It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


U.S.A.: Invasion, Insurrection, or Civil War?

page: 2
<< 1    3 >>

log in


posted on Oct, 2 2006 @ 11:15 AM
Well of the three scenarios, Civil War is the most likely.

Invasion? By what?
There is no military power on the planet capable of pulling it off.

Politicians "seizing power" - a little late to the party are we?
Two parties that don't really represent anyone except small bands of partisans have already seized power - without firing a shot, or anyone really paying much attention.

Civil War - well there are plenty of people that can't stand the government, probably a majority - and most of them don't vote, because they don't believe their votes make a difference. But without a major economic crisis there's little motivation - as much as people dislike the leadership, they like their relative affluence & comfort more.

Still, as economies are inherently unpredictable chaotic systems, some kind of major economic downturn is likely eventually. Thus making Civil War the likeliest of the three scenarios. The resentments and cynicism necessary are already in place. All that's lacking is a strong motivator for action.

posted on Oct, 2 2006 @ 04:27 PM
I'll stand by what I said earlier. A lot will depend on how well the initial insurgency does. Imagine this:

[Washinton Post] 8/3/2014: During routine remarks, Press Secretary Jonathan Q. Public said without hesitation, "The President was quite pleased to hear that the level of insurgent activity along the Eastern seaboard has dropped by more than ninety-percent over the last six weeks. Cooperation from individual citizens and civic groups has lead to more than ten thousand tips which have resulted in the arrest of msot dissidents seeking to plunge this country in to chaos."

The Press Secretary's remarks were followed by short presentations made by representatives from the Departments of Homeland Security and National Intelligence. Over the last two months, tactical teams from DHS have worked closely with intelligence analysts from DNI to enhance regional police capabilities, which have been largely responsible for keeping the would-be terrorists from moving freely from one city to the next.

[Click here to read the complete text of this story]

posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 02:55 AM
That is good but you left out the video of the staged bombing and bodies from other news clips mixed and phot shoped to look like the insurgents. At some point they may even throw in the Hollywood Osama at 100 years old to really make them bad guys.

posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 06:46 PM
No matter what actually happens, we should expect to see a major media push by the Federal government to gain support for its side of the argument. As I've already said, it may be quite hard indeed for the rebels, whoever they are, to generate their own positive media presence.

posted on Oct, 4 2006 @ 06:20 PM
Well, now. Here's something to grind on. The North Koreans are going to set off their first underground nuclear test in the weeks or months ahead. Suppose that a N.K. ICBM finds its way to the United States? that would surely be "cause" for deployment of the regular army, would it not? What politician could turn down the temptation presented by that terrible event know....

posted on Oct, 4 2006 @ 06:35 PM
HMMMMM... Il vote C, everything combined together since 9/11 and before will eventually result in a new civil war which will then be the deciding factor as to where America will go next. I personally Don't think it will happen in 10 years, but within 20 and I do not think America will come out of it as one nation anymore. The reason for that is if America where to fall into a civil war the factions that would form are numerous because of our size in general.

posted on Oct, 4 2006 @ 11:34 PM
If an insurgency could grow in to a civil war, it might still fail. Invasion? I would suppose we could see our neighbors stepping in to have a nibble. Under the wrong circumstances, we might be unable to stop that.

posted on Oct, 5 2006 @ 12:00 AM
I don't see a civil war happening anytime soon.

What kind invasion are you speaking of? It is nuts to say the US can be invaded.

There has always been great times of distress in US history. Seriously, you guys are a bunch of negative nancies.

posted on Oct, 5 2006 @ 12:03 AM

Originally posted by BattleofBatoche

They also have all ready promissed North America to the Chinese, to keep them from expansion into Europe & Russia. We are all just slaves with no actual recourse.

Heh?!?!?!? When did anyone promise China, North America? Are you talking about their investments? Seriously, you are way too obsessed with this NWO stuff.

posted on Oct, 5 2006 @ 12:09 AM

Originally posted by RetinoidReceptor
you guys are a bunch of negative nancies.

Nah. We're just kicking the ball around a little. Hypothetical discussion. I should know, I started this party.

posted on Oct, 5 2006 @ 12:10 AM
I go with all three scenarios stated in the op. For years the powers that be have let vicente fox send his citizens over the border in mass waves.Now we have 12 million ppl here illegally,not renewing student visa's etc. Stage either one massive attack,or a series of moderate ones. Tell joe schmo that the terrorists came through the south border,with their weapons/devices. Also let them beleive that the coyotes and illegals were sympathetic with their agenda's,and gave them shelter/food.

We will then shut the border tight with national guard,and ATTEMPT to round up all the illegals. They will then become angry and fight back,but because they are illegal they will be considered "enemy combatants".It becomes us vs. see how the rest unfolds.

posted on Oct, 5 2006 @ 12:28 AM

Now we have 12 million ppl here illegally
I think it's more about 20-30 millions, from many books I red on minutemens and people who study the illegal immigrants. And it's gonna double when the NAFTA highway will be in use.

[edit on 5-10-2006 by Vitchilo]

posted on Oct, 5 2006 @ 02:15 AM
G'day all,

Well, The North Koreans are threatening to set off a nuclear weapon, and cry out "look at poor little 'ol me, I need some financial assistance or I'll let this bomb go off".....C'mon, it's about time we did something about this, like the story about the boy who cried wolf, and yeah, they might let one go off, but where is that going to get them? Not too far.

