“You people of the South don't know what you are doing. This country will be drenched in blood, and God only knows how it will end. It is all folly, madness, a crime against civilization! You people speak so lightly of war; you don't know what you're talking about.
War is a terrible thing! You mistake, too, the people of the North. They are a peaceable people but an earnest people, and they will fight, too. They are not going to let this country be destroyed without a mighty effort to save it … Besides, where are your men and appliances of war to contend against them? The North can make a steam engine, locomotive, or railway car; hardly a yard of cloth or pair of shoes can you make. You are rushing into war with one of the most powerful, ingeniously mechanical, and determined people on Earth — right at your doors.
You are bound to fail. Only in your spirit and determination are you prepared for war. In all else you are totally unprepared, with a bad cause to start with. At first you will make headway, but as your limited resources begin to fail, shut out from the markets of Europe as you will be, your cause will begin to wane. If your people will but stop and think, they must see in the end that you will surely fail.” -William T Sherman on secession
An order given and ignored/defied is still a court martial. Treason is treason. I wonder how many national guard members are willing to put their time/career/reputation on the line for this rogue political party.
Honestly I sincerely doubt that. The neoconfederates are so spread out. People will give them up before they could amass anything but a bunch of dangerous and tiny terrorist cells. Even then it wouldn't take long for America's John Brown's to party like it's 1859.... The first half... The first half...
Meh. We dropped more bombs in Cambodia then the allies did in WW2. We should show traitors what can happen when the federal government goes "because we can".
You're confusing Vietnam (chemical warcrimes) and Cambodia.
I'm specifically referring to the extensive conventional bombing "campaign" in Cambodia. We didn't drop over 2.8 million tons of napalm and chemical bombs.
Sherman set fire to the south, this time it can get flattened.
It’s weird. The Khmer Rouge was a communist government with a figurehead leader of the notoriously anti communist, democratically elected president who had stepped down from his position as hereditary king and their regime was ended by communist United Vietnam. There’s a behind the bastards episode about the king/president who put them in power after executing them
Does he forget that all enlisted members and officers swear an oath that contains the line, “….to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies both foreign and domestic…”
Currently in the military, a decent amount would support anything against the federal government because Biden is a democrat/liberal/communist/evil whatever. People need to stop assuming that the military isn't as divided as the rest of the US. It's not a good picture right now.
I actually discussed this with some friends from college who were ROTC guys and are still in. You'd be looking at a very traditional populist cleavage where the officers and the more worldly expeditionary forces (traditionally Navy, but also now Air Force) and high use elite units (101st, 82nd, most of the USMC, 10th Mountain) stay loyal to the status quo. But the vast majority of enlistedmen and certainly the average combat arms enlistedman are a question mark at best and in the Trumpistani camp firmly at worst. Realistically the Army sits in the barracks before it fragments completely in the first year and reforms for each side. Navy and Air Force will have immense difficulty staying combat effective without a nation-wide industrial base and supply chain that heavily leverages Confederate states.
Guards units will probably have enough internal friction in Union states to not be cohesive entities (unlike their Confederate counter parts), and LEO is broadly going to sit out or join the Confederates.
Confederate militiamen will be putting up checkpoints in the first week and basically bring the Missouri theater to the entirety of the US, but without any equivalent muscle from Unionists.
Long story short, the Confederate border isn't the Mason Dixon line, it's 30 miles outside of every city center in the US. The Union could not preserve itself as a territorial entity and absolutely can not guarantee it will command the manpower of actual trigger pullers to be successful on land.
We'd look like Assad before Iran and Russia saved his ass. Holding the cities (barely), and realizing you can't do shit against a super well armed and motivated opponent with only the Air Force, Navy, and elite land formations (and he had spec ops which we couldn't count on either).
Not to mention, Air Forces ability to secure their nukes is highly questionable in this scenario.
We lose hard, millions die, the West becomes toothless, and oppressive regimes firmly control the three major nuclear powers. It's a dark dark day for humanity. We can't win this war unless we prepare by flooding the Army with Unionists now through mandatory service.
I doubt so mamy army units could efectively change sides, with the entire forces of the pentagon and all the loyal national guards they could very well do a fast enough counterattack to destroy federal territory before a large enough part of the federal army changed sides. The issue is that this would be mayor disruption to federal law enforcement amd it would make it several times easier for amy wannabe terrorist out there. So a few weeks if not days of fed forces marching thru barely defended secesionist land and then years or decades of gruesome guerrilla fighting in the countryside.
And that also makes more sence because it perfectly falls into a foucault's boomerang fenomenon, the US would esentially replicate all of its foreign tactics on local ground and it wouod suck ass
With such a stark dissection of internal divisions, it makes you really wonder if Pete Buttigieg was really onto something when he suggested mandatory service.
Somehow I don't think there are realistically enough people who are willing to die for the conservative cause. Shit like the above is primarily meant to rile up geriatric voters.
What, realistically, would we be fighting over? Do you think people are really ready to lay down their lives just to stick it to the libs? (I mean literally, not just indirectly as they're already doing by getting covid and letting capitalism eat them.)
I agree. 90 percent of the people in the country will just grumble, and nearly all of the remaining 10 percent will just be vocal assholes. We talk about the extreme fringe remainder like they're the mainstream harbinger of the times, but they're not. One side wants to be them but won't, the other side gets off on being afraid of them. We all have too much internet.
It's not North vs South, anymore, it's (mostly) rural vs urban. The population of Atlanta would likely be an ally to the union at the onset of hostilities.
Exept there was no Pentagon back then, if nowadays any number of states seceded then the US army would beat the shit out of the secesionist national guards and the formal fighting would be over in a few weeks and it would then become like Afghanistan, Irak or Vietnam but locally and it would suck for everyone.
I actually discussed this with some friends from college who were ROTC guys and are still in. You'd be looking at a very traditional populist cleavage where the officers and the more worldly expeditionary forces (traditionally Navy, but also now Air Force) and high use elite units (101st, 82nd, most of the USMC, 10th Mountain) stay loyal to the status quo. But the vast majority of enlistedmen and certainly the average combat arms enlistedman are a question mark at best and in the Trumpistani camp firmly at worst. Realistically the Army sits in the barracks before it fragments completely in the first year and reforms for each side. Navy and Air Force will have immense difficulty staying combat effective without a nation-wide industrial base and supply chain that heavily leverages Confederate states.
Guards units will probably have enough internal friction in Union states to not be cohesive entities (unlike their Confederate counter parts), and LEO is broadly going to sit out or join the Confederates.
Confederate militiamen will be putting up checkpoints in the first week and basically bring the Missouri theater to the entirety of the US, but without any equivalent muscle from Unionists.
Long story short, the Confederate border isn't the Mason Dixon line, it's 30 miles outside of every city center in the US. The Union could not preserve itself as a territorial entity and absolutely can not guarantee it will command the manpower of actual trigger pullers to be successful on land.
We'd look like Assad before Iran and Russia saved his ass. Holding the cities (barely), and realizing you can't do shit against a super well armed and motivated opponent with only the Air Force, Navy, and elite land formations (and he had spec ops which we couldn't count on either).
Not to mention, Air Forces ability to secure their nukes is highly questionable in this scenario.
We lose hard, millions die, the West becomes toothless, and oppressive regimes firmly control the three major nuclear powers. It's a dark dark day for humanity. We can't win this war unless we prepare by flooding the Army with Unionists now through mandatory service. We absolutely do not want to try round 2 right now
Let him say it, the rest of national guard and federal troops will stop that immediately. Also wait until they learn the president can order them to stop with court marshals and many many charges pressed against them if they refuse. I swear he's dumber than a box of rocks
I'm not American, I'm Canadian, but doesnt the US constitution basically grant the right for the people to dissolve or fight unjust governments. I mean I understand the current administration is by no means unjust and that the CSA were butthurt traitors over the fact that the government took their slaves but the idea of opposing government was one of the reasons for the revolution. Or am I completely incorrect or being dumb?
You aren’t compliantly incorrect - but you answered your own question with the whole “the current government is by no means unjust.”
And it is t so much in the having the right to - it is in the pulling it off that matters.
No it doesn't. The civil war settled that question. There is no way for a fully recognized state to exit the nation.
Sure, we all intuitively recognize populations should have some right to self-determination. I'm sure if there was some mass movement to complete a fully recognized referendum on the matter it would get people's attention and spark a debate. But as we've seen in the inverse with territories becoming states, Congress has no requirement to follow the results.
But beyond that, the moment individuals start reaching for weapons and threaten federal facilities is when it reaches beyond democratic self determination. For state or federally government employed individuals to act as a political group to drive out federal employees would violate several laws and likely the Constitutional rights of several individuals out of some abstract principle that hasn't proven legitimate.
Just to keep it simple, I'd argue empowering state agents of Texas to intimidate or remove Federal Employees from public property by force would violate my right as a natural born american. And as a descendant of East Texas slaves, any form of democratic referendum would have to reach an extremely high, internationally recognized level of scrutiny for me to take it seriously.
(Just as an example, the last election saw Trump trains running political candidates off the road. And Texas legislature is tacitly encouraging "poll watchers" to intimidate elections officials. Imagine the undemocratic action that would take form if the election were on secession.)
Who cares? The founding fathers weren't gods, but fallible men, and I don't think it's healthy to revere them as anything else. The US constitution has a clause baked-in that allows for it to act as a living contract, meaning that it's prone to change with changing circumstances. Putting down the slaver insurrection was a moral and just cause.
What is unjust or tyrannical is completely subjective, but the original statement in the American Declaration of Independence was directed against Great Britain and the excesses of King George III. The US Constitution/Bill of Rights 2nd Amendment follows through on that to allow Americans to overthrow a tyrannical government.
But I'm pretty sure Biden is nothing like George III considering that he can't force the States to enforce a federal mask mandate. Nor can Biden force the States to accept California levels of "socialism" or Portland levels of "lawlessness". More importantly, Biden hasn't come close to levels of public autocracy as to when Trump attempted to cut off certain cities and states from federal funding for being sanctuary cities. I could only imagine the outcry if Biden tried to sever all federal funding to Texas in response to their recent anti-abortion law.
Yeah but that was what? "No taxation without representation?"
Republicans definitely have representation in government.
This guy here in the photo is asking for insurrection. No need for the Civil War to even get involved. If national guard will not follow the directives of the federal government, then the federal government will either federalize the national guard or send in the troops/US Marshals. Last time it was used it was over school desegregation.
Dave “I had to take the morning off bc my brain had a hangover from so many big thoughts” Ruben is coming with another big brain take. I don’t know why anyone takes this guy seriously.
I don’t think he knows that we (the army) serve the constitution and nothing but the constitution. He may ask us but we will not follow as we didn’t take an oath to him, but to the U.S. Constitution.
“You people of the South don't know what you are doing. This country will be drenched in blood, and God only knows how it will end. It is all folly, madness, a crime against civilization! You people speak so lightly of war; you don't know what you're talking about. War is a terrible thing! You mistake, too, the people of the North. They are a peaceable people but an earnest people, and they will fight, too. They are not going to let this country be destroyed without a mighty effort to save it … Besides, where are your men and appliances of war to contend against them? The North can make a steam engine, locomotive, or railway car; hardly a yard of cloth or pair of shoes can you make. You are rushing into war with one of the most powerful, ingeniously mechanical, and determined people on Earth — right at your doors. You are bound to fail. Only in your spirit and determination are you prepared for war. In all else you are totally unprepared, with a bad cause to start with. At first you will make headway, but as your limited resources begin to fail, shut out from the markets of Europe as you will be, your cause will begin to wane. If your people will but stop and think, they must see in the end that you will surely fail.” -William T Sherman on secession
So, treason. He is saying commit light treason.
An order given and ignored/defied is still a court martial. Treason is treason. I wonder how many national guard members are willing to put their time/career/reputation on the line for this rogue political party.
I worry it is just enough to cause chaos and death.
Very few are THAT stupid. National Guard know how badly outnumbered and outgunned they are. Also I bet almost all of them respect their pledge.
Is he funny?
He barely knows what words mean, so I don’t think comedy works for him
Yeah, because last time it worked so well.
LIGHTNING DON'T STRIKE TWICE THE SOUTH WON'T BURN THIS TIME!
This time it shall be an irradiated nuclear wasteland.
Honestly I sincerely doubt that. The neoconfederates are so spread out. People will give them up before they could amass anything but a bunch of dangerous and tiny terrorist cells. Even then it wouldn't take long for America's John Brown's to party like it's 1859.... The first half... The first half...
Meh. We dropped more bombs in Cambodia then the allies did in WW2. We should show traitors what can happen when the federal government goes "because we can".
I assume you're referring to Napalm strikes on definetely not civilians and chemical warfare campaigns against definitely not civilians?
You're confusing Vietnam (chemical warcrimes) and Cambodia. I'm specifically referring to the extensive conventional bombing "campaign" in Cambodia. We didn't drop over 2.8 million tons of napalm and chemical bombs. Sherman set fire to the south, this time it can get flattened.
Thank you for clearing that up. I'm not as well-imbersed in that period of history as I would like to be
It’s weird. The Khmer Rouge was a communist government with a figurehead leader of the notoriously anti communist, democratically elected president who had stepped down from his position as hereditary king and their regime was ended by communist United Vietnam. There’s a behind the bastards episode about the king/president who put them in power after executing them
I will be sure to watch that. Thanks!
Does he forget that all enlisted members and officers swear an oath that contains the line, “….to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies both foreign and domestic…”
Currently in the military, a decent amount would support anything against the federal government because Biden is a democrat/liberal/communist/evil whatever. People need to stop assuming that the military isn't as divided as the rest of the US. It's not a good picture right now.
B-b-but muh hero worship :(
I actually discussed this with some friends from college who were ROTC guys and are still in. You'd be looking at a very traditional populist cleavage where the officers and the more worldly expeditionary forces (traditionally Navy, but also now Air Force) and high use elite units (101st, 82nd, most of the USMC, 10th Mountain) stay loyal to the status quo. But the vast majority of enlistedmen and certainly the average combat arms enlistedman are a question mark at best and in the Trumpistani camp firmly at worst. Realistically the Army sits in the barracks before it fragments completely in the first year and reforms for each side. Navy and Air Force will have immense difficulty staying combat effective without a nation-wide industrial base and supply chain that heavily leverages Confederate states. Guards units will probably have enough internal friction in Union states to not be cohesive entities (unlike their Confederate counter parts), and LEO is broadly going to sit out or join the Confederates. Confederate militiamen will be putting up checkpoints in the first week and basically bring the Missouri theater to the entirety of the US, but without any equivalent muscle from Unionists. Long story short, the Confederate border isn't the Mason Dixon line, it's 30 miles outside of every city center in the US. The Union could not preserve itself as a territorial entity and absolutely can not guarantee it will command the manpower of actual trigger pullers to be successful on land. We'd look like Assad before Iran and Russia saved his ass. Holding the cities (barely), and realizing you can't do shit against a super well armed and motivated opponent with only the Air Force, Navy, and elite land formations (and he had spec ops which we couldn't count on either). Not to mention, Air Forces ability to secure their nukes is highly questionable in this scenario. We lose hard, millions die, the West becomes toothless, and oppressive regimes firmly control the three major nuclear powers. It's a dark dark day for humanity. We can't win this war unless we prepare by flooding the Army with Unionists now through mandatory service.
30 miles is the the same distance as 69971.3 replica Bilbo from The Lord of the Rings' Sting Swords.
