When will the next civil war happen?

[rectifryer]

I gave three options in the poll.

[crupiea]

When you think of the actual civil war years ago you have to wonder how they motivated the trops to actually start shooting at each other and killing them in large numbers.

Seems that pride in ones region and especially state was a driving factor of unit pride. That unity helped them look the other way basically and kill anyone not a member of that group.

i dont think we are anywhere near that stage now. Think about it. Even if blm rioters came to town, would you want to mow them down with a machine gun or simply quell the riot and arrest them? Obviosuly arrests and punishment would be a much more understandable reaction.

It would be odd to take up positions and start gunning them down. Then moving into their towns and gunning down their families and such.

We are a very long way from behaving like that i think.

Armen conflicts where police fail and we push back, thats a different story. Thats just defending what is ours and that is a more understandable thing to do. That wouldnt be a huge thing though I dont think. Not to where there are giant factions against one another. People just dont have the heart for it.

Rioters do what they do because they can get away with it. if I could go downtown, get drunk and throw rocks and get a new tv, I would, looks like fun sort of. Most are thinking like that i am pretty sure. if there were serious penalties for it including getting shot, you would think twice about how fun it is.

[DeshaunWatson]

15 years is too late. NWO commences 2030

[FatBallz]

I think the course of the next 5 years will be crucial on the answer to that question. It's too hard to tell at this point.

That said, if there was another civil war in the country, I seriously doubt there would be any shooting and combat. It would be more of a cold civil war with bombings and domestic terrorism. Either way, it would be bad news.

[|ceman]

I would love to see anyone who thinks a civil war is coming to explain how it will play out.

In the 19th century there were clear lines drawn between northern and southern states.

But now it's less about homogenous populations in specific states as pretty much every state has liberal leaning metro and suburban areas and conservative leaning rural areas.

So what would happen then? Conservative militants in rural areas driving to more urban areas to murder liberal citizens? Or just to murder liberal politicians and judges?

At this point if any deeply conservative states wanted to leave the US I don't see any deeply liberal states willing to take up arms to prevent them from leaving. Probably both liberals and conservatives would welcome the secession of the most conservative states.

[Pterodactyl314]

I don’t even see an outright war being possible outside of guerilla warfare. Go back to the civil war both sides were equal on weaponry. Today the non fed side would have less weaponry than the confederacy (better rifles but no artillery) while the fed side has the entire planet mapped out by google, air/land/sea/space control, and with every weapon under the sun.

[LukeLissen]

I don’t even see an outright war being possible outside of guerilla warfare. Go back to the civil war both sides were equal on weaponry. Today the non fed side would have less weaponry than the confederacy (better rifles but no artillery) while the fed side has the entire planet mapped out by google with every weapon under the sun.

that's not how it'll happen

there will be a split in gov and military and both sides will have plenty of artillery and everything else




ps. But I hope not. I hope instead things will calm down in this country. I’d love nothing more than to get proven wrong on this subject.

[FatBallz]

I would love to see anyone who thinks a civil war is coming to explain how it will play out.

In the 19th century there were clear lines drawn between northern and southern states.

But now it's less about homogenous populations in specific states as pretty much every state has liberal leaning metro and suburban areas and conservative leaning rural areas.

So what would happen then? Conservative militants in rural areas driving to more urban areas to murder liberal citizens? Or just to murder liberal politicians and judges?

At this point if any deeply conservative states wanted to leave the US I don't see any deeply liberal states willing to take up arms to prevent them from leaving. Probably both liberals and conservatives would welcome the secession of the most conservative states.

The way I see it, for example, is that there wouldn't be a battle front with certain states against other states. It would be more like citizen against citizen, kinda like civil wars in developing nations. Difference is that it wouldn't have the combat aspect. It would be more like The Troubles in the UK with different factions going after things that represent the opposing side via terrorism.

[|ceman]

The way I see it, for example, is that there wouldn't be a battle front with certain states against other states. It would be more like citizen against citizen, kinda like civil wars in developing nations. Difference is that it wouldn't have the combat aspect. It would be more like The Troubles in the UK with different factions going after things that represent the opposing side via terrorism.

So the idea is that conservatives will go militant and turn into actual terrorists?

[NYPat]

Well there's only one idiotic group of people willing to start a "civil war" and we've already seen what they're willing to do last Jan 6th.

[FatBallz]

So the idea is that conservatives will go militant and turn into actual terrorists?

Both will. The hatred will run deep if we get to that point. It wont be pretty.

Of course most of the population will not be involved in any way, but many will likely choose a side (similar to now). The problem is that it would turn the county into a dangerous place to live.

[|ceman]

Both will. The hatred will run deep if we get to that point. It wont be pretty.

Of course most of the population will not be involved in any way, but many will likely choose a side (similar to now). The problem is that it would turn the county into a dangerous place to live.

What makes you think that "both sides" will turn militant? Every comment I've seen about this new "civil war" talks about how conservatives have all the bullets and liberals don't own firearms.

[Pterodactyl314]

Also look forward to more false flags like January 6 this year

[FatBallz]

What makes you think that "both sides" will turn militant? Every comment I've seen about this new "civil war" talks about how conservatives have all the bullets and liberals don't own firearms.

That's because of the current state of our federal government. If the power shifts in coming years, the other side is going to get angry... like when Trump was president. Either side will retaliate against the other as well.

The rioters/protesters that we've seen over the past couple of years will be the types involved. Instead of burning down a police station, they would probably bomb something that represents the other side, sort of like the Weather Underground and other radical groups of the past did, only on a grander scale. The violence would then feed on itself.

