If the US Civil war | |
| MartianPrincess Ginesthoi! User ID: 1302027 12/27/2012 12:16 AM ![]() Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 30708042 12/27/2012 12:22 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | You mean the War of Northern Aggression and if they started to kill us again so we would do what they wanted, who would win? Whatever happens to "America" will be determined by the military and which side they choose. It's not likely that they will just stand to the side. |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 30922287 12/27/2012 12:24 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 5436144 12/27/2012 12:33 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | It would be brutal, but no country in the world could win a ground war in America including our own government. considering the thousands upon thousands of atvs,dirt bikes,pickups,golf carts,and our stockpile of assault weapons,I think it's safe to say we've got the worlds quickest and deadliest infantry.Don't forget once you leave the city everybody has got on some sort of hunting camo,whether it's a ballcap,pajama pants,slippers or high quality carharrt types with realtree or mossy oak prints. |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 30108220 12/27/2012 12:37 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | The Southern states could be counted on to line up with the South but I wonder if all those northern states would be so eager to line up with this government we have? I don't think it would be the same kind of North VS South division this time around were it to ever happen. It will not happen though. But it's interesting to think about how it might play out. |
| Dr. Lecter User ID: 24275310 12/27/2012 01:04 AM ![]() Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | it's not going to be "north vs. south"... it's going to be red vs. blue... left vs. right. Liberal Logic: Demanding that the government stay out of your bedroom while insisting they pay for your birth control and abortions. The only way we will win, is by being more passionate about defending our liberties, than the other side is about taking them away. |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 24782026 12/27/2012 01:06 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
| IssueX User ID: 14348632 12/27/2012 01:19 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | it's not going to be "north vs. south"... it's going to be red vs. blue... left vs. right. Quoting: Dr. Lecter agree urban vs rural is the modern problem, except this time the conservatives control the rural regions and the liberals have the cities... This is the inverse of the breakdown in China during Mao's revolution I don't believe there will be anything more than strong talk, but history does suggest that those who hold the country are in a stronger position than those in the cities and Anita Dunn would probably agree, as the section of Mao's little red book she was reading (her favorite philosopher, lol) was discussing exactly this point This is what she said to a graduating class: In 1947, when Mao Tse-tung was being challenged within his own party, on his plan to basically take China over, Chiang Kai-shek and the nationalist Chinese held the cities, they had the army, they had the air force, they had everything on their side and people said how can you win, how can you do this, how can you do this against all odds against you, and Mao Tse-tung said “You fight your war and I’ll fight mine.” Think about that for a second, you don’t have to accept the definition of how to do things and you don’t have to follow other people’s choices in the past. [link to www.orthodoxytoday.org] [link to en.wikipedia.org] Interesting times we live in.... Last Edited by IssueX on 12/27/2012 01:21 AM |
| rickky User ID: 27848641 12/27/2012 01:32 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | The question about the Civil war isn't how did the North win but how come it took so long and the South still ended up killing about twice as many Union Soldiers as Confederate soldiers that were killed. The Union had more then twice as many soldier, 90% of manufacturing for things like cannons and 97% firearms production, and 71% of the railroads. Things are no longer so lopsided. But I don't think we will ever have a Civil way like that. If anything it will be a breakup like the Soviet Union because of an economic collapse. Last Edited by rickky on 12/27/2012 01:36 AM |
| Dr. Lecter User ID: 24275310 12/27/2012 01:34 AM ![]() Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | it's not going to be "north vs. south"... it's going to be red vs. blue... left vs. right. Quoting: Dr. Lecter That would be too easy. one can only hope. Liberal Logic: Demanding that the government stay out of your bedroom while insisting they pay for your birth control and abortions. The only way we will win, is by being more passionate about defending our liberties, than the other side is about taking them away. |
| Dr. Lecter User ID: 24275310 12/27/2012 01:38 AM ![]() Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | it's not going to be "north vs. south"... it's going to be red vs. blue... left vs. right. Quoting: Dr. Lecter agree urban vs rural is the modern problem, except this time the conservatives control the rural regions and the liberals have the cities... This is the inverse of the breakdown in China during Mao's revolution I don't believe there will be anything more than strong talk, but history does suggest that those who hold the country are in a stronger position than those in the cities and Anita Dunn would probably agree, as the section of Mao's little red book she was reading (her favorite philosopher, lol) was discussing exactly this point This is what she said to a graduating class: In 1947, when Mao Tse-tung was being challenged within his own party, on his plan to basically take China over, Chiang Kai-shek and the nationalist