Will American Soil ever be Invaded?

Who is fighting in a war? This is debating man. Sorry I write so much, it just flies out of my brain. I guess I miss school and having people to talk to about this stuff. Didn't mean to come across too arrogant with my Degree specifics. To just say you've got a Major in History means nothing. At least you know where I'm coming from. I don't need to discover the Parthians because I already know about them. With the whole library thing I wasn't telling you to go and re-check your facts - you made it sound as if you gathered a lot of info off the net, and if that were the case I was pointing out the library is a much better place to do research(depends on the school though too). You're in school, might as well right? You'll miss it when its over.

After Parthia was overthrown the 2nd Persian Empire was still trouble for Rome. These powers are not studied like Rome because there is not that much information on them. If you look it up though, you will see that the east was a thorn in Rome's side.

Thank you. A thorn in Rome's side indeed.

I know you were not literally referring to modern day Germans either. Yes many historians use the term, but unless you provide a disclaimer its wrong. Its wrong because you imply (and you did) that the Germanic tribes were united in some way - politically, socially, or by language - against Rome. Simply put, the tribes east of the Rhine were completely autonomous. They did not speak the same languages, they lived and fought on their own and against each other, and some payed tribute to Rome at one time and others didn't (the Roman frontier did exist beyond the Rhine at one point). Its best to refer to specific tribes by name if possible. Whether you see the terms Germanic or Germans also depends on the particular English translation you're reading (another beef historians have). Often Germanic/German gets translated out of Greek or Latin texts simply to better describe the present day area they came from. Real historians read the original greek or latin translations. They say you can't even begin to really understand classics until you read the original translations.

Regarding your views about the US, its great you're patriotic but man you really must have never been anywhere else in the world, or even spoken to someone from another country (and if so, asked them more than "so, do you have McDonalds and Coke there too?" :grinno: ). I'm sure the Belgians, Dutch, and the French are very proud that American's love their french fries so much...er, freedom fries. Please, when you get your degree, take some time off and go on a nice overseas trip. Broaden your mind. You'll see there's a lot more to their lives than Coca-cola and cheeseburgers.

And do you think the top 50 "American" companies are owned by the US or something, or entirely owned by americans????????


And hey lamborghinirocks, you won't notice them coming if they're already living here.

I'm not tryin to Bash You... Ok, the Tribes I am talknig about include both Visigoth and Ostrogoth, Vandals, Franks, Alemani, Burgundians, Bavarians, Lombards, etc. (sorry may have missed a few). I was simply classifying these Indo-European peoples into a simplified group based on laguage (they all spoke a similar tounge also simliar to moder German and Scandinavian, which also implies a common root language). This also implies the possibility of common ancestry. I was in no way trying to imply political unity, I though it was understood that the "Germans" were barbarians and a buch of scattered tribes, hence the "break-up" of western lands by them into small kingdoms.
I'm sorry I also thought that by the knowledge I have posted you would have already realized I am no amaturer and don't rely on the Inernet as my source of info... and so I also thought you'd realize what facts I would be aware of... I thought it was pretty well known that Flavius Aetius in the 5th century first united with the Huns against the Visigoths and so subdued them for tribute, yet later allied with the Visigoths against the Huns to stop their growing expanse. This is all known to any Roman historian... Rome was overthorwn becuase by the 5th century the "Germans" were serving in vast numbers in their army, and Odacer was actually an Army officer when he overthrew the emporer, not just a random barbarian. I thought my level of knowledge was appparent and you'd assume I know what I am talking about. And in any records you will see the stalemate in the east, Parthia, and later Persia, I am right about that... just wanted to point out Rome did not have ULTIMATE SUPREMECY.
Ok, to America, alright, highest GNP in the World, Highest GNP per capita. Highest Defense spending in the World. Most techologically advaced in the World. Only nation w/ GPS. Inventer's of PC, Windows, Internet. Our entertainment is exported to the World. Forbes list of billionaires, more are American than anything else, Bill Gates, Paul Allen, the Walton Family. World's largest companies, GM, Ford, ExxonMobile, Viacom, Disney, AOL Time Warner, Microsoft, Wal-Mart. The World's Largest EVERYTHING is American. America leads the rest follow, nuff said.

