Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Now that I think of it the scenario of China and Russia becoming patron states to a plethora of future American vassal states , may as well be brought up ...
I mean couldn't it be more likely that ( if things continue at their current pace ) we will see a plethora of de facto independent states ( reminiscent of petty fiefdoms ) in the US which will pay homage to Russia or China in a vassal state sort of way ?
Or is that also a very far flung sort of speculation ?
Interesting indeed.
I still believe that an insurrection act would be invoked, and a (failed) attempt to purge the offending party, or parties sufficiently would occur before that could happen.
So we're back to a civil war scenario beforehand. But I could see it as a result of a civil war that failed to reunite the nation like Civil war 1 did.
I still believe that an insurrection act would be invoked, and a (failed) attempt to purge the offending party, or parties sufficiently would occur before that could happen.
So we're back to a civil war scenario beforehand. But I could see it as a result of a civil war that failed to reunite the nation like Civil war 1 did.
CN
Yes the Insurrection Act could most certainly be invoked if the current situation were to deteriorate to the point of there being ( say ) an actual armed confrontation between an extremist paramilitary group and a National Guard unit which would result in no clear victory for the National Guardsmen , but then the big question would be whether or not the invocation of the Act would legally contested by some branch of government .
After all ( and I'm not trying to pick on the left wing by using this example FWIW ) certain Democratic politicians have seemed rather willing as of late to lend vocal ( if albeit arguably tacit ) support to the various riots which have occurred , which makes the scenario of their Republican counterparts striking back in similar fashion not at all unlikely .
A scenario which would lead to the sort of de facto political showdowns/gridlocks that have been ongoing for the past 4 years , things which would only serve to fan the flames of civil disorder in the case of this sort of bureaucratic finaggling .
In short my point is I sincerely hope that the sort of partisan " I'll try to get back at you any way I can " rubbish we've been seeing so much of will be put aside , in the case of more serious civil disorder .
Because if it isn't then we may very well see the beginning of a de facto ungovernable nation .
What do you think happened during the last civil war? Britain and France were waiting in the wings. Then the Russian empire having recently fought the war in Crimea against them parked Russian navel element s on each coast. What would the EU do? What would India? You think India wants the US to be a Chinese colony?
That you have no understanding of things-military.
Before posting fantastical differently twisted bizzarities, it would be prudent to ask someone with experience.
I planned combat operations in Panama and Iraq, because that's we do in the S-3 Section.
Civil war or not, it would take China's 8 shipyards 75+ years to build enough ships.
It would take Russia about 53+ years.
Can we all agree it is not a video game?
Can we? Please?
When a Chinese infantry solider walks over a purple flower, he does not get food, water, ammunition and new uniform.
When a Russian tank drives over a barrel, it does not get fuel, ammo, food and water for the crew.
Why?
Because it is not a video game. Didn't we already agree it is not a video game?
Do you people even understand the meaning of the phrase "basic combat load?"
A company can supply its troops for about 3-5 days depending on the level of intensity. Four or more hours per day is high intensity, so 3 days. An hour or less per day is low intensity, so 5 days.
Who resupplies them after that?
Battalions carry 5-7 days worth of ammo, fuel, food and water.
Their brigades resupply them and they can do that for 7-9 days.
After that, it's up to the division, which carries about 30 days of fuel, ammo, food, water, medical supplies, parts, etc. etc. etc.
Of course, that assumes the supply line is not impeded, meaning there aren't giant craters in the road blocking the path of supply trucks, or bridges that are damaged/destroyed that bar movement of the supply trucks, or that the supply trucks aren't being harassed or interdicted by fires or aircraft, or that the supply depots haven't been fired or bombed into oblivion.
Then it's up to the corps or army for resupply.
Again, that assumes the supply lines are unimpeded.
Any country, whether it be China or Russia or any other needs literally 10s of 1,000s of ships to transport troops, tanks, APCs, IFVs, artillery pieces, air defense platforms, vehicles, ammo, fuel, food, water, medical supplies, parts, etc. etc. etc.
It would also help to understand basic strategy theory regard force planning.
The US, China, Russia, India, Britain, France, Germany, et al prefer odds of 8:1 or 10:1 or worse case 3:1 for engagements.
So, yeah, it will take more than a single Chinese infantry or mechanized division.
Are you all writing this down?
You should be, so we can dispense with the silliness.
That you have no understanding of things-military.
Before posting fantastical differently twisted bizzarities, it would be prudent to ask someone with experience.