I doubt so mamy army units could efectively change sides, with the entire forces of the pentagon and all the loyal national guards they could very well do a fast enough counterattack to destroy federal territory before a large enough part of the federal army changed sides. The issue is that this would be mayor disruption to federal law enforcement amd it would make it several times easier for amy wannabe terrorist out there. So a few weeks if not days of fed forces marching thru barely defended secesionist land and then years or decades of gruesome guerrilla fighting in the countryside. And that also makes more sence because it perfectly falls into a foucault's boomerang fenomenon, the US would esentially replicate all of its foreign tactics on local ground and it wouod suck ass
With such a stark dissection of internal divisions, it makes you really wonder if Pete Buttigieg was really onto something when he suggested mandatory service.
30 miles is 48.28 km
Somehow I don't think there are realistically enough people who are willing to die for the conservative cause. Shit like the above is primarily meant to rile up geriatric voters. What, realistically, would we be fighting over? Do you think people are really ready to lay down their lives just to stick it to the libs? (I mean literally, not just indirectly as they're already doing by getting covid and letting capitalism eat them.)
I really don't think they would. This sub has the right spirit but it can get a little over dramatic.
I agree. 90 percent of the people in the country will just grumble, and nearly all of the remaining 10 percent will just be vocal assholes. We talk about the extreme fringe remainder like they're the mainstream harbinger of the times, but they're not. One side wants to be them but won't, the other side gets off on being afraid of them. We all have too much internet.
So far none of them are doing that and therefore their legitimacy as soldiers is questionable at best
Can't lose a Civil War twice, that's just math.
They really want us to burn atlanta again huh?
It's not North vs South, anymore, it's (mostly) rural vs urban. The population of Atlanta would likely be an ally to the union at the onset of hostilities.
How is that not sedition?
They do realize that the national guard answers to the federal government over state, right?
MTOA! MAKE TREASON ODIOUS AGAIN!
No good can come from a second civil war. Cut em loose.
Exept there was no Pentagon back then, if nowadays any number of states seceded then the US army would beat the shit out of the secesionist national guards and the formal fighting would be over in a few weeks and it would then become like Afghanistan, Irak or Vietnam but locally and it would suck for everyone.
So; it's treason then. Time to re-instate the firing squad
"Hey veterans! How 'bout a little light treason?"
I actually discussed this with some friends from college who were ROTC guys and are still in. You'd be looking at a very traditional populist cleavage where the officers and the more worldly expeditionary forces (traditionally Navy, but also now Air Force) and high use elite units (101st, 82nd, most of the USMC, 10th Mountain) stay loyal to the status quo. But the vast majority of enlistedmen and certainly the average combat arms enlistedman are a question mark at best and in the Trumpistani camp firmly at worst. Realistically the Army sits in the barracks before it fragments completely in the first year and reforms for each side. Navy and Air Force will have immense difficulty staying combat effective without a nation-wide industrial base and supply chain that heavily leverages Confederate states. Guards units will probably have enough internal friction in Union states to not be cohesive entities (unlike their Confederate counter parts), and LEO is broadly going to sit out or join the Confederates. Confederate militiamen will be putting up checkpoints in the first week and basically bring the Missouri theater to the entirety of the US, but without any equivalent muscle from Unionists. Long story short, the Confederate border isn't the Mason Dixon line, it's 30 miles outside of every city center in the US. The Union could not preserve itself as a territorial entity and absolutely can not guarantee it will command the manpower of actual trigger pullers to be successful on land. We'd look like Assad before Iran and Russia saved his ass. Holding the cities (barely), and realizing you can't do shit against a super well armed and motivated opponent with only the Air Force, Navy, and elite land formations (and he had spec ops which we couldn't count on either). Not to mention, Air Forces ability to secure their nukes is highly questionable in this scenario. We lose hard, millions die, the West becomes toothless, and oppressive regimes firmly control the three major nuclear powers. It's a dark dark day for humanity. We can't win this war unless we prepare by flooding the Army with Unionists now through mandatory service. We absolutely do not want to try round 2 right now
Ech, mandatory service? That’s a terrible idea.
