Yeah...but how well is that working in the three wars we have going that we can't weem to get ourselves out of? I would argue that the US military are "breakers" rather than "makers." We're very good at employing destructive force, but we don't even know how to begin to create a stable and peaceful environment. Until we learn how to do this, or until American voters are comfortable leaving a country we invaded still in the ravages of civil war, we're going to mired down for years to come.DragonLord Seth said:
Anyway, at this time, an invasion of the united states doesn't make sense, no. We have too many military resources still (read: nukes) and borders that are pretty well protected by oceans. The only countries we do border, we overwhelmingly trump in wealth, military strength, and sheer population.
But let's have fun for just a second, and theorize what might happen in the twenty-first century to change all this:
First, the US defaults on its debts. Maybe not on Aug. 2, but soon. This seems plausible to say the least; we are, at the moment teetering on the brink of facing this exact situation. With a country so divided on fiscal policy and extremists in the House, at some point we might not be able to agree to any compromise; we still might not this time. Now, no one knows what would happen if we actually failed to raise the debt ceiling in time, but if we don't do it soon after defaulting, it will have major repercussions for our economy. Our credit rating would fall into downward spiral, emergency austerity measures at put in place; higher taxes, slashed budget for infrastructure, education, and even the military. We'd withdraw almost entirely from foreign conflicts. The rest of the world, seizing on the opportunity we'd provided them, would use our credit rating to force us into treaties that months ago would have seemed impossible; fair trade, non-interventionism, and nuclear disarmament. The UN would become the tool of China and NATO would decline in relevance.
Now wait for say, fifty years. Who knows what the landscape is like? Americans perhaps have turned inward, focusing on developing renewable energy after having all of foreign supplies of oil cut off by forces we can no longer contend with. Brazil, India, Venezuela, and dozens of other former third world countries are now poised to surpass our economy.
Then comes bad weather; global climate change devastates one of the these rising powers with drought, while the increase in natural disasters leaves the US sorely hurting, and diverts its natural resources to protecting those who have lost their homes after a freak storm.
By now, it is becoming clear to people around the globe that the most important resource in the world is water. This gives a US a chance to regain its global dominance, as we have one of the largest sources of potable water in world. However, the shift in world power has changed, and some countries may decide that it will be easier to take control of the water supply than to bargain for it...
Long walk around the park, to be sure, and plenty of unlucky breaks along the way, but I think this is a semi-plausible scenario. Now, the invasion is coming; it doesn't really matter from where, but I'm inclined to think that it would be a coalition of China and its allies, under the justification that US was trying to use its water supply to garner an economic advantage in the face of millions suffering from thirst outside its borders. There would likely be some South American forces, and perhaps even the Russians will try to invade from the west, invading Alaska. Perhaps, even as this occurs, Sarah Palin is sitting on her porch, having long ago forsaken politics and the media and getting back to a world and way of life she truly loves, and where she feels she can better raise her family. When she looks out, she sees the Ruskies crossing the Bering Sea in whatever commercial ships they can impound to take their soldiers over to foreign soil, and at once she leaps to her feet, calls to her the by now vast Palin clan, grabs her semi-automatic and plunges into the breach, the first of the many citizen-soldiers this thread is supposed to be about.
Now, about these armed civilians...the first wave of combat would almost certainly involve them, assuming our invaders didn't go straight for army bases, and almost equally certainly the citizens would be massacred. Under the affects of adrenaline, most would simply walk up to the front line, guns in hand, and fire at anything that moved. Without any proper organization, these brave souls would fall. Many, however, will avoid death by not being a part of the conflict at all, as ensuring their family's safety takes priority over repelling the would-be conquerors.
The US military response, again assuming the we are now in a state of nuclear disarmament, would be to try and stop the invaders before they land. Once landed, however, the chain of command may lack the will to deploy missiles into the cities we once held. After all, the US military hasn't had to make these kinds of calls since the Civil War, and it took us a long time to get serious about that war as well. Early mistakes will almost certainly be made.
Now, we enter phase two of the invasion, trying to secure resources and pacify the occupied territory. I know, I know I'm skipping the whole part about racing across the great plains and all, but either you've followed me this far or you gave up a while ago, so stay with me if you're still here, just for the hell of it; this is where our armed population begins to have an affect. While our military tries to assemble a wall of defense, no doubt much of population will be paralyzed by the reality of a home front war. What happens next will largely depend on the invading force; will they have learned from our mistakes in the Middle East, and try to win over their new subjects hearts and minds by speaking out language, respecting our cultural traditions, reaching out to community leaders, promising and delivering peace and safety for those who cooperate, and distributing food, health care and water? Or will they patrol the streets, violate privacy, and try to rule by fear? If the former, the resistance will the worst early and collapse over time. If the later, it will slowly build until the level of resistance dwarfs that in Iraq and Afghanistan; the supply of firearms in America being too widespread for invaders to effectively control. Now, of course this will benefit the invaders as well, who will never be short on guns for soldiers, but the resistance will be very difficult to contain nonetheless. And here is where the difference is made; fighting a war with both the military and an insurgency in the population, the Invading force will almost certainly find it nearly impossible to secure a firm hold on American soil, and with the rest of the world depending on the water supply and having watched prices for water skyrocket during the war, international pressure will force the invaders to end the conflict with diplomacy. Treaties will be signed relinquishing control of all American soil to the American government, under the stipulations that the price of water be kept at stable levels.
So, there it is. The only scenario I can come up with for an invasions. I kinda came up with this on the fly, so please poke holes where you see fit and amend where you see broken and insult were you see stupid, especially on the role of armed citizens.
