How China Might Take Over

This may or may not be plausible. But China could buy out Saudi Arabia's oil reserves that they were going to ship to the US, negating us from acquiring 40% of our oil. We would have no choice but to drill offshore, but it would take years for the oil to actually enter the market, and in the meantime the economy crumbles.

At 4/7/2012 12:22:50 AM, OberHerr wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:20:02 AM, THEBOMB wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:19:20 AM, OberHerr wrote:

Um....that is a 4-1 advantage........
E
But, we would win because our tech, civilians being armed with guns, and the home field advantage.

Plus the fact they need to transport their soldiers across the Pacific and through the US's navy...

Yeah, good luck with that.

Called, we use some cruise missiles, blow up their transports, bye bye Chinese army.

Well they'd probably use their single Aircraft carrier as well :P

At 4/7/2012 12:23:33 AM, BlackVoid wrote:
This may or may not be plausible. But China could buy out Saudi Arabia's oil reserves that they were going to ship to the US, negating us from acquiring 40% of our oil. We would have no choice but to drill offshore, but it would take years for the oil to actually enter the market, and in the meantime the economy crumbles.

two words. Oil shale

At 4/7/2012 12:22:50 AM, OberHerr wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:20:02 AM, THEBOMB wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:19:20 AM, OberHerr wrote:

Um....that is a 4-1 advantage........
E
But, we would win because our tech, civilians being armed with guns, and the home field advantage.

Plus the fact they need to transport their soldiers across the Pacific and through the US's navy...

Yeah, good luck with that.

Called, we use some cruise missiles, blow up their transports, bye bye Chinese army.

I had all the missles used on penguins in antartica and the austrlian outback

At 4/7/2012 12:23:34 AM, THEBOMB wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:22:50 AM, OberHerr wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:20:02 AM, THEBOMB wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:19:20 AM, OberHerr wrote:

Um....that is a 4-1 advantage........
E
But, we would win because our tech, civilians being armed with guns, and the home field advantage.

Plus the fact they need to transport their soldiers across the Pacific and through the US's navy...

Yeah, good luck with that.

Called, we use some cruise missiles, blow up their transports, bye bye Chinese army.

Well they'd probably use their single Aircraft carrier as well :P

We use our, what? Five? Seven?

At 4/7/2012 12:24:17 AM, thett3 wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:22:50 AM, OberHerr wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:20:02 AM, THEBOMB wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:19:20 AM, OberHerr wrote:

Um....that is a 4-1 advantage........
E
But, we would win because our tech, civilians being armed with guns, and the home field advantage.

Plus the fact they need to transport their soldiers across the Pacific and through the US's navy...

Yeah, good luck with that.

Called, we use some cruise missiles, blow up their transports, bye bye Chinese army.

I had all the missles used on penguins in antartica and the austrlian outback

Hmm, then we must resort to Skittles.

At 4/7/2012 12:24:19 AM, OberHerr wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:23:34 AM, THEBOMB wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:22:50 AM, OberHerr wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:20:02 AM, THEBOMB wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:19:20 AM, OberHerr wrote:

Um....that is a 4-1 advantage........
E
But, we would win because our tech, civilians being armed with guns, and the home field advantage.

Plus the fact they need to transport their soldiers across the Pacific and through the US's navy...

Yeah, good luck with that.

Called, we use some cruise missiles, blow up their transports, bye bye Chinese army.

Well they'd probably use their single Aircraft carrier as well :P

We use our, what? Five? Seven?

That plus our battleships plus our submarines plus our air force = no more Chinese Army :P

At 4/7/2012 12:24:07 AM, THEBOMB wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:23:33 AM, BlackVoid wrote:
This may or may not be plausible. But China could buy out Saudi Arabia's oil reserves that they were going to ship to the US, negating us from acquiring 40% of our oil. We would have no choice but to drill offshore, but it would take years for the oil to actually enter the market, and in the meantime the economy crumbles.

two words. Oil shale

Then why arent we using it now?

At 4/7/2012 12:25:17 AM, BlackVoid wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:24:07 AM, THEBOMB wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:23:33 AM, BlackVoid wrote:
This may or may not be plausible. But China could buy out Saudi Arabia's oil reserves that they were going to ship to the US, negating us from acquiring 40% of our oil. We would have no choice but to drill offshore, but it would take years for the oil to actually enter the market, and in the meantime the economy crumbles.

two words. Oil shale

Then why arent we using it now?

Because the insane environmentalists decided not to let us :P its actually proven the US has more potential oil within its borders than Saudi Arabia....

