What would a war between urban and rural look like?

a reply to: JustJohnny

Um, the US hasn't had the number game in their favor since the Indian wars. Patton often spoke of how Rome would invade regions with serious number disadvantages and still triumph because their leaders understood war strategies. Tzu absolutely wrote about what you're saying he didnt... he called it "Dispersive land" and said it was a fools errand to fight on it, he also said in dispersive territories, the local combatants knowledge of the area alongside some planning leads invaders into traps where their numbers are neutralized.

300 Spartans used this to bloody Persia's nose in a fight where they were outnumbered thousands to one, but I'm supposed to fear 5 suit wearing yuppies with economic potential? LOL! You're hilarious.

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: MrRCflying

The Northerners destroyed the South during the civil war. It would be the same result.

The North and the South were entire regional areas too comprising both urban and rural. It was more like two full countries duking it out.

In this scenario, the left confines themselves to largely urban areas by choice while the rural areas are mainly red.

If you didn't bother watching the posted video analysis, you should. A city is not a complete base from which to fight, and a rural area provides more of what an army needs.

I'm sure you've heard the saying that an army fights on its stomach? Well, that's what the red areas provide both to themselves and to the urban areas. You cannot muster enough power projection out of the cubicle lands to hold the agriculture you need to feed yourselves in blue America. And if you think the hood will fight for you, you are sadly mistaken. And *they* hold most of your guns.

Wow! I had not checked in since last night. Lot's of good opinions, and information.

Personally, I think things would turn to chaos pretty quick. Neither side would come out a clear winner. Everyone would be thrown back to the 1800's. All but the most rural would have a hard time with that.

Again, just a thought experiment, not that I think it would actually happen.

originally posted by: MrRCflying
Just a hypothetical question.

In the US we seem very divided between conservative and liberal right now. More so than I have ever seen in my 45 years on the planet. Everything is very polarized, and it seems there is no turning back at this point.

Let's face reality. Urban centers are basically liberal, while rural areas tend to lean conservative.

In the hypothetical situation, let's assume that things boil over, the government can no longer control things, and basically a new civil war begins.

What would that look like? It sure wouldn't be pretty. Every state has big cities, and open country. How would the dividing lines be drawn, certainly not via states like in the Civil War.

Coastal cities would cut off supplies that are incoming bound for middle America, farmers would stop shipping goods bound for cities. Who would control the electric infrastructure, highways between cities, sanitation, etc???

Which side would the military come down on, would it split? Would they just disband and go home to protect families, and whichever side they believe in?

All hypothetical... let's keep things on topic, not go political. Just a what if scenario.

In the midwest, south, and most of the western mountain states only the inner cities are liberal. Most of the suburbs are conservative. Those cities are much more politically isolated than the cities on the coasts. In Missouri, I would be very fearful if I was left wing and a civil war broke out. The 2 major cities would be choked out or forced into submission at a very early stage.
I do not think there will be any civil war though. Even though Obama took great care in stacking military leadership in his favor I am about 100 percent sure who a vast majority of the military would side with if they had to pick sides and it isn't the side that has deep concerns about tranny's and illegal aliens.

a reply to: JustJohnny

they maybe out numbered but there would be mass looting in the cities and kill each other for food and supplies it would be carnage , by the time food and supplies run out their numbers would be a lot less and the rural areas would be ready and organised , so yes i think that the rurals would win .

a reply to: EmmanuelGoldstein

That may indeed transpire, but as soon as those orders are given, sabotage of the urban areas and infrastructure begins, there are no real 'boundaries', and no place will be safe for anyone.

Ugly stuff.

I just hope it never happens!

Soylent Green!! Great product.


I think if it started the government would release some kind of bug and suddenly less people to fight for survival.




Soylent