Article looks interesting (I see where you get a lot of your points from).

http://www.voiceoffreedom.com/archives/AUarticles/gulliver.html

The US is indeed a major influence in the world, a leading influence no doubt. Yet one thing I didn't like was how the author quickly skipped over the part about nuclear Armageddon. He's talks about how the US could never be challenged militarily, then sort of admits it could actually be completely wiped off the face of the earth by a nuclear barrage but that would mean everyone else would too, so basically it will never happen and thats why the US could never lose. I kind of brought this up before when I referred to Russia.

Indeed Russia is in "shambles" as you put it. It appears to many people in the west that half the people in Russia can't afford or find bread and the other half are alcoholics. Nevertheless, Russia still has a lot of its former military might. Look at nuclear submarines for a sec Joe. Just one of these badass subs carry something like 16 ballistic missiles - one of which could wipe out an entire State. As much of a shadow of its former state Russia may appear, they still have many nuclear subs in their arsenal. Think about it, one sub could wipe out the entire eastern seaboard. Sure, a country like Russia would gain nothing expect mutual devastation for deliberately doing so - nevertheless they could if they wanted to. One order, thats it. Or if some rogue general or crazy breakaway republic terrorist group got a hold of a sub it would cause disaster. The Roman's never faced this everyday possibility of instant doom. And by the way, Russia may seem like a lame duck these days, but they're the only country keeping the international space station afloat right now. You've got to give them that.

As far as English goes, you surely can't take credit for starting it! :grinno: And one could easily argue that the British did more in the worldwide spread of the English language. The author states the British never took English culture or language beyond their militaristic colonial frontiers. Still, back in those days when the US was busy with manifest destiny the British were sailing around the entire world and exposing foreign cultures to the western-English way for the first time. These days computers and other media can zip english culture to literally every corner of the world. Sure it sounds grand and unprecedented (and it is), but I believe the author glossed over the Brit's far too easily. They were the ones who rolled up their sleeves and started it, when it was the most difficult. If you look at culture or history, you'll see that up until the mid-late twentieth century the history of western civilization has been the history of the world according to white English scholars. It is by no means completely accurate, but it shows how much influence the British had on our culture as well as many other cultures. The history we study in a sense belongs to them (and thats why other people are now beginning to question it and change it!).

This kind of leads me to what my thesis would be against your argument (since I'm playing devil's advocate). Human civilization has seen more change in the last 100 (even 50) years than over the past three thousand years. Modern countries like the US are able to dwarf the achievements of the past because they have so much more technology at their disposal. That is what makes the Ancient's discovery and mastery of mathematics, geometry, architecture, primitive warfare, and astrology almost unfathomable. Rome influenced its known world (as far as they were concerned) for nearly a thousand years, and utterly dominated it for a solid four hundred years. If America is to be the next Rome, it must first past the test of time. And 14 years of sole superpower or "hyperpower" dominance just doesn't cut it in the grand scheme of human history. If nothing more, let a few hundred years of natural disasters go by and then see what the situation is. Its only fair if we're talking this way. :2cents:

lol, ok, I understand where you are coming from... a lot of what we are talking about is opinionated.
I have to agree with much of waht you have said, but different things I see from different point of view.
English being a global language was in no doubt started by the Brittish Empire, in fact, if it wasn't for that entity there'd most likely be no America, for they paved the way with Gold. But in one of my posts I believed I refered to the Anglo-Saxon empire, which existed then, and still exists now, just with a different nation at the helm. Power passed smoothly from them to us. It was the Brittish that showed the World that power could be weilded softly (through economics and culture). I just believe that America has taken that to another level. We sit so much farther above our nearest rivals than the British ever did.
Ok, in my opinion, having the ability to inflect destruction on someone else, at the cost of one's own destruction is not an argument for power. Just because North Korea can wipe out our West Coast in an instant doesn't mean they are anywhere near as powerful as we are. It's hard to explain... ok, so if you have this martial arts master, who is unbeatable, he is too quick to be shot, whatever. The only way to beat him would be to engage him in combat while having a bomb strapped to your chest, then, boom, you're both gone. I don't see this as a valid argument for saying a can beat the master or I am as powerful or equal to him. But I guess it is a matter of perspective. And then again, beside Russia I don't think any nation actually has enough Nukes to completely wipe us of the map, we are the third largest nation in population and forth in size.
Ok, so to balance my statement, we may not yet be Rome, but America is the biggest thing on the face of the Earth since Rome.
Oh, and Alexander the Great only had a what, roughly ten year Empire, and he changed the World forever, so I think America's 50 or so years will leave their mark... The Internet, Hollywood, etc are examples.
Always good to hear from ya.

As for when I think the Roman Empire "fell" I can't really say because it didn't happen all at once. It was a steady social and political decline over many centuries - and in fact we could essentially substitute the word "decline" for "change" to better understand what happened to the Empire.

I would definitely say that the age of Constantine was the Empire's last hurrah! But even then we're looking at an Empire that had been culturally divided from east to west since the third century AD, and it wasn't even a pagan empire anymore. (Rome wasn't even the home of the emperor anymore!)

So although I can't say when the Empire fell, I think the significant changes that would later snuf out the empires ability to exist began to arise following the so-called reign of the "Good Emperors" - beginning with Trajan in 98 AD and up to Marcus Aurelius in 180. It was during this time that the citizens of the Empire enjoyed relative internal peace, a strong economy, and most importantly political stability. You don't hear about any usurpers during these decades. As far as I'm concerned after Constantine's reign every emperor looks like a usurper to me (heck even his sons). So I guess I'm saying the fall of Rome began in the late second and early third century AD, around the time of the Severan dynasty. Which isn't to say the dynasty was bad because they were in fact quite an educated and cultured bunch who supported the arts and writing. Yet even these emperors couldn't avoid the deeper internal problems which were then emerging.

What would you say?

Is the Empire in the fifth century AD the same Empire Augustus created??

Alexander the Great only had a what, roughly ten year Empire, and he changed the World forever, so I think America's 50 or so years will leave their mark...

this is a very interesting point, will definitely discuss further with you. lates.

And hey lamborghinirocks, you won't notice them coming if they're already living here.

I know this is isn't directed towards me, but do you think we would really miss the movement of 1/6 of the earths population? It wouldn't take someone with much intelligence to notice that big of an increase in the population.

DVS,
I'm glad you will respond to my Alexander point... though it was a good one.
What I was kind of getting at is that some people, I think you included, but could be wrong, say the Roman empire lasted til 1453, the fall of Constantinople to the Ottomans. The Byzantines even called themselves Romans I believe. I disagree with this. The empire in the East was a mere Shadow of the former Rome. It retained hardly anything from it's predecessor. My main point is that if anything this was a GREEK empire, that is the language they spoke and the culture they followed. So although Constantine was the last breathe in a decaying empire, I have to agree with others that 476 was the fall of the ROMAN empire, when Odacer forced Romulus Agustus from the thrown. This was the End of the Latin empire that had ruled the World, and so the end. A peice of it may have survied as a political unit, that's it. It's like saying the Moorish, Mameluke empires in the Mid East were still considered the Arab empire of the 700-800s. They were Muslim and arose out of the Arab's empire ploitical leftovers, but they are not the same empire... your thoughts?