I planned combat operations in Panama and Iraq, because that's we do in the S-3 Section.
Civil war or not, it would take China's 8 shipyards 75+ years to build enough ships.
It would take Russia about 53+ years.
Can we all agree it is not a video game?
Can we? Please?
When a Chinese infantry solider walks over a purple flower, he does not get food, water, ammunition and new uniform.
When a Russian tank drives over a barrel, it does not get fuel, ammo, food and water for the crew.
Why?
Because it is not a video game. Didn't we already agree it is not a video game?
Do you people even understand the meaning of the phrase "basic combat load?"
A company can supply its troops for about 3-5 days depending on the level of intensity. Four or more hours per day is high intensity, so 3 days. An hour or less per day is low intensity, so 5 days.
Who resupplies them after that?
Battalions carry 5-7 days worth of ammo, fuel, food and water.
Their brigades resupply them and they can do that for 7-9 days.
After that, it's up to the division, which carries about 30 days of fuel, ammo, food, water, medical supplies, parts, etc. etc. etc.
Of course, that assumes the supply line is not impeded, meaning there aren't giant craters in the road blocking the path of supply trucks, or bridges that are damaged/destroyed that bar movement of the supply trucks, or that the supply trucks aren't being harassed or interdicted by fires or aircraft, or that the supply depots haven't been fired or bombed into oblivion.
Then it's up to the corps or army for resupply.
Again, that assumes the supply lines are unimpeded.
Any country, whether it be China or Russia or any other needs literally 10s of 1,000s of ships to transport troops, tanks, APCs, IFVs, artillery pieces, air defense platforms, vehicles, ammo, fuel, food, water, medical supplies, parts, etc. etc. etc.
It would also help to understand basic strategy theory regard force planning.
The US, China, Russia, India, Britain, France, Germany, et al prefer odds of 8:1 or 10:1 or worse case 3:1 for engagements.
So, yeah, it will take more than a single Chinese infantry or mechanized division.
Are you all writing this down?
You should be, so we can dispense with the silliness.
There's absolutely no need for the sort of arrogant tone your post seems to be conveying , but I appreciate your reply regardless .
P.S. No offense , but claiming to have bona fide military credentials on an essentially anonymous forum such as this means absolutely jack squat .
I'd like to begin by stating that it isn't at all my intention to stoke the flames of paranoia , on the contrary my intention is quite the opposite , albeit admittedly in a somewhat ominous " the Grinch will get you if don't behave " sort of way .
That said I must say that sort of message may well have its uses , since the usual sort of " play nice kids " type one has limited uses when applied to adults and in the current climate can well make one seem like a laughingstock .
All that said I'm starting up this topic because I'm curious to see the consensus that exists regarding it here , especially among those who consider their rivals on the opposite side of the spectrum to be the real danger to this country .
Because if we keep on fighting each other , then we may very well find ourselves with a much bigger enemy on our backs .
The ultimate goal for Nazi Germany/Soviet Union in the past, and now with Russia and Communist China is to break up the Anglosphere and create internal strife by using race instead of class. In other spheres like the Francosphere the Lusopheres and the Hispanosphere, it is virtually difficult to break up society due to race, but instead it is easy to create strife based along class lines. The Anglospshere enjoys high degree of luxury and dominance thus people feel extremely content with their lives. Best way to divide a nation like America or Great Britain such as the former British Empire is not through class, but through race. Places like America and Britain can be broken up.
With that said. Will Russia and China invade America? I don't know. However with America gone and no longer a power and a threat. This gives China and Russia time to expand politically, economically and militarily in there spheres of influence. Russia for example can expand its domain deep into Central Europe, and in Central Asia and to some extent into the Far East. While China can expand into the Fareast and into the Pacific Southeast. Also with America gone, there will be a scramble to take over the 500 year old Atlantic trade system which was crafted by the Spanish, fell into British hands and now under American control.
Due to our current division. America needs to be broken up into numerous states. Their should be a place for black people. Georgia and South Carolina should turn into a homeland for African Americans, especially those who are tired of White Supremacy and systemic racism. Like wise a land for whites as well somewhere in the pacific. And maybe turn Texas and Florida into independent nations, as well as turning The Northeast and California into woke nations. With America broken up, it will be easy to side with some and to take out weaker regions.
Well, I'll rest assured that whatever ends up happening, will be, as usual.......
Something entirely different from anything we're expecting, thinking about, or discussing on C-D.
CN
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
