OP-ED Kurt Schlichter: Why Democrats Would Lose the Second Civil War, Too

thompson

Certa Bonum Certamen
Lots of links at the source


https://townhall.com/columnists/kur...-would-lose-the-second-civil-war-too-n2459833

Why Democrats Would Lose the Second Civil War, Too

Kurt Schlichter
Posted: Mar 12, 2018 12:01 AM

Cjnli9e.jpg


It’s obvious that the central tenet of the Democrat Party platform is now hatred and contempt for Normal Americans. Taking their cue from the elites in Europe and Canada who are stripping dissenters of their free speech rights and religious freedoms, the leftist elite is moving to solidify its hold on power here with the eager assistance of tech companies and the moral support of the Fredocons who yearn to return to pseudo-relevance as the ruling class’s slobberingly loyal opposition. In California, the leftist government is practically firing on Fort Sumter. And nationally, these aspiring fascists are especially eager to disarm Normal Americans – doing so would be an object lesson in who’s the boss, as well as solving that frustrating problem of the Normals having the ability to resist.

Probably because I’ve spent time where they actually had a civil war, many people ask me – people whose names you know – whether I think this turmoil will all end in a Second Civil War. They are seriously concerned, and not without cause – the left’s hatred for Normal Americans and its dedication to totally stripping the people who are the backbone of this country of their ability to participate in their own governance is threatening to rip the country apart.

Do I think there will be a civil war? No, but there could be. This is the Age of Black Swans, and anything is possible – we could easily see the country split into red and blue. Civil war is unlikely, but never underestimate Democrat stupidity and hatred. The Schlichter family learned that lesson a century and half ago, the last time the Democrats decided to try to impose their hatred of basic human rights on the rest of the country, when an army of Democrats burned our family hometown.

Oh, they paid for it. And they would pay again. Democrats are 0-1 in insurrections, and if they went for another round, they would be 0-2. It’s a matter of terrain, numbers, and morale.

Democrats, who think history began when Obama was elected, don’t understand the dangerous game they are playing when they talk about how they want to impose their brown shirt vision upon red America. The keyboard commandos of the left seek to hand wave away the massive strategic challenge of imposing control by force upon a well-armed, decentralized citizenry occupying the vast majority of the territory, so they babble about drones and tanks as counterinsurgency trump cards. But there are no trump cards in war. There are men, with rifles, standing on patches of dirt, killing the people trying to push them off. That’s the ugly reality of war. And multiply the usual brutality of war by ten when it’s a civil war.

There are two Civil War II scenarios, and the left is poorly positioned to prevail in either one. The first scenario is that the Democrats take power and violate the Constitution in order to use the apparatus of the federal government to suppress and oppress Normal Americans. In that scenario, red Americans are the insurgents. In the second scenario, which we can even now see the stirrings of in California’s campaign to nullify federal immigration law, it is the blue states that are the insurgents.

The Democrats lose both wars. Big time.

Let’s talk terrain and numbers. Remember the famous red v. blue voting map? There is a lot of red, and in the interior the few blue splotches are all cities like Las Vegas or Denver. That is a lot of territory for a counter-insurgent force to control, and this is critical. The red is where the food is grown, the oil pumped, and through which everything is transported. And that red space is filled with millions of American citizens with small arms, a fairly large percentage of whom have military training.

Remember what two untrained idiots did in Boston with a couple of pistols? They shut a city down. Now multiply that by several million, with better weapons and training.

Let’s look at the counter-insurgent forces in the Democrat oppression scenario should they attempt to misuse our law enforcement and military in an unconstitutional manner to take the rights of American citizens. There are a lot of civilian law enforcement officers, but the vast majority of the agencies are local – sheriffs, small town police departments. They will not be reliable allies in supporting unlawful oppression of their friends and neighbors. The major cities’ police departments are run by Democrat appointees, so the commands would be loyal. But the rank-and-file? A small percentage would be ideologically loyal. More would be loyal because that’s their paycheck – they could be swayed or intimidated to support the rebels. Others would be actively sympathetic to the insurgents. This is true of federal law enforcement agencies as well.