Chinese held the cities, they had the army, they had the air force, they had everything on their side and people said how can you win, how can you do this, how can you do this against all odds against you, and Mao Tse-tung said “You fight your war and I’ll fight mine.” Think about that for a second, you don’t have to accept the definition of how to do things and you don’t have to follow other people’s choices in the past. [link to www.orthodoxytoday.org] [link to en.wikipedia.org] Interesting times we live in.... history repeats itself... but most chose not to pay attention. there will be no peaceful conclusion to what's about to happen over the next few years. the biggest mistake obama is going to make is trying to disarm the american public. there are simply too many that will not tolerate it. Liberal Logic: Demanding that the government stay out of your bedroom while insisting they pay for your birth control and abortions. The only way we will win, is by being more passionate about defending our liberties, than the other side is about taking them away. |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 9364722 12/27/2012 01:39 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
| IssueX User ID: 14348632 12/27/2012 02:17 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | history repeats itself... but most chose not to pay attention. Quoting: Dr. Lecter there will be no peaceful conclusion to what's about to happen over the next few years. the biggest mistake obama is going to make is trying to disarm the american public. there are simply too many that will not tolerate it. history doesn't repeat...but it does rhyme eyes open, ears to the ground and pay attention to the just noticeable differences... Last Edited by IssueX on 12/27/2012 02:18 AM |
| s. d. butler User ID: 974819 12/27/2012 02:55 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | You mean the War of Northern Aggression and if they started to kill us again so we would do what they wanted, who would win? Whatever happens to "America" will be determined by the military and which side they choose. It's not likely that they will just stand to the side. Maybe. Since the U.S. military is supposed to keep the country safe from external enemies, I don't see why they wouldn't stand down in an internal fight. That is why the obama and ilk want their own SS. They already have DHS. Besides that it may not be a civil war. A civil war is where one side wants to replace the same gubmint with their own gubmint. The american civil war wasn't a civil war since the south merely wanted independence. They did not want to replace the northern gubmint. Last Edited by s. d. butler on 12/27/2012 03:19 AM |
| Anonymous Coward (OP) User ID: 17114980 12/27/2012 09:32 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | You mean the War of Northern Aggression and if they started to kill us again so we would do what they wanted, who would win? Whatever happens to "America" will be determined by the military and which side they choose. It's not likely that they will just stand to the side. Maybe. Since the U.S. military is supposed to keep the country safe from external enemies, I don't see why they wouldn't stand down in an internal fight. That is why the obama and ilk want their own SS. They already have DHS. Besides that it may not be a civil war. A civil war is where one side wants to replace the same gubmint with their own gubmint. The american civil war wasn't a civil war since the south merely wanted independence. They did not want to replace the northern gubmint. Some of the military could go south, some north. I'd be interesting to think of all the ways that could go. |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 25399990 01/05/2013 09:44 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | They wouldnt try. Their out numbered a million to one. US citizens are either into fire arms by sport, former rangers or marines, also teenagers raised on call of duty so warfare is already in their brain and they dont even know it. Slaughter of all who tried to take away weapons. Not to mention most assault rifle owners have hundreds or thousands of rounds just incase that happened ( and yes steel pennatrators ). |
| me5 User ID: 24211503 01/05/2013 09:47 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | I was thinking about this the other day. Some asswipe was saying it's impossible to defeat a tyrannical us government with guns, which is true BUT then I thought about the dc sniper. Two guys with a rifle has millions of people on edge and huge federal resources were required to get them. Now, imagine the government became truly repressive and awful. Imagine 1,000, 2,000 0r 5,000 DC snipers. That would be a very bad situation, so in a sense people with guns could "win" or at least throw some serious wrenches in the gears of things. My thinking is, this will not happen and I truly hope it does not. I think people forget reality, they see life through the prism of movies or something. |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 13825301 01/05/2013 09:51 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Chemical and biological weapons can be employed without any hint of their use. It would look like people are dying and/or becoming incapacitated naturally. The feds know where you live. Your house might blow up like those folks in Indiana. Your militia group will be targeted as white supremacist drug dealing terrorists. It's hard to get popular when everyone thinks you're a Nazi pedophile on crack. Your power can be shut off instantly. Can you shut off theirs? A real Civil War must involve ranking military officers, current or previous-term politicians, and usually support from forign sponsor nations. Guns are about the most worthless thing you could possibly have in a Civil War. What you need are 1. Leadership 2. organization 3. Resources If you have those, you'll have REAL weapons, not some AR-15's. |