Which US State would inflict the most deaths on an invading army - Page 3

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Which US State would inflict the most deaths on an invading army (Page 3 of 5)

Posted: 9/22/2005 10:49:37 PM EDT

[#1]

Ofcourse TX would clean house, but don't down play CA. The PRK has very stupid gun laws, however their are a few million in this state who are not sheep! We are however, outnumbered by 10's of millions who are.

Our master plan is to use the sheep as cannon fodder, while the prepared use our bolt actions, 10rd m-1a's, and garands in a delaying action while awaiting reinforcements from AZ, CO, @ TX.

Posted: 9/22/2005 10:58:45 PM EDT

[#2]

Oh man. I know quite a few people here in Florida who own top quality qear and hundreds of 1000s of rounds of ammo.

Yeah...this is in South East Florida too.

A fight here...? In South East Florida...? You bet your freaking ass!!

Z

Posted: 9/22/2005 11:09:58 PM EDT

[#3]

Quoted:
i wanted to say wyoming but then i rememberd the population there and unless you armed the antelope you just wouldnt have the numbers. i use to live there so i know how it is

LOL!

Yep.
I'd be fighting in the SE with my crew. We all have personal arsenals.

We can hit a thing or two also :)

ETA: woot, post 556

Posted: 9/22/2005 11:35:28 PM EDT

[#4]

i use to stay every summer down in centinial(sp?) down in the SE corner of the state. that place is still in the 1880s.

AZ doesnt have a hope unless a certain majority learn how to speak english and do other kinds of shooting besides drive by.

Posted: 9/23/2005 12:56:55 AM EDT

[#5]

AZ and Texas. Shit...if we could only hook up with Alaska!

Posted: 9/23/2005 1:15:05 AM EDT

[#6]

Quoted:
AZ and Texas. Shit...if we could only hook up with Alaska!

You do every winter when half the state moves back down to AZ, why do you think AZ is suck a gun friendly place?, we are rubbin off on yas.

Posted: 9/23/2005 1:28:48 AM EDT

[#7]

Quoted:
Quoted:
TX

I dont think any civilians could stop an invading army with small arms alone. Cause alot or trouble and kill alot of soldiers but not stop them.

Ask the soviets about how that worked out in Afghanistan/Chechnya RPGs, Stinger AAMs, mortars, landmines.....

Ask our own army about how that worked out in Vietnam The enemy had....RPGs, Mortars, Recoilless Rifles, Mines, Mig-17s, Mig-21s, Katusha Rockets, Numerous conventional artillery, PT-76 light tanks, Heavy Machine guns, ......

Ask the Brits how that worked out in America We had numerous cannon, heavy bombardment mortars, A large fleet of powerfull warships(French) just when we needed them most.

You need to find better analogys....in each war, heavy weapons played a critical role.

The Afghans were getting slaughtered by Hind-d Gunships that were able to stay out of rifle range and attack with impunity.....Untill we supplied stingers and improved RPGs to the Mujis.

The Vietnamese made extensive use of all sorts of heavy weapons.

In each case powerful outside forces supplied heavy weapons to the "rebels"

On the other hand, in our Civil War one side was at a disinct diavantage in heavy metal.

I still think NH can kick all of yous ass's....

Posted: 9/23/2005 1:29:50 AM EDT

[#8]

Indiana would do good but I think Texas would do a little better

Posted: 9/23/2005 1:44:04 AM EDT

[#9]

texas and tennessee. keeping the homeland defended.

Posted: 9/23/2005 4:24:00 AM EDT

[#10]

Texas ISN'T stopping the invaders right now!

What makes you think it would be different?

Posted: 9/23/2005 4:27:59 AM EDT

[#11]

Quoted:
Texas ISN'T stopping the invaders right now!

What makes you think it would be different?

uh....

what?

Posted: 9/23/2005 4:31:00 AM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:
Texas hands down. Remember the Alamo! I'm not so sure about Florida. It seems to me that you have a lot of retirees from New England and Cuban immigrants there. I really don't think they'd be very motivated or effective against an invading force.

Basically, BushCountry would defend everyone else http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/vote2004/countymap.htm
I'd like to think that Georgia would be in the top 10, but we probably have too many Lib-tards in Atlanta. Besides, we couldn't defend Atlanta the last time a foreign army invaded it.

You've obviously never spent any quality time in south Florida, have you? Those retirees and Cubans, etc. all drive like sprayed roaches. Hell, they would probably account for more casualties than the gun owners, not to mention the possibility of any invading force getting caught in a hurricane!

Posted: 9/23/2005 4:35:21 AM EDT

[#13]

Depends on where in the country the US was invaded. I would suspect that the actual states invaded, irregardless of whether they were red or blue states and the social politics involved, would see the most deaths. Politics aside, people draw together against a common enemy, and an actual invader would cause this nations factions to drop its differences and join forces against the invader.

Posted: 9/23/2005 4:48:45 AM EDT

[#14]

Just thinking of all the deer hunters and them instantly becoming 'snipers':

TN
AL
FL
TX
VA
GA
MS
NC
SC
KY
WV
PA
AR
b/c--"And we can skin a buck; we can run a trot line
And a country boy can survive
Country folks can survive"
Then the midwest

Posted: 9/23/2005 4:54:25 AM EDT

[#15]

Quoted:
Well don't be looking to Canada, to much Gun-Control up here. It's getting to point where we can't even yell at criminals anymore, or we'll get charged with harassment. Hell pretty soon we'll be leaving front doors open, so that we don't get sued for liable by the criminals, in case they hurt themselves breaking in.

Just my .02

Yeah I am thinking we would just nuke Canada to create a no mans land that no one could attack from without glowing. No great loss.

Posted: 9/23/2005 4:57:02 AM EDT

[#16]

I say my homestate. We have nowhere to shoot. All the state run ranges are terrible. All the indoor ranges treat the guests/ members like doo-doo.

I think we would welcome the opportunity better than anyone else.

Posted: 9/23/2005 5:06:02 AM EDT

[#17]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
TX

I dont think any civilians could stop an invading army with small arms alone. Cause alot or trouble and kill alot of soldiers but not stop them.

Ask the soviets about how that worked out in Afghanistan/Chechnya RPGs, Stinger AAMs, mortars, landmines.....

Ask our own army about how that worked out in Vietnam The enemy had....RPGs, Mortars, Recoilless Rifles, Mines, Mig-17s, Mig-21s, Katusha Rockets, Numerous conventional artillery, PT-76 light tanks, Heavy Machine guns, ......

Ask the Brits how that worked out in America We had numerous cannon, heavy bombardment mortars, A large fleet of powerfull warships(French) just when we needed them most.

You need to find better analogys....in each war, heavy weapons played a critical role.

The Afghans were getting slaughtered by Hind-d Gunships that were able to stay out of rifle range and attack with impunity.....Untill we supplied stingers and improved RPGs to the Mujis.

The Vietnamese made extensive use of all sorts of heavy weapons.

In each case powerful outside forces supplied heavy weapons to the "rebels"

On the other hand, in our Civil War one side was at a disinct diavantage in heavy metal.

I still think NH can kick all of yous ass's....

Oh I'm well aware of that - however, in each case the guerrillas I mentioned were ORIGINALLY armed with light small arms - it was only through battle field pickups that they were able to improve their lot.
The Viet Cong forces, by and large were lightly armed, most having only Mosin Nagant rifles or SKSs.
The NVA were those who made the use of heavy weapons.

In each case mentioned, yes, every group took very high casualties - as would we (civilians) if we ever entered into an armed conflict against a group of professional soldiers. We might still win, but we would lose many men.
Sorry for bringing a bit if realism to the internet commandory.

Posted: 9/23/2005 5:06:26 AM EDT

[#18]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Well, if they invaded thru the SC coastline, the rest of y'all would see no action.

That's right, Brother. The ones that make it past you guys will have to make it past my North Carolina Mountains, and all the "don't fu@k with me or my land" relatives I have up in the hills...

especially if they go for the moonshine.

Bring it on boys, we's got some killin' ta do

Don't forget if they try to touch our wimmenz too...

+10000000000000000000000

Posted: 9/23/2005 5:08:10 AM EDT

[#19]

Quoted:
Just thinking of all the deer hunters and them instantly becoming 'snipers':

Just thinking of all those deer hunters and how most of them shoot a 4 or 5 moa group from 100 yards, then pronounce it "good nuff for a deer"

Posted: 9/23/2005 5:16:36 AM EDT

[#20]

For thos TX, NM and AZ voters I ask: Have we made a dent in the Mexican invasion?

Posted: 9/23/2005 5:16:50 AM EDT

[#21]

Quoted:
Don't forget Colorado.
But I think the point being made by the contributors to this thread is:

It aint gonna be a blue state!!

Oh yah... nothing quite like a bunch of big country elk hunters raining .30-06 death down on your ass.

Posted: 9/23/2005 5:26:33 AM EDT

[#22]

Please none of the border states would make a dent in an invading army.

You let in 20 million Mexican's for christs sake!!!

[where is the dug and cover icon?!?!?!]

Just noticed the other post pointing out the border states not noticing the invasion. Don't take it personally, but those states have dropped the ball. The only thing an invading army has to do to take over this country is put on a sombraro, look hungry, and speak spanish. We'll clothe, feed, and provide medical assistance, hell, well even give them a job.

Not all armys use guns to win.

