What are your predictions if the US had another Civil War?

I believe there will be a violent overthrow of the US government within my lifetime. I believe there will be a wholesale slaughter of people living in ghettos/inner cities. There'll be something like 'The Purge' in the burbs and rural areas. I wouldn't want to be anyone who looked like a potential illegal immigrant.

It'll get stupid if farmers get snuffed. Really bad if the guys who know how to run nuclear power plants get tagged. A bad place to live if natural water supplies are poisoned.

The military will 'put it down' if things get bad enough that another nation might invade. Expect that when the electrical grid is threatened in any way.

The Federal Reserve is done and the US Dollar won't be worth the paper it's printed on. The rest of the world will likely turn its back on the country and try to get the 'weapons smart' people to defect (much like Operation Paperclip).

Let's hope I'm wrong.

a reply to: JUhrman

Says the guy with a very Arab looking avatar.. gosh, that must mean you're a terrorist or something!
No worries.. I reported you to the relevant European authorities.

LOL.. you really are too much aren't you?

I'm not an American. But even if your ridiculous jest pertained to me I'm quite sure nothing I wrote was of any interest. Besides, some would say even frequenting this site may put you on a list. Either way, I don't care and nothing YOU could do could ever touch me. You're insignificant like that.

originally posted by: TheLaughingGod
a reply to: JUhrman

Reported to the fun police too for being oblivious to sarcasm.


PS: my avatar is an Indian prince, not an Arab. Reported for racism.

a reply to: Aazadan

So, basically you're describing the show "Revolution" that got cancelled a year or two ago?

I would side with the most liberty-minded people fighting for their liberty. I watch the show "Turn" on AMC, and I can't help but think that I easily would have been one of the rebels fighting under (or with) Washington.

I think the true sense of Liberty has been lost in our government and politicians in the last 100 years, and seems to be getting exponentially worse as technology helps those in power invade our privacy and lives with increasingly secretive frequency. The spirity of Liberty has been lost on our political officials--but it's bound to happen in cycles in every society. A reset button is always a good tihng to hit, so I'd be on the side fighting to capture and hit the reset button as opposed to fighting for a side that is seeking to establish an already-existing status quo, but just with more control than before over the government.

Fighting for one of the two main sides of current American politics are akin to spitting in the face of the pursuit of life, liberty, or happiness--at least for me.

It won't be a revolution. It will be a holocaust against people of color. Racism in America is growing....
We aren't coming together as a country we are being divided by those with an agenda of control.....the fascist corporate elite.

The control mechanisms are in plain sight if your ideologies haven't clouded your senses of perception.

www.globalresearch.ca...

a reply to: Aazadan

The outcome of a civil war?

The USA would get weakened by internal division, leaving the door wide open for a Sino-Russia takeover.

The next American Civil War would be a bunch of people making threats back and forth and no one actually doing anything...

a reply to: JUhrman

I called it a ridiculous jest for a reason - giving you the benefit of the doubt. In the case that you were serious it didn't make much sense.

By the way, since it seems you're new at life or perhaps the internet: using sarcasm on the internet is a losing proposition. They've even got a law named for it, it's called Poe's law.

Morgan's Maxim elaborates:
"Any sufficiently advanced troll is indistinguishable from a genuine kook."

The Op has asked about another civil war in the USA. And what would be the outcome of such.
Having given it thought here is what I believe would happen:
First would be chaos, negotiations and then finally ultimatums, with a single shot causing the set off of the whole powder keg. At stake would be the country. And it would be nasty and fighting to the end. The sides would be states wanting to leave the union, and the federal government. However, the moment it happens, there would be panic in the streets as people try to move to behind the drawn up lines, wanting to move either from where they are or far away from the boarders. As the tensions built up, the states would be struggling to reinforce and protect their infrastructure.
During that time, some groups would see an opportunity to stake out for themselves. The wild cards in this mess will be the minorities, like the African Americans and the Hispanic community, seeking which ever side will give them the best deal, and to settle old scores, from hurts long past and gone.

Many states will have a problem, as there are military bases in most states, however those with more than 2 will be even more hard press, as then that gives a toe hold to the Federal government to be in those states. And major military bases will go on alert, with orders to shoot to kill any trying to jump the fence on either side. Then the race is on. While both sides are engaged in hostilities, the race is on to control the infrastructure of the area. Resources will become vital. Things like water and power become more valuable than say gold or silver. Choke points like highways will become targets as will airports. Then there is the communications, to either kept going or to destroy.

It will be messy, make no mistakes, as there will be those opportunistic people who will make claims that one group or individuals are spying for the other side, seeing them as a chance to be locked away, or killed, with little to no evidence. Food will become an issue after about a month, as will medication and medical supplies. Gas will get even harder to come by, and in short it will either be a long drawn out war, or a very short one.

The biggest issue here that will be required, will be to get the populations support for such. The side that can get the population to support them, will win in the end, and achieve victory. Then comes the clean up.
If the Federal government were to keep the Union in tact, there will be a cost levied on the states and people who were engaged in the civil wars. Some will be fair, though it will hurt for generations to come. Should the Federal government lose, then the country will break apart, into different sections, with a few seeking to become their own independent country, while some will come together. This would be a country of many nations and all will be initially 3rd world status for a bit until they can get their acts together and start moving forward. A few may even be absorbed into other countries. And the healing will take years if not generations to happen.

a reply to: Ritter327

WTH are you talking about. I said ANY western nation not just the US.

