The Conservative Cave
Current Events => Politics => Topic started by: Right and Proud on January 01, 2013, 05:25:51 PM
-
I suspect we can all agree that the United States hasn't been this politically divided since the late 1850s. And we all know what that division led to.
So is another Civil War brewing in this country?
Is it inevitable?
Avoidable?
Just one possibility among many?
Can civil war be averted if some states secede, or will that just guarantee it?
My honest opinion is I don't know what can and can't happen - the actions and ideological positions of the left never make sense to me - but I don't feel very optimistic about remaining a united United States.
I could be wrong, and just worrying too much. But I have four soldier-age sons, and I can't help worrying about it.
I'd really appreciate other views.
Thanks!
-
Conditions will have to get much worse first.....like a major food shortage for instance...it would take something that drastic to get people out with their weapons and ready to fight.
-
I don't think a civil war is likely, but at some point the Demonrats will run out of OPM, and the government teat will run dry. That will lead to a decrease in population when the moochers and takers start rioting.
The Dems know that and that is why they want to disarm law abiding citizens.
-
No.
-
I don't think a civil war is likely, but at some point the Demonrats will run out of OPM, and the government teat will run dry. That will lead to a decrease in population when the moochers and takers start rioting.
The Dems know that and that is why they want to disarm law abiding citizens.
It would be interesting if someone conducted a poll of democrats and see exactly how many of them want gun control versus how many republicans want gun control
I have no stats to back this up but i kinda suspect that it is the democratic leadership that is pushing the gun control issue and not the people.....just my opinion.
-
Extremely unlikely...roughly as unlikely as Obama's policies actually coming through on the free Skittles-shitting unicorns for everyone, actually.
-
Extremely unlikely...roughly as unlikely as Obama's policies actually coming through on the free Skittles-shitting unicorns for everyone, actually.
We live in interesting times.....things are changing very quickly.....it would be nothing short of arrogancy to contemplate the possibility of civil unrest in the next few years......any sort of huge disaster man made or otherwise could push the nation into armed conflict. Do not think for one moment just because this is America that it could not happen.
-
I meant to say to fail to contemplate the possibility of social unrest.
-
I would never want to see this country plunge into another civil war. Even if we disagree politically. It was a tragedy the first time and it could only get worse the second time.
-
I would never want to see this country plunge into another civil war. Even if we disagree politically. It was a tragedy the first time and it could only get worse the second time.
Most know very little about the War Between The States....if it hapens again it will be completely davastating. Some very intelligenct people have suggested the possibility...it is something that deserves serious thought for sure.
-
Russian Scholar Says America Will Break Apart............http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,457550,00.html
-
The more appropriate name for that conflict is....The War Between The States
http://www.ncwbts150.com/CivilWarorWarBetweentheStates.php (http://www.ncwbts150.com/CivilWarorWarBetweentheStates.php)
-
Most know very little about the War Between The States....if it hapens again it will be completely davastating. Some very intelligenct people have suggested the possibility...it is something that deserves serious thought for sure.
You are starting to bore the **** out of me.
-
We live in interesting times.....things are changing very quickly.....it would be nothing short of arrogancy to contemplate the possibility of civil unrest in the next few years......any sort of huge disaster man made or otherwise could push the nation into armed conflict. Do not think for one moment just because this is America that it could not happen.
Arrogancy? Is that different from arrogance?
-
Arrogancy? Is that different from arrogance?
Check with the School Marm or the grammar cop. heh heh
-
Hi,
I think it will happen. There was a Russian scholar after the 2008 election that predicted the breakup of the US much like happened to the Soviet Union. He then showed the country breaking up into five parts. His reasoning for the breakup made sense; however I disagreed with how it would turn out..
When you look at the demographics of voting by county you will notice that the vast majority of the geography votes republican; it is predominately the inner cities that are democrats.
I don't feel that it will be totally taxation that does it as much as continued erosion of individual freedom. The most interest part is there are already secessionist movements taking place. BO basically said no state will secede that was decided in the 1860's; however that does not make it so.
Here is my question. If several states decided to secede and form a new union, who is going to fight to preserve the union? The welfare class who are on the dole?
Happy New Year everyone,
5412
-
Another civil war in the United States would be between . . . who?
Not states, because the north/south geographical divide no longer applies.
Would the county-by-county voting map from the 2012 election mean anything?
(http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/2012-Election-County-By-County-570x346.png)
-
You are starting to bore the **** out of me.
Put me on ignore then.....ah duh!
Where do such ignoramouses come from?
-
There will not be a civil war. Obama doesn't have an army of people willing to die for obamaphones.
My worst case scenario is secession: Conservative states leave the union and Obama does nothing.
-
Put me on ignore then.....ah duh!
Where do such ignoramouses come from?
You're not worth the effort to put you on ignore. I'd rather type snarky responses to your dumbass statements.
As to where you ignoramuses come from -- that's a great question. Where DO you come from?
-
Put me on ignore then.....ah duh!
Where do such ignoramouses come from?
You ARE being an asshole.
-
Hi,
I think it will happen. There was a Russian scholar after the 2008 election that predicted the breakup of the US much like happened to the Soviet Union. He then showed the country breaking up into five parts. His reasoning for the breakup made sense; however I disagreed with how it would turn out..
When you look at the demographics of voting by county you will notice that the vast majority of the geography votes republican; it is predominately the inner cities that are democrats.
I don't feel that it will be totally taxation that does it as much as continued erosion of individual freedom. The most interest part is there are already secessionist movements taking place. BO basically said no state will secede that was decided in the 1860's; however that does not make it so.
Here is my question. If several states decided to secede and form a new union, who is going to fight to preserve the union? The welfare class who are on the dole?
Happy New Year everyone,
5412
-
Hi,
I think it will happen. There was a Russian scholar after the 2008 election that predicted the breakup of the US much like happened to the Soviet Union. He then showed the country breaking up into five parts. His reasoning for the breakup made sense; however I disagreed with how it would turn out..
When you look at the demographics of voting by county you will notice that the vast majority of the geography votes republican; it is predominately the inner cities that are democrats.
I don't feel that it will be totally taxation that does it as much as continued erosion of individual freedom. The most interest part is there are already secessionist movements taking place. BO basically said no state will secede that was decided in the 1860's; however that does not make it so.
Here is my question. If several states decided to secede and form a new union, who is going to fight to preserve the union? The welfare class who are on the dole?
Happy New Year everyone,
5412
There is a link above about the Russian.....I do not think the coming civil unrest will be like the War Between the States ....it will not be so formal. Ever heard of the term...'Assymetrical Warfare' that is most likely what it will be like.
There will be No North South struggle...it will be a struggle for survival....it will start out as rioting in the big cities...most likely food riots....then people will start forming alliances....families,neighborhoods, regions etc. these alliances will produce war lords of a sort...so there will be a complete break down first of law and order then regional and national battles.
-
You ARE being an asshole.
You are entitled to your opinion.....and opinions are like assholes...everyone has one. heh heh
-
There will not be a civil war. Obama doesn't have an army of people willing to die for obamaphones.
My worst case scenario is secession: Conservative states leave the union and Obama does nothing.
I do not think the coming violence will begin like that. As I have already posted.....it will take a huge disaster to initiate it and then a breakdown of law and order...then it will be every man for himself...those that can form the most potent miltaristic groups will dominate.
-
Another civil war in the United States would be between . . . who?
Not states, because the north/south geographical divide no longer applies.
Would the county-by-county voting map from the 2012 election mean anything?
(http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/2012-Election-County-By-County-570x346.png)
You are on the right track.
-
You're not worth the effort to put you on ignore. I'd rather type snarky responses to your dumbass statements.
As to where you ignoramuses come from -- that's a great question. Where DO you come from?
