+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 10 of 141

Threaded View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    In the interwebz
    Posts
    5,057
    Points
    2,493,067.99
    Rep Power
    240

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pain_ELementaL View Post
    "Having the largest army or most powerful doesn't mean you can take out EVERY other country, unless you plan on nuking them... In that case, there's nothing left for you to take... Which leads me back to the "dying slowly" So yeah, there goes that."

    You make it sound like all the US can do is nuke. Having a powerful military involves much more than nuclear warfare. If the US decided to take over Canada, nukes wouldn't need to be used...same for Mexico. Your land would still be usable...preventing the "slowly dying". Sure, nukes can be used on Russia, China, or some other huge threats...but it's not like the entire world needs to be nuked.
    Well that's not what I was trying to make it sound like, but the point still stands... If you're going to start taking over land in such a situation, then you might want to start using nukes, because at that point, it's whoever hits the other first...

    And really, if the US were to take over Canada and Mexico, how would you use all that land or even keep control over it?

    We're getting into really stupid scenarios now -_-

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,383
    Points
    2,001,094.65
    Rep Power
    226

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WhoIsYou View Post
    Well that's not what I was trying to make it sound like, but the point still stands... If you're going to start taking over land in such a situation, then you might want to start using nukes, because at that point, it's whoever hits the other first...

    And really, if the US were to take over Canada and Mexico, how would you use all that land or even keep control over it?

    We're getting into really stupid scenarios now -_-
    Right, because I'm sure Canada or Mexico would nuke the US.

    The US has expanded from 13 colonies to 50 states (plus multiple territories) just fine...adding a few more wouldn't be a problem. Considering that Texas used to belong to Mexico, Florida to Spain, and many others... it wouldn't be entirely illogical for more to come.






  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    In the interwebz
    Posts
    5,057
    Points
    2,493,067.99
    Rep Power
    240

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pain_ELementaL View Post
    Right, because I'm sure Canada or Mexico would nuke the US.

    The US has expanded from 13 colonies to 50 states (plus multiple territories) just fine...adding a few more wouldn't be a problem. Considering that Texas used to belong to Mexico, Florida to Spain, and many others... it wouldn't be entirely illogical for more to come.
    Um... I never said anything about Canada or Mexico nuke the US... So yeah.... Ever hear of China?

    And yeah, that expansion didn't happen over night... Not to mention, Canada alone is already larger than the whole US, so have fun?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,383
    Points
    2,001,094.65
    Rep Power
    226

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WhoIsYou View Post
    Um... I never said anything about Canada or Mexico nuke the US... So yeah.... Ever hear of China?

    And yeah, that expansion didn't happen over night... Not to mention, Canada alone is already larger than the whole US, so have fun?

    "Well that's not what I was trying to make it sound like, but the point still stands... If you're going to start taking over land in such a situation, then you might want to start using nukes, because at that point, it's whoever hits the other first..."


    We were talking about multiple countries, and you didn't specify which ones you were referring to...so I could only assume. You made it sound like Canada and Mexico would use nukes (since they were included in the conversation that was at hand) I said Nuke the big threats like Russia and China...of course there would be nukes back.

    I didn't say it happened over night...and I don't know how that has anything to do with this.

    Landmass size has nothing to do with anything. Watchout for badass greenland eh?

    (Not to mention that half of Canada is uninhabitable)






  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    In the interwebz
    Posts
    5,057
    Points
    2,493,067.99
    Rep Power
    240

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pain_ELementaL View Post

    "Well that's not what I was trying to make it sound like, but the point still stands... If you're going to start taking over land in such a situation, then you might want to start using nukes, because at that point, it's whoever hits the other first..."


    We were talking about multiple countries, and you didn't specify which ones you were referring to...so I could only assume. You made it sound like Canada and Mexico would use nukes (since they were included in the conversation that was at hand) I said Nuke the big threats like Russia and China...of course there would be nukes back.

    I didn't say it happened over night...and I don't know how that has anything to do with this.

    Landmass size has nothing to do with anything. Watchout for badass greenland eh?

    (Not to mention that half of Canada is uninhabitable)
    Size of the land has a lot to do with it
    Uninhabitable land is still land you have to traverse? People live all over Canada, east, west, north, south.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,383
    Points
    2,001,094.65
    Rep Power
    226

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WhoIsYou View Post
    Size of the land has a lot to do with it
    Uninhabitable land is still land you have to traverse? People live all over Canada, east, west, north, south.
    lol, you make it sound like some hobo living out in the tundra is going to fight against the US military.

    Also, it's not like a landmass can only be taken over if every last inhabitant is killed. There's a reason why Florida has strong Spanish traits, and Texas with Mexican traits.






  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    In the interwebz
    Posts
    5,057
    Points
    2,493,067.99
    Rep Power
    240

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pain_ELementaL View Post
    lol, you make it sound like some hobo living out in the tundra is going to fight against the US military.

    Also, it's not like a landmass can only be taken over if every last inhabitant is killed. There's a reason why Florida has strong Spanish traits, and Texas with Mexican traits.
    I'm not making anything sound like anything, you're just 'hearing' what you want to... All I said is that people live all around.

    And you'd have to kill a lot of them, or get rid of them somehow, you can't just expect everyone to bow before the US....
    And taking over is only half of it, how would you CONTROL the all that land? (We're counting Mexico as well), you'd probably never know what going on, and some separate government would probably form, and never be a part of the US...
    Otherwise the inhabitants of the land may just fight back, and therefore you would have to kill everyone.....
    then what? Everyone from the US is just going to hop in their cars and move north and start working? Lol k...

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts