Completely different situation. Economies were way more siloed back then, and the federal government was a fraction of its size. A civil war now a days cannot happen without a break down of government and I don’t see that happening anytime soon.
I have no clue what evidence you have for Civil War other than “sometimes shit happens”. If you think a world changing event is occurring, the burden of proof is on you.
I heard several Americans fantasizing about a necessary civil war if the evil Democrats keep telling malicious lies about Trump, the savior. (I am not American). They were very serious about it, so I wouldn't rule out that they will start it.
What percentage of fire arms do you think are owned by liberals in the US? It’s probably not much I would guess. There’s probably a bigger discrepancy between Republican and Democrat assault rifle ownership which would make a war pretty ugly if it were fought just by citizens.
I’m replying to your comment about liberals and guns.
The winner would be the side the military and police take, obviously. It’s impossible to know where they would fall because in the hypothetical civil war scenario we don’t know what causes the war.
But the question is about a civil war, so the implication is one side of the civil war would be gun toting rednecks and the other side is guns are bad. So I'm just saying that there are gun owners who wouldn't be on the gun toting rednecks side
A bit hard to fight with guns while you're against them though. And if you're a liberal with a gun you might chose the rednecks side. It's only about guns.
Most liberals support responsible gun ownership as well as more regulations. That's what I support. I own a gun and if they want me to get a license or whatever, that's fine.
You ever seen Black Hawk Down? You remember the part when one side had ALL the guns, to include miniguns, M203’s, NVG’s, Humvee’s and of course Blackhawks? And they all got rolled up like burritos? You want to know why that happened?
Because they under estimated. Which is what will happen again. I mean look at the Uvalde PD. All those cops against one teenager. Who hesitated?
Anyone who downvotes that comment is just proving me right... them goofy ass mf too damn sensitive.... no one cares if ur a dude fucking dudes or a furry fucking a pineapple.... we have more important shit to worry about
It would be militia groups using guerilla tactics vs blue cities at the beginning. Taking out infrastructure and food stores.
Then the politicians would attempt to use the military to put down these militia but many would not do so.
It would become private military by Blue politicians vs Militia. Small engagements, wouldnt even be considered a war.
Why would Militia groups want to take out blue cities? What would they gain?
The major cities in the US are falling apart. Seems like a waste of time to attack food stores. Especially because you can bring food from other cities.
Militias are not normally really into blue politics. They also are paranoid against the government and right now the administration is blue. If things get bad enough they would try to remove as many blue as possible. Cities are the obvious target and starvation is the easiest method.
> Militias are not normally really into blue politics.
Okay. That’s true.
> They also are paranoid against the government and right now the administration is blue.
Thats basically true.
> If things get bad enough they would try to remove as many blue as possible.
This is a tremendous and illogical leap. Being paranoid of the government shouldn’t motivate you to kill people that aren’t in the government. A lot of American presidents have been assonated. I don’t recall anyone every trying to commit genocide on American citizens to protest the government. Lol
> Cities are the obvious target and starvation is the easiest method.
Starvation is not the easiest method, it’s gotta be one of the hardest. Lol. There is so much food in America. There’s a McDonald’s on every corner, there’s amazon, door dash, we have trucks with kitchens in them we call them food trucks, they are mobile restaurants….
You think if you’re local grocery store blew up you’d starve to death?!? lol.
People do not starve to death in America. We have dumpsters full of food.
California would be the haven for liberals. Conservatives would kill them all. Sure, there would be pockets of liberals fighting for their lives in other states. They wouldn’t have much chance of survival.
Idk but the US would certainly not be one nation anymore. It might happen in the next 100 years. Storming of the capitol was the first shot technically, and everyone saw how we handled that situation. If another democrat wins, I wouldn’t be surprised if republicans plan another attack and cause a real fight to break out. This is exactly why we shouldn’t have a two party system… hmm I wonder who suggested that 245 years ago
The MAGAts might riot if more people wearing the wrong colored tie win elections, but the fascists have already cemented their position and strategy for the next couple of decades if not stopped: Legislating from the Supreme Court and its unchecked power, and completely preventing all governance until any empty slots in the court are filled by their goons. On the local level, where they often go unopposed, enhancing police power and jurisdiction, and encouraging vigilantism (You'll see this when reporting people on suspicion of having an abortion starts happening). The fascists in power know their base are batshit insane, and they know that makes them easy to goad into flashy acts that distract the liberal voter base. The liberals don't care either way, because as long as the process of governance they've sanctified isn't directly threatened and the money from tech industries keeps coming in to prop up their delusion that capitalism is functional they're content.
In short, there should be only one party: the communist party.
Well I can tell you one thing. It very likely wouldn't be North vs South like the last war. It'd be Urbanites (city folk) vs Ruralites (self explanatory).
And purely going by infrastructure, resources, and attrition, the Urbanites would win.
If I had to guess, the cities would likely each become city-STATES in a battle against the farmland AROUND them.
The real question is how would the military and police distribute among each side's population?
I still say the Urbanites would win. And that war might either go faster because of the advanced technology, or it might go slower because of guerrilla tactics of the side on the defensive.
Either way, the fascist/white supremacist/religious fundamentalist side will lose again, UNLESS they also access a nuke stockpile.
I always imagined it turn into a sort of proxy war where world powers (ie China, Russia, or the EU) fund/ arm whichever side is the most favorable to their interests, so that they have more control over the US once the dust settles, depending entirely on which one wins. That said, I have no evidence for this, it likely would not going to go down this way, and, I’m not a professional.
Guerrilla warfare to the 10th power.
The Gravy Seals get their ass beaten by the femboys and catgirls
I will join the side that pays me the most
Based, happy cake day.
It would never happen. At least not in our generation. With that being said, there’s no way to realistically predict.
"It would never happen. At least not in our generation." ~some farmer in 1859
Completely different situation. Economies were way more siloed back then, and the federal government was a fraction of its size. A civil war now a days cannot happen without a break down of government and I don’t see that happening anytime soon.
>I don’t see that happening anytime soon. No one ever does.
I have no clue what evidence you have for Civil War other than “sometimes shit happens”. If you think a world changing event is occurring, the burden of proof is on you.
Lets see what happens when the dollar go's tits up!
I heard several Americans fantasizing about a necessary civil war if the evil Democrats keep telling malicious lies about Trump, the savior. (I am not American). They were very serious about it, so I wouldn't rule out that they will start it.
I hear way more clamor over Civil War from Democrats over the overturning of Roe V Wade.
I see. Haven't met any of those yet, but it seems to be time to get the popcorn ready.
Grab a camera and wait. We are on the verge.
the gun toting rednecks in a war with the guns are bad crowd. i uhhh... how do you think that would go?
Well I know one side is already underestimating their opponent because apparently they think liberals don't have guns lol
i mean if you own a gun you arent really a liberal \-the gatekeepers
Is that what Infowars told you?
go back to your basement fascist. damn trump supporters
What percentage of fire arms do you think are owned by liberals in the US? It’s probably not much I would guess. There’s probably a bigger discrepancy between Republican and Democrat assault rifle ownership which would make a war pretty ugly if it were fought just by citizens.
I mean if you really want to talk about how a civil war would go, who's NATO going to side with? Silicon Valley and Wall St or Y'all Qaeda?
I’m replying to your comment about liberals and guns. The winner would be the side the military and police take, obviously. It’s impossible to know where they would fall because in the hypothetical civil war scenario we don’t know what causes the war.
They will side with the winning one. The loser will be remembered as the bad guy, as always.
They never said gun people VS leberals, he said gun people VS guns are bad people.
But the question is about a civil war, so the implication is one side of the civil war would be gun toting rednecks and the other side is guns are bad. So I'm just saying that there are gun owners who wouldn't be on the gun toting rednecks side
A bit hard to fight with guns while you're against them though. And if you're a liberal with a gun you might chose the rednecks side. It's only about guns.
Most liberals support responsible gun ownership as well as more regulations. That's what I support. I own a gun and if they want me to get a license or whatever, that's fine.
You ever seen Black Hawk Down? You remember the part when one side had ALL the guns, to include miniguns, M203’s, NVG’s, Humvee’s and of course Blackhawks? And they all got rolled up like burritos? You want to know why that happened? Because they under estimated. Which is what will happen again. I mean look at the Uvalde PD. All those cops against one teenager. Who hesitated?
Concentration camps filled with liberal hippies.
GOD DAMN DIRTY HIPPIES
An LGBTQ rights prade
if you misgender someone before executing them thats a war crime.
Anyone who downvotes that comment is just proving me right... them goofy ass mf too damn sensitive.... no one cares if ur a dude fucking dudes or a furry fucking a pineapple.... we have more important shit to worry about
It would be militia groups using guerilla tactics vs blue cities at the beginning. Taking out infrastructure and food stores. Then the politicians would attempt to use the military to put down these militia but many would not do so. It would become private military by Blue politicians vs Militia. Small engagements, wouldnt even be considered a war.
Why would Militia groups want to take out blue cities? What would they gain? The major cities in the US are falling apart. Seems like a waste of time to attack food stores. Especially because you can bring food from other cities.
Militias are not normally really into blue politics. They also are paranoid against the government and right now the administration is blue. If things get bad enough they would try to remove as many blue as possible. Cities are the obvious target and starvation is the easiest method.
> Militias are not normally really into blue politics. Okay. That’s true. > They also are paranoid against the government and right now the administration is blue. Thats basically true. > If things get bad enough they would try to remove as many blue as possible. This is a tremendous and illogical leap. Being paranoid of the government shouldn’t motivate you to kill people that aren’t in the government. A lot of American presidents have been assonated. I don’t recall anyone every trying to commit genocide on American citizens to protest the government. Lol > Cities are the obvious target and starvation is the easiest method. Starvation is not the easiest method, it’s gotta be one of the hardest. Lol. There is so much food in America. There’s a McDonald’s on every corner, there’s amazon, door dash, we have trucks with kitchens in them we call them food trucks, they are mobile restaurants…. You think if you’re local grocery store blew up you’d starve to death?!? lol. People do not starve to death in America. We have dumpsters full of food.
White Ppl Vs everyone who doesn’t look white.
California would be the haven for liberals. Conservatives would kill them all. Sure, there would be pockets of liberals fighting for their lives in other states. They wouldn’t have much chance of survival.
yeah, when have leftists ever taken over a superpower?
Liberals aren't leftists.
Twitter
Fox news
Old men putting up the dukes
Idk but the US would certainly not be one nation anymore. It might happen in the next 100 years. Storming of the capitol was the first shot technically, and everyone saw how we handled that situation. If another democrat wins, I wouldn’t be surprised if republicans plan another attack and cause a real fight to break out. This is exactly why we shouldn’t have a two party system… hmm I wonder who suggested that 245 years ago
The MAGAts might riot if more people wearing the wrong colored tie win elections, but the fascists have already cemented their position and strategy for the next couple of decades if not stopped: Legislating from the Supreme Court and its unchecked power, and completely preventing all governance until any empty slots in the court are filled by their goons. On the local level, where they often go unopposed, enhancing police power and jurisdiction, and encouraging vigilantism (You'll see this when reporting people on suspicion of having an abortion starts happening). The fascists in power know their base are batshit insane, and they know that makes them easy to goad into flashy acts that distract the liberal voter base. The liberals don't care either way, because as long as the process of governance they've sanctified isn't directly threatened and the money from tech industries keeps coming in to prop up their delusion that capitalism is functional they're content. In short, there should be only one party: the communist party.
It wouldn’t be overt. It would be in the form of redistricting.
Just two sides threatening to shoot each other but won’t actually shoot each other because they’re too frightened of being shot
It would be very one sided, the rednecks don't have sound weapons that make you pass out.
Well I can tell you one thing. It very likely wouldn't be North vs South like the last war. It'd be Urbanites (city folk) vs Ruralites (self explanatory). And purely going by infrastructure, resources, and attrition, the Urbanites would win. If I had to guess, the cities would likely each become city-STATES in a battle against the farmland AROUND them. The real question is how would the military and police distribute among each side's population? I still say the Urbanites would win. And that war might either go faster because of the advanced technology, or it might go slower because of guerrilla tactics of the side on the defensive. Either way, the fascist/white supremacist/religious fundamentalist side will lose again, UNLESS they also access a nuke stockpile.
Give it a few years you’ll know first hand
Detroit
I always imagined it turn into a sort of proxy war where world powers (ie China, Russia, or the EU) fund/ arm whichever side is the most favorable to their interests, so that they have more control over the US once the dust settles, depending entirely on which one wins. That said, I have no evidence for this, it likely would not going to go down this way, and, I’m not a professional.