Very weak come back. I would not even call it a come back. heh heh
-
There is a link above about the Russian.....I do not think the coming civil unrest will be like the War Between the States ....it will not be so formal. Ever heard of the term...'Assymetrical Warfare' that is most likely what it will be like.
There will be No North South struggle...it will be a struggle for survival....it will start out as rioting in the big cities...most likely food riots....then people will start forming alliances....families,neighborhoods, regions etc. these alliances will produce war lords of a sort...so there will be a complete break down first of law and order then regional and national battles.
You're a pompous, arrogant ass. To come parading in here and pontificate about "asymmetrical warfare" as if you had a clue. Well, maybe you do have a clue. Maybe you've got a baseball bat.
How about sticking that baseball bat up your ass and see how it fits?
****tard. :loser:
-
I do not think the coming violence will begin like that. As I have already posted.....it will take a huge disaster to initiate it and then a breakdown of law and order...then it will be every man for himself...those that can form the most potent miltaristic groups will dominate.
More drivel from the shitstick.
-
You're not worth the effort to put you on ignore. I'd rather type snarky responses to your dumbass statements.
As to where you ignoramuses come from -- that's a great question. Where DO you come from?
Here that clicking noise? Thats you being put on ignore. heh heh
-
More drivel from the shitstick.
It's obvious he has no idea what he's talking about.
-
Here that clicking noise? Thats you being put on ignore. heh heh
Thank God. I don't know what I'd do if I couldn't be ignored by you.
-
It's obvious he has no idea what he's talking about.
No, he's simply got a few hours to burn so he came wading in here to pose a few dumbass questions that he thought of while picking the lint out of his belly button.
-
Hi,
I think it will happen. There was a Russian scholar after the 2008 election that predicted the breakup of the US much like happened to the Soviet Union. He then showed the country breaking up into five parts. His reasoning for the breakup made sense; however I disagreed with how it would turn out..
When you look at the demographics of voting by county you will notice that the vast majority of the geography votes republican; it is predominately the inner cities that are democrats.
I don't feel that it will be totally taxation that does it as much as continued erosion of individual freedom. The most interest part is there are already secessionist movements taking place. BO basically said no state will secede that was decided in the 1860's; however that does not make it so.
Here is my question. If several states decided to secede and form a new union, who is going to fight to preserve the union? The welfare class who are on the dole?
Happy New Year everyone,
5412
As an amateur, but avid, student of the Civil War, I've come across the idea that the secession question was decided by the war many, many times. But in the United States, it's the LEGISLATIVE BRANCH that makes the laws we live by, not the Judicial or Executive branches.
And I agree: No matter what Barry says, I can't find any legislation anywhere that prevents states from seceding if they choose to.
Many legal scholars consider that one SCOTUS case dealing with it, Texas vs White (which maintained that Texas had technically never left the Union), was nullified not long after when President Grant signed an act re-admitting Texas to the Union. That set a legal conflict that has never been resolved.
I'm in NO WAY suggesting that any states secede; even my adopted "home state" of Texas. Too many good, patriotic Americans have given their lives to keep the United States together. But I can understand the reasoning behind the desire of some states to be somewhere else when Barry and his rabid lefty minions finally crash the Republic.
-
Here that clicking noise? Thats you being put on ignore. heh heh
Strange, from here it sounded like a Prince Albert tapping out "SOS" on your braces.
-
Thank God. I don't know what I'd do if I couldn't be ignored by you.
Being ignored by a troll. That's rather cowardly. What does Smilingjack do?
1) hijacks a thread (rule breaking)
2) Has no idea what he is talking about
3) starts fights (rule breaking)
4) puts people who object to his asinine statements on ignore.
Generally trolls are braver than that.
-
I look forward to the dems proposing a gun ban of some sort and then having a million-plus protesters show-up armed on the steps of the capital.
That should give them a jolt.
-
Being ignored by a troll. That's rather cowardly. What does Smilingjack do?
1) hijacks a thread (rule breaking)
2) Has no idea what he is talking about
3) starts fights (rule breaking)
4) puts people who object to his asinine statements on ignore.
Generally trolls are braver than that.
I wouldn't have a problem with hijacking a thread so much -- hell, I do it all the time! :-)
But I've been here awhile. This turd was just dropped out of somebody's ass an hour or so ago. Still stinking up the carpet, too.
He's trying to engage in conversation (and getting several who are quite willing to do so) without having done his homework, without trying to assimilate into conversation rather than start his own bullshit, and illustrates not a little bit of pomposity in the process.
I call that "****tard" material.
-
You ARE being an asshole.
And you are being put on ignore....deal wid it chump. heh heh
-
And you are being put on ignore....deal wid it chump. heh heh
Another turd and another coward. One and the same.
-
Strange, from here it sounded like a Prince Albert tapping out "SOS" on your braces.
Now that was funny....i give you credit. heh heh
-
As an amateur, but avid, student of the Civil War, I've come across the idea that the secession question was decided by the war many, many times. But in the United States, it's the LEGISLATIVE BRANCH that makes the laws we live by, not the Judicial or Executive branches.
And I agree: No matter what Barry says, I can't find any legislation anywhere that prevents states from seceding if they choose to.
Many legal scholars consider that one SCOTUS case dealing with it, Texas vs White (which maintained that Texas had technically never left the Union), was nullified not long after when President Grant signed an act re-admitting Texas to the Union. That set a legal conflict that has never been resolved.
I'm in NO WAY suggesting that any states secede; even my adopted "home state" of Texas. Too many good, patriotic Americans have given their lives to keep the United States together. But I can understand the reasoning behind the desire of some states to be somewhere else when Barry and his rabid lefty minions finally crash the Republic.
Something big is headed our way.....and very soon.
-
Something big is headed our way.....and very soon.
You put diesel in the Peterbilt, didn't you.
-
I can see rioting by people who are free loading. As for a second civil war, you never know.
-
Something big is headed our way.....and very soon.
Really? I think you are pushing this a bit too much, troll.
Tell me. Which side will you be on?
-
And you are being put on ignore....deal wid it chump. heh heh
Oohhh. I'm so devastated, NOT.
edit to add: well I'm impressed, I'm ignored by TWO members now.
Maybe if we ALL call him names he will ignore everyone!
-
I can see rioting by people who are free loading. As for a second civil war, you never know.
I think it will start out as minorities rioting in the big cities....then when they head up to the burbs you will a general insurrection....followed by a break down of law and order. There could be intervention from overseas.
I think of all of this is much more probable or at least possible than most can possibly imagine.
Those of us who went through Katrina can relate to all this much better than most.
-
I think it will start out as minorities rioting in the big cities....then when they head up to the burbs you will a general insurrection....followed by a break down of law and order. There could be intervention from overseas.
And who would do the intervening?
If the world doesn't have the balls to take on a few dozen-thousand jihadists how will they muster the strength to take on a few million irate rednecks on their home turf? Who has the strategic lift capability? Even if they tried to take over liberal enclaves like NY and LA the crime alone would make their occupation a living hell.
Obama is building a house of cards. It produces nothing and it despises the one thing that all governments require -- force of arms. And those who do hold the arms don't hold liberals in very high esteem; certainly not high enough to kill their neighbors in defense of a liberal regime.
I see a massive act of defiance coming from the right. A Rosa Parks moment. As I mentioned earlier: it would be a joy to see millions of gun owners parading around the Capital building with thei weapons slung in protest of a pending gun ban. It would be too huge for the police to enforce and as such prove that the idea would bring more grief than it was worth. That would prove just how hollow the current regime truly is.
Giving orders is fun until you realize you have no realistic capability of enforcing your will.
-
There could be intervention from overseas.