Oh, and Alexander the Great only had a what, roughly ten year Empire, and he changed the World forever, so I think America's 50 or so years will leave their mark... The Internet, Hollywood, etc are examples.

I get what you meant by this point in terms of America leaving its mark. But, my fascination isn't really with your point but how you made it. Remember that Hellenistic culture didn't take root through the eastern Mediterranean, Egypt, and the Middle East during Alexander's time. It was the successor states of his generals that literally spread and embedded Hellenistic culture in that region. Alexander for his part actually turned his back on his Greco-Macedonian culture in favour of Persian culture following Darius' death. He allowed Persian's into his court, married (and had most of his men marry) a Persian wife, and its often argued that the morale of Alexander's army quit on him (at the end of the earth) because they were alienated by his strange behaviour. Thats all I wanted to point out, that Alexander himself wasn't responsible for spreading greek culture into that region (as much as he was responsible for the collapse of the Persian Empire). And then you've got many people who will argue that Hellenistic culture was destined to travel into that region at some point in time. Al was at the right place at the right time. The most interesting thing about our discussion is just how lasting the US's contribution will be over time. Its kinda crazy to think about it - democracy has survived from the time of the Greeks, in addition to their popular plays, poems, culture, etc... Will people TWO THOUSAND YEARS from now be watching copies of The Terminator?!?!??

And hey, that popular blockbuster from '84 was created and filmed by a Canadian and it starred an Austrian! :grinno: Popular American culture eh? :)

I've never heard anyone claim the Roman Empire lasted until 1453. If you go by the last "official" emperor Romulus Augustus (oh the irony) as you mentioned it was 476. But take a look at the last few names on that list (including the Western Empire) and you'll see that they were nobody's - not even Romans! Like I said, I think the Empire was toast after Constantine - and even under him it was so different because you had the East vs. West, Greek vs. Latin, Christianity vs. pagan split which had existed for like a century become very clear cut. Thats why historians sometimes classify the third century AD on (definitely the fourth century on) as the later Roman Empire, because its so different from the earlier one. I don't know about you but I give the REAL empire lasting up to 180 AD, and technically on paper up until Constantine's consolidation of the empire in the mid fourth century AD. After it split again, people can call it whatever they want. Its just a bunch of usurpers screwing around.

lol... nice, and thanks for the response.

Will American Soil ever be Invaded? The answer is YES! The invasion of American soil is inevitable, whether it happens in 2006, 2010, 2030, etc.. It is bound to happen. Europe, Russia, Asia, Africa, Middle East, & South America have all had their go at it. Next, i believe it will be America's turn. In fact, many believe (as do I) That World War Three will take place on American soil. Folks, World War Three is at hand at this very moment. When China attacks Taiwan, we MUST go to Taiwan's aid. Most people don't realize this but: CHINA ALSO HAS ALLIES!! For example, Singapore, Russia (we are not aware of this though. ), India, & I'm pretty sure Iraq & Iran will be against us. After we go to war with China over Taiwan (That will be the trigger of WW3) Russia will tell China not to worry; we will make a suprise attack on the U.S... Suprise attack indeed. Russia will most likely use military invasion on the U.S. That will be our downfall. America will lose it's economic & military power, as we are the "secret Babylon" we must perish in order for the Rapture to begin. Anyway - The whole world will be in complete shock - No country has ever attempted and succeded at invading America.

This is just MY opinion.. Sorry if I offended anyone, it was'nt meant to be offensive... :)

Why would China attack Taiwan?

becuase it was part of china but in their civil war ppl who wanted a democratic country fled there after the communist victory, now they are a semi-independent country and we(America) is selling them weapons, and China might invade taiwan incase china thinks they are becoming to independent or declare themselfs completely free of china.

This topic is one of the few things where previous history and experience gives you absolutely no guidance on probably or unprobably future occurances. Can it happen? Yes. Will it? No one knows that until it does. I think 11 Sep 01 woke a few people up to this fact.