And the military? Well, wouldn’t the military just crush any resistance? Not so fast. The military would have the combat power to win any major engagement, but insurgents don’t get into major engagements with forces that have more combat power. They instead leverage their decentralized ability to strike at the counter-insurgents’ weak points to eliminate the government’s firepower advantage. In other words, hit and run, and no stand-up fights.

For example, how do a bunch of hunters in Wisconsin defeat a company of M1A2 Abrams tanks? They ambush the fuel and ammo trucks. Oh, and they wait until the gunner pops the hatch to take a leak and put a .30-06 round in his back from 300 meters. Then they disappear. What do the tanks do then? Go level the nearest town? Great. Now they just moved the needle in favor of the insurgents among the population. Pretty soon, they can’t be outside of their armored vehicles in public. Their forces are spending 90% of their efforts not on actual counter-insurgency operations but on force protection. Sure, they own their forward operating bases, and they own a few hundred meters around them wherever they happen to be standing at the moment, but the rest of the territory is bright red. As my recent novel illustrates, American guerillas with small arms are a deadly threat to the forces of a dictatorship.

But the military is so big it would overwhelm any rebels, right? Well, how big do you think the military is? And, more importantly, how many actual boots on the ground can it deploy? Let’s put it in terms of brigade combat teams, which total about 4,500 troops each. There are about 60 brigades in the Army, active and reserve, here and abroad, and let’s give the Marines another 10 brigades, for about 70 brigades. Sounds impressive. But that’s deceptive.

Let’s put aside a big consideration – the existence of red states that would provide for an insurgent government structure and possibly attract the loyalty of some National Guard and even federal brigades. For example, if President Hillary Clinton put down her chardonnay long enough to sign a ban on privately owned guns, it’s not unreasonable to expect the governor of Texas to reject federal authority – after all, California just taught us that this is totally cool. But in this case, look for several brigades located there to hoist the Lone Star flag.

So, now the blue states are facing unconventional and conventional forces.

Let’s ignore that problem and focus on a different challenge. Even a normal unit has about 10% non-deployable members. Now, if these troops were assigned to combat operations against other Americans, you would have significant additional losses through desertion. Many of the senior leaders would participate – the Obama generation – and there is a certain type of junior officer only too happy to curry favor by sucking up in defiance of their oath (which is to the Constitution, not to some leftist president). You can identify them because they usually have “strategist” in their Twitter bios. But a lot of key, capable officer and NCO leaders, and enlisted troops, would vanish. That is proper. It is a violation of their oath to unconstitutionally oppress fellow Americans; their duty would be to refuse such unlawful orders.

So, you have significantly understrength units going in. Now, how many of the troops in a brigade are actually even front line combat troops? About a third – the rest are support. So a brigade is really about 1500 riflemen tops before you count losses. Cut those in half for sleep, training, and refitting at any one time (which is very generous) and your brigade is really 750 troops on your best day with everyone showing up. Realistically, it’s 300.

That holds one mid-sized town. And there are hundreds of mid-sized towns. Plus there are millions of Normal Americans who would fight back. Nothing would move without their permission – a few guys shooting up big rigs along the interstate would shut down the entire trucking industry. Bottom line: there simply are not enough military forces to clear and hold red America.

What about drones and bombers? Both are useful. But the minute a bombing strike kills some red civilians the families of counter-insurgent drone operators and pilots will be knocking at the base gates to be let inside. Now you’ll need many of those brigades to protect the civilians you now need to protect from retribution.

Civil wars are harsh. That’s why you avoid them.

How about the blue insurgency scenario? That goes even worse for the Democrats. You have the federal government apparatus in the hands of red America, and the insurgents are the opposite of decentralized and armed. They are conveniently centered in gun-unfriendly blue cities. In other words, the blue civilian population is much less of a threat.