I can see a movement at the UN to interfere if there's any kind of civil unrest. Some of those far-left member countries have been salivating to help bring down the United States for decades, and a low-grade shooting war here would be just the kind of excuse they're looking for.
There's a stubborn rumor that Barry has already allowed UN troops to have training bases here. I haven't been able to confirm the rumor, and I haven't been able to disprove it, either. There are sources like this, but it's so easy to fake up this sort of thing on the internet: http://www.thedailysheeple.com/where-is-the-proof-that-un-soldiers-are-on-american-soil-oh-right-here_082012
Anyone know the real story on it?
-
And who would do the intervening?
If the world doesn't have the balls to take on a few dozen-thousand jihadists how will they muster the strength to take on a few million irate rednecks on their home turf? Who has the strategic lift capability? Even if they tried to take over liberal enclaves like NY and LA the crime alone would make their occupation a living hell.
Obama is building a house of cards. It produces nothing and it despises the one thing that all governments require -- force of arms. And those who do hold the arms don't hold liberals in very high esteem; certainly not high enough to kill their neighbors in defense of a liberal regime.
I see a massive act of defiance coming from the right. A Rosa Parks moment. As I mentioned earlier: it would be a joy to see millions of gun owners parading around the Capital building with thei weapons slung in protest of a pending gun ban. It would be too huge for the police to enforce and as such prove that the idea would bring more grief than it was worth. That would prove just how hollow the current regime truly is.
Giving orders is fun until you realize you have no realistic capability of enforcing your will.
If this country was severely weakened in the minds of say China for example....they could very well make a strategic decision to intervene....as far as lift capability....they are spending and spending on such matters...their navy particuarly.
Regarding crime in L.A. or N.Y. my local national guard outfit could deal with that....it is just a matter of being willing to shoot to kill.....crime only flourishes in our big cities because the politicians dare not deal with it for fear of being accused of being a racist...our crime problem is 99 per cent due to politics...politicians ...mostly liberal and pc republicans with more concern over their personal political career than any concern over the best interests of America.
-
If this country was severely weakened in the minds of say China for example....they could very well make a strategic decision to intervene....as far as lift capability....they are spending and spending on such matters...their navy particuarly.
China would be lucky if it could make the trek to Australia and even then sustaining operations would be impossible.
Regarding crime in L.A. or N.Y. my local national guard outfit could deal with that....it is just a matter of being willing to shoot to kill.....crime only flourishes in our big cities because the politicians dare not deal with it for fear of being accused of being a racist...our crime problem is 99 per cent due to politics...politicians ...mostly liberal and pc republicans with more concern over their personal political career than any concern over the best interests of America.
Sorry but the NG won't be subjgating the streets of the US with martial law. Maybe the odd riot but no sustained operation such as you describe.
BTW -- I mentioned the crime in major cities as an impediment to foreign occupation; not as a domestic issue.
-
If this country was severely weakened in the minds of say China for example....they could very well make a strategic decision to intervene....as far as lift capability....they are spending and spending on such matters...their navy particuarly.
You are completely full of shit if you think the Chinese navy could muster together a few cruisers and an odd oiler or two, to go along with their faux aircraft carrier. They might make it out of the brown water in 10 years but until then, fugeddaboudit.
You really might want to stop displaying your ignorance the way you do. It's gone beyond funny to just....sad.
Regarding crime in L.A. or N.Y. my local national guard outfit could deal with that....it is just a matter of being willing to shoot to kill.....crime only flourishes in our big cities because the politicians dare not deal with it for fear of being accused of being a racist...our crime problem is 99 per cent due to politics...politicians ...mostly liberal and pc republicans with more concern over their personal political career than any concern over the best interests of America.
:rotf: :lmao: We got us real genius here. Fo'shizzle. :lol:
-
You put diesel in the Peterbilt, didn't you.
No. But he did stay at a Holiday Inn Express.
-
If this country was severely weakened in the minds of say China for example....they could very well make a strategic decision to intervene....as far as lift capability....they are spending and spending on such matters...their navy particuarly.
China.... :lmao:
They would be stretched on lift if invading Taiwan. Their navy would be sitting on the bottom as soon as it gets underway.
-
China.... :lmao:
They would be stretched on lift if invading Taiwan. Their navy would be sitting on the bottom as soon as it gets underway.
Never know when a small spark will start a forest fire. NEVER FORGET WHAT ROSA PARKS DID WHEN HER FEET ACHED ON A BUS.
Somehow I see this spark starting on the South West border by a group of land owners fed up with Latinos keeping them off the land they pay taxes on.
The blacks fed up with loosing their jobs to illegals, their land to illegals, and the best and brightest of their children not able to go to college as all slots have been filled with non American kids.
I predict the American blacks will start the spark and the Whites will join them------We are not fighting a race of others, we will be defending America from a foreign Country and our Government that doesn't seem to give a rats Ass.
When the Latinos buy land next to the mosques and bring in the Dog and Pig racing fans, as one topic here is about, then we will have the American Muslims that Will fight for their rights as American citizens.
When more States legalize pot, the foreign country's will take a big hit. As did the Boot Leggers when Prohibition ended. The big problem will be that in the city's the Illegals and the blacks will riot against each other for what is left of the drug trade the jobs and security from each other. Why am I thinking about West Side Story, was it the Jets against the Sharks ????
Just one tiny spark will come out of nowhere, Fancy had the shooter in Conn. been an illegal alien that the Government knew was in the country and did not deport for past behavior.
-
Put me on ignore then.....ah duh!
Where do such ignoramouses come from?
You tell us DUmbass since it seems that's where you came from.
-
Here that clicking noise? Thats me being a coward. heh heh
FIFY.
-
Really? I think you are pushing this a bit too much, troll.
Tell me. Which side will you be on?
I can answer that Mr. Mann....the losing one.
-
If this country was severely weakened in the minds of say China for example....they could very well make a strategic decision to intervene....as far as lift capability....they are spending and spending on such matters...their navy particuarly.
Lemme guess--never served or at least wasn't Navy, correct?
-
Lemme guess--never served or at least wasn't Navy, correct?
Dude is a ****ing dumbass. Latest in several. My bet is on Taverner, or whatever his name is. Same level of ****ing stupid.
China doesn't need to invade physically. They already are economically. Once they own everything there (or at least the critical pieces) is no need to put troops on the ground.
-
Dude is a ****ing dumbass. Latest in several. My bet is on Taverner, or whatever his name is. Same level of ****ing stupid.
China doesn't need to invade physically. They already are economically. Once they own everything there (or at least the critical pieces) is no need to put troops on the ground.
But again, and I've said this before, and will say it again until people start understanding it:
China needs us more than we need them. PERIOD. Who is their biggest trading partner? US. Who would be hurt more if trade were cut off? THEM. Yeah, so Joe Six-Pack can't get cheap shit at WalMart anymore, and might have to pay a few bucks extra for that iPhone. But the US market makes up a LARGE percentage of Chinese GDP, and if they want to avoid becoming a bunch of shit-pickers (and they're barely above that level now) they might not want to piss us off all that much.
Everyone bellyaches about how China is the second-largest economy, blah blah blah...but their GDP is still barely 1/4 of ours. Couple that with population, and you're seeing the average Chinese income about 1/10 of ours. Now consider that income disparity is even MORE pronounced in China than it is here.
So sure, they can TRY to put out a shitload of ships, etc., but the quality, capabilities, training of the crews, etc., aren't even close. Not even the same ballpark. Not even the same damned sport.
-
But again, and I've said this before, and will say it again until people start understanding it:
China needs us more than we need them. PERIOD. Who is their biggest trading partner? US. Who would be hurt more if trade were cut off? THEM. Yeah, so Joe Six-Pack can't get cheap shit at WalMart anymore, and might have to pay a few bucks extra for that iPhone. But the US market makes up a LARGE percentage of Chinese GDP, and if they want to avoid becoming a bunch of shit-pickers (and they're barely above that level now) they might not want to piss us off all that much.