Russia will tell China not to worry; we will make a suprise attack on the U.S... Suprise attack indeed. Russia will most likely use military invasion on the U.S. That will be our downfall.
:lol2: Russia invade the US :lol2: thanks for the laugh

China could invade us. for every 1 of us theres 40 of them I saw it on discovery chennel they did a thing on country growth over the past 10 years.

[edit]

Will American Soil ever be Invaded? The answer is YES! The invasion of American soil is inevitable, whether it happens in 2006, 2010, 2030, etc.. It is bound to happen. Europe, Russia, Asia, Africa, Middle East, & South America have all had their go at it. Next, i believe it will be America's turn. In fact, many believe (as do I) That World War Three will take place on American soil. Folks, World War Three is at hand at this very moment. When China attacks Taiwan, we MUST go to Taiwan's aid. Most people don't realize this but: CHINA ALSO HAS ALLIES!! For example, Singapore, Russia (we are not aware of this though. ), India, & I'm pretty sure Iraq & Iran will be against us. After we go to war with China over Taiwan (That will be the trigger of WW3) Russia will tell China not to worry; we will make a suprise attack on the U.S... Suprise attack indeed. Russia will most likely use military invasion on the U.S. That will be our downfall. America will lose it's economic & military power, as we are the "secret Babylon" we must perish in order for the Rapture to begin. Anyway - The whole world will be in complete shock - No country has ever attempted and succeded at invading America.

This is just MY opinion.. Sorry if I offended anyone, it was'nt meant to be offensive... :)

I have heard many different versions of how the end times will be played out. (your version included) . The biggest problem with that version is the large role of the USSR. Things have changed over there. Russia is no longer a major player. I doubt that the US will continue to be a major player forever. I don't think the US will have a very large part at all in the end times other than the amount of Christians here praying.

Just my :2cents:.

China could invade us. for every 1 of us theres 400 of them I saw it on discovery chennel they did a thing on country growth over the past 10 years.

Things like this make me feel bad about the education system :disappoin

1.3 billion to 300 million. Last I checked thats just over 4 to 1 not 400 to 1. The ratio is only going to get close - not further away.

China's population will be passed by India in the next twenty years (that one child policy is affecting the growth). Nobody is claiming India is invading anywhere. There is a lot more to the military then just a mass of bodies.













Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)

I was invaded once and ended up with an American soil. He he.

Sry missd the replys on this thread I meant to say 40 to 1 not 400 didnt c the extra zero there lol.

Sry missd the replys on this thread I meant to say 40 to 1 not 400 didnt c the extra zero there lol.

The ratio is 4 to 1. Not 400 to 1, or 40 to 1.













Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)

it doesn't matter what the ratio is, there whole population wouldn't be in the army coming to invade us, and the number of soliders in an army is mattering less and less, espiecally with all the technology and firepower we have

well numbers could work againts China, try imagining moving them all.

your avatar would do fine :naughty:

The way politics are going in this country I think that America will fall from an invasion. It won't be from another country, but from within. Why would somebody else need to invade us to destroy this country? Seems to me they don't have to because this country is destroying itself.
Also, if several countries did invade us we would nuke them into the stone age. I think the U.S. has enough nukes to destroy the world 32 times over. So, if we're going to go down then we are taking everybody else with us.

it wouldn't be an invasion if it came from within this country, it would a revolution

even if a country was invading us, we would only use our nukes in ultimate desperation, because of the Mutually Assured Destruction principle, which basically is that if we use nukes we're going to get nuked ourselves, because even if we are fighting a non-nuclear country, they'lll have alllies with nukes, so its not good for either side if nuclear weapons are involved because both sides would be completely destroyed

in the great scheme of things america isnt doing all that well compared to past world powers, Rome lasted 1200 years, in the first 900 they only fought 1 major war, 300 years later the roman empire fell. we last 1/3 as long as rome and we think we are forever invinceable. no. The way things are looking in 1000 years, students could be looking at the US as being the most powerful country in the world for just 400 years. They would cover our countries history in a little over 2 weeks. We feel like we have been around forever because we are alive in our time, but in the large scheme of things we have not been powerful, and may not be powwerful for all that long. Especially if we keep fighting with everyone.