Once again, things have to get much worse for this to happen, but it's certainly a possibility.

[RIKTER]

I gave three options in the poll.

LOL@silly OP.

Their has been a civil war going on for decades...except, its been a mostly silent war waged by globalists/marxists against the middle class/right leaning voters. Thats been the real power struggle and since the latter doesn't really have any real power/voice, its been a completely one sided war.

Now, as Ive said before, the reason the right is losing/lost, is because they believe civil war to mean tanks in the streets, etc. The marxists knew they couldn't win that war, so they waged, and won, a war within academia/media/financial industries and now control the intelligence communities at the highest levels and much of our military brass.

Im not even getting into how they've financed and strategically placed state attorney generals for the purpose of(eventually) not bringing charges to the mob who will come for your families. The brilliance of the left is that they will end American sovereignty without a single shot ever being fired in their direction.

But keep waiting for that Knight on a white horse to save you.

[radrd]

Never. The majority of the population doesn't care enough to vote in every election, much less take up arms.

[|ceman]

That's because of the current state of our federal government. If the power shifts in coming years, the other side is going to get angry... like when Trump was president. Either side will retaliate against the other as well.

The rioters/protesters that we've seen over the past couple of years will be the types involved. Instead of burning down a police station, they would probably bomb something that represents the other side, sort of like the Weather Underground and other radical groups of the past did, only on a grander scale. The violence would then feed on itself.

Once again, things have to get much worse for this to happen, but it's certainly a possibility.

There have always been fringe militia groups and individual lone wolves. That's not the same as a civil war.

Plus only one side is fantasizing about killing those with different political beliefs.
"At this point, we're living under corporate and medical fascism. This is tyranny. When do we get to use the guns? No, and I'm not — that's not a joke. I'm not saying it like that. I mean, literally, where's the line? How many elections are they going to steal before we kill these people?"

[Fishman15]

November 5th 2024

[|ceman]

November 5th 2024

Who vs who?

[Fishman15]

Who vs who?

Those who agree with the election and those who don't...

[|ceman]

Those who agree with the election and those who don't...

Why would people who agreed with the election take up arms?

And people who disagree with the election outcome will start killing who exactly? Their neighbors with a political sign they disagreed with or a local politician who won the race?

[Lastrepbrah]

Never. The majority of the population doesn't care enough to vote in every election, much less take up arms.

This is most likely the right answer

[A-GAME]

Never. The majority of the population doesn't care enough to vote in every election, much less take up arms.

This.

[2011change]

Reported to the FBI

[LukeLissen]

Every time there's a thread like this there's always posts like these, mostly talking about silly things like who ya gonna shoot your neighbahs!?

Wars are organized forceful conflicts that start with at least one organized side engaging in forceful activities to seek a desired outcome. They are not about 'who ya gonna start shootin bro.' Wars are not about killing somebody - they are about the use of force to defeat another group of opponents and seek a desired outcome either wholly -against- that group or a more desirable negotiated outcome -from- that group. The outcome can be many things such as complete defeat of the opponent and the takeover of rule of a territory; or it can be to create a situation wherein a more desirable negotiated settlement is reached -with- the opponent.

In the case of Civil War II in the US in the present-to-near-future context, it would most likely start with at least one organized side ending normal legal-political negotiations/discussions and beginning the organized and regulated use of force to takeover strategic targets such as government quarters, communications, military bases, ports and airports, manufacturing districts, cities and larger regional areas, etc etc etc.

[LukeLissen]

Never. The majority of the population doesn't care enough to vote in every election, much less take up arms.

It's completely irrelevant. The masses- the majority of the unorganized population - rarely or pretty much never engages in warfare when it happens; and so it most certainly is not any sort of requirement in the slightest. It's always a far smaller organized minority % of the population who does so.

[|ceman]

Every time there's a thread like this there's always posts like these, mostly talking about silly things like who ya gonna shoot your neighbahs!?

Wars are organized forceful conflicts that start with at least one organized side engaging in forceful activities to seek a desired outcome. They are not about 'who ya gonna start shootin bro.' Wars are not about killing somebody - they are about the use of force to defeat another group of opponents and seek a desired outcome either wholly -against- that group or a more desirable negotiated outcome -from- that group. The outcome can be many things such as complete defeat of the opponent and the takeover of rule of a territory; or it can be to create a situation wherein a more desirable negotiated settlement is reached -with- the opponent.

In the case of Civil War II in the US in the present-to-near-future context, it would most likely start with at least one organized side ending normal legal-political negotiations/discussions and beginning the organized and regulated use of force to takeover strategic targets such as government quarters, communications, military bases, ports and airports, manufacturing districts, cities and larger regional areas, etc etc etc.

So sounds like you're saying that one of these right wing radical militia groups would start by taking over the state government and airports and other military and commercial assets in that state?

Do you think conservatives across the country would cheer them on or condemn them?

[LukeLissen]

So sounds like you're saying that one of these right wing radical militia groups would start by ...

No. No I'm not.

I've already clearly said a great many times that it could and would only happen after a split in government and military.

[|ceman]

No. No I'm not.

I've already clearly said a great many times that it could and would only happen after a split in government and military.

Elaborate. The military obeys the commander in chief and the Constitution. Unless if you're saying that there would be a military junta.

[LukeLissen]

The military obeys the commander in chief and the Constitution.

You're describing normal times.

If the 'government splits' then there's more than one commander in chief ... and normal constitutional order is then no longer in effect. If the military then also splits along those two sides of gov split, then there would either be a negotiated settlement or war.

If there is no government split, nor anything but one commander in chief, and the military obeys the commander in chief and only the commander in chief then there's no civil war.