Red Dawn

[LEAA/SOFR]

Do you recall the movie "Red Dawn" (1983) in which we were invaded
by Soviet conventional forces? This movie brought this to the attention
to America of this possibility. The Democrat's blamed this movie for the
successful reelection of Ronald Reagan, calling it "propaganda".

Could conventional forces take us like that, or just nuke us and get it
over with?

 

[TuxAme]

They'd probably try to nuke us. It's hypothesized that no one tries to "invade" the US, among other reasons, because the citizens are armed. It's not just the military that invading forces would have to worry about.

 

[majj27]

The US population is 300 million (-ish). And it's a big area. And it's not easy to get to unless you move through a large part of an allied nation first. Any army large enough to attempt an actual invasion of conquest will either be drawing air and naval attacks for a few thousand kilometers, or is small enough to be relatively ineffective in holding territory, because there's only so thin a force can be spread before you're pretty much just random fire teams tromping about.

If you wanted to invade America, you're kind of in Wishful thinking territory.

Nuking it would work, but it wouldn't leave anything worthwhile behind, plus, wherever the nukes come from is going to wind up as dust.

Now, non-nuclear strikes could cause a lot of damage, but you'd not wind up holding any territory.

 

[LEAA/SOFR]

Just a rhetorical question on my part. But TuxAme and majj27's observations are correct.
The real estate we have would create such a deterrence. Our Naval forces would wipe out
any enemy vessels enroute, either above or below water. The millions of armed citizens
(not just police and the military) with or without permits. Gun-control would become a
dead issue, along with dead pacifists.....


The one non-rhetorical question I have is: how many of you otherwise gentle believer's would be able to stand by and allow enemy soldiers to murder your loved one's before you do something about it?

 

[football5680]

They would have to nuke us because an invasion wouldn't work. We have the greatest Army, Navy and Air Force, as well as a large population and plenty of weapons to arm them. It would take +10 Million soldiers to actually subdue the huge amount of land the US has and this massive army would have to be supplied by supply lines that are several thousand miles long overseas and there is no way that they could possibly protect it.

 

[majj27]

The one non-rhetorical question I have is: how many of you otherwise gentle believer's would be able to stand by and allow enemy soldiers to murder your loved one's before you do something about it?

That's an interesting question, and honestly, unless you've been in a life-or-death situation (or highly trained to be in such a situation), there's no real way to know. Human brains are fickle things at times. Heck, we specifically train soldiers to be able to kill other humans and while it can be done, the process is not easy, nor is it necessarily healthy.

In general, as a species we're not really wired for killing other people.

Also, there's a big difference between taking a shotgun or an AR-15 and standing up to three or four casually-cruel grunts, or taking the same weapons and facing down 20+ Special Forces with a nasty helicopter like a Hind on overwatch and a pair of manned and watchful IFVs a dozen or so yards away.

 

[Resha Caner]

It's hypothesized that no one tries to "invade" the US, among other reasons, because the citizens are armed.

I doubt that's much of a consideration for a serious modern military force. I would expect the reasons are more in line with what majj27 said.

Further, despite how much some may hate the U.S., I also doubt many give any serious thought to conquering the U.S. Aside from the military obstacles, the technical & economic motivators just aren't there. Rather, those bent on achieving goals through force are probably more interested in affecting political policy through terrorism than conquest.

Finally, Red Dawn was a stupid movie. A fun few hours of escapism ... but stupid. Anyone who uses that movie as a blueprint for world politics or military strategy is bound to be disappointed.

 

[majj27]

Finally, Red Dawn was a stupid movie. A fun few hours of escapism ... but stupid. Anyone who uses that movie as a blueprint for world politics or military strategy is bound to be disappointed.

The worldbuilding in Red Dawn strains suspension of disbelief until it hides in the corner whimpering, yes.

Behind it there are several possible messages you can take away, depending on your point of view, but the invasion itself? You need to pretty much handwave it. Things like:

• How did we miss over a million troops marching 3,500 miles through Canada?
• If Mexico suddenly became Bigger Cuba, we'd have that border monitored like CRAZY, even taking into account 80's tech. And 500,000 troops on the move in Mexico would be hard to miss.
• The fighter pilot who went one-on-five against russian jets and got four? Yeah, that's cool and all, but how the heck does a US fighter pilot get tag-teamed that much over his own territory?
• And speaking of that, we see exactly one US helicopter in battle. That's one guy wondering where the hockey sticks his backup is.
• We spent HUGE amounts of money on military gear in the 80s. So where was it?
• Apparently the US Special Forces can handle any territory on earth. Except for the deathtrap that is Colorado.
• The Soviets respect the Wolverines more than the US army does. While the US SpecOps balked at a 40-mile trek to help out, the Soviets pulled in elite units to hunt them down. Way to blow a huge morale-boosting PR move there, guys.
• Who was driving that US tank, and why did they figure that the best thing to do when fired on was to sit still and allow the other chap another go?

 

[tulc]

I think if, say Russia, wanted to take over the US wouldn't simply working hard to get the least effective/easily manuipulated person they could think of elected as President?
tulc(thinks that sounds like a great first step)

 

[JackRT]

Early in WW2 the general in charge of the defense of the west coast of North America was asked in a news conference if the Japanese could actually invade the USA through Alaska. He replied "Yes, they could but by the time they got down here they would all be citizens." Actually considering that the USA was 2 years late entering the war, I should have not have said "early".

 

[Dave-W]

Apparently the US Special Forces can handle any territory on earth. Except for the deathtrap that is Colorado.

One thing we learned from Hurricane Katrina: What we do well on foreign soil falls totally apart when we try to do it at home.

 

[pat34lee]

I think if, say Russia, wanted to take over the US wouldn't simply working hard to get the least effective/easily manuipulated person they could think of elected as President?
tulc(thinks that sounds like a great first step)

Then they didn't do a very good job, because
'that' woman didn't get elected. And neither
did Bernie Sanders, who would probably have
welcomed them to the country.

 

[tulc]

Then they didn't do a very good job, because
'that' woman didn't get elected. And neither
did Bernie Sanders, who would probably have
welcomed them to the country.

It's sort of endearing how in spite of all the evidence you still push the myth that it was Sec Clinton the Russians worked so hard to get elected.
tulc(kind of sad, but still endearing)

 

[LEAA/SOFR]

One thing's for certain: "Red Dawn" is a work of fiction. But even movies
like this (no matter how technically inaccurate they are) have been known
to give us pause about our current state of affairs and human nature. It
was an exciting piece of cinema, but militarily? Come on.

It was the only movie I could really use to start a conversation.

The up-to-date version (2012) was a disappointment. They changed bad guys
for the plot from Arab terrorists to North Korea. They just didn't want to offend
"our Arab allies and friends".

 

[pat34lee]

It's sort of endearing how in spite of all the evidence you still push the myth that it was Sec Clinton the Russians worked so hard to get elected.
tulc(kind of sad, but still endearing)

It was even worse than a foreign power trying
to get Hillary elected. It was our own media,
along with the FBI and Justice Department
trying to derail Trump and hand Hillary the
election, and they're still at it a year and a
half after he took office. (almost)

 

[tulc]

It was even worse than a foreign power trying
to get Hillary elected. It was our own media,
along with the FBI and Justice Department
trying to derail Trump and hand Hillary the
election, and they're still at it a year and a
half after he took office. (almost)

...so you're saying the Russians were better (all while not being as evil either) at getting their candidate President Trump elected then all those Americans you listed?
tulc(good point!)

 

[LEAA/SOFR]

Democrats are the party of Blue, so let's begin production on "BLUE DAWN"