I guess we will see in 1000 years.

No country is going to invade the USA anytime soon. Why? Because an invading army would be spotted by satellite or radar before they made it anywhere near here. And if an invading force did decide to press on? You can almost bet the purpose would be to start a nuclear war, in which case, every living thing on earth loses.
If anything were to happen along the lines of an invasion/revolution, it would likely be sparked by a major terrorist attack, something that makes 9/11 look like a fender bender. In the ensuing chaos, i could see how an onslaught of attacks by sleeper cells could get the ball rolling. Remember, there are terrorists already in our country, plotting and scheming their next attack. Sadly, it's no longer a question of if, but when?

hmmm good question... even the roman empire fell eventually...

...although that could be attributed to over expansion... you know .. sending your armies into other peoples countries when they didn't want them there... time after time... oh and a social decay on the inside... where their democratic system fell apart as the people running it became more and more corrupt and self serving... that wouldn't happen to the US though..

as far as standing armies goes? i think the only way would be if the US pissed off so many other countries so much that they eventually united against them, in which case a technological advantage may be overcome by superior numbers and resources.. a bit like germany in ww2.. but hey the bad guys always have concentration camps right? where human rights are ignored and all that, and that couldn't happen in the US.... but in Cuba...hmmm

i don't think north american soil will be invaded because before the rest of the world gets round to clubbing together and invading, america will self destruct, like all empires have throughout history. Another huge economic crash is on its way, which is why other developed countries are moving away from you. Someone made a post saying the world couldn't survive without Microsoft. This is untrue- no one needs Microsoft.
America is going to go belly up in 50 to 70 years when we run out of oil. It refuses to cut down emissions, pulling out of every treaty designed to slow down global warming. The rest of the world could function completely without oil in 50 years but we can't do it without the spport of the united states which, as a country is too lazy and selfish to do anything to help even though it is the most responsible with the highest emissions that are still increasing. All of this, and your corrupt and evil foreign policy has made the USA the most hated country on Earth.
If America was invaded do you really think that your citizens could defend youselves with your rifles and whatnot? Just look at how many fellow north Americans you kill with those guns every year- in a situation where everyone would be panicking and scared americans would shoot more fellow americans than the invading force. If your highly trained army was unable to defeat a relatively small force of Vietnamese wearing pyjamas then your civilians wouldn't have a chance against highly trained soldiers. In the Iraq fiasco, more British troops have been killed by USA friendly fire than by Iraqis.
But anyway, I don't think that North american soil will be invaded anytime soon. But maybe you should think about why so many people hate the usa- a question that no-one seemed to think to ask after september the 11th. These terror attacks were a great tragedy but the way your government responded did nothing to help you. What better way to further anger Arabic people than mindlessly bombing a whole country and killing thousands of people who had nothing to do with Osama Bin Laden?

boy i can see you getting some mindless reponses to that post!

in case u didnt notice our country was invaded on o i think the date was 7-11-01


i hope your not refering ot 9/11. at whihc point i would tell you...thoes Islama Facists where trained on how to fly an airplane in the US. they went to college in the US. we gave them an education and the nthey blind sided us with an attack like that. no that wasnt an invasian. that was an economical attack. they where trying to destroy our economy thike killing as much of us as they could in the process. they wheren't trying to gain american soil for their own bennifit.

i will tell you this. it would take one very large army to stop all the rednecks in this country form killing off any army. really we dont need a national guard for anytohing other than preventing lootings during major natural disastors. we could ban togather all the rednecks (not offending, its true, i would be in it too) in gorrila abmishing platunes with their remintons and 12 guage shot guns and F350's jacked up 10 inches with 44'' bogers. i myself would have my potato gun fireing chunks of potatos at (as we clocked it) them going 240km/hr with not too bad of acuracy (when you live by some woods and have nothing else to do...you take the time to make very accurate and powerful spud guns).

