Announcement

Announcement Module
Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why No Invasion?

Page Title Module
Move Remove Collapse
X
Conversation Detail Module
Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Why No Invasion?

    Got this in an email, makes sense.

    After the Japanese decimated our fleet in Pearl Harbor Dec 7, 1941, they could have sent their troop ships and carriers directly to California to finish what they started. The prediction from our Chief of Staff was; we would not be able to stop a massive invasion until they reached the Mississippi River.
    Remember, we had a 2 million man army and war ships…... all fighting the Germans. So, why did they not invade? After the war, the remaining Japanese generals and admirals were asked that question. Their answer…... They knew that almost every home had guns and the Americans knew how to use them...they said they'd be up against a gun behind every blade of grass. The world's largest army.... America's hunters! I had never thought about this.... A blogger added up the deer license sales in just a handful of states and arrived at a striking conclusion: There were over 600,000 hunters this season in the state of Wisconsin alone. Allow me to restate that number. Over the last several months, Wisconsin's hunters became the eighth largest army in the world. More men under arms than in Iran .. More than in France and Germany combined. These men deployed to the woods of a single American state to hunt with firearms, and no one was killed. That number pales in comparison to the 750,000 who hunted the woods of Pennsylvania and Michigan's 700,000 hunters, all of whom have now returned home. Toss in a quarter million hunters in West Virginia, and it literally establishes the fact that the hunters of those four states alone would comprise the largest army in the world. The point? America will forever be safe from foreign invasion with that kind of home-grown firepower. Hunting -- it's not just a way to fill the freezer. It's a matter of national security. That's why all enemies, foreign and domestic, want to see us disarmed. Food for thought when next we consider gun control.

  • #2
    Re: Why No Invasion?

    Founding Fathers were very wise, wish they could have seen the future.

    wookie

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Why No Invasion?

      Of course they did invade and occupy but it was only in the sparse area of Alaska.

      Mark
      "Somewhere a Village is Missing Twelve Idiots!" - Casey Anthony

      I never lost a cent on the jobs I didn't get!

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Why No Invasion?

        Unless all those weapons and their owners could be pulled together in some form of organized trained militia they would never be able to stop combat ready troops. Slow them down a bit, probably, but defeat them, never. I also don't believe an American 2 million man army and war ships were fighting any Germans on Dec. 7, 1941.
        Teach your kids about taxes..........eat 30 percent of their ice cream.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Why No Invasion?

          Did the US have troops in Europe when Japan invaded?

          I thought we declared war with Japan before Germany.

          I seriously doubt a group of deer hunters would deter an invading army. Look at Iraq, they were heavily armed when we invaded. It didn't deter Bush/Cheney.

          I think someone is having a Red Dawn moment.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Why No Invasion?

            Originally posted by James P View Post
            ...........I think someone is having a Red Dawn moment.
            Now that's funny!
            Teach your kids about taxes..........eat 30 percent of their ice cream.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Why No Invasion?

              Nice story... but that is all that it is.

              First off, the attack on Pearl wasn't meant to be a complete surprise... it was the incompetance of the Japanese diplomatic office in Washington that failed to deliver a declaration to the White House before the raid was actually launched. Lack of communication led to an embarrassing and dreaded realization that the attack, without warning, would be a blow that would have a terrible backlash to the Japanese. If you don't know any history, then you don't have any realization of the steps that led the Japanese to strike Pearl Harbor.

              The attacking force was a naval air strike force. It did not have enough manpower to invade anything more than a small city. It also did not have enough fuel for it's ships or aircraft to pull off a strike on the west coast and it certainly didn't have enough munitions to make the added journey worth the effort. Logistics is primary to any invasion scenario and the Japanese force simply did not have that capability. One might also consider that after the initial strike, it realized that it did not hit any of our carrier force... which was a significant "miss". That "miss" caused them considerable concern, dramatically realized at Midway several months later.

              Second. At the time, December 7, 1941 we were not in Europe with much more than military "diplomacy". Most, if not all, the shipment of material to England was via commercial shipping. Even with commercial shipping under U-boat attacks off the Carolina and Gulf coasts, we still did not go to war in Europe. The attack on Pearl Harbor is what moved us out of our complacency and moved us into war in both the Atlantic and the Pacific.

              Third, while the number of arms in the U.S. can be thought of as alarming to some nations, it is our military might that keeps are perceived enemies at bay and NOT the NRA or the large number of households that are armed. While a small military force might well take some consideration in it's dealings on a particular area/target, a major well-coordinated force would not be hesitant should the U.S. military not be in existance. Military action in either defence or offense requires not only fire-power but also communications and precise coordination of forces against determined targets.