A red counter-insurgency avoids the problem of a decentralized insurgency and insecure logistical lines. In the case of California, whose secessionist antics are approaching the point where President Trump could legitimately employ his power to crush insurrections, the tactical problem is relatively simple. For example, San Francisco is a hotbed of treason, but the populace is largely unarmed and is trapped in a confined area. You put a brigade on securing the Golden Gate and Bay Bridges, then put a brigade on the San Francisco Peninsula to cut off the I-280 and US-101 corridors. Next you go to the Crystal Springs Dam and cut off the water. Then you watch and wait as the tech hipsters run out of artisanal sushi rice and kombucha.

After about a week, they surrender. After all, you can’t eat and drink smugness. LA is just bigger in scope – more corridors to cut off, but in the end the population concentrations in large liberal urban areas that are their strength also make them extremely vulnerable to logistical pressure.

Then there’s another factor, an intangible but a crucial one. It’s commitment. The Democrat threat to peace is based on its policies designed to deprive Normal Americans of their right to speak freely, to worship freely, and to defend themselves and their rights with firearms. Make no mistake – millions of Normal Americans are willing to risk death to defend those rights. In fact, many swore to do so when they entered our military and law enforcement. But who is the leftist big talker willing to die to impose the fascist dream of censorship, religious oppression, and disarmament on Normal American citizens? Is the screeching SJW at Yale going to suit up in Kevlar? Is the Vox columnist going to grab a M4? Is the Hollywood poser going to switch her gyno-beanie for a helmet?

No. Hell, we just heard our liberal opponents explaining why a cop shouldn’t be expected to go fight a scumbag murdering kids because it’s scary. America might split apart, but it’s highly unlikely Team Kale n’ Vinyl would fight should their big talk finally push Normal America too far.
 

Sacajawea

Has No Life - Lives on TB
One reason they'd lose, is because the things they would be fighting for, are imaginary, utopian day-dreams of a perfect world that has never and will never, exist.

While the rest of us would be fighting for things that have real meaning and deep significance to us. Home, family, freedom to live our lives without some busy-body telling us what they think is the right way to do that.
 

Dennis Olson

Chief Curmudgeon
_______________
You know, this can be “fun” to think about, but the objective reality is that millions would die, and this country would very probably end.
 

The Mountain

Here since the beginning
_______________
What Dennis said, plus Schlicter's article ignores a point brought up last week regarding the Left's ability to organize. Yes, the Left is largely confined to dense urban pockets, and yes their goals are abhorrent to anyone who values freedom. At the same time, their ability to organize and to leverage that ability means that both scenarios aren't nearly as lopsided as Kurt posits.

If the Left is in power, they might not have the full support of the military, but they'll have all kinds of other institutions behind them including the media, and will use them to their utmost to demonize and delegitimize the Right. On the flip side, as insurgents, the Left will have cells, underground railroads, and sympathizers everywhere, and will still have the media in their corner and a solid Fifth Column inside the government that will provide them with passive support at least (investigation evidence gets misplaced, news of raids and impending arrests get leaked, paperwork is lost, etc etc). Sure there are millions on the right that will take the fight to the Left, but there will be tens of millions in the middle who don't want to fight, but will have to be convinced by one side or the other. The Right might have the tactical and force advantage, but if the noncom middle believes that the Right is a nascent violent dictatorship, the Right still loses even if it prevails over the Left.
 

Millwright

Knuckle Dragger
_______________
The OP pretty much covers the general complexion of the situation, as it has been wargamed hundreds of times here.

If we arrived at the same conclusion, you can bet the communist revolutionaries have too.

Their only chance at gaining the upper hand is disarming patriots before any festivities begin.
 

West

Senior
The OP pretty much covers the general complexion of the situation, as it has been wargamed hundreds of times here.

If we arrived at the same conclusion, you can bet the communist revolutionaries have too.

Their only chance at gaining the upper hand is disarming patriots before any festivities begin.

