Tasmania, I guess, would be so small that Guerrilla warfare for a few years is inevitable but, I guess, inevitable to fail as well. We're not talking about every person at once, we're talking about a crippling majority in the urban sprawls.
Agreement: HOORAY XD
Hydrogen: I totally agree, it would take a vast shidt in infrastructure, but then again, doesn't an invasion also require that as well? Hydrogen from geothermal works (EXTREMELY SIMPLIFIED) that: Big bottomless pit drilled, water goes in, steam comes out and collected, steam produces power, power used on steam to turn into Hydrogen and Oxygen, hydrogen used in fuel cell or just burnt with Oxygen. Since this is non-fossil-fuel dependant and available in the centre of a large land mass I see the occurance of this probable, if not likely.
Logistics: China would probably invade other countries first, yes, but Germany conquered countries on it's way to Poland did it not? I see a very likely scenario revisiting the "Island hopping" strategy of WW2 Japanese soldiers and the supposed domino theory prediction line making Australia still a very logical target. And again, with MAD and the amount of Industry, America would have to bow down before China in this matter.
I live in the Philippines.....
so if my goddamn home was invaded
I have 3 choices:
A. Join the armed forces and probably die later on or be a prisoner of war
B. Submit to the invading force. I'd be a slave, a prisoner or simply die
C. Travel to one of the many islands we have away from the major cities and travel
and start/join a rebel/guerrilla group.
since I'll die anyway
I choose effing C
of course I'll resist
since the last world war
100 years of freedom is still too short
so if my goddamn home was invaded
I have 3 choices:
A. Join the armed forces and probably die later on or be a prisoner of war
B. Submit to the invading force. I'd be a slave, a prisoner or simply die
C. Travel to one of the many islands we have away from the major cities and travel
and start/join a rebel/guerrilla group.
since I'll die anyway
I choose effing C
of course I'll resist
since the last world war
100 years of freedom is still too short
Well... Depends on what country you mean. I have two, Egypt, where i was born and where my family is, and Sweden, where i live now. I love Sweden and all, but I'm not sure if i would stay. I might sign up with the army, but if the army was destroyed and they took the cities, i'd probably flee. The rest of Europe would probably respond as quickly as they can and kick the invaders out anyway. But if it was Egypt, i might actually go back and join the resistance in Cairo. Wouldn't sign up for the military though. Grunts don't get much body armor, if they get any at all (at least i think so. things might have changed sine our last war with Israel), and the infantry's job kind of sucks because they're in the middle of the desert.
I mean, I'd be all up for killing some Israelis (hey, i don't mind them in peace time, but when they decide it's time to take Sinai and perhaps even Cairo, it's time to get my killing on), but i prefer actually having a chance to kill them. Which i probably won't because of my lack of training in desert warfare. I would have a chance in Cairo and Alexandria, but not in the desert.
I mean, I'd be all up for killing some Israelis (hey, i don't mind them in peace time, but when they decide it's time to take Sinai and perhaps even Cairo, it's time to get my killing on), but i prefer actually having a chance to kill them. Which i probably won't because of my lack of training in desert warfare. I would have a chance in Cairo and Alexandria, but not in the desert.
Depends. If my country had been become a dictatorship and another nation had invaded to liberate us then I would help them (the invaders) or at least not try to stop them. If my country still was the country it is today then I would fight the invaders one way or another. It would most likely be a non-violent struggle though or at least I would try to avoid killing people.