Posted: 9/23/2005 5:34:43 AM EDT

[#23]

Quoted:
If they make it as far as the Midwest - that is where it WILL stop.

IF y'all still have any weapons left.

Blame it on Chicago.

We do.

Eric The(Texas,OurTexas)Hun

Posted: 9/23/2005 5:35:45 AM EDT

[#24]

Texas would definitely be a problem for any invader, but Florida would win hands-down. Not only are we one of the best states regarding gun ownership, but we have a very large population of retirees that can't drive worth a shit and would just run down anyone in their way (or even not in their way). Or they would just talk them to death

Posted: 9/23/2005 5:42:03 AM EDT

[#25]

Texas by all means would inflict the worst damage. After them I'd go with Arizona, then one of those deep southern states. If they went from east to west, don't doubt us Virginians! Well, at least the ones that aren't in occupied NoVA. MJD

Posted: 9/23/2005 5:48:10 AM EDT

[#26]

Quoted:
Sorry its yet another stupid question by me

I believe that Texas would inflict the most casualties on an invading army. In fact I believe that Texas would inflict the most atrocities on an invading army. My second vote would go to Florida with a close third going to Arizona. I am talking about a Red Dawn scenario.

I concur with Texas being first.

Posted: 9/23/2005 5:49:17 AM EDT

[#27]

ND would kick ass.

Posted: 9/23/2005 5:53:51 AM EDT

[#28]

Quoted:
Texas would definitely be a problem for any invader, but Florida would win hands-down. Not only are we one of the best states regarding gun ownership, but we have a very large population of retirees that can't drive worth a shit and would just run down anyone in their way (or even not in their way). Or they would just talk them to death

I believe we have a winner!

Posted: 9/23/2005 6:27:02 AM EDT

[#29]

WV and south western VA, Eastern KY, Eastern TN, Western NC would be easily defended.

Posted: 9/23/2005 6:32:27 AM EDT

[#30]

Duh, Texas. We'd probably be able to stop most armies with just what's in our cars.

R.

Posted: 9/23/2005 6:36:21 AM EDT

[#31]

Imagine they land at the Camp Perry docks during CMP week of the National Rifle Champs. Bet we would have a bunch of people that could shoot better at 600 than they do!

Posted: 9/23/2005 6:56:55 AM EDT

[#32]

I believe North Florida along with south Georgia and south Alabama would provide a great pocket of resistance. Tons of firearms and crazy racist rednecks in these here parts. Plus the majority of the area is heavily wooded with rolling hills and you don't have to worry about dying from exposure in the winter.

My question is:

After order is restored would our government allow us to keep all the cool battlefield pickup firearms we may have acquired ?

My answer : I found this .22 on the side of the road. What are these full-auto AK-47's you speak of ? Grenades ? Never heard of 'em.

Posted: 9/23/2005 7:00:45 AM EDT

[#33]

East Washington.

Posted: 9/23/2005 7:03:54 AM EDT

[#34]

Quoted:
I believe North Florida along with south Georgia and south Alabama would provide a great pocket of resistance. Tons of firearms and crazy racist rednecks in these here parts. Plus the majority of the area is heavily wooded with rolling hills and you don't have to worry about dying from exposure in the winter.

My question is:

After order is restored would our government allow us to keep all the cool battlefield pickup firearms we may have acquired ? My answer : I found this .22 on the side of the road. What are these full-auto AK-47's you speak of ? Grenades ? Never heard of 'em.

Here's a better question for you: Would WE allow the government to take all the cool battlefield pickups we got?

"No sir, I lost my RPG and machine guns in a tragic boating accident during the final push to drive the invading bastards from our beloved nation. Now go fuck yourself and the cheap suit you rode in on."

Posted: 9/23/2005 7:19:37 AM EDT

[#35]

California.

Armed civilian people ain't shit compared to aircraft, gunship, nuclear weapons, artillery ... and despite the efforts of the countries liberals to destroy our military over the last five rounds of BRAC California still has the largest military presence.

The tens of thousands of trained sailors operating the three aircraft carrier battle groups are enough to destroy complete countries let alone a mythical little army which magically appears upon our shores. A million armed citizens can't equal the abilities of an aircraft carrier's air wing to dominate the battle space for three hundred miles in all directions. The cruise missile capable frigates, destroyers, and cruisers pack a potent punch. There's nothing like a few hundred pounds of high explosive delivered on the end of a Tomahawk LACM to make you day. Of course the thousands of nuclear weapons stored aboard the ships could also brighten someone’s day too.

The USMC base at Camp Pendleton is also know to contain more that it's share of killers. Supplied from the base at El Centro where there are dozens and dozens of M1 Abrahams along with hundreds of other vehicles they're going to be a force to be reckoned with. When the weather's right I get to here the sound of the artillery fire where I live.