Everyone bellyaches about how China is the second-largest economy, blah blah blah...but their GDP is still barely 1/4 of ours. Couple that with population, and you're seeing the average Chinese income about 1/10 of ours. Now consider that income disparity is even MORE pronounced in China than it is here.
So sure, they can TRY to put out a shitload of ships, etc., but the quality, capabilities, training of the crews, etc., aren't even close. Not even the same ballpark. Not even the same damned sport.
[youtube=425,350]NKkRDMil0bw[/youtube]
-
I think it will start out as minorities rioting in the big cities....then when they head up to the burbs you will a general insurrection....followed by a break down of law and order. There could be intervention from overseas.
I think of all of this is much more probable or at least possible than most can possibly imagine.
Those of us who went through Katrina can relate to all this much better than most.
Hi,
I not only see rioting, but see it encouraged by the libs and the Jesse Jackson's of this world. Instead of trying to quell the riots, they will be enabling and encouraging them to do so.
regards,
5412
-
If this country was severely weakened in the minds of say China for example....they could very well make a strategic decision to intervene....as far as lift capability....they are spending and spending on such matters...their navy particuarly.
Regarding crime in L.A. or N.Y. my local national guard outfit could deal with that....it is just a matter of being willing to shoot to kill.....crime only flourishes in our big cities because the politicians dare not deal with it for fear of being accused of being a racist...our crime problem is 99 per cent due to politics...politicians ...mostly liberal and pc republicans with more concern over their personal political career than any concern over the best interests of America.
:retard:
-
And you are being put on ignore....deal wid it chump. heh heh
Ooh... I is so scared!!!! 111111!!!!1111
:bird:
-
You only have to look at recent disasters and riots to know how people would behave on a national level.
-
This whole thread is weird! What the hell possible reason could we have that's big enough (like slavery was) to split apart? Who's going to do the splitting? Every single state in the union has liberals and conservatives. I don't want to move out of Oregon just because it's being split into the United States of Progressive Communist America. And then there's the military. Hell, California is off the cliff liberal and there are several huge military bases there. Oh, and the military is NOT liberal. They also know the left works damn hard to suppress their vote. Very few, very, very few would want to be on the progressive side. As they take an oath to uphold and protect the Constitution, and progressives have little use for it, except for the parts that say "free Mumia", "we're scared to ****ing death of seeing any Christian symbol so bury them all or else we'll melt", or "yes, I can stab that unborn mash of tissues in the head with a fork and suck out of my body...multiple times...and you do have to pay for it", the military would obviously go with the document they swear an oath to protect.
As 200 years of history has shown, capitalism works. Freedom works. Small government works. One side would embrace it fully (finally) and the other side would be...Greece, whining for everyone to bail them out. Me, I'd tell them "you reap what you sow"...this is the world you wanted, wallow in it until it suffocates you and you die in your own selfishness. And then there's the whole issue of gun control. One side would have a few more laws about that than the other. So...one side has the majority of the military AND private gun ownership...I'd say even if the split happened, we'd be the United States of America again in short order. FEMA camps anyone?
Cindie
-
This whole thread is weird! What the hell possible reason could we have that's big enough (like slavery was) to split apart? Who's going to do the splitting? Every single state in the union has liberals and conservatives. I don't want to move out of Oregon just because it's being split into the United States of Progressive Communist America. And then there's the military. Hell, California is off the cliff liberal and there are several huge military bases there. Oh, and the military is NOT liberal. They also know the left works damn hard to suppress their vote. Very few, very, very few would want to be on the progressive side. As they take an oath to uphold and protect the Constitution, and progressives have little use for it, except for the parts that say "free Mumia", "we're scared to ****ing death of seeing any Christian symbol so bury them all or else we'll melt", or "yes, I can stab that unborn mash of tissues in the head with a fork and suck out of my body...multiple times...and you do have to pay for it", the military would obviously go with the document they swear an oath to protect.
As 200 years of history has shown, capitalism works. Freedom works. Small government works. One side would embrace it fully (finally) and the other side would be...Greece, whining for everyone to bail them out. Me, I'd tell them "you reap what you sow"...this is the world you wanted, wallow in it until it suffocates you and you die in your own selfishness. And then there's the whole issue of gun control. One side would have a few more laws about that than the other. So...one side has the majority of the military AND private gun ownership...I'd say even if the split happened, we'd be the United States of America again in short order. FEMA camps anyone?
Cindie
Hi,
Slavery had little to do with the civil war; that is just how Lincoln sold it to the north. Basically the war was fought about states rights versus the federal government. The southern states were of the opinion that the part of the constitution that said, "All other rights belong to the states" was what it meant.
Our individual liberties, schools and most everything else that was handled well on a state level are now regulated by the federal government.
regards,
5412
-
Hi,
Slavery had little to do with the civil war; that is just how Lincoln sold it to the north. Basically the war was fought about states rights versus the federal government. The southern states were of the opinion that the part of the constitution that said, "All other rights belong to the states" was what it meant.
Our individual liberties, schools and most everything else that was handled well on a state level are now regulated by the federal government.
regards,
5412
I agree. Slavery was just a side issue to State's Rights. Wrt that, I agreed wi the South. However, slavery is not acceptable.
-
Hi,
Slavery had little to do with the civil war; that is just how Lincoln sold it to the north. Basically the war was fought about states rights versus the federal government. The southern states were of the opinion that the part of the constitution that said, "All other rights belong to the states" was what it meant.
Our individual liberties, schools and most everything else that was handled well on a state level are now regulated by the federal government.
regards,
5412
That's my take on the progenitor of wide ranging civil unrest. It may take a national disaster, perpetrated by man or nature, but folks will come to realize local control usually comprises the best results. As such there will be a groundswell demand of return of and adherence to the 10th Amendment of the US Constitution. Might even include threats of succession.
-
This whole thread is weird! What the hell possible reason could we have that's big enough (like slavery was) to split apart? Who's going to do the splitting? Every single state in the union has liberals and conservatives. I don't want to move out of Oregon just because it's being split into the United States of Progressive Communist America. And then there's the military. Hell, California is off the cliff liberal and there are several huge military bases there. Oh, and the military is NOT liberal. They also know the left works damn hard to suppress their vote. Very few, very, very few would want to be on the progressive side. As they take an oath to uphold and protect the Constitution, and progressives have little use for it, except for the parts that say "free Mumia", "we're scared to ****ing death of seeing any Christian symbol so bury them all or else we'll melt", or "yes, I can stab that unborn mash of tissues in the head with a fork and suck out of my body...multiple times...and you do have to pay for it", the military would obviously go with the document they swear an oath to protect.
As 200 years of history has shown, capitalism works. Freedom works. Small government works. One side would embrace it fully (finally) and the other side would be...Greece, whining for everyone to bail them out. Me, I'd tell them "you reap what you sow"...this is the world you wanted, wallow in it until it suffocates you and you die in your own selfishness. And then there's the whole issue of gun control. One side would have a few more laws about that than the other. So...one side has the majority of the military AND private gun ownership...I'd say even if the split happened, we'd be the United States of America again in short order. FEMA camps anyone?
Cindie
I don't recall anyone so far offering the opinion that any new civil war would involve states leaving the union, or be region against region. I think it would be an ideological divide and not a geographical divide, which could make it a LOT more deadly - like we're seeing in Syria.
Even in the bluest blue counties there are conservatives, like there are liberals in even the reddest of red counties, which makes it a lot more personal.