              While there may be hundreds of thousands of us with our weapons and ammunition caches, how well do you think we could coordinate defense on a wide area? Cell phones would be almost the first target to go. While cell phones are still active in Afganistan and Iraq, one must not forget that we are not a merciless force looking to overwhelm those countrys. We have not destroyed their communications infrastructure and are in fact, helping to build and enhance it. But a force determined to destroy the U.S., would not be so inclined I think. Once communications and electricity are denied, an enemy would have only to wait a short time for the resulting chaos to overwhelm the remnants of our society. Our guns and munitions would most likely be used to defend ourselves against our neighbors. He!!, we can't get along in peaceful times and most of us can't follow any sort of "government"... can you imagine what you'd be like if your neighbors all got to together and decided that you needed to share your guns and food with them and they with you?

              The other point is that many may well have large caches of ammunition; but with that, how defensive can we really be, once our locations are spotted. Basically, a defense of a large invasion force and the subsequent strike patrols would demand that we defenders be extremely mobil, moving our munitions from place to place and striking at the enemy as an insurgent force. With today's technology, almost any concentration of defensive force would be wiped out by combined air and ground concentrations. You or I or any "one" of us would stand little opportunity sitting in one spot with our 50-cal and several thousand rounds of ammo. Surely we'd take out a few of the enemy, but that of course would only make you a sitting target for a field gun, chopper, or missile.

              Overall we'd be a real pain in the a$$, but not one that wasn't somewhat discounted as the invasion plans came together. If an enemy really wanted to wipe us out there's many methods of doing so, including chemical, bacteriorlogical, and, if absolutely insane, NUCLEAR war.

              Best kind of war is one where they simply buy us out, destroying our economy, corrupting our politicians, industrialists, bankers, and moreover forcing us into a conscious-less society that thinks in terms of greed. Great country's generally do not fall from external enemies, they fall from within.

              BTW, I'm not against guns, owning guns, or using them for fun, food, friendship,and even defense. I don't like using them for political purposes though.

              CWS
              Last edited by CWSmith; 10-09-2011, 04:42 PM. Reason: Mispellings

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Why No Invasion?

                This might be of interest about America's involvement in the Pacific prior to December 7, 1941.
                HISTORY: American Volunteer Group (Flying Tigers)

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Why No Invasion?

                  Hey, if it helps keep legal guns in the hands of good Americans I'd give'em some wiggle room. I suppose you don't think it would be wise to keep Americans armed in the event of a Night of the Living Dead scenario come true? I have seem plenty of movies about zombie hoards, they do exist.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Why No Invasion?

                    I myself am depending on Mike Moore ,and His band of soft boys to defend Us.
                    I can build anything You want , if you draw a picture of it , on the back of a big enough check .

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Why No Invasion?

                      Originally posted by Frankiarmz View Post
                      Hey, if it helps keep legal guns in the hands of good Americans I'd give'em some wiggle room. I suppose you don't think it would be wise to keep Americans armed in the event of a Night of the Living Dead scenario come true? I have seem plenty of movies about zombie hoards, they do exist.
                      Today is World Zombie day, go figure.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Why No Invasion?

                        I believe we would have given the Japs a good fight back in ww2 on our turf. Thank God for our military we didn't have to find out.
                        With todays weapons no way. As CWS pointed out our enemies foreign and domestic can and are taking us down internaly. Haven't given up hope, I believe the same power that helped form this GREAT country can save it if the people wise up.

                        wookie

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Why No Invasion?

                          Originally posted by wookie View Post
                          I believe we would have given the Japs a good fight back in ww2 on our turf. Thank God for our military we didn't have to find out.
                          With todays weapons no way. As CWS pointed out our enemies foreign and domestic can and are taking us down internaly. Haven't given up hope, I believe the same power that helped form this GREAT country can save it if the people wise up.

                          wookie
                          If the power you are referring to is God then I agree. Man has proven to be a big disappointment as far as the situation we are in and any possible solutions. I ask folks here and in my everyday life, "By what means can out problems be solved?". I gotten no positive rely, inflation, unemployment, out of control spending, waste, fraud, things seem too far gone. More and more folks are wise to all the wrong things going on but are still powerless to change them. We have two choices to run our country and both have worked to put us where we are today. I have zero confidence either will do what's right for us and our country. The best I can hope for is to vote out the current bum(s) and vote in new ones who will do little to nothing better. Nothing funny about this whole situation, what lies ahead is frightening. Frank

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Why No Invasion?

