Why would their being painted white matter any? I’m pretty sure that even if the US were so incompetent to not notice the massive naval force that would be required to land so many tanks in the Arctic, Canada itself is going to realize they’re being invaded fairly quickly and won’t keep quiet about it, especially to the US. Relations between the two countries might not be as brotherly as they could be but I can’t imagine a scenario where one or the other wouldn’t offer support in response to something so overt as invasion by a foreign power.
Surely the Russian side will be able to take and control the Middle East won’t that put a huge crimp in the USA’s war machine? Thats a lot of oil that the USA is going to have to find a different source for.
:rolleyes:
M1A1 mileage: 490 gallons (1,850 L), allowing the tank to go about 265 miles (426 km) without refueling and it likely averages 40 kmph.
Pay attention. 400 km per 2000 l. Now to get from Yellowknife to Winnipeg is about 3000 km. That’s 7.5 tanks or 15,000 l of tank fuel per tank! Look at the logistics of this little escapade of yours:
1000 tanks with a crew of 3 moving at least 6000 km over 7 days.
Fuel: 30 million liters
Crews: 3000 men
Food (2 kg per man) 6 tonnes per pay = 50 tonnes total
You’re going to drag this unnoticed across 6000 km? Neat. Did I mention you also need the trucks to carry the fuel? And the trucks to carry the fuel for the truck carrying the fuel? Plus the food trucks, spare parts, the rest of the logistics train…
In short, there is no way short of divine intervention that the Chinese and Russians will be marching anything into the US.
The US produces about half of its own oil, and most of our foreign oil comes from Canada & Venezuela. Even with Iran & Syria’s help, it would be near impossible for them to get forces down to the big oil producing gulf states like Kuwait or Saudi Arabia. And look how poorly Russia’s invasions of Afghanistan or Chechnya have gone - and those were countries they share(d) a border with.
Nice weasle words, really :wally
No, I’m not saying everybody. I’m saying you, YOU are dirty little coward who would sell out his own country. At least, I implied it.
Neurotik, chill the fuck out.
Your tone has been belligerent, arrogant, and unacademic. You really want to have some credibility? Then back up your claims. I would do the same, except I just got done scrolling through some immature back-and-forth tirade that made me wonder–what the hell am I doing here? Thank God this is a free subscription.
You know, reading your comments has exhausted me, for some reason. I don’t even care what jingoistic false patriotism spews from your ahem “facts” because I can spot a fake when I see one. There comes a point when the same 'ole diatribes about West being the Best, Might making Right, and other ways of explaining conflict in the world get stale.
And since I have a ton of schoolwork to do this week (a presentation + paper on U.S. fopo-making; paper for law; paper on Orientalism and Western perceptions…ya know, intellectual stuff that require the reading and analysis of scholarly works), I decided your ranting and raving was not worth putting time into a real argument. If I did, though, my rebuttal would smack you like its bitch.
Like this tone? Well, judging by your posts, you’ll sense it more often. And once my school stuff simmers down a bit, I’ll pay you a visit in the “Why Does Iran Hate Israel?” post under the Great Debates…I plan to educate you, ya dern ignoranty.
And that, children, is why we don’t play “politics” in IMHO. I’m shipping the lot of you off to Great Debates.
Huh imagine that. Apparently we only import 66% of our oil and only 13.7% of our total oil comes from the Persian Gulf. Even if we lost all of the Persian Gulf oil I bet with increased production from other countries and rationing personal use at home we could make that up. Jeez thats a pretty big mistake to make in GD thanks for fighting my ignorance ** RandomLetters **.
I’m sure your professors wait with the same grim foreboding the rest of us do to hear more missives from the heights. :rolleyes:
China and Russia couldn’t do anything with their crappy logistical supplies. Russian forces are even in a worse position because of the sheer size of their country and small population in relevance to that size. Adding to the fact there is high levels of corruption in both countries, what makes you think these forces could even pose a threat to the US?
Heres a typical example of their armies;
A strong central, loyal fanatical and well armed core of soldiers, the rest, just crappy and used for cannon fodder. I believe the main strategies for both armies is to just wear down the opponent with cannon fodder so the more experienced part of the Army can go in with less hassle.
This is just a wag, but after reading a little on Operation Barbarossa, I do not see any one driving tanks through Alaska, Canada down into the US.
But what about China & Russia allied with Mexico. Building bases and setting up shop. After all the US has bases near Russia and China. ( What US president would allow this?).
Then China makes the move on Tawain, Russia on the Ukraine. Block off the oil from the ME & Venezuela by destroying the oil fields and or oil port facilities. Now the US has a choice of letting the land grab go on or getting rid of its Hummers or turning down the thermostats a few degrees.
Very, very unlikely, unless the US debt & economy implodes.
The US military is primarily an organization for moving vast tonnages of crap around the world, and only secondarily an organization for blowing stuff up and killing people.
Logistics is the real game in intercontinental warfare. That is the fundamental advantage the US has over every other country in the world.
Every soldier, every tank, every aircraft, every warship, every submarine, every artillery piece, needs vast amounts of supplies…spare parts, food, ammo, fuel, socks, paper clips, generators, batteries, and on and on and on and on.
Yeah, a band of irregulars can harrass an invading force with a few rifles, a few bullets and a few home-made sticks of dynamite. They can’t invade another country that way. The logistics required for invading another country, even a neighboring country, are simply mind boggling. Other countries have effective militaries for home defense…prepositioned supplies, soldiers already in place, airfields stocked. But no other country besides the US has the capacity to invade a country on the other side of the world, even a third world basket case.