And even if they hold opposing ideological convictions, it's a lot easier to hate someone a few hundred miles away that we'll never lay eyes on than it is to hate the family at the next table in the restaurant; who could be former classmates, baseball teammates, fellow ELKS, whatever.
But just because it's hard doesn't mean it can't happen, as has been proven many, many times in the human experience.
My personal plan is to prepare for the worst (EDIT: as best I can), then hope to God it never happens.
-
Most know very little about the War Between The States....if it hapens again it will be completely davastating. Some very intelligenct people have suggested the possibility...it is something that deserves serious thought for sure.
The first civil was fought with highly inaccurate firearms and a lot less people than are in the US today.
Today, firearms are very accurate, highly lethal, and widely disseminated across the nation. Ammo and assault rifles are flying off the shelves. High capacity magazines are unattainable, they've all been purchased. Almost all high velocity rifle ammo has been purchased.
If this nation sees another war among ourselves, it will be a blood bath and a very terrible out come.
All we need is a serious depression. That seems unavoidable. And the food supply to diminish. Hungry people are desperate people, and desperate people are dangerous.
Right now 40-50% of the nation is prepping to some point. I hope you are! Walmart and large sporting goods stores are selling foods meant to last on the shelf for years. I can imagine things could indeed get very ugly.
Until the lame stream media turns on Husain Obama and the people demand his impeachment, things are as unpredictable as they can possibly be.
-
I agree. Slavery was just a side issue to State's Rights. Wrt that, I agreed wi the South. However, slavery is not acceptable.
Most conservatives let liberals beat them up over the issue of Southern Slavery. Most understand very little about that institution. We should never attempt to judge another people that lived in different times by the same moral standards that are acceptable now. Slavery was a legal institution and had been for thousands of years.
I thank The Lord that my ancestors were brought to America. We became civilized,educated and Christians. If my ancestors had not been brought over here-I shudder to think what would have happened to them in Africa.
All kinds of people form judgements on this without knowing the least about it. In fact without even giving it much thought. They just accept what is programmed into their minds by the liberal media and Public Schools.
My great, great Grandfather was a slave and the family has passed down a lot of information about all that and it was not like it has been made out to be.
For the most part it was very humane and the Plantation Owners helped my family and others tremendously even after Slavery was made illegal.
Most do not understand that when Mr. Lincoln ended slavery he nor the Federal Government made any provisions for the former Slaves. What did they think the newly freed slaves would do or where they would go? Obviously they did not care. Thanks to their former master my family members survived.
If anyone in the world is or has ever been a racist, Mr. Lincoln must definitely be included in that number. He wanted to send the slaves back to Africa even before the commencement of the War. He left many writings exposising his racist beliefs. Yet no figure in American History is more lauded or had more streets and towns named after him and he continues to be a Hero to this day.
No Man is more responsible for that conflagration than Mr. Lincoln.
-
I don't recall anyone so far offering the opinion that any new civil war would involve states leaving the union, or be region against region. I think it would be an ideological divide and not a geographical divide, which could make it a LOT more deadly - like we're seeing in Syria.
Even in the bluest blue counties there are conservatives, like there are liberals in even the reddest of red counties, which makes it a lot more personal.
And even if they hold opposing ideological convictions, it's a lot easier to hate someone a few hundred miles away that we'll never lay eyes on than it is to hate the family at the next table in the restaurant; who could be former classmates, baseball teammates, fellow ELKS, whatever.
But just because it's hard doesn't mean it can't happen, as has been proven many, many times in the human experience.
My personal plan is to prepare for the worst (EDIT: as best I can), then hope to God it never happens.
Listen, princess, here's YOUR post:
I suspect we can all agree that the United States hasn't been this politically divided since the late 1850s. And we all know what that division led to.
So is another Civil War brewing in this country?
Is it inevitable?
Avoidable?
Just one possibility among many?
Can civil war be averted if some states secede, or will that just guarantee it?
My honest opinion is I don't know what can and can't happen - the actions and ideological positions of the left never make sense to me - but I don't feel very optimistic about remaining a united United States.
I could be wrong, and just worrying too much. But I have four soldier-age sons, and I can't help worrying about it.
I'd really appreciate other views.
Note the bolded sentences. If the "civil war" YOU are talking about is different than the accepted definition most Americans have, based on a real war that happened and was called (surprise, surprise!) THE CIVIL WAR, then YOU have to explain what you mean. Anyone with a modicum of knowledge about the Civil War understands it was a ****ing war, not just a "difference of opinion" with OWS on one side of a park and the Tea Party on another.
Next is your question about whether it could be "averted if some states secede". Now, I took that sentence literally. Doesn't "some states secede" mean "some states secede" or do you have a different definition than those of us using a dictionary? As for WHICH states, I made the leap (perhaps it's too big of a jump for someone who obviously is such a mental tampon they can't even remember what their whole thread was about) of using the scenario most people think of when they talk about this. Usually, people refer to the red/blue state map (kinda like the one in your avatar, except states instead of counties). When one looks at that map, one notices both coasts are rather blue, whereas the middle of the country is red. Even when DUmmies talk about dividing the country they talk about it like this. Thus, if one is working out a way for "peaceful secession" (as if), it would be practical to keep the majority of left/right where they are, correct? It would certainly be damned ridiculous to secede by counties.
And then there's your third point about having 4 sons who are "soldier-age". Why the hell would you worry about that if you weren't talking about some kind of war they would be fighting in? Do you think one or other of the new nations would recruit "soldier-age" men & women to serve in the "moving van brigade" and are worried they would hurt their back or drop a piano on their foot?
Bitch slap for being so ****ing stupid you didn't even reread your OP before replying. Idiot!
Cindie
-
Listen, princess, here's YOUR post:
Note the bolded sentences. If the "civil war" YOU are talking about is different than the accepted definition most Americans have, based on a real war that happened and was called (surprise, surprise!) THE CIVIL WAR, then YOU have to explain what you mean. Anyone with a modicum of knowledge about the Civil War understands it was a ****ing war, not just a "difference of opinion" with OWS on one side of a park and the Tea Party on another.
Next is your question about whether it could be "averted if some states secede". Now, I took that sentence literally. Doesn't "some states secede" mean "some states secede" or do you have a different definition than those of us using a dictionary? As for WHICH states, I made the leap (perhaps it's too big of a jump for someone who obviously is such a mental tampon they can't even remember what their whole thread was about) of using the scenario most people think of when they talk about this. Usually, people refer to the red/blue state map (kinda like the one in your avatar, except states instead of counties). When one looks at that map, one notices both coasts are rather blue, whereas the middle of the country is red. Even when DUmmies talk about dividing the country they talk about it like this. Thus, if one is working out a way for "peaceful secession" (as if), it would be practical to keep the majority of left/right where they are, correct? It would certainly be damned ridiculous to secede by counties.
And then there's your third point about having 4 sons who are "soldier-age". Why the hell would you worry about that if you weren't talking about some kind of war they would be fighting in? Do you think one or other of the new nations would recruit "soldier-age" men & women to serve in the "moving van brigade" and are worried they would hurt their back or drop a piano on their foot?
Bitch slap for being so ****ing stupid you didn't even reread your OP before replying. Idiot!
Cindie
Far be it from me to jump in
the
middle of a catfight. But it is late and I have had a couple of drinks...maybe that explains you treating that lady so badly.
Or perhaps you have a history with her over something. But I really do not understand why you are getting so hyped up about her post..though the way this window is jumping around, maybe you saw something I missed.
Anyhow I think any lady with 4 sons does not deserve a response like you have given her. Just my opinion I could be wrong.
Are you bi-polar?
-
Actually, I'm a guy, which means I worry about the wife - who is confined to a wheelchair after a head-on wreck with a drunk driver just after our youngest was born - too.