And killing the drive, mindset, of individuals being their own boses in the government so called educational systems. At the same time regulating their payrolls so it cost two plus times for labor than that of what the laborer gets to take home. And making whats left of the independent individuals into greedy white business owners who destroy our environment and are all privledge and didn't build this nation. Just see Captain Planet.

But I digress....

Small business is the incubator of employment. As it declines, so too do opportunities for first jobs, second chances and economic independence.
 

Jeff B.

Don’t let the Piss Ants get you down…
Lots of links at the source


https://townhall.com/columnists/kur...-would-lose-the-second-civil-war-too-n2459833

Why Democrats Would Lose the Second Civil War, Too

Kurt Schlichter
Posted: Mar 12, 2018 12:01 AM

Cjnli9e.jpg


...Democrats, who think history began when Obama was elected, don’t understand the dangerous game they are playing when they talk about how they want to impose their brown shirt vision upon red America. The keyboard commandos of the left seek to hand wave away the massive strategic challenge of imposing control by force upon a well-armed, decentralized citizenry occupying the vast majority of the territory, so they babble about drones and tanks as counterinsurgency trump cards. But there are no trump cards in war. There are men, with rifles, standing on patches of dirt, killing the people trying to push them off. That’s the ugly reality of war. And multiply the usual brutality of war by ten when it’s a civil war...

What about drones and bombers? Both are useful. But the minute a bombing strike kills some red civilians the families of counter-insurgent drone operators and pilots will be knocking at the base gates to be let inside. Now you’ll need many of those brigades to protect the civilians you now need to protect from retribution...

...Civil wars are harsh. That’s why you avoid them...

Although Schlichter mentions the in-civility of a Civil War, he doesn't delve too deeply into it. IMO, one of the first soft and easy targets that sends a message are the crews of the news media. They can be dropped with a deer rifle from a couple of hundred yards, immolated in their vans or abducted to make some videos demonstrating why parroting the Communist line is unhealthy. Then you move on to the servants of the Deep State. If (as I'd expect) the Fed.Gov becomes invested in the fight "against homegrown terrorists", the gloves would come off. The inoffensive dude down the street that works for the GSA as a middle manager... Go to get the mail and is spread across his neighborhood by a surprise delivery in his mailbox. The TSA guy around the corner's wife never returns from the quick trip to the store. Of course, there's a natural increase in retribution, which then leads to the next level of atrocities. Point being, CW becomes very nasty, very bloody and leaves scars that never really disappear (the War of Northern Aggression) from the population.

Consider the III% folks. Give or take that's about 3.somthing million. Let's then take 10% of that 3% and we have about 300,000. Again take 10% of that number and you arrive at 30,000. And, again take 10% to 3000. Think about the news coverage when a LEO of one affiliation or another is killed. Remember when five were lost in Dallas? What would the news be like if 3000 LEO's participating in violating the Constitution were struck down in one day?

The Left and the sheep argue that "you can't fight the Army" of tanks, or helicopters or jets or drones or whatever. Point is you don't have to. A relatively small number of fighters have kept us pretty busy in A-Stan and don't show any signs to going away or giving in. The attack isn't always on the force. Sometimes it's on the cameras in an area. Maybe it's the power substation near the base. Maybe its the water treatment plant. Or the pipeline to heat the the Northeast.

Dennis was on the money with his comment about destroying the country, because there would be no going back once that ball started rolling.

Better that some adults in the room realize where we're heading and decide for a more or less civil divorce...

Jeff B.
 

rhughe13

Heart of Dixie
Oh, they paid for it. And they would pay again. Democrats are 0-1 in insurrections, and if they went for another round, they would be 0-2. It’s a matter of terrain, numbers, and morale.

Bad Math there. He is using the 1861 Democrats in reference to the 2018 Democrats.

People doing that loose me pretty quick, as there is no mention of the pre 1861 Torrie/Whig/Republican Party agenda completely.

You can't write a feel good article about the Civil War/Political Parties in one page, and reference it to what is happening today.
 