Just heard North Korea has demanded the US withdraw from South Korea; not much likelihood of that happening is there, so what then? Will the North Invade the south, will the Noprth Nuke Seoul? Any sort of nuclear attack will result in a nuclear reply, you can bet on that, and to make a strong statement to the rest of the world regarding nukes, which the US will only be too happy to promote.

BUT......the Chinese and Russian will try to haul the US's ass to the UN security council, where the other members will veto it, and China will fire up at America.

Now, whether this situation occurs before an attack on Iran or after will be the deciding factor here. For if this pssibly occurs before an attack on Iran it would buy Iran a considerable amount of time regardless of US threats to them for the Yanks would be tied up with another possible Pacific war against the Koreans and China.....the koreans being, welll, maybe even a surprisingly unified one, you never know, they could join forces and become one. The north has the strong-arm and the south has the big wallet, could be like east and west germany's reunification in a way.

But, if the US was caught up in a war with Iran and more troops were sent to the middle east, then an Asian Korean/Chinese war breaks out too, the US would be severely overstretched, mandatory draft brought in, civil disturbances escalating to large levels in ceratin areas, and could get to a point where the USA's armed forces are all over the world fighting various wars and the United Nations is forced to bring in a peace keeping force of their own to quell the disturbances around the United States.

Like Justin said, these are just hypothetical situations based on current and possible events, so before you all cut me down, just voice your opinions, and remember this is a civil discussion.

posted on Oct, 5 2006 @ 02:44 AM
You're right, the big factor here is China and Russia. China won't let the US invade NK IMO because they don't want another US puppet by their side. They already have SK, Japan, Taiwan, India, Pakistan and australia to a certain extand.

Certainly, a reunification of NK and SK would be very interesting. But if NK nuke SK, it's near impossible, but the populations want a reunification, but not under the dictatorship of the stupid Kim Jong Ill, if he could compromise, with the power in SK and the populations, it would be great for everyone, modernization of the north, more liberties, a lot of unified families... it would be very great. Get the US out of their country and claim their sovergnity.

Also, Russia is near war against Georgia because of their new military doctrine and the probable accession of Georgia in NATO. Also, Iran will be soon part of the SCO, the asian NATO. Another factor, it's the accession of Israël in NATO.

If NK test a nuke, the US attention could go there but let Iran alone... if they go to Iran anyway and NK start a war, China will join for sure or ask for NK/SK reunification, the US won't have many choices. Draft, withdraw from SK,nuke NK or face severes casualities. Maybe China would try to get Taiwan... Russia... Georgia. We'll see.

China may invade NK and annex them to stop them making stupid things.

[edit on 5-10-2006 by Vitchilo]

posted on Oct, 5 2006 @ 03:06 AM
Why is it, not only myself that sees this, but many other people too, that the world seems to be balancing on a cliff edge in regards to international law, security, politics, human rights, etc etc etc. It's as if everyone knows what is going to happen, you can sort of feel it in your bones so to speak.

Its that deep gut feelin you have that in the near future our way of life will change dramatically, and maybe not even first hand but as a result of the occurences - such as major war will hugely escalate gas prices, if you can get gas; transportation costs will go up, if you CAN transport; food prices will skyrocket; people will not be able to buy food, riots and robberies of major stores will occur, people will do anything to survive;

the economies will go into depression; factories will close because no one is buying the product in the climate of fear and war; no income......and it goes on and on.....

mankind in such dire situations will return to his primal instincts and behaviours - that of an animal and a hunter gatherer, no matter what the risks for the first priority is to provide for your immediate families health and security.

How, may I ask you, will society get out of a rut such as that?

If every man is going for it for himslef, regardless of the law and morals, how can we ever get a civilised society back into existence?

posted on Oct, 5 2006 @ 03:25 AM
Man this is great conversation, the one thing that truley has me worried now though is the North Korea thing. This is one situation where there will be a whole lot of losers no matter what happens. The North Korean people are at a point where they can not fight to take back their own country even if someone helped them and China dosent want refuges at all. Is this not a good case for 1 well placed bomb or maybe a good sniper it is just such a waste of human life to go to war maybe just because of a crazy man.
If anything happens in Asia it will I fear send our country into a tailspin that we may not be able to stop.

posted on Oct, 5 2006 @ 03:18 PM
Okay, let's put a little spin on this and ask the question. Is the U.S. Vulnerable to international events? Which of those events would trigger invasion, insurrection, or civil war? I've got an answer, but I want to hear yours first.

posted on Oct, 5 2006 @ 04:10 PM
You guys are going off into mythic realms, not even possibilities.

The US will not get in a war with China and South Korea. China will not attack Taiwan, because not only will the US be angry about it, but so will the EU.

Asia's economies are developing and need western investment and business. Getting involved in a war with the West will have many investors withdraw due to tensions and nervousness that everything will go to hell.

Economics rule the world. Thankfully at this point in time, the world is so economically intermingled with each other that a large war just will not happen. Sorry to burst your bubbles.

posted on Oct, 6 2006 @ 01:37 AM
We're just having a little fun. Sorry it doesn't appeal to you. As you can see, there's a wide variety of opinions here.

posted on Oct, 6 2006 @ 04:17 AM
the only thing your going to worry about in a civil war is where your next meal is or who you will have to shoot next to get it. kiss you know what to get it and so on.what do small countries worry about, that will be us. famine, gangs, killings, not the civil war you think of (the red coats are comming.)no, not this time.

top topics

<< 1    3 >>

log in