Potential for Civil War in the USA

This has pretty much been a hot topic since Obama took the presidency. Of course during the Obama years it was the right aching and pining away at the idea of it. Now it seems that alot of lefties are day dreaming about it.

It is a very bad idea in any regard and if it ever did happen, many of us would die. Many of our friends and family would die. Is it worth it in reality? No, not really.

However, lets just say it did happen.

My thoughts are that in the country, the right would win. The main reason for that is that nearly all leftwing strongholds are in cities. Cities can be blockaded. The essential needs that people need would be stopped. The poorer people in those areas would begin to riot. Those riots would start an insurrection and rebellion within the strongholds. Also take into account that the left has spent the last couple of decades alienating themselves from those that would be the "boots on the ground" ie cops. I mean initially they may have success due to bigger firepower but for how long? Also I am positive that at least 50% of the armed forces supporting the left would abandon and fight for the other side.

Hell, even the blue states are 50/50 when you look at county maps (with a few exceptions).

Also take into account that rural and some suburban people are heavily armed with military backgrounds.

Think about all the chokepoints in the USA. Strategically I can think of at least 3 states where almost the entirety of the state are chokepoints.
Missouri, Colorado, and most of Arkansas.

Texas would pop out of the union instantly and be on the "right" instantly. Same for most southern states.

The thought of it is horrific - I suppose my final thought is this; if you are sane, do not support the meme that there should be a civil war in the USA. It will affect you personally, and many people you know will die.

a reply to: Fools

First thing to actually think of is competition for resources.

Big cities will have their populations eating each other in a week.

An example for you... I've spoken to ranchers in Oklahoma who lived through the Great Depression. For them, nothing really changed in their lives. At all. Now, the people in the cities... that was a whole other ball of wax.

Now change that to an actual civil war?

That's Georgia Guidestones kinda population reduction. It would be horrible.

There will be no civil war in the United States.
There may be protests, even small and shortlived rebellions,
might occur.
Civil war though, not a chance and for more reasons than I care to list.

a reply to: ezramullins

If the left wing gets a re-vote or whatever on Hillary because she supposedly won the popular vote (which come on we all know at least 10 percent of the Dem vote is dead people and so on - is why they are so against voter ID laws) I can pretty much say that there would be several states willing to opt out of this union.

a reply to: Fools

What do you mean by chokepoints? Just curious.

I'm not sure you understand what a chokepoint actually is if you're defining entire states as a chokepoint.

But thanks for the advice to not support a civil war. Really enlightening.

a reply to: pirhanna

Areas where all transportation to and from, in and out, can be almost completely controlled.

I didn't notice anyone mentioning the hard to ignore point that the loudest of the left are adamantly anti-gun, which means if they have any interest in starting a civil war, they'd be hiring people with guns to fight it for them.

The only way the left start a war in the US would be by leveraging crooked politicians to take over the government and implement strong anti-freedom laws rapidly.
Doing it slowly, the way they've been doing it for the last few decades, is the smarter method.

stocked and cocked

a reply to: Fools

The only way civil war would occur is if the government introduced nationwide martial-law (for whatever reason) and then decided to keep ML active indefinitely until all civilians were completely disarmed.

Then there would be a civil war - government vs citizens vs 2nd amendment.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
I'm not sure you understand what a chokepoint actually is if you're defining entire states as a chokepoint.

But thanks for the advice to not support a civil war. Really enlightening.

Maybe Missouri is one because Kansas City, like Omaha, is one of the few rail hubs that link up east and westbound rail transit.

If any terrorists were really serious about disruption they would hit this area. That they focus instead on high visibility targets like New York and other such spots shows that their intent is not strategic damage but terrorizing the population. No one thinks about flyover much. We get ignored, but if you hit us right, you do lasting damage to the country's ability to transport goods.

Civil war is when one or more parties are vying for control of one government. What if Texas (for example) just wants to go its own way and start its own country? That not a "civil war" that is a revolution. I'd love my home state to be its own country. Local is where its at. Whatever lets be PEACEFUL about it!

While it would be horrid for you all to go through a violent revolution or civil war I do admit it would be very exciting for the rest of the world. Imagine ATS and the you tube videos
But It will not happen I would be more wary of the north...Canada.

You'd have to shut down Mc Donald's,Domino's and KFC simultaneously in tandem with ATand T and Verizon to de-activate zombie mode and cancel football,the Kardasians and all reality tv programmes....all too hard.

a reply to: Fools

You forget Interstate 70 through Illinois, Missouri, Indiana, Kansas, Colorado, Utah, Ohio, West Virginia.......... 40 runs parallel, so it's as much of a "choke point" as 70.
I've seen the highway backed up for over 20 miles [ literally ] because of a bad wreck, that took hours to clear. Now, Imagine if several bridges were taken out.
Like another poster said, there may be "brushfire" type fighting, but civil war? No.

originally posted by: testingtesting
While it would be horrid for you all to go through a violent revolution or civil war I do admit it would be very exciting for the rest of the world. Imagine ATS and the you tube videos

But It will not happen I would be more wary of the north...Canada.

Yeah, gotta watch them Canucks. Weird folk. Milk in bags, eating ketchup chips and poutine. Saying "eh" all the time. And calling ham bacon. Gotta watch out for them.

a reply to: ketsuko

Maple syrup also, chopping all the trees down and wearing high heels...

But Nah like khnum said most people only care about the comforts they have and will not kick off to jeopardize them. Some will but they will be put down by the people who can afford the best and pay the best.

a reply to: testingtesting

It depends.

You don't need a majority of active rebels to succeed, but they would need the sympathy of a enough of the remaining populace in order to have a majority or near to one.

Looking at the map, the government is very near to losing the consent of the governed as it is.

IMO there has been a civil war going on since at least JfK was popped if not before. Smedly Butler comes to mind also..it is just more transparent/accepted now due to the takeover of our educational institutions.... instead of bullets they use PC words and intimidation... The oligarchy controls the press and has many of the laws approved or written by their financed buds in congress... a civil war between the people would just cause the people to die and would change very little in the long term without a real revolution like France had with their monarchy.. The problem with that is the roots extend every where and the head (s) are well hidden..

One of the reasons I still like Trump is because everyone in power still hates him.... they have much to lose.... I hope he and his team..... does not let us down...!

In my opinion, the only real solution to all the fighting and misery going on between citizens, is to give states back their sovereignty.
There is supposed to be 50 different independent states, each a little different from the next. Each American is supposed to be able to move freely to any of these states. If a state adopts a liberal form of government, anyone with liberal beliefs would be free to make a home with citizens who share a common core value with them.
And conservative minded people would have their place to call home as well and make laws that please them. We were never supposed to force our beliefs on each other election after election.
Right now Bernie Sanders should be governor somewhere, practicing his constituents version of utopia. People from all walks of life should be exercising their right to live with people who believe as they do......and taxing themselves accordingly.
Instead we give no one, what ever their beliefs.... the chance to live out their version of the American Dream. Forcing people to dwell together who are fundamentally different in their beliefs, each side doing whatever it takes to force the other to accept their way as superior...... will never amount to anything good