Blacknarwhal

Let's Go Brandon!
If the Left is in power, they might not have the full support of the military, but they'll have all kinds of other institutions behind them including the media, and will use them to their utmost to demonize and delegitimize the Right. On the flip side, as insurgents, the Left will have cells, underground railroads, and sympathizers everywhere, and will still have the media in their corner and a solid Fifth Column inside the government that will provide them with passive support at least (investigation evidence gets misplaced, news of raids and impending arrests get leaked, paperwork is lost, etc etc). Sure there are millions on the right that will take the fight to the Left, but there will be tens of millions in the middle who don't want to fight, but will have to be convinced by one side or the other. The Right might have the tactical and force advantage, but if the noncom middle believes that the Right is a nascent violent dictatorship, the Right still loses even if it prevails over the Left.

The problem with that assessment is that trust in media is still at catastrophic lows. Only the Left would actually believe what the media reported.
 

pinkelsteinsmom

Veteran Member
..........so the question remains, what do we do with the multitude of left wing fascist fanatics walking the streets of america?
 

PghPanther

Has No Life - Lives on TB
If there was such a conflict I believe the country would end up splintered into a couple nations.............
 

Millwright

Knuckle Dragger
_______________
If there was such a conflict I believe the country would end up splintered into a couple nations.............

Not for long.

The blue areas cannot sustain themselves.

Remember, communist parasites need a host to provide for them.
 

hiwall

Has No Life - Lives on TB
I think the Democrats ARE winning the war. By some miracle Trump got elected in 2016 but I rather doubt it will happen again.
Everyone thinks the next civil war will start with troops going door-to-door taking away guns. I sure don't see it happening that way. The Democrats have more of the votes all the time and they will vote in anything they want. So they had a set back in 2016 so what? They WILL gain strength in Congress, some in 2018 and more in 2020. So what if it takes them another 6 years or more. They will gain control. In the mean time they will erode more and more of the things we care about using the courts.
They are getting more voters all the time. Obviously many of those voters are being imported.
It is not just about guns. And they are patient. They know this change is gradually taking place and they will just let it keep happening, certainly with no open warfare (other than their lackeys like BLM and antifa). Just look at the changes in the last 50 years. Then imagine the changes in the next 10 or 15 years. The rate of change is accelerating.
They have all the schools of higher learning to indoctrinate our young people, obviously this is a totally long-range plan. Now just think about all the 20 something year olds when they run for elected positions in upcoming elections. From city and county positions on up to national positions. And many more are being hired into non-elected positions. This is being done without a shot being fired.
And what do we have? We have all the RINO's and anti-Trumpers. We do have Trump and he is certainly doing what he can but, I'm sorry, it will not be enough.
 

West

Senior
I think the Democrats ARE winning the war. By some miracle Trump got elected in 2016 but I rather doubt it will happen again.
Everyone thinks the next civil war will start with troops going door-to-door taking away guns. I sure don't see it happening that way. The Democrats have more of the votes all the time and they will vote in anything they want. So they had a set back in 2016 so what? They WILL gain strength in Congress, some in 2018 and more in 2020. So what if it takes them another 6 years or more. They will gain control. In the mean time they will erode more and more of the things we care about using the courts.
They are getting more voters all the time. Obviously many of those voters are being imported.
It is not just about guns. And they are patient. They know this change is gradually taking place and they will just let it keep happening, certainly with no open warfare (other than their lackeys like BLM and antifa). Just look at the changes in the last 50 years. Then imagine the changes in the next 10 or 15 years. The rate of change is accelerating.
They have all the schools of higher learning to indoctrinate our young people, obviously this is a totally long-range plan. Now just think about all the 20 something year olds when they run for elected positions in upcoming elections. From city and county positions on up to national positions. And many more are being hired into non-elected positions. This is being done without a shot being fired.
And what do we have? We have all the RINO's and anti-Trumpers. We do have Trump and he is certainly doing what he can but, I'm sorry, it will not be enough.