At 4/7/2012 12:25:13 AM, THEBOMB wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:24:19 AM, OberHerr wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:23:34 AM, THEBOMB wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:22:50 AM, OberHerr wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:20:02 AM, THEBOMB wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:19:20 AM, OberHerr wrote:

Um....that is a 4-1 advantage........
E
But, we would win because our tech, civilians being armed with guns, and the home field advantage.

Plus the fact they need to transport their soldiers across the Pacific and through the US's navy...

Yeah, good luck with that.

Called, we use some cruise missiles, blow up their transports, bye bye Chinese army.

Well they'd probably use their single Aircraft carrier as well :P

We use our, what? Five? Seven?

That plus our battleships plus our submarines plus our air force = no more Chinese Army :P

Not to mention they would have to break past our entrenched coastal defenses.

Seriously, I would hate to be the general having to plan an D-Day on US soil.

At 4/7/2012 12:26:32 AM, THEBOMB wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:25:17 AM, BlackVoid wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:24:07 AM, THEBOMB wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:23:33 AM, BlackVoid wrote:
This may or may not be plausible. But China could buy out Saudi Arabia's oil reserves that they were going to ship to the US, negating us from acquiring 40% of our oil. We would have no choice but to drill offshore, but it would take years for the oil to actually enter the market, and in the meantime the economy crumbles.

two words. Oil shale

Then why arent we using it now?

Because the insane environmentalists decided not to let us :P its actually proven the US has more potential oil within its borders than Saudi Arabia....

Not to mention other resource besides.

At 4/7/2012 12:26:48 AM, OberHerr wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:25:13 AM, THEBOMB wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:24:19 AM, OberHerr wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:23:34 AM, THEBOMB wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:22:50 AM, OberHerr wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:20:02 AM, THEBOMB wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:19:20 AM, OberHerr wrote:

Um....that is a 4-1 advantage........
E
But, we would win because our tech, civilians being armed with guns, and the home field advantage.

Plus the fact they need to transport their soldiers across the Pacific and through the US's navy...

Yeah, good luck with that.

Called, we use some cruise missiles, blow up their transports, bye bye Chinese army.

Well they'd probably use their single Aircraft carrier as well :P

We use our, what? Five? Seven?

That plus our battleships plus our submarines plus our air force = no more Chinese Army :P

Not to mention they would have to break past our entrenched coastal defenses.

Seriously, I would hate to be the general having to plan an D-Day on US soil.

On another note, the Germans could have won D-Day actually :P quite easily

At 4/7/2012 12:29:12 AM, THEBOMB wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:26:48 AM, OberHerr wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:25:13 AM, THEBOMB wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:24:19 AM, OberHerr wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:23:34 AM, THEBOMB wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:22:50 AM, OberHerr wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:20:02 AM, THEBOMB wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:19:20 AM, OberHerr wrote:

Um....that is a 4-1 advantage........
E
But, we would win because our tech, civilians being armed with guns, and the home field advantage.

Plus the fact they need to transport their soldiers across the Pacific and through the US's navy...

Yeah, good luck with that.

Called, we use some cruise missiles, blow up their transports, bye bye Chinese army.

Well they'd probably use their single Aircraft carrier as well :P

We use our, what? Five? Seven?

That plus our battleships plus our submarines plus our air force = no more Chinese Army :P

Not to mention they would have to break past our entrenched coastal defenses.

Seriously, I would hate to be the general having to plan an D-Day on US soil.

On another note, the Germans could have won D-Day actually :P quite easily

How?

I mean, I understand it was one of the most miraculous and well done operations in US history, but what would have made the German win?

At 4/7/2012 12:26:48 AM, OberHerr wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:25:13 AM, THEBOMB wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:24:19 AM, OberHerr wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:23:34 AM, THEBOMB wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:22:50 AM, OberHerr wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:20:02 AM, THEBOMB wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:19:20 AM, OberHerr wrote:

Um....that is a 4-1 advantage........
E
But, we would win because our tech, civilians being armed with guns, and the home field advantage.

Plus the fact they need to transport their soldiers across the Pacific and through the US's navy...

Yeah, good luck with that.

Called, we use some cruise missiles, blow up their transports, bye bye Chinese army.

Well they'd probably use their single Aircraft carrier as well :P

We use our, what? Five? Seven?

That plus our battleships plus our submarines plus our air force = no more Chinese Army :P

Not to mention they would have to break past our entrenched coastal defenses.

Seriously, I would hate to be the general having to plan an D-Day on US soil.

Serious reply: I wold tend to agree. U.S. policy makers have never gotten over the cold war, we're still super paranoid about infrastructure at home. I remember my father telling me that there was a huge bridge by the Naval base he was stationed in where they purposely made the pieces float able, so that if the enemy ever blew up the bridge we could just drag out the pieces and keep the harbor from being blocked.