She can't just run and hide with me if there's violent civil upheaval, so I want to be as well-informed as possible about what might happen, and what indications to watch out for.
Just wanted to clear that gender thing up.
Carry on.
CLARIFICATION: She can't run and hide, and I'm not going to leave her to go hide, myself, if the unthinkable happens in this country. So I have to stand my ground at our little farm, and hope our sons can be there standing beside me. Luckily, it's not within easy walking distance of the large cities just over the horizon, and my neighbors - all good people - feel pretty much the same way I do about liberals.
-
Listen, princess, here's YOUR post:
Note the bolded sentences. If the "civil war" YOU are talking about is different than the accepted definition most Americans have, based on a real war that happened and was called (surprise, surprise!) THE CIVIL WAR, then YOU have to explain what you mean. Anyone with a modicum of knowledge about the Civil War understands it was a ****ing war, not just a "difference of opinion" with OWS on one side of a park and the Tea Party on another.
Next is your question about whether it could be "averted if some states secede". Now, I took that sentence literally. Doesn't "some states secede" mean "some states secede" or do you have a different definition than those of us using a dictionary? As for WHICH states, I made the leap (perhaps it's too big of a jump for someone who obviously is such a mental tampon they can't even remember what their whole thread was about) of using the scenario most people think of when they talk about this. Usually, people refer to the red/blue state map (kinda like the one in your avatar, except states instead of counties). When one looks at that map, one notices both coasts are rather blue, whereas the middle of the country is red. Even when DUmmies talk about dividing the country they talk about it like this. Thus, if one is working out a way for "peaceful secession" (as if), it would be practical to keep the majority of left/right where they are, correct? It would certainly be damned ridiculous to secede by counties.
And then there's your third point about having 4 sons who are "soldier-age". Why the hell would you worry about that if you weren't talking about some kind of war they would be fighting in? Do you think one or other of the new nations would recruit "soldier-age" men & women to serve in the "moving van brigade" and are worried they would hurt their back or drop a piano on their foot?
Bitch slap for being so ****ing stupid you didn't even reread your OP before replying. Idiot!
Cindie
I've been giving this some thought before responding.
I started this thread because I have concerns about the extreme political division in the U.S. today. And I asked questions - questions - of other conservatives who are up on the current situation because I wanted to get the views of other Americans who are as concerned about the Republic as I am.
Some responses were encouraging, some were not, but I believe all of them were honest, informed opinions from the kind of people I respect: non-leftists.
If my response to your post seemed unnecessarily argumentative or petty and offensive in any way, I apologize. I did not mean to give offense.
I just wanted to point out that - based on my three decades of study of the American Civil War of the 1860s as a CW buff and not any kind of professional historian - that any impending social violence in this country will not be like the original American civil war between the United States and the Confederate States. So - I believe - very little about that war will apply to any new reality.
We agree on many, many things - if not just about everything - so I hope we can peacefully move past this.
-
The ideological divide also somewhat correlates with the division between urbanites and ruralites (and small towns). Liberals tend to collect in cities while Conservatives tend to live rual areas and small towns. All that one needs to do is look at the red/blue county-by-county map to see that. While there are a few exceptions to this on that map, the counties with large cities are usually blue and while everywhere else is red.
So, if there is a civil war it would be between cities and rural/small town areas.
-
Damn, a civil war thread and you guys didn't invite me? :popcorn:
-
Damn, a civil war thread and you guys didn't invite me? :popcorn:
Well, we knew you'd be arguing about football and such, but would be along directly. Didja bring the f'n AMMO we asked you to get?
-
Well, we knew you'd be arguing about football and such, but would be along directly. Didja bring the f'n AMMO we asked you to get?
Football is the opiate that allows me to forget, if for one minute, how utterly f'n stupid this nation has become and how this nation is soon to be "The Country Formerly Known as".
-
Football is the opiate that allows me to forget, if for one minute, how utterly f'n stupid this nation has become and how this nation is soon to be "The Country Formerly Known as".
There are isolated pockets of sanity here and there, mostly in flyover country, but yeah, it's hard to stay optimistic when so many retards actually cannot see the political elite class for what it is - a collective ticket to implosion from within.
-
There are isolated pockets of sanity here and there, mostly in flyover country, but yeah, it's hard to stay optimistic when so many retards actually cannot see the political elite class for what it is - a collective ticket to implosion from within.
I could forgive the first term for various reasons, but a second? That jackass actually got the majority vote for a second damn term? We're a nation of parasites now. Everyone votes for what they can get. People like me, who just wants to be left the hell alone and am willing to barter my labor for currency like a dollar bill, are outnumbered. These people don't want to barter shit. ...unless it's your labor.
-
These people don't want to barter shit. ...unless it's your labor.
I seem to remember a term for that which escapes me at the moment...
-
I could forgive the first term for various reasons, but a second? That jackass actually got the majority vote for a second damn term? We're a nation of parasites now. Everyone votes for what they can get. People like me, who just wants to be left the hell alone and am willing to barter my labor for currency like a dollar bill, are outnumbered. These people don't want to barter shit. ...unless it's your labor.
Keep the rant coming, Reb, because football can take you only so far. :-)
-
China.... :lmao:
They would be stretched on lift if invading Taiwan. Their navy would be sitting on the bottom as soon as it gets underway.
You are talking 'current' conditions and you are correct as of now. However, the poster that started all of this said if "The United States Was Severely Weakened" and if that occurs then some foreign power might intervene.
The sad truth is that no country can have a first rate military machine if said country has a poor economy. Tragically our economy is on the verge of collapse and when that happens the collapse of our military prowess will not be far behind. It is well known this administration is anti-military and just itching to cut the defense budget.
I see a lot of posts on this that are right on target but then many of them seem to get fragmented and confused.
http://www.sinodefence.com/navy/default.asp
-
I see a lot of posts on this that are right on target but then many of them seem to get fragmented and confused.
So, are you trying to say that we are rambling?
You are talking 'current' conditions and you are correct as of now. However, the poster that started all of this said if "The United States Was Severely Weakened" and if that occurs then some foreign power might intervene.
"Intervene" is the wrong word. Substitute "invade".
-
So, are you trying to say that we are rambling?
"Intervene" is the wrong word. Substitute "invade".
What I see is that many when responding to a post seem to omit or skip over what the poster they are responding to actually said. Using the quote feature should prevent that.
Intervene, Invade, Tomatoe or Tahmahto
-
Intervene, Invade, Tomatoe or Tahmahto
Smilin' Jack/XYiftah, sock puppet/poser... All samey-same.
-
You are talking 'current' conditions and you are correct as of now. However, the poster that started all of this said if "The United States Was Severely Weakened" and if that occurs then some foreign power might intervene.
Couldn't let it go, could you, "Jack"?
-
Most conservatives let liberals beat them up over the issue of Southern Slavery. Most understand very little about that institution. We should never attempt to judge another people that lived in different times by the same moral standards that are acceptable now. Slavery was a legal institution and had been for thousands of years.
I thank The Lord that my ancestors were brought to America. We became civilized,educated and Christians. If my ancestors had not been brought over here-I shudder to think what would have happened to them in Africa.
All kinds of people form judgements on this without knowing the least about it. In fact without even giving it much thought. They just accept what is programmed into their minds by the liberal media and Public Schools.
My great, great Grandfather was a slave and the family has passed down a lot of information about all that and it was not like it has been made out to be.
For the most part it was very humane and the Plantation Owners helped my family and others tremendously even after Slavery was made illegal.
Most do not understand that when Mr. Lincoln ended slavery he nor the Federal Government made any provisions for the former Slaves. What did they think the newly freed slaves would do or where they would go? Obviously they did not care. Thanks to their former master my family members survived.