Just seeing how our schools and media teach and preach that citizens have to be yes men and women. Go to collage to get a job. To be entitled to have government safety nets, etc...

It's sickening. And the plan. Agree with you.

Small business is the incubator of employment. As it declines, so too do opportunities for first jobs, second chances and economic independence.
 

Jonas Parker

Hooligan
You know, this can be "fun" to think about, but the objective reality is that millions would die, and this country would very probably end.

My major was military history. The idea of CWII is anything but "fun" to think about. However, I feel that CWII is coming, and probably in my lifetime. The split with he Communist/Marxist/anarchist left wing of the Democrat party is too deep. The chances of these fanatics coming to their senses and seeing reason are nil to none. The results will be as Dennis states: millions will die and the USA will end.
 

vestige

Deceased
This subject is always interesting and the variety of posts that ensue reveal insight to all.

You know, this can be “fun” to think about, but the objective reality is that millions would die, and this country would very probably end.

Without a doubt, the country, as it presently exists, would end only days after any "first major engagement" of what could be called organized or semi-organized forces. To date engagements have consisted of only hits performed by one individual or small group upon another individual or small group. Waco is an example of .gov overreach and occurred only after extended vilification of Koresh by the media and .gov spokesmen. Waco typified the approach .gov involvement will always use and has been studied by many since. The same cannot said as precisely re the "blue" and "red" group encounters. Rules of engagement do not really exist in B/R encounters... are and will be... somewhat spontaneous. In such situations YMMV but.... if/when engagements of significant size occur they will be bloody, particularly bloody when weapons (firearms) are involved.

For the record... Waco is to this day referred to by untold numbers of patriots as the spark that started what lies ahead. This is stated and/or felt by young as well as old patriots.

If protracted, as I suspect it would be, it would spread rapidly and as Dennis said millions would die. Foreign involvement would be inevitable whether foreign.gov or simply wealthy foreign entities with something to gain by advantaging "their side." I cannot avoid thinking of Afghanistan in the 70s as I type this.

Although Schlichter mentions the in-civility of a Civil War, he doesn't delve too deeply into it. IMO, one of the first soft and easy targets that sends a message are the crews of the news media. They can be dropped with a deer rifle from a couple of hundred yards, immolated in their vans or abducted to make some videos demonstrating why parroting the Communist line is unhealthy. Then you move on to the servants of the Deep State. If (as I'd expect) the Fed.Gov becomes invested in the fight "against homegrown terrorists", the gloves would come off. The inoffensive dude down the street that works for the GSA as a middle manager... Go to get the mail and is spread across his neighborhood by a surprise delivery in his mailbox. The TSA guy around the corner's wife never returns from the quick trip to the store. Of course, there's a natural increase in retribution, which then leads to the next level of atrocities. Point being, CW becomes very nasty, very bloody and leaves scars that never really disappear (the War of Northern Aggression) from the population.

Consider the III% folks. Give or take that's about 3.somthing million. Let's then take 10% of that 3% and we have about 300,000. Again take 10% of that number and you arrive at 30,000. And, again take 10% to 3000. Think about the news coverage when a LEO of one affiliation or another is killed. Remember when five were lost in Dallas? What would the news be like if 3000 LEO's participating in violating the Constitution were struck down in one day?

The Left and the sheep argue that "you can't fight the Army" of tanks, or helicopters or jets or drones or whatever. Point is you don't have to. A relatively small number of fighters have kept us pretty busy in A-Stan and don't show any signs to going away or giving in. The attack isn't always on the force. Sometimes it's on the cameras in an area. Maybe it's the power substation near the base. Maybe its the water treatment plant. Or the pipeline to heat the the Northeast.

Dennis was on the money with his comment about destroying the country, because there would be no going back once that ball started rolling.

Better that some adults in the room realize where we're heading and decide for a more or less civil divorce...





Jeff B.