And we have that kind of sh1t everywhere. Not to mention the civilian population. I would estimate just from people I know that around 10% would fight to the death, meaning 30 million partisans for an enemy to deal with at the least.

Can you imagine all the hunters throughout the country just swapping out Chinese soldiers as their targets?

Dang, we pwn!

At 4/7/2012 12:30:50 AM, OberHerr wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:29:12 AM, THEBOMB wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:26:48 AM, OberHerr wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:25:13 AM, THEBOMB wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:24:19 AM, OberHerr wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:23:34 AM, THEBOMB wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:22:50 AM, OberHerr wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:20:02 AM, THEBOMB wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:19:20 AM, OberHerr wrote:

Um....that is a 4-1 advantage........
E
But, we would win because our tech, civilians being armed with guns, and the home field advantage.

Plus the fact they need to transport their soldiers across the Pacific and through the US's navy...

Yeah, good luck with that.

Called, we use some cruise missiles, blow up their transports, bye bye Chinese army.

Well they'd probably use their single Aircraft carrier as well :P

We use our, what? Five? Seven?

That plus our battleships plus our submarines plus our air force = no more Chinese Army :P

Not to mention they would have to break past our entrenched coastal defenses.

Seriously, I would hate to be the general having to plan an D-Day on US soil.

On another note, the Germans could have won D-Day actually :P quite easily

How?

I mean, I understand it was one of the most miraculous and well done operations in US history, but what would have made the German win?

They decided to listen to British spies and they stationed their tanks at Calais which was a few hundred miles away...whoopsies....if their tanks had been there.....bye bye any chance of an invasion...

At 4/7/2012 12:27:34 AM, OberHerr wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:26:32 AM, THEBOMB wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:25:17 AM, BlackVoid wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:24:07 AM, THEBOMB wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:23:33 AM, BlackVoid wrote:
This may or may not be plausible. But China could buy out Saudi Arabia's oil reserves that they were going to ship to the US, negating us from acquiring 40% of our oil. We would have no choice but to drill offshore, but it would take years for the oil to actually enter the market, and in the meantime the economy crumbles.

two words. Oil shale

Then why arent we using it now?

Because the insane environmentalists decided not to let us :P its actually proven the US has more potential oil within its borders than Saudi Arabia....

Not to mention other resource besides.

Coal
Gas
McDonalds
Minerals
Tourism
Sun
Wind
A lot of rivers (hydro)
A lot of geo thermal

Etc.

At 4/7/2012 12:32:21 AM, OberHerr wrote:
Can you imagine all the hunters throughout the country just swapping out Chinese soldiers as their targets?

Dang, we pwn!

Dont underestimate them, just ask any WWII veteran who fought against the Japanese.

At 4/7/2012 12:32:21 AM, OberHerr wrote:
Can you imagine all the hunters throughout the country just swapping out Chinese soldiers as their targets?

Dang, we pwn!

Alabams has like 80% gun ownership >:)

@THEBOMB

Yeah, I think I've heard about the before.

Honestly, D-Day couldn't have gone much better. I understand we lost a ton of men, but we could have lost FAR more if it had gone bad.

At 4/7/2012 12:33:37 AM, thett3 wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:32:21 AM, OberHerr wrote:
Can you imagine all the hunters throughout the country just swapping out Chinese soldiers as their targets?

Dang, we pwn!

Dont underestimate them, just ask any WWII veteran who fought against the Japanese.

As a matter of fact, if I had to fight in WWII I would want to fight against the Germans or the Western Allies. The Soviets and Japanese were downright terriyfing and vicious.

At 4/7/2012 12:34:22 AM, OberHerr wrote:
@THEBOMB

Yeah, I think I've heard about the before.

Honestly, D-Day couldn't have gone much better. I understand we lost a ton of men, but we could have lost FAR more if it had gone bad.

Well the German's could have just not set up beach defenses....

They almost lost anyway.

At 4/7/2012 12:33:37 AM, thett3 wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:32:21 AM, OberHerr wrote:
Can you imagine all the hunters throughout the country just swapping out Chinese soldiers as their targets?

Dang, we pwn!

Dont underestimate them, just ask any WWII veteran who fought against the Japanese.

Dont worry, I have talked to men who have been in CQC with Japanese officers. He win, simple because he threw the guy into a wall SIX times.

He said he was like a friggen hydra, kept on coming back.

At 4/7/2012 12:36:18 AM, THEBOMB wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:34:22 AM, OberHerr wrote:
@THEBOMB

Yeah, I think I've heard about the before.