The US is invulnerable to ground invasion. You cannot drive tanks over the north pole. A tank can barely drive from Seattle to Portland without needing a major overhaul. Tanks cannot drive cross-country, except in emergencies…that is, when in combat. Tanks need bridges to cross rivers. Remember all those WWII movies where blowing up or not blowing up some crappy little bridge over some crappy little stream was such a big deal? That is because with the bridge the tanks can advance. Without the bridge the tanks are stalled. Russia couldn’t invade China by driving a fleet of tanks through Mongolia, China can’t invade Russia by driving a fleet of tanks through Mongolia. It simply is a logistical impossibility.
Here’s a challenge. Take ONE vehicle, any vehicle of any design. It doesn’t have to have armor plating, it doesn’t have to have weapons, it doesn’t have to carry ammunition, it doesn’t have to fight anyone. Now drive that vehicle from Seattle to Nome, assuming all bridges on the Alaska highway are off limits. I’m generously allowing you to use existing roads, but bridges are right out. And notice that there are no roads from Fairbanks to Nome. How long do you think it would take? Now drive across the frozen Bering sea from Nome to Kamchatka. How long do you think that will take? Now drive from Kamchatka to Vladivostok. Heck, I’ll even let you use the existing bridges in Siberia since I’m feeling generous. How long do you think it will take? How often will you need to refuel? HOW will you refuel? Are you expecting to buy diesel at gas stations along the way?
Battles are won and lost by the ability of one side to somehow arrive at a certain place at a certain time in some sort of condition to fight, while the other side fails to move as fast. Russia, China, and Iran barely have the logistical capability to supply units in neighboring countries where they can be resupplied by short rail hops. They certainly don’t have the logistical capability to supply units on another continent.
And what temperature is snow? What temperature are tank engines that have been running for hundreds of miles?
Man, there is nothing stealthy about a massive wave of tanks with their associated supply vehicles. And you can’t really occupy hostile territory with just tanks. You still have get boots on the ground, so add in a sizeable infantry force, the transports to keep them with the tanks, and the supply chain to keep them fed and warm on the way…
Since the US mainland would be impossible to invade and occupy, General Dynamics would be running triple shifts and churning torpedoes out by the hundreds.
If the UK is in it, do all the Commonwealth nations have to back her up? India could field enough foot soldiers to cancel out China’s advantage.
(inside the National Reconnaissance Office)
“Hey, Bob, come look at this.”
“It looks like a bunch of ships heading for Alaska. Better keep an eye on them.”
(next day)
“Hey! Those guys are inside the 12 mile limit. Better get a closer look.”
(satellite zooms in)
“Holy crap! Those are tanks!”
(calls the military)
“I wonder which window on the bridge they’ll put the smart bombs into.”
I am not a military strategist - by any means of the imagination!
But I was thinking, way ahead of this conversation, that why wouldn’t they simply invade and take over Alaska and use that as a stronghold for attacks to carve a path from Canada to Canada-American border? If America was surrounded with forces on Hawaii, Alaska, and Puerto Rico, what could they possibly do? Heck, just for good measure, I’d also make plans to capture Iraq just to let them know I mean business. I guess I’m just sadistic. Heh
- Honesty
Because supply issues prevent them from doing so.
You cannot drive from Siberia to Alaska, let alone drive a tank. It is impossible.
Therefore an invasion of Alaska would have to be airborne or seaborne. HAVE TO BE. Any airborne invasion would have to contend with the US airforce. If the US airforce can’t maintain total air supremacy over Alaska I’ll eat my hat. An airborne invasion of Alaska would be just as difficult as an airborne invasion of the continental US. No country in the world has the airlift capabilities of the US, much less the long-range air superiority planes to protect the cargo planes and attack planes.
Same with a sealift invasion. The US navy might not be able to stop every cocaine smuggler that sneaks into US waters. So yes, special forces teams could be infiltrated into the US, but what are they going to accomplish? A sealift invasion is impossible, for the simple reason that no country in the world has the ships and the amphibious assault forces that the US does (excepting the UK, which has them albeit not nearly as many as the US, and they are on our side). And no other country has the navy that the US does, again excepting the UK which again is on our side.
The US navy and land-based aircraft can sink any invasion fleet from any combination of countries. Any stragglers that make it to shore will be pulverized from the air, completely cut off from resupply and reinforcement, and mopped up by the national guard and outraged farmers with shotguns.
Of course, this is all nonsense, as I mentioned earlier. Wars aren’t about countries lining up on a playing field and fighting to the last man. Wars are waged to acheive some political/economic objective. Without stating the objectives of the parties to the war, the question of who would win the war is meaningless.
By the way, just to clear things up, Alaska is probably the most heavily militarized state in America, relative to population. There’s lots of empty room to train in, lots of empty land to build bases in, lots of wild terrain to hold exercizes in, fewer neighbors to complain about the noise. And it is close to the former Soviet Union. Remember when we were expecting nuclear war with them? Alaska is stuffed with radar, communication systems, and airbases. Well, not stuffed. But it isn’t an undefended unihabited wasteland that can be invaded by a few guys stuffed into a fishing boat. Military bases are all over Alaska…army, navy, air force, coast guard.