I'm assuming that if the timing is right there's always a chance for a few ten thousand army troops to be armed up and playing in the desert training base out at NTC. Their toys - the gunship, tanks, APV's and artillery have to be thrown into the mix too.

If you're talking civilians only, as if the same magic spell of yours that delivered this army also magically removed the hundreds of thousands of armed service members here then I still say California. We have the largest share of retired military of any state in the nation. If they also get magically removed then I still say California as we have the largest armed population of any state. If they magically go away then I still say California along with the other western mountain states as it then becomes a battle of terrain and the mountains are going to favor those armed with rocks and sticks better.

Hasn't school started?

Posted: 9/23/2005 7:21:16 AM EDT

[#36]

that's easy ..... MS .... once they got to Vicksburg, it would be on ...

Posted: 9/23/2005 7:28:47 AM EDT

[#37]

Disregarding my earlier post.

Any nation with enough wealth to assemble and transport an army to our shore, or walk them up the coast has enough to buy America.

They don't need to invade to acquire territory. Just buy it.

They don't need to invade to populate our land, just walk, fly, drive in.

They don't need to invade to ... you get the idea. There won't be an invading army.

Put to anser the question. I'm afraid that unless they airdrop in or ampibious assault from Lake Erie there won't be much left of an army by the time it get's to Ohio (The heart of it all!!!).

Posted: 9/23/2005 7:37:56 AM EDT

[#38]

Quoted:
Hell we would all put a hell of a fight. Except for the states that border with Mexico. You're being invaded now and can't stop them, much less an actual army.

D'OH!!!

Posted: 9/23/2005 7:42:00 AM EDT

[#39]

seriously, i say nyc! with all the aids ridden crack ho's, drug dealers, mafia goombahs, muggers, and s&m sex clubs no army would make it out of there in one piece...

i think we all pretty much agree that everywhere east of the left coast, south of wash dc, and east of pa will fight rather than switch...

Posted: 9/23/2005 7:44:49 AM EDT

[#40]

CT would be the leader in kicking ass by far!
I have an endless supply of liberal "ammo" for my catapult.
Nothing inflicts more pain or fear than 120 pounds of whinin treehugger flying thru the air.

Of course we can only fight during the day becuase we would be seen at night due to the evil flash hider restriction and we could only fight from a distance becuase of the evil bayonet restriction,and we couldnt fight in cqb situations becuase our pinned stocks wont allow for it but we would definetely kick ass.

We do teach French in our schools and I think "I surrender" is the first sentence they learn.

Posted: 9/23/2005 7:45:06 AM EDT

[#41]

Sadly enough, the invaders could just yell FIGHT in Texas, wait until they all came running to the same spot, and then drop a bomb on 'em. That would wipe out at least three quarters of the state

. Then Tenn. would have to step in and volunteer to help out

(I am a native Tennessean).

Posted: 9/23/2005 7:53:19 AM EDT

[#42]

Not sure which state would offer the most resistance, but I think Georgia would still be in the top ten. The enemy can HAVE Atlanta if they want it. There's nothing there. anyway!

I agree with nuking canada along with mexico just them make any enemies coming from those directions glow.

The question is: Will our goverment declare war on American citizens at the same time? Not sure about GWB, but I know a president hillary would. She'd even order the military to stand down & surrender. Would they refuse to obey the order? Id like to think that they would.

Scott

Posted: 9/23/2005 8:02:09 AM EDT

[#43]

Unfortunately... The invasion has started.

Their operations are commanded by the ACLU and the Left.

Their strongholds are the public schools.

Their battleground is the courts.

Reinforcements are flooding in from Mexico.

We could just all wish it were a shooting war, where the enemy doesn't look like an anonymous someone in the checkout line ahead of you.

Posted: 9/23/2005 8:04:32 AM EDT

[#44]

Quoted:
I'm going with North Dakota. Seriously.

Yeah. The encamped army would commit ritual suicide, either due to extreme boredom or the impending winter.

Posted: 9/23/2005 8:07:10 AM EDT

[#45]

Montana and Idaho Then maybe Wyoming.
Rough Terrain Lots of it perfect for hiding and ambushing.

Posted: 9/23/2005 8:14:44 AM EDT

[#46]

Quoted:
Quoted:
I'm going with North Dakota. Seriously.

Yeah. The encamped army would commit ritual suicide, either due to extreme boredom or the impending winter.

ya call that a fuckin' winter?
My 7 year old son plays hockey outdoors in weather colder than that.

Posted: 9/23/2005 8:35:21 AM EDT

[#47]

You cannot have this discussion without mentioning Virginia. We have experience with armed conflict on our soil and have been waiting for some payback. There are a bunch of tough mofos and a high degree of comraderie.

Virginia is for ~~Lovers~~ er ah Killers....yea KILLERS...who you lookin at?

Bomber