If anyone in the world is or has ever been a racist, Mr. Lincoln must definitely be included in that number. He wanted to send the slaves back to Africa even before the commencement of the War. He left many writings exposising his racist beliefs. Yet no figure in American History is more lauded or had more streets and towns named after him and he continues to be a Hero to this day.
No Man is more responsible for that conflagration than Mr. Lincoln.
Great Post :)
Have any of your family's experiences during slavery and afterwards been publicized? My favorite book of all time is "Jubilee". A woman wrote it about the stories her grandmother told her during the Civil War era.
http://www.amazon.com/Jubilee-Margaret-Walker-Alexander/dp/0395924952
-
Great Post :)
Have any of your family's experiences during slavery and afterwards been publicized? My favorite book of all time is "Jubilee". A woman wrote it about the stories her grandmother told her during the Civil War era.
http://www.amazon.com/Jubilee-Margaret-Walker-Alexander/dp/0395924952
Dori, this is Smilin' Jack's sock puppet, don't get played.
-
Intervene, Invade, Tomatoe or Tahmahto
Do tell. I have always been under the impression that invading a sovereign country was a big deal, bigger than the meaning of "intervention".
Your 82nd Airborne avatar intrigues me. When were you in? We have several Veterans of the 82nd here, perhaps you can reconnect with an old Army buddy.
-
The ideological divide also somewhat correlates with the division between urbanites and ruralites (and small towns). Liberals tend to collect in cities while Conservatives tend to live rual areas and small towns. All that one needs to do is look at the red/blue county-by-county map to see that. While there are a few exceptions to this on that map, the counties with large cities are usually blue and while everywhere else is red.
So, if there is a civil war it would be between cities and rural/small town areas.
I agree. I often refer to liberals as HERD ANIMALS because of the way they tend to gather into large groups. MAN, do they ever hate that! But the population, and population density figures, prove it. That's why I think they are so obsessed with the UN. To them, a village is more desirable than an individual farmstead; a town is more desirable than a village; a city is more desirable than a town...right on up to a world-wide government is more desirable than a national government. It's as if they can't see themselves as individuals; only as members of the group. The hive. The herd.
And that's why they're the most vulnerable if any shooting war based on ideological division does break out in the U.S.; the big liberal cities are also where the big barbaric ghettos are located - and it's often said that civilization is never more than three or four missed meals away from complete breakdown. Meals that, interestingly enough, come to them almost exclusively from the generally conservative rural places liberals hate so much.
You'd think - if they really were the intellectually superior elitists they portray themselves as being - they could figure all this out for themselves; but they haven't yet.
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/__n_HhbauiKI/SSB3EV9N-zI/AAAAAAAAABo/KRTjwg2pnys/s1600/parker%27s%2Bcity%2Bgraph.jpg)
You can see that Fort Worth is not as densely populated as Dallas, which could be why FW is mostly conservative and Dallas is mostly liberal. Also, Oklahoma City is a BIG city in square miles, but the population density is relatively small; and it's the red capital of the only completely red state.
-
Do tell. I have always been under the impression that invading a sovereign country was a big deal, bigger than the meaning of "intervention".
Your 82nd Airborne avatar intrigues me. When were you in? We have several Veterans of the 82nd here, perhaps you can reconnect with an old Army buddy.
Well it could be debated whether China would engage in a large scale invasion or a smaller scale intervention type scenario. At this time the way I see it(of course none of us are prophets but some are better analytical type thinkers than others)would be on the smaller scale type intervention...perhaps followed later by a large scale invasion.
Now I must emphasize this would only be possible if we are severely weakened...which may very well happen due to our economic problems. Chinese are very intelligent people. I do not think they will make such a move unless they are absolutely convinced it would succeed.
I was in the 508th...the infamous Red Devils.
-
I was in the 508th...the infamous Red Devils.
The 508th PIR? When? Which battalion, which company? You should know that I'm skeptical, based on your answer, and Stolen Valor claims are a banning offense here.
Well it could be debated whether China would engage in a large scale invasion or a smaller scale intervention type scenario. At this time the way I see it(of course none of us are prophets but some are better analytical type thinkers than others)would be on the smaller scale type intervention...perhaps followed later by a large scale invasion.
Now I must emphasize this would only be possible if we are severely weakened...which may very well happen due to our economic problems. Chinese are very intelligent people. I do not think they will make such a move unless they are absolutely convinced it would succeed.
So, you postulate that "intervention" is different from "invasion" only as a matter of scale. What is the basis of your belief in that position; upon what do you base the idea that a foreign military initiating any action in the United States is anything other than an invasion (i.e., an act of war)?
***
So, let's build this scenario.
1. The United States government.... does what? Collapses? What catalyst do you envision for this situation?
2. What happens to our military, economy, and infrastructure?
3. Based on #1, the People's Republic of China "intervenes" by invading the United States with a "smaller scale" military action. What is the goal of this "intervention" (which is not an invasion, in your scenario)?
4. What is the strategy of your Chinese "intervention" force, which would have a 51% or better chance of success?
5. What are the logistics of a Chinese air- and sea-lift to "intervene" on the North American continent?
6. Most importantly, what is there about your "weakened" United States that makes it an attractive target for the Chinese?
-
The 508th PIR? When? Which battalion, which company? You should know that I'm skeptical, based on your answer, and Stolen Valor claims are a banning offense here.
So, you postulate that "intervention" is different from "invasion" only as a matter of scale. What is the basis of your belief in that position; upon what do you base the idea that a foreign military initiating any action in the United States is anything other than an invasion (i.e., an act of war)?
***
So, let's build this scenario.
1. The United States government.... does what? Collapses? What catalyst do you envision for this situation?
2. What happens to our military, economy, and infrastructure?
3. Based on #1, the People's Republic of China "intervenes" by invading the United States with a "smaller scale" military action. What is the goal of this "intervention" (which is not an invasion, in your scenario)?
4. What is the strategy of your Chinese "intervention" force, which would have a 51% or better chance of success?
5. What are the logistics of a Chinese air- and sea-lift to "intervene" on the North American continent?
6. Most importantly, what is there about your "weakened" United States that makes it an attractive target for the Chinese?
You are beginning to piss me off. Nevertheless....the 3rd Btn. Abn. Inf. Hq&Hq Co.
Are you a vet? Probably a lame ass leg. Unless you were Airborne you will have no clue as to what I am talking about.
An intervention could be a large scale or a small scale operation.
The scenario I envision would be a severely weakened America that is in chaos and different factions in the country are fighting each other....the Nation's Armed Services would no longer be functioning---at least in much of a co-hesive manner. Most likely the Military would have broken apart and would join whatever faction they think would best serve their interests or allegiance.
I am not saying that the Chinese are the only ones that might be tempted to intervene....it could be another power or it could be a coalition of foreign powers.
Under such conditions I think any foreign power or powers that might choose to intervene would not have to do so with a large scale invasion...at least not at first. Most likely they would send in their elite special forces and secure a certain area or areas....they would then access the situation across the nation and determine the best way to proceed...probably try and form an alliance with the strongest force in America to subjugate and dominate the nation as a whole.
In the scenario I envision America would no longer be a Military Threat or considered to be a military threat by any foreign power. Their goal I think would be to take advantage of the country in a economic sense...to seize our natural resources and most especially to be able to use our farmlands to feed their peoples. They would treat the population here as human resources aka cheap labor. Actually the conditions for Americans under such a scenario would be akin to slavery.
We are all speculating here. You should not expect any kind of agreement on such an issue. While I may not disagree with someone elses or anyone elses opinions on such a future possibility that does not mean they are not entitled to engage in such speculations.
You come across as heavy handed and argumentative. That may not be your intention-- that is just my opinion- I could be wrong.
-
You are beginning to piss me off. Nevertheless....the 3rd Btn. Abn. Inf. Hq&Hq Co.
