U.N. Force to disarm America

[Truth Detector]

I think it's a highly plausible scenario actually. but sure, keep on braying like an ass.

That's because you are a moron of epic proportions and prone to uttering incredibly stupid things.

 

[Freddy Figbottom]

No and even if they did...and I shall repeat myself...currently they don't have the naval and air support and the 10 million well trained and supplied solidiers it would take to invade this nation.

And I will repeat as well... what if the federal government is complicit, and is merely seeking U.N. assistance in dealing with "local militant guerillas" or "terrorists".

 

[Freddy Figbottom]

That's because you are a moron of epic proportions and prone to uttering incredibly stupid things.

Right, because the U.N. doesnt exist.

 

[Truth Detector]

What would the gain be? I mean, they'd EACH have to mobilize MILLIONS of troops, and use a magic fucking navy (because even combined, they have what amounts to 2 carriers groups, and we can field 16), spending trillions of dollars to invade a nation of incredibly rebellious and independent minded people (who are also more heavily armed than the actual armies that would be invading). What would they possibly gain from it? Resources? They have enough of those as is, and it's far less expensive getting them then trying to come over here. Strategic locations? What would you need those for if, by an act of Azathoth, you defeated the only military power you would NEED a strategic position around? Markets? They already have free and open markets (relatively speaking) here.

There is no possible gain to be had from spending trillions of dollars and millions of lives trying to conquer America.

***WARNING*** You are attempting to argue with an idiot. This will lead to a never ending circle of stupidity. Do not attempt to argue with idiots. Just point out that they are idiots and pity them.

 

[Truth Detector]

Right, because the U.N. doesnt exist.

 

[Freddy Figbottom]

***WARNING*** You are attempting to argue with an idiot. This will lead to a never ending circle of stupidity. Do not attempt to argue with idiots. Just point out that they are idiots and pity them.

Yes, pity them while they beat your ass. lol.

 

[Lorca]

Sorry, I may have misread the OP then but if the US govt wanted to use the UN to disarm the American people, it would arm the UN ground forces. Do you mean that there just arent enough people in those ground forces? (Or, we're 7 pages in, perhaps you were responding to someone else. If so, my bad.)

Really? I'm a dullard and stupid because I ask questions? I'd hate to be your kid.

I said I didnt know numbers but asked if there were enough. The UN has a body of people to use...if the US govt were to throw it's weight around and commandeer them. Call them what you will, "peacekeepers".....but they could be armed and trained. I"m sure the govt would love to keep that name, as a matter of fact.

Just one more person with insults and no actual substance.

With the stated aims in the poll? Perhaps.

Besides, no "UN force" could get boots on the ground if the US govt itself did not consent. That's why my comment was based on those goals being *US governmental* goals and using UN forces to enforce them since they cant use our own forces against us (Constitutionally and most likely, they would not comply). Just IMO.

No it does not dullard; its enforcement actions can only come from member States usually led by the US who does ALL of the heavy lifting for UN actions since its formation.

Most nations have eviscerated their militaries and do not have the capacity to defend their own borders, let alone, enforce UN actions.

Therefore, the premise of this thread is so incredibly retarded it should be placed in the conspiracy forum.

Dimwit.

ROFLMAO

 

[Lorca]

What if the federal government is complicit? What if they just are wanting U.N. assistance in implementing international environmental laws and handgun reduction initiatives? Are you against the initiatives of the u.n.?

This is what I read into the poll.

It may not have been the intent but that's what it implied to me.

 

[Billy the Great Khan]

What does anyone gain in occupying any territory? control, influence, dominance, the esteem of their people at home?

I suggest you familiarize yourself with reality in general.

I suggest you stop reading books written for children. There is nothing to gain by war with America.

 

[Truth Detector]

Yes, pity them while they beat your ass. lol.

You couldn't beat a wet noodle dimwit.

 

[Billy the Great Khan]

And I will repeat as well... what if the federal government is complicit, and is merely seeking U.N. assistance in dealing with "local militant guerillas" or "terrorists".

So if the most powerful, uncontested, military on the planet can't do the job, what makes you think any other nation would say "Hey, we can do it better, in a land we've never fought in, over thousands of miles of unguarded supply trains, where the only thing we might gain is "influence"!"

 

[Mott the Hoople]

What would the gain be? I mean, they'd EACH have to mobilize MILLIONS of troops, and use a magic fucking navy (because even combined, they have what amounts to 2 carriers groups, and we can field 16), spending trillions of dollars to invade a nation of incredibly rebellious and independent minded people (who are also more heavily armed than the actual armies that would be invading). What would they possibly gain from it? Resources? They have enough of those as is, and it's far less expensive getting them then trying to come over here. Strategic locations? What would you need those for if, by an act of Azathoth, you defeated the only military power you would NEED a strategic position around? Markets? They already have free and open markets (relatively speaking) here.

There is no possible gain to be had from spending trillions of dollars and millions of lives trying to conquer America.

Well said!

 

[Mott the Hoople]

What if the federal government is complicit? What if they just are wanting U.N. assistance in implementing international environmental laws and handgun reduction initiatives? Are you against the initiatives of the u.n.?

Well what if the Easter Bunny develops a hand tossed nuclear weapon? My answer would be the same. I'm willing to take that risk!

 

[Mott the Hoople]

AGAIN, what the fuck would they gain?

NOt to mention the probability of that happening is incredibly remote.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

And I will repeat as well... what if the federal government is complicit, and is merely seeking U.N. assistance in dealing with "local militant guerillas" or "terrorists".

And what if I win the powerball drawing this weekend? Cause it has a greater probability of occuring than your scenario does.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

I suggest you stop reading books written for children. There is nothing to gain by war with America.

Sure there is. Certain death, destruction and anhilation.

 

[Lorca]

LOLOL

"groans"....the very height of skilled debate.

 

[Freddy Figbottom]

I suggest you stop reading books written for children. There is nothing to gain by war with America.

Well according to U.N. initiatives, accepting U.N. environmental and arms laws would help the environment and improve world peace.

And if war with america is so non-advantageous, would you also then recommend disbanding our military, since it's so unnecessary.

And hi damo. I know this is you. This is your style of idiotic fictional "reverse engineering".

 

[Freddy Figbottom]

We have no global enemies. How refreshing that Dickpuncher has set me straight. lol.

 

[Billy the Great Khan]

Well according to U.N. initiatives, accepting U.N. environmental and arms laws would help the environment and improve world peace.

And if war with america is so non-advantageous, would you also then recommend disbanding our military, since it's so unnecessary.

I'd certainly reduce it by metric fuck tons.

And hi damo. I know this is you. This is your style of idiotic fictional "reverse engineering".

You're really fucking stupid.