America's Uncertain Future

[Kaggeceria]

Cite exactly where I said that or even implied it, because we both know that's bullshit.

If you can't remember your own posts then I don't think I can help you.

Where have I ever implied all Republicans are crack units? Hell, where have I even said Republicans?

Republicans, right, whatever.

Further, I really love the logic that despite the militia types being armed and ready, they somehow won't make a difference because of "reasons". Get real or at least come up with something coherent, if you can.

Not because of "reasons", because a few hundred people scattered across the country are too few in number to be of any consequence. As I said.

What's more hilarious is that you failed to realize I was pointing out that what you were saying literally describes the National Guard; they get together on the weekends every so often to train and have been deployed in wartime to conquer cities in the millions.

The National Guards are actual professional armed forces, rather different from people playing in the woods and calling themselves a militia and dreaming of marching on the nearest city.

Ah, so you don't know what a militia is.

[Shrillland]

What's funny is people actually believe these rebels will even need or want to march on a city.

They just need to shut down the major highways and let starvation do the job for them.

That doesn't quite fly in our modern age of airlifts.

I also agree with a lot of posters that the general attitude towards gun control among many would mean that a war might not last long. And bear in mind, I haven't been saying that it WILL happen, just my fears that it could. Though I would like to ask people another question: How do you think we can get back on the rails? Realistically, it's getting harder for me to find a solution since no one will stand behind any "blessed act of oblivion".

[Western Vale Confederacy]

You can't put leftists against the wall by shutting down highways.

Except no civil war just has one side lining the other side up against the wall and shooting them unless the other side is completely and hopelessly outgunned. It's likely it'll go more like most other modern civil wars in that cities will be besieged depending on which side holds said city.

The right also tends to severely underestimate the left's capability to protect its ideals by force, since they think they own "all deh guns" and "muh soyboys".

The reality is that leftists are more than willing to pick up a gun if it means defending their concept of a revolution.

[The Lone Alliance]

What's funny is people actually believe these rebels will even need or want to march on a city.

They just need to shut down the major highways and let starvation do the job for them.

That doesn't quite fly in our modern age of airlifts.

The US holds the largest in strategic airlift capability last I heard, if there is a civil war, part of that airlift capability may be degraded, destroyed, captured, or working for the enemy. Looking it up most of the C-17s are stationed in places like California and Washington, so it's likely they would be left intact. The US C-130 air fleet are a little more scattered and some of them are located in bases inside places that likely could become dangerous to control so some of them would likely be lost. It's likely the west coast could survive. It's more worrying when you get to places like Denver and the cities in flyover country.

I also agree with a lot of posters that the general attitude towards gun control among many would mean that a war might not last long.

I disagree, I think the only reason that would cause a US civil war to end early would be that people would get so tired of the hardship, the suffering, and the utter stupidity of the fighting that both sides would likely go "OH GOD WHAT HAVE WE DONE". Like after the first case of an outright massacre everyone else will be so disgusted that one side would completely lose whatever support they had... hence why I think another reason why there won't be some "Line them up against the wall" moment. No one would want that to get out to the rest of the international community.

It's likely if a war does break out it'll be slow to escalate until it reaches a point where everyone goes crazy and we destroy ourselves or we go "No we've already killed millions, this has to stop."

And bear in mind, I haven't been saying that it WILL happen, just my fears that it could. Though I would like to ask people another question: How do you think we can get back on the rails? Realistically, it's getting harder for me to find a solution since no one will stand behind any "blessed act of oblivion".

There lies the question.

I think the biggest thing preventing a civil war is no one wants to make the first move. Because the first person to kill someone loses. What we have now isn't enough to launch a full scale war, no matter how bad, we could reach 60s level violence, but likely not a revolt, it'd take something major, something horrible, something utterly unforgivable, something that I don't think any side currently has the guts to do so.

Yet at least... and hopefully ever.

However I really think part of this has to do with the fact that people aren't even seeing the same reality anymore, we're not just two nations in one country we're in two completely different worlds with different ways of seeing reality.

The reality is that leftists are more than willing to pick up a gun if it means defending their concept of a revolution.

Really that depends on the Revolution, a communist or socialist Revolution is doomed to fail, I can't see such a thing gaining any real large scale support among the population though. If such groups remain defensive they may be able to survive, and keep people alive until the war ends at the least. But overthrowing the Constitution would likely be frowned upon.

But that's also why I think that if it did come to a drag out shoot out war that it wouldn't end quickly though in the end the people who are fighting would only be the extremists in the end, see Ukraine.

[Painisia]

1968 was worse than 2018:

https://youtu.be/tv0rI-5ycBU

[Shrillland]

1968 was worse than 2018:

https://youtu.be/tv0rI-5ycBU

True, but then, at least, there was no self-isolating social media to create echo chambers and twist reality itself into what they wanted it to be. Nor did personal worldview and beliefs on raising children shape politics to the same level.

[Tokora]

I'm voting no matter what but what I want to know is if my vote will make a difference this november (and 2020 for that matter) since half of america seems to part of this capitalist cult.

[Valrifell]

1968 was worse than 2018:

https://youtu.be/tv0rI-5ycBU

True, but then, at least, there was no self-isolating social media to create echo chambers and twist reality itself into what they wanted it to be. Nor did personal worldview and beliefs on raising children shape politics to the same level.

No, there were those echo chambers. They were just more physical print-media and rallies and the like. It's not like the rise of the Internet made it possible or even easier to only hear people you want to, if anything it makes it a bit harder. Hence all the vitriol when these two sides who would prefer to be left without the other collide.

[Oil exporting People]

If you can't remember your own posts then I don't think I can help you.

Oh please, we both know this a cop out. Do try to embarrass yourself a little less.

Republicans, right, whatever.

Again, you confirm for everyone you make up bullshit.

Not because of "reasons", because a few hundred people scattered across the country are too few in number to be of any consequence. As I said.

First, the militia movement alone numbers in the tens of thousands; the Michigan Militia alone has a membership in the hundreds. Second, your logic is unsound; the U.S. Military is just an organization of less than two million yet there are 7 Billion people in the world. No one, however, doubts their capabilities to deal death.

The National Guards are actual professional armed forces, rather different from people playing in the woods and calling themselves a militia and dreaming of marching on the nearest city.

If you had bothered to read what was posted and apply critical thinking, you would've realized no one was talking about that.

[Diopolis]

Except no civil war just has one side lining the other side up against the wall and shooting them unless the other side is completely and hopelessly outgunned. It's likely it'll go more like most other modern civil wars in that cities will be besieged depending on which side holds said city.

The right also tends to severely underestimate the left's capability to protect its ideals by force, since they think they own "all deh guns" and "muh soyboys".

The reality is that leftists are more than willing to pick up a gun if it means defending their concept of a revolution.

Now, let's not pretend that popular sovereignty has any bearing on this. Half-trained, barely armed volunteers are only useful for suicide bombing and human wave attacks, neither of which are that effective in a high tech conflict. It's going to be a fight between professional military forces with militias fighting a constant guerilla war on the side. Now, right wing militias will have an initial advantage because they're more familiar with guns, that's true, but let's not pretend that in the event of a protracted guerilla war it'll come down to anything but numbers.
On the other hand, guerrilla warfare will not be the deciding factor. It'll be military involvement, in pitched battles. And at the moment, the officer class leans red. The enlisted are split, but there'll be conscription anyways, and it's pretty easy to make a private, less so an officer.
I give the right the advantage in pitched battles, control of the countryside, and a huge territorial advantage. I give the left an even match in guerrilla warfare and an edge in population. Rightist victory more likely than not, but not a sure thing.
Of course, this assumes this hypothetical civil war occurs in a vacuum. If the shooting starts because white supremacists take over the idaho government and secede, then obviously things would go differently.

[Ifreann]

If you can't remember your own posts then I don't think I can help you.

Oh please, we both know this a cop out. Do try to embarrass yourself a little less.

Republicans, right, whatever.

Again, you confirm for everyone you make up bullshit.

Not because of "reasons", because a few hundred people scattered across the country are too few in number to be of any consequence. As I said.

First, the militia movement alone numbers in the tens of thousands; the Michigan Militia alone has a membership in the hundreds. Second, your logic is unsound; the U.S. Military is just an organization of less than two million yet there are 7 Billion people in the world. No one, however, doubts their capabilities to deal death.

Because their strength is not just the number of people with guns. The US military has huge amounts of money keeping it supplied with tanks and planes and ships and materiel in general and nuclear weapons. What does the Michigan Militia have? Hundreds of people with guns and...what else? Faux unit badges? Bumper stickers? Free NRA membership? Wow, clearly these hundreds of amateurs will make the difference in a civil war.

[Holy Tedalonia]

I will point out that depending on the cause of the civil war the republican party might not have the military backing.

However I would speculate that the military might split also, or they chose to stay aligned to the "loyalist" faction considering how the military branch tends to stay with the party that doesnt start the civil war, which would likely be the party that opposes the president.

[Western Vale Confederacy]

I will point out that depending on the cause of the civil war the republican party might not have the military backing.

However I would speculate that the military might split also, or they chose to stay aligned to the "loyalist" faction considering how the military branch tends to stay with the party that doesnt start the civil war, which would likely be the party that opposes the president.

Bases stationed in certain states might join said state, methinks.

[Holy Tedalonia]

I will point out that depending on the cause of the civil war the republican party might not have the military backing.

However I would speculate that the military might split also, or they chose to stay aligned to the "loyalist" faction considering how the military branch tends to stay with the party that doesnt start the civil war, which would likely be the party that opposes the president.

Bases stationed in certain states might join said state, methinks.

Soldiers arent loyal to the states. It is unlikely they would side with the state they are stationed at, especially considering how many times a us soldiers moves from state to state, or even from country to country.

The confederacy wouldve loved for that to happen for them though.

[Western Vale Confederacy]

Bases stationed in certain states might join said state, methinks.

Soldiers arent loyal to the states. It is unlikely they would side with the state they are stationed at, especially considering how many times a us soldiers moves from state to state, or even from country to country.

The confederacy wouldve loved for that to happen for them though.

The allegiance of the military is what would make or break an hypothetical American Civil War.

If a majority joins either side, then said civil war will end quite quickly. If it gets split in a roughly equal fashion, then get your arse ready for Syria 2: Thicc Edition.

At least it's what I believe.

[The United Lands of Ash]

This thread is pure fear-mongering. The US has been through worse and one bad presidency isn't going to end it. Handfuls of pissy people deciding to fight each other doesn't mean we're on the verge of a full-scale war.

That's not to say the political situation is great and that people aren't angry but we're a ways from people "rising up" in the name of whatever their political ideology is. If anything, we're about see to a period of extreme political dissociation where either the Republican and Democratic parties face losing their younger voters or the parties themselves reform.

And on a sidenote, if there was a hypothetical civil conflict, military bases aren't going to flip to certain states. Most of the personnel in bases are from across the country so chances if some soldier had a die-hard allegiance to his state instead of the country (which I highly doubt is the case with most soldiers) they're not even going to be in their own state.

[Holy Tedalonia]

This thread is pure fear-mongering. The US has been through worse and one bad presidency isn't going to end it. Handfuls of pissy people deciding to fight each other doesn't mean we're on the verge of a full-scale war.

That's not to say the political situation is great and that people aren't angry but we're a ways from people "rising up" in the name of whatever their political ideology is. If anything, we're about see to a period of extreme political dissociation where either the Republican and Democratic parties face losing their younger voters or the parties themselves reform.

And on a sidenote, if there was a hypothetical civil conflict, military bases aren't going to flip to certain states. Most of the personnel in bases are from across the country so chances if some soldier had a die-hard allegiance to his state instead of the country (which I highly doubt is the case with most soldiers) they're not even going to be in their own state.

I could see it happening in the future, present? Nah, this is merely the build up to the climax if anything.

[Greed and Death]

Personally, I believe the tensions will result in a 2nd Civil War. The only way to prevent this (at least for me) is to re-make the entire American Administration, Judicial, and Legislative wings, which I doubt would ever happen. Simply put, the U.S.A. will not survive the next few years, and if it does, it will be at the cost of the lower and middle class.

I think we have to let this civil war run its course. The winner will likely be whoever has the military. This is why I think it is wise to provoke the left while the GOP has the Presidency. That way when the dust clears of mass imprisonment and disappearances the right will firmly have control.

[Holy Tedalonia]

Personally, I believe the tensions will result in a 2nd Civil War. The only way to prevent this (at least for me) is to re-make the entire American Administration, Judicial, and Legislative wings, which I doubt would ever happen. Simply put, the U.S.A. will not survive the next few years, and if it does, it will be at the cost of the lower and middle class.

I think we have to let this civil war run its course. The winner will likely be whoever has the military. This is why I think it is wise to provoke the left while the GOP has the Presidency. That way when the dust clears of mass imprisonment and disappearances the right will firmly have control.

America's to stable right now. We need more Marius political tactics to really shake things up. Although once that happens we'll start decaying like Rome did.

[Geneviev]

There will be a second Civil War, everyone hates each other, and America will never be a real country again.

Or, alternatively, something happens to make everyone at least civil.

[The Lone Alliance]

I will point out that depending on the cause of the civil war the republican party might not have the military backing.

However I would speculate that the military might split also, or they chose to stay aligned to the "loyalist" faction considering how the military branch tends to stay with the party that doesnt start the civil war, which would likely be the party that opposes the president.

It's likely the Military will side with the Constitution, so whatever side declares the support for the continuing constitutional government would likely gain the support of most of the military.

That's why if a rebel group pops up declaring a Fascist Ethnostate or some crazy Communist nation they're likely just going to get machine gunned.

[The United Lands of Ash]

This thread is pure fear-mongering. The US has been through worse and one bad presidency isn't going to end it. Handfuls of pissy people deciding to fight each other doesn't mean we're on the verge of a full-scale war.

That's not to say the political situation is great and that people aren't angry but we're a ways from people "rising up" in the name of whatever their political ideology is. If anything, we're about see to a period of extreme political dissociation where either the Republican and Democratic parties face losing their younger voters or the parties themselves reform.

And on a sidenote, if there was a hypothetical civil conflict, military bases aren't going to flip to certain states. Most of the personnel in bases are from across the country so chances if some soldier had a die-hard allegiance to his state instead of the country (which I highly doubt is the case with most soldiers) they're not even going to be in their own state.

I could see it happening in the future, present? Nah, this is merely the build up to the climax if anything.

I highly doubt it will come to anything. Unless the people in power start to crack down on opposition or other warning signs and I mean more than some angry tweets and taking verbal shots at the press.

People here are talking like a civil war is inevitable and the point of no return is way behind us.

[Genivaria]

There will be a second Civil War, everyone hates each other, and America will never be a real country again.

Or, alternatively, something happens to make everyone at least civil.

Oh don't be so melodramatic.

[Senkaku]

listen guys if we're gonna do the thermonuclear tango, with ourselves or anyone else, please just make sure I'm like inside one of the fireball areas that gets vaporized, thanks

[Infected Mushroom]

There will be a second Civil War, everyone hates each other, and America will never be a real country again.

Or, alternatively, something happens to make everyone at least civil.

if there's a war, I might fly over to the USA to participate. I would like to fight for the right wing.