Europe, Asia and Africa taking a drink from the Ohio.

[Velocity]

@ZenBeam

Does the US, plus either Mexico or Canada*, have enough oil to last for a ten year war?

• I’m assuming at least one of these get’s dragged into it, because I’d expect a surprise amphibious invasion of a previously neutral country would be easier than directly invading the US.

Canada has lots of oil shale, but that’s difficult to extract. And the USA might bomb those petrochemical facilities to hinder the enemy.

[wolfman]

The wierd thing to me is, that is is feasible enough as a thought exercise today, Back when Lincoln said it, it was total bullshit.

[silenus]

With Mexico and Canada sitting things out, the Afro-Eurasian forces have no place to stage an invasion from. Team USA wins in a walk.

[Velocity]

@Mr.Kobayashi

nothing annoys a country as much as having ones territorial sovereignty and neutrality violated for an alien game show

Rofl, I like how you say this as if there’s historical precedent.

[txtumbleweed]

Had to go with Team USA. With both Mexico and Canada strictly neutral, there is just no way and for the rest of the world to buildup the logistical train necessary to support a beachhead on the US Mainland.

The only place they might find big enough to support troops would be Cuba, and you are still looking at 90 miles of open ocean with water deep enough for effective submarine operations.

[eltro102]

Do non US born US citizens also turn against the US? What about people with dual-nationality?

[ZenBeam]

@eltro102

Do non US born US citizens also turn against the US? What about people with dual-nationality?

Or tourists. If a couple of German tourists happen to be walking along the shore of the Ohio when the mind ray strikes, it’s game over pretty quick, unless they have to leave the country first to count.

[Velocity]

@ZenBeam

Or tourists. If a couple of German tourists happen to be walking along the shore of the Ohio when the mind ray strikes, it’s game over pretty quick, unless they have to leave the country first to count.

Kobayashi addressed this earlier:

@Mr.Kobayashi

I understand Lincoln to mean that their armies have secured it and can drink out of it at will, sneaking one bloke in to have a sip doesn’t seem to be in the spirit of his quote.

[Velocity]

@eltro102

Do non US born US citizens also turn against the US? What about people with dual-nationality?

Given the immense size of the militaries involved, I think this issue would barely be a drop in the bucket.

[MEBuckner]

I would still have to go with Abraham Lincoln. (And the Abraham Lincoln.)

This page has a handy graphic showing all the world’s aircraft carriers, to scale. The U.S. just has too much naval and air power, and carrying out an invasion halfway around the world is just too difficult. Even the U.S. invasions in the Middle East–Kuwait in 1991, and Iraq itself in 2003–were huge, complex, expensive undertakings, and of course that was with the U.S. armed forces participating on the side of the invaders, and the U.S. and its allies were able to spend months building up forces in the immediate area (in Saudia Arabia in '91, and in Kuwait in '03) without opposition, which in the OP the Rest of the World would not be able to do.

In 1990-91, when Iraq had “the world’s fourth largest armed forces!!!”, Iraq was still very far from superpower status. Even with nukes off the table, the military forces of the U.S. are vastly more formidable than Iraq’s were in 1991, and–with no easy place to stage forces from, and no likely prospect of being able to build up forces in Bermuda or Cuba or wherever without facing American counterattacks from the very start–the ROW would have a much more difficult task than the U.S. faced in 1991.