Are you a vet? Probably a lame ass leg. Unless you were Airborne you will have no clue as to what I am talking about.
You come across as heavy handed and argumentative. That may not be your intention-- that is just my opinion- I could be wrong.
:badass:
-
So, are you trying to say that we are rambling?
"Intervene" is the wrong word. Substitute "invade".
Perhaps this will enlighten you....but as most know --anyone can lead a jackass to water but no one can make him drink.
What is the difference between invade and intervene?
English Language Questions
Best Answer
.
Intervene-stop by interfering in some way
Invade-trespass with an opposing aggressive force.
-
Hey big Dog--You can come out of the doghouse now. Do not take it personal. Most make mistakes now and then. I have yet to be proved wrong though.
-
Big dog has now been demoted to little dog. Plus if he cannot prove he is a dog then he may be banned for stolen species!!!!! Personally me thinks in real life he is a ***** cat.
-
You are beginning to piss me off. Nevertheless....the 3rd Btn. Abn. Inf. Hq&Hq Co.
Are you a vet? Probably a lame ass leg. Unless you were Airborne you will have no clue as to what I am talking about.
You come across as heavy handed and argumentative. That may not be your intention-- that is just my opinion- I could be wrong.
I am quite heavy handed, but not the heaviest hand here. We don't hold hands and sing Kum-Ba-Yah in the Cave. Even our wimminz are tougher than 95% of the rest of the Internet- and statistics on the Internet never lie.
You showed me yours, I'll show you mine.
Army. SSG, 91B3F Medical NCO/Flight Medic. EFMB. Order of the Spur.
Units:
82nd Med Det (AA)(MAST), Ft Riley KS
USAR-J MEDDAC, CP Zama JP
24th Med Co (AA) NEARNG, Lincoln NE
HHT 1-167 CAV NEARNG, Lincoln NE
177 AR Bde (Sep)- NTC, Ft Irwin CA
Currently employed as Dept of the Army Civilian at Ft Riley. Member of the American Legion, American Legion Riders, DUSTOFF Association (life member) and the Patriot Guard Riders (past national officer).
An intervention could be a large scale or a small scale operation.
Gonna stop you right here. "Intervention", as the word is used for geopolitics, refers to invasion and occupation of a sovereign nation by another (or a group of others) on humanitarian grounds (see here (http://www.merip.org/mer/mer187/can-military-intervention-be-humanitarian) for a good discussion of the term). It's still an invasion.
-
Big dog has now been demoted to little dog. Plus if he cannot prove he is a dog then he may be banned for stolen species!!!!! Personally me thinks in real life he is a ***** cat.
Hey, dumb shit. I'm enjoying my day off here. Talking to you is not the first thing on my priority list today.
You would do well to get to know the culture here at CC, if you plan to stay. You're stepping on your
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-lIMfL4UkPKY/TlJkBewv-qI/AAAAAAAAAaI/eekBkHN4S3k/s320/naughty-little-schnitzel.jpg)
-
I am quite heavy handed, but not the heaviest hand here. We don't hold hands and sing Kum-Ba-Yah in the Cave. Even our wimminz are tougher than 95% of the rest of the Internet- and statistics on the Internet never lie.
You showed me yours, I'll show you mine.
Army. SSG, 91B3F Medical NCO/Flight Medic. EFMB. Order of the Spur.
Units:
82nd Med Det (AA)(MAST), Ft Riley KS
USAR-J MEDDAC, CP Zama JP
24th Med Co (AA) NEARNG, Lincoln NE
HHT 1-167 CAV NEARNG, Lincoln NE
177 AR Bde (Sep)- NTC, Ft Irwin CA
Currently employed as Dept of the Army Civilian at Ft Riley. Member of the American Legion, American Legion Riders, DUSTOFF Association (life member) and the Patriot Guard Riders (past national officer).
Gonna stop you right here. "Intervention", as the word is used for geopolitics, refers to invasion and occupation of a sovereign nation by another (or a group of others) on humanitarian grounds (see here (http://www.merip.org/mer/mer187/can-military-intervention-be-humanitarian) for a good discussion of the term). It's still an invasion.
I posted the definition already.
Let us cut to the chase and put the pedal to the metal---do you think there is any possibility this nation will split apart?
-
I posted the definition already.
Let us cut to the chase and put the pedal to the metal---do you think there is any possibility this nation will split apart?
You posted a definition. Unattributed and not authoratative. Since I already pointed you to the proper use of "intervention", with citation to more than a century of military intervention to support it, I am going to dismiss you at this point.
You are dismissed.
-
You posted a definition. Unattributed and not authoratative. Since I already pointed you to the proper use of "intervention", with citation to more than a century of military intervention to support it, I am going to dismiss you at this point.
You are dismissed.
funni...you are a funni. Yey you best get back in the dog house and stay there...because you have absolutely nothing to contribute to this thread other than your disruptive tactics.
-
You are beginning to piss me off. Nevertheless....the 3rd Btn. Abn. Inf. Hq&Hq Co.
Are you a vet? Probably a lame ass leg. Unless you were Airborne you will have no clue as to what I am talking about.
An intervention could be a large scale or a small scale operation.
The scenario I envision would be a severely weakened America that is in chaos and different factions in the country are fighting each other....the Nation's Armed Services would no longer be functioning---at least in much of a co-hesive manner. Most likely the Military would have broken apart and would join whatever faction they think would best serve their interests or allegiance.
I am not saying that the Chinese are the only ones that might be tempted to intervene....it could be another power or it could be a coalition of foreign powers.
Under such conditions I think any foreign power or powers that might choose to intervene would not have to do so with a large scale invasion...at least not at first. Most likely they would send in their elite special forces and secure a certain area or areas....they would then access the situation across the nation and determine the best way to proceed...probably try and form an alliance with the strongest force in America to subjugate and dominate the nation as a whole.
In the scenario I envision America would no longer be a Military Threat or considered to be a military threat by any foreign power. Their goal I think would be to take advantage of the country in a economic sense...to seize our natural resources and most especially to be able to use our farmlands to feed their peoples. They would treat the population here as human resources aka cheap labor. Actually the conditions for Americans under such a scenario would be akin to slavery.
We are all speculating here. You should not expect any kind of agreement on such an issue. While I may not disagree with someone elses or anyone elses opinions on such a future possibility that does not mean they are not entitled to engage in such speculations.
You come across as heavy handed and argumentative. That may not be your intention-- that is just my opinion- I could be wrong.
Unlike SmilinJack, who is an especially obnoxious turd, you were doing marginally okay until this thread came along.
Take your Airborne Hooah bullshit and shove it up your ass. I'm a retired "leg", proud of it, and have no intention of falling out of a perfectly good airplane - now or ever.
I also call you a ****ing poser. Nobody who has served in the US Army that I know of abbreviates "battalion" as "Btn."
As I see it, and more to the point, the U.S. has been invaded several times just since 9/11 and including 9/11. Liberal American pussies quickly found war to be a nasty business and as long as they weren't personally asked to ruck the **** up, started with the perpetual whining and pissing and moaning that characterizes the lack of political will in failing to finish a fight -- they quickly forgot about our HOMELAND having been attacked. Forgetting is something the politicians and their liberal brethren have gotten very good at over the years.
The lame bastard in the White House and all of his shitstick cretin sycophants actually think that the Taliban is done as a fighting force.
They are so ****ing wrong.
So if China, or anybody else, should "intervene" with the current crop of ****sticks we have in Congress and the Oministration, we might as well just go ahead and ****ing surrender - that is, that's what they would want.
I think there are plenty who won't play that shit.
Edited to clarify and to call our current shitstick a poser.
-
It's getting ****ing weird around here.
Cindie