God, go do what ever you do to get in a better mood. That was a jerk thing to say...grow up.

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: Aazadan

So, basically you're describing the show "Revolution" that got cancelled a year or two ago?

Am I? I never saw it, or even heard of it.

a reply to: Aazadan

Maybe there would be a chance of world peace if America was preoccupied with fighting on its own soil .

a reply to: Aazadan

Well, sort of. It was about a modern world where all the power is disabled, and the U.S. is divided up into different countries that are fighting with each other while what's left of the U.S. government is trying to regain control over the original borders of the country (but doing so in illegal and evil-minded ways, like killing off masses of people and towns who are fighting against them).

It was an interesting series, although the acting wasn't always the greatest (but I thought the writing and production was good).

Your scenario isn't exactly the same, but the ensuing chaos and reactions of people would probably be similar.

You need to factor in the urban/rural divide. In most places in this country, the blue attitude is largely an urban phenomena. Once you get beyond the large urban areas - rich and poor - the country goes red - rich and poor. This is something that happens in pretty much every state of the union.

Basically though, what the US was and is intended to be - a country where the average citizen is mostly free to pick and choose his own destiny through his own actions - is a foreign concept to the rest of the world. So as soon as a part of the country rebels against a strong-arming central government attempting to impose its central planning will, all that government has to do is call out to the other nations of the world, and they will be only too happy to help.

The libertarian and classical liberal forces attempting to re-establish the old order of Constitutional Originalism will not just be fighting our own government, but that of more or less every other nation on earth, too.

a reply to: sdcigarpig

I've read that it comes down a 1/3 proposition. A revolution only needs about 1/3 of the civilian population to buy in, 1/3 of the military to support it in order to succeed. So it doesn't need to be in a majority position at all.

Right now, the Federal government is polling at well below 40% popularity in almost all branches. Only Obama has any real kind of vestige of popularity left in the country, and if he goes too far, that falls out.

But a would be revolt has to be careful too. Take the wrong kind of action in the wrong way and the public won't support it either.

That's why the Bundy Stand-Off was only a stand off. Whichever side fired the first shot was going to lose.

Two low power low yield nukes will quieten down the populace when they get a bit frisky, people will soon remember Japan.

originally posted by: ketsuko
You need to factor in the urban/rural divide. In most places in this country, the blue attitude is largely an urban phenomena. Once you get beyond the large urban areas - rich and poor - the country goes red - rich and poor. This is something that happens in pretty much every state of the union.

Basically though, what the US was and is intended to be - a country where the average citizen is mostly free to pick and choose his own destiny through his own actions - is a foreign concept to the rest of the world. So as soon as a part of the country rebels against a strong-arming central government attempting to impose its central planning will, all that government has to do is call out to the other nations of the world, and they will be only too happy to help.

The libertarian and classical liberal forces attempting to re-establish the old order of Constitutional Originalism will not just be fighting our own government, but that of more or less every other nation on earth, too.

This is something I tried to touch on. Urban centers are more liberal and densely populated this makes them a good terrorist target for conservatives. On the other hand, rural areas which are more conservative can't really be effectively controlled by troops because the population density is so much lower. This would lead to things like air strikes, burning farms, and so on for a response to force them out of rural areas, if it went down liberal vs conservative lines. Basically, one group would be attacking people while the other is attacking their homes.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: sdcigarpig

I've read that it comes down a 1/3 proposition. A revolution only needs about 1/3 of the civilian population to buy in, 1/3 of the military to support it in order to succeed. So it doesn't need to be in a majority position at all.

Right now, the Federal government is polling at well below 40% popularity in almost all branches. Only Obama has any real kind of vestige of popularity left in the country, and if he goes too far, that falls out.

But a would be revolt has to be careful too. Take the wrong kind of action in the wrong way and the public won't support it either.

That's why the Bundy Stand-Off was only a stand off. Whichever side fired the first shot was going to lose.

Less actually. 10% support among the general population can do it, 1% of those that are fighting age and willing to take up arms. The 10% mark is where an idea becomes accepted and valid as a legitimate argument/belief.

originally posted by: pikestaff
Two low power low yield nukes will quieten down the populace when they get a bit frisky, people will soon remember Japan.

The US would never nuke it's own citizens, the nukes would however act as an effective deterrent to prevent Russia, China, and others from taking parts of the US in the chaos.

a reply to: Aazadan

We already are fighting a civil war in the US: The War on Drugs.

With Patriot Act powers and mass surveillance that is constantly collected under, the main target has been drug investigation, NOT terrorism.

The War on Drugs has given the state the power to confiscate one's money with no proof of a crime, and major assets like vehicles and property over a relatively small amount of illegal drugs. It also encourages neighbors to spy on each other and report anything suspicious. The War on Drugs also targets the poor as well as blacks and Hispanics.

It also has created an Army of domestic spies with Confidential Informants who are covertly on payroll and deep undercover agents who will often befriend someone for years and be allowed to indulge with illegal drugs, as well as buy and sell illegal drugs all so they can make a big bust that enables to seize cash and assets.

What gets me, is so few recognize that the war on drugs is a civil war that appears to have no end in site.