Honestly, D-Day couldn't have gone much better. I understand we lost a ton of men, but we could have lost FAR more if it had gone bad.

Well the German's could have just not set up beach defenses....

They almost lost anyway.

Ok, realistically better. I mean, it was a very risky move, and if it hadn't worked.......who knows how the war would have played out?

We could have still won, but D-Day definitely helped.

At 4/7/2012 12:35:44 AM, thett3 wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:33:37 AM, thett3 wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:32:21 AM, OberHerr wrote:
Can you imagine all the hunters throughout the country just swapping out Chinese soldiers as their targets?

Dang, we pwn!

Dont underestimate them, just ask any WWII veteran who fought against the Japanese.

As a matter of fact, if I had to fight in WWII I would want to fight against the Germans or the Western Allies. The Soviets and Japanese were downright terriyfing and vicious.

The USSR lost millions of men in the first days of battle....they almost lost.

At 4/7/2012 12:37:44 AM, OberHerr wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:36:18 AM, THEBOMB wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:34:22 AM, OberHerr wrote:
@THEBOMB

Yeah, I think I've heard about the before.

Honestly, D-Day couldn't have gone much better. I understand we lost a ton of men, but we could have lost FAR more if it had gone bad.

Well the German's could have just not set up beach defenses....

They almost lost anyway.

Ok, realistically better. I mean, it was a very risky move, and if it hadn't worked.......who knows how the war would have played out?

We could have still won, but D-Day definitely helped.

The Allies probably would have invaded from the Mediterranean if D-Day had failed.

At 4/7/2012 12:35:44 AM, thett3 wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:33:37 AM, thett3 wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:32:21 AM, OberHerr wrote:
Can you imagine all the hunters throughout the country just swapping out Chinese soldiers as their targets?

Dang, we pwn!

Dont underestimate them, just ask any WWII veteran who fought against the Japanese.

As a matter of fact, if I had to fight in WWII I would want to fight against the Germans or the Western Allies. The Soviets and Japanese were downright terriyfing and vicious.

Agreed.

The Soviets were sorta like the Allies version of the Japanese, in the sense that they were 1) Brutal to POWs 2) Would fight to the last man more often 3) Executed people that ran, or were more brutal with dicipline.

At 4/7/2012 12:38:18 AM, THEBOMB wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:35:44 AM, thett3 wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:33:37 AM, thett3 wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:32:21 AM, OberHerr wrote:
Can you imagine all the hunters throughout the country just swapping out Chinese soldiers as their targets?

Dang, we pwn!

Dont underestimate them, just ask any WWII veteran who fought against the Japanese.

As a matter of fact, if I had to fight in WWII I would want to fight against the Germans or the Western Allies. The Soviets and Japanese were downright terriyfing and vicious.

The USSR lost millions of men in the first days of battle....they almost lost.

And yet they fought on. That's what is so terrifying about them. They don't surrender. They wouldnt even take "one step backward" at one point, you had to kill them all to move forward.

At 4/7/2012 12:39:56 AM, OberHerr wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:35:44 AM, thett3 wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:33:37 AM, thett3 wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:32:21 AM, OberHerr wrote:
Can you imagine all the hunters throughout the country just swapping out Chinese soldiers as their targets?

Dang, we pwn!

Dont underestimate them, just ask any WWII veteran who fought against the Japanese.

As a matter of fact, if I had to fight in WWII I would want to fight against the Germans or the Western Allies. The Soviets and Japanese were downright terriyfing and vicious.

Agreed.

The Soviets were sorta like the Allies version of the Japanese, in the sense that they were 1) Brutal to POWs 2) Would fight to the last man more often 3) Executed people that ran, or were more brutal with dicipline.

Yeah thats a good comparison. Not to mention both were super patriotic.

Then again, every nation in WWII was.

At 4/7/2012 12:39:30 AM, THEBOMB wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:37:44 AM, OberHerr wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:36:18 AM, THEBOMB wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:34:22 AM, OberHerr wrote:
@THEBOMB

Yeah, I think I've heard about the before.

Honestly, D-Day couldn't have gone much better. I understand we lost a ton of men, but we could have lost FAR more if it had gone bad.

Well the German's could have just not set up beach defenses....

They almost lost anyway.

Ok, realistically better. I mean, it was a very risky move, and if it hadn't worked.......who knows how the war would have played out?

We could have still won, but D-Day definitely helped.

The Allies probably would have invaded from the Mediterranean if D-Day had failed.

I've always thought how history would have played out if certain things hadn't happened, or hadn't worked, like say the US was never founded, or we lost WW II.