I support the movement in the middle east by bush... but after 9/11 when bush announced they where invading afganistan i said "just give it a 20million dollar prize, and send anyone who thinks they can find osama over there with a lifted truck and their choice of artillary and give htem transmortation and they'd be found in no time." i know rednecks that know more about hunting and tracking than colen powel could ever dream of knowing....

still had a good point with friendly fire though... have no doubt rednecks would shoot better than the us army. but they may well shoot each other.

vietnam had more US deaths to friendly fire too.

As for the whole roman empire theory... it is the liberalism that iwll brin this country down. i feel we are safe for another 4 years...its in '08 when the democrats drop the H-bomb that i am scared tree huggers, clinton lovers, and womens rights activists will come out of the woods and put the first (and worse) female president in office.

There would never be an invasion before a big bombing operation. They would have to do the "Shock and Awe" type thing we did in Iraq, before they could try to send troops to take over.

As long as we have that Star Wars program up and running soon its all good :D

in the great scheme of things america isnt doing all that well compared to past world powers, Rome lasted 1200 years, in the first 900 they only fought 1 major war, 300 years later the roman empire fell. we last 1/3 as long as rome and we think we are forever invinceable. no. The way things are looking in 1000 years, students could be looking at the US as being the most powerful country in the world for just 400 years. They would cover our countries history in a little over 2 weeks. We feel like we have been around forever because we are alive in our time, but in the large scheme of things we have not been powerful, and may not be powwerful for all that long. Especially if we keep fighting with everyone.


ok i just read the whole thread.... and I think people are putting to much emphasis (sp) on time. Like i think DVS said... the world has developed more in the last 50 years than 3000 years before that.

That means the 14 years that the US has bin the sole superpower, is really worth alot more than just 14 years (based on the 50/3000 estimate, that 14 years is the equivelent of 840. But i dont want to be extreme) because the only reason Rome's empire lasted so long is because there was no technology. They couldn't fly to China and bomb them in one day.... their troops had to WALK to battle, they had to WALK to whatever part of the world they wanted to conquer. If they wanted to conquer asia, just the walk there would take their troops a year when we can accomplish the same (and more) in one day. Also it was easier for them to be a great empire, because they only knew about like 20% of the world, and the rest of the world didnt know them. They didnt have to defend themselves or even start conflicts with Asia or all the other parts of the world because they were too far away and unknown. Now the US has to consider the ENTIRE WORLD, not just the mediterranean area. Thats a HUGE difference... and its alot more difficult and volatile now


Time isnt really irrelevent in comparing empires, but you have to bring it into perspective. Having an empire 2000 years ago last long is much easier than it would be to keep an empire now a days.

True.

But The Romans Had The Vikings, The Greeks, The Egyptians (all Be It Conquered By The Greeks) The Moors, And The Germanic Tribes (including The Goths Who Had Migrated To The Transylvania Region) As Neighbours.

America Has Near Neighbours Of Canada And Mexico.

ALSO
50/3000 is a little out of whack, so too would trying to equate 14 years to 840.

mathmatics, literature, chemistry, physics, biology, astronomy, navigation, mechanics... all around long before 1950... in fact most "discoveries" in the last 50 years have merely been further enhancements on previous theory and practice. While it's true that there have been a lot of discoveries and developments in the last 50 years... i don't think any match literature or the wheel for example.

equating time of civilisation power to world knowlege development is a false economy. While it's true that we are now in a global situation and we can move armies faster, it does not mean that conquest is any more likely, in fact i would say it is less likely. for some countries war is a chice, and those are the countries that do not have a fear. it's a lot different to the continuous conquest type wars of a few hundred years ago.... you were much more likely to be toppled as a superpower if you were constantly at war with countries worth fighting.

yeah true but in modern times neighbors arent really as important because countries 3000 miles away can attack us within an hour or 2

The whole world is our neighbors now

And i just gave the 50/3000 thing as an example remember i said i dont want to be to extreme, but you have to put into perspective.