                            Originally posted by James P View Post
                            I seriously doubt a group of deer hunters would deter an invading army. Look at Iraq, they were heavily armed when we invaded. It didn't deter Bush/Cheney.

                            I think someone is having a Red Dawn moment.
                            Comparing Pearl Harbor to today's war of Iraq is comparing apples to oranges. We didn't have 3/4 of the technology back then, as we do today.

                            You took the story out of context, as they were implying boots on the ground in America would of been devastating to the Japs, and they are correct.

                            If another country invaded us, and put boots on the ground, they would be in serious trouble, as more people than you think are heavily armed.

                            Try coming to a gun show in Pennsylvania, as seeing all the freaks that go...it will make the hair on the back of your neck stand-up. I don't know where these people come from, but these people are hard-core.
                            Last edited by Flux; 10-08-2011, 02:12 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Why No Invasion?

                              Originally posted by CWSmith View Post
                              Nice story... but that is all that it is.

                              First off, the attack on Pearl wasn't meant to be a complete surprise... it was the incompetance of the Japanese diplomatic office in Washington that failed to deliver a declaration to the White House before the raid was actually launched. Lack of communication led to an embarrassing and dreaded realization that the attack, without warning, would be a blow that would have a terrible backlash to the Japanese. If you don't know any history, then you don't have any realization of the steps that led the Japanese to strike Pearl Harbor.

                              The attacking force was a navel air strike force. It did not have enough manpower to invade anything more than a small city. It also did not have enough fuel for it's ships or aircraft to pull off a strike on the west coast and it certainly didn't have enough munitions to make the added journey worth the effort. Logistics is primary to any invasion scenario and the Japanese force simply did not have that capability. One might also consider that after the initial strike, it realized that it did not hit any of our carrier force... which was a significant "miss". That "miss" caused them considerable concern, dramatically realized at Midway several months later.

                              Second. At the time, December 7, 1941 we were not in Europe with much more than military "diplomacy". Most, if not all, the shipment of material to England was via commercial shipping. Even with commercial shipping under U-boat attacks off the Carolina and Gulf coasts, we still did not go to war in Europe. The attack on Pearl Harbor is what moved us out of our complacency and moved us into war in both the Atlantic and the Pacific.

                              Third, while the number of arms in the U.S. can be thought of as alarming to some nations, it is our military might that keeps are perceived enemies at bay and NOT the NRA or the large number of households that are armed. While a small military force might well take some consideration in it's dealings on a particular area/target, a major well-coordinated force would not be hesitant should the U.S. military not be in existance. Military action in either defence or offense requires not only fire-power but also communications and precise coordination of forces against determined targets.

                              While there may be hundreds of thousands of us with our weapons and ammunition caches, how well do you think we could coordinate defense on a wide area? Cell phones would be almost the first target to go. While cell phones are still active in Afganistan and Iraq, one must not forget that we are not a merciless force looking to overwhelm those countrys. We have not destroyed their communications infrastructure and are in fact, helping to build and enhance it. But a force determined to destroy the U.S., would not be so inclined I think. Once communications and electricity are denied, an enemy would have only to wait a short time for the resulting chaos to overwhelm the remnants of our society. Our guns and munitions would most likely be used to defend ourselves against our neighbors. He!!, we can't get along in peaceful times and most of us can't follow any sort of "government"... can you imagine what you'd be like if your neighbors all got to together and decided that you needed to share your guns and food with them and they with you?

                              The other point is that many may well have large caches of ammunition; but with that, how defensive can we really be, once our locations are spotted. Basically, a defense of a large invasion force and the subsequent strike patrols would demand that we defenders be extremely mobil, moving our munitions from place to place and striking at the enemy as an insurgent force. With today's technology, almost any concentration of defensive force would be wiped out by combined air and ground concentrations. You or I or any "one" of us would stand little opportunity sitting in one spot with our 50-cal and several thousand rounds of ammo. Surely we'd take out a few of the enemy, but that of course would only make you a sitting target for a field gun, chopper, or missile.

                              Overall we'd be a real pain in the a$$, but not one that wasn't somewhat discounted as the invasion plans came together. If an enemy really wanted to wipe us out there's many methods of doing so, including chemical, bacteriorlogical, and, if absolutely insane, NUCLEAR war.

                              Best kind of war is one where they simply buy us out, destroying our economy, corrupting our politicians, industrialists, bankers, and moreover forcing us into ad conscious-less society thanks thinks in terms of greed. Great country's generally do not fall from external enemies, they fall from within.

                              BTW, I'm not against guns, owning guns, or using them for fun, food, friendship,and even defense. I don't like using them for political purposes though.

                              CWS
                              No offense but...WOW!

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X