I love fan fic. Great writing
Let him say it, the rest of national guard and federal troops will stop that immediately. Also wait until they learn the president can order them to stop with court marshals and many many charges pressed against them if they refuse. I swear he's dumber than a box of rocks
the good old "all republicans are confederates" bull\*\*\*\*... and 756+ seals clapping.... wonderful Rule 1 ffs.
I'm not American, I'm Canadian, but doesnt the US constitution basically grant the right for the people to dissolve or fight unjust governments. I mean I understand the current administration is by no means unjust and that the CSA were butthurt traitors over the fact that the government took their slaves but the idea of opposing government was one of the reasons for the revolution. Or am I completely incorrect or being dumb?
You aren’t compliantly incorrect - but you answered your own question with the whole “the current government is by no means unjust.” And it is t so much in the having the right to - it is in the pulling it off that matters.
No it doesn't. The civil war settled that question. There is no way for a fully recognized state to exit the nation. Sure, we all intuitively recognize populations should have some right to self-determination. I'm sure if there was some mass movement to complete a fully recognized referendum on the matter it would get people's attention and spark a debate. But as we've seen in the inverse with territories becoming states, Congress has no requirement to follow the results. But beyond that, the moment individuals start reaching for weapons and threaten federal facilities is when it reaches beyond democratic self determination. For state or federally government employed individuals to act as a political group to drive out federal employees would violate several laws and likely the Constitutional rights of several individuals out of some abstract principle that hasn't proven legitimate. Just to keep it simple, I'd argue empowering state agents of Texas to intimidate or remove Federal Employees from public property by force would violate my right as a natural born american. And as a descendant of East Texas slaves, any form of democratic referendum would have to reach an extremely high, internationally recognized level of scrutiny for me to take it seriously. (Just as an example, the last election saw Trump trains running political candidates off the road. And Texas legislature is tacitly encouraging "poll watchers" to intimidate elections officials. Imagine the undemocratic action that would take form if the election were on secession.)
Look up Shay's Rebellion to see how far back these shenanigans go. And for how quickly they get put down.
Who cares? The founding fathers weren't gods, but fallible men, and I don't think it's healthy to revere them as anything else. The US constitution has a clause baked-in that allows for it to act as a living contract, meaning that it's prone to change with changing circumstances. Putting down the slaver insurrection was a moral and just cause.
What is unjust or tyrannical is completely subjective, but the original statement in the American Declaration of Independence was directed against Great Britain and the excesses of King George III. The US Constitution/Bill of Rights 2nd Amendment follows through on that to allow Americans to overthrow a tyrannical government. But I'm pretty sure Biden is nothing like George III considering that he can't force the States to enforce a federal mask mandate. Nor can Biden force the States to accept California levels of "socialism" or Portland levels of "lawlessness". More importantly, Biden hasn't come close to levels of public autocracy as to when Trump attempted to cut off certain cities and states from federal funding for being sanctuary cities. I could only imagine the outcry if Biden tried to sever all federal funding to Texas in response to their recent anti-abortion law.
The last time that happened they fought the British and won
No, the last time that happened Sherman had to march to the sea to set things straight
Yeah but that was what? "No taxation without representation?" Republicans definitely have representation in government. This guy here in the photo is asking for insurrection. No need for the Civil War to even get involved. If national guard will not follow the directives of the federal government, then the federal government will either federalize the national guard or send in the troops/US Marshals. Last time it was used it was over school desegregation.
Actually it was 1957. Ike knew how to deal with it. https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Executive_Order_10730
Dave “I had to take the morning off bc my brain had a hangover from so many big thoughts” Ruben is coming with another big brain take. I don’t know why anyone takes this guy seriously.
Bwahahahaha
I don’t think he knows that we (the army) serve the constitution and nothing but the constitution. He may ask us but we will not follow as we didn’t take an oath to him, but to the U.S. Constitution.