14 Years... That Means The First Generation Born Into The American Era Are Just Reaching Puberty... Maybe

The Roman Empire Lasted Like 15 Generations Or Something...

Also, Who Aside From Canada Or Mexico Could Invade The Us Within 2 Hours? And What Countries Could Attack Within Two?

China? Russia?

The Only Country With The Sort Of Ability To Attack From That Distance Is Unfortunately The Only One That Frequently Demonstrates It's Will To Attack And Utilise Weapons Of Mass Destruction.... And That Is The United States.

The Only Way That The Us Could Be Toppled Within The Last 14 Years Is If It Shared A Border With China And Got Stuck In A Land War. Isolation Is A Larger Aspect Of Defence Than You Are Giving Credit For. It Has Saved The Us From Attack On Many Occasions And Will Continue To Do So.

The Only Way That The Us Could Be Toppled Within The Last 14 Years Is If It Shared A Border With China And Got Stuck In A Land War. Isolation Is A Larger Aspect Of Defence Than You Are Giving Credit For. It Has Saved The Us From Attack On Many Occasions And Will Continue To Do So.


No doubt... i dont deny that fact. I'm just saying time is worth more now than it was 2000 years ago, maybe its not 50/3000 but even 3,4,5 times 14 is still a big difference

The isolation factor is a BIG one

PERHAPS TIME IS WORTH MORE NOW... IF YOU TAKE INTO ACCOUNT TRANSPORT ETC.

BUT TIME IS WORTH LESS IF YOU CALCULATE IT BY THE FACT THAT MAJOR POWERS HAVENT CLASHED DIRECTLY FOR 50 YEARS.

TIME IS IN FACT WORTH NOTHING IF IN THAT TIME NOBODY IS TRYING TO CONQUER YOUR EMPIRE. IT IS ONLY "ACTIVE" TIME THAT COUNTS IN THAT REGARD. THE us IS YET TO EXPERIENCE IT'S FIRST ATTACK WHERE SOMONE ACTUALLY TRIES TO TAKE THE COUNTRY. THE ROMANS EXPERIENCED MANY CONQUEST TYPE WARS.

ATTACKS ON PEARL HARBOUR AND PARTICULARLY THE WTC ARE HARDLY DESIGNED TO TOPPLE AN EMPIRE.

sorry about caps it usually gets rid of them.

True.


i agree...

America Will Probably Not Be Invaded For Many Years. The Main Risk Is That It Will Crumble As The Rest Of The Worl Turns Away From It And It's Economy Suffers. There Are More Ways To Wage War These Days.

I Do Not Believe That The Us Will Ever Be As Significant As The Roman Empire. And 14 Years Is Nothing.

I think America will fall the way rusia did(money). Through money and debt. We will spend ourselves to death, trying to kill the terorists. I think We will end up in a major depression in which time another country could attack. But I dont know if a country would be able to take over all of america in that time, more likely it would only take a certain portion. Because as america falls financially so does every other country.

what like Alaska? the thing i see though is that the days of conquering the world seem to be pretty much over... well for most countries, the US still invades other countries, so do some third world type countries but they could never attack ummm better equipped significant? countries. so i don't really see the motive for another country to attack america. America may however lose its control over foreign soil and interests overseas, i don't think mainland US will be invaded for a long time. The only forseable reason would be a world war whereby the rest of the world essentially had to stop america.

We've had enough US bashing in this thread. No invasion imminent, the lock however is.













Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)