There is zero doubt that .gov at many levels would become involved in such conflicts as they escalated. Then... as the violence is recognized as growing rather than subsiding (with the media downplaying it 24/7 as "minor" spats) the .gov individuals noted in the quote above will, by necessity of family/friends and, in general, survival... be forced to take a side and will likely choose the side that "currently" poses the least threat to them and their loved ones or, initially, the one that "looks" like the inevitable victor. That "look" may be the cause of their demise depending upon a number of things too large in number to discuss.

Asymmetrical war will be the method of choice and again reminds me of Afghanistan 1970s.... the overwhelming power of Soviet military strength and engagement methods developed by the ragheads.(still used successfully today)

This>>>A relatively small number of fighters have kept us pretty busy in A-Stan and don't show any signs to going away or giving in.

Two negros shut down the DC area a few years ago with nothing more than a young shooter in the trunk of an old car. During that relatively small escapade the fear and shut downs expanded to areas well outside the belt way. During that time I had a family of six "visit" me for a week just to "get the hell away from the danger."

Think about the above described DC shooter situation taking place coast to coast.

This >>> Better that some adults in the room realize where we're heading and decide for a more or less civil divorce...


I agree 100% but from my observations over more than a few years there are no adults among the blue.
 
Last edited:

Dosadi

Brown Coat
Aside from the fact that the war for independence might have been considered a civil war except it had no desire on the colonialists part to replace the king with a different king.

Aside from the fact that the War of Northern Aggression was not a civil war, but another war for independence.

If this happens it might be considered a civil war since both sides want to rule the normal folk.

but all that is just semantics.

The side that controls the food and shipment and fuel wins.

Messy and horrible death totals, but they win.

More importantly a lot of people on both sides are truly at the Not one more Inch point.

Those who would harm free men will find little compasion and I predict firing squads, stripping of wealth and total destruction.

To the point that after killing off all those seen as enemy, on the way out the door the free men (SAXONS) will dump a box of salt into their enemies figurative gold fish bowl, leaving nothing, not two stones touching.

Destroying their enemies utterly so that neither they nor their ilk will ever rise again to cause freedom problems.

Aye, a messy bloody end to progs every where is what they are courting.

Freedom is never free, but free men will always rise up to pay that price.
 

OldCraftsman

Membership Revoked
My major was military history. The idea of CWII is anything but "fun" to think about. However, I feel that CWII is coming, and probably in my lifetime. The split with he Communist/Marxist/anarchist left wing of the Democrat party is too deep. The chances of these fanatics coming to their senses and seeing reason are nil to none. The results will be as Dennis states: millions will die and the USA will end.

And new life will spring up from the ashes. Empires rise and fall.
 

Cardinal

Chickministrator
_______________
What Dennis said, plus Schlicter's article ignores a point brought up last week regarding the Left's ability to organize. Yes, the Left is largely confined to dense urban pockets, and yes their goals are abhorrent to anyone who values freedom. At the same time, their ability to organize and to leverage that ability means that both scenarios aren't nearly as lopsided as Kurt posits.

If the Left is in power, they might not have the full support of the military, but they'll have all kinds of other institutions behind them including the media, and will use them to their utmost to demonize and delegitimize the Right. On the flip side, as insurgents, the Left will have cells, underground railroads, and sympathizers everywhere, and will still have the media in their corner and a solid Fifth Column inside the government that will provide them with passive support at least (investigation evidence gets misplaced, news of raids and impending arrests get leaked, paperwork is lost, etc etc). Sure there are millions on the right that will take the fight to the Left, but there will be tens of millions in the middle who don't want to fight, but will have to be convinced by one side or the other. The Right might have the tactical and force advantage, but if the noncom middle believes that the Right is a nascent violent dictatorship, the Right still loses even if it prevails over the Left.

I really don't think there is a (noncom) middle anymore. I think we are radically divided between left and right.
What is more of a threat, is the left getting organized to the point of making alliances with other countries and "inviting" Russia/China in.
Those coastal cities may indeed be cut off from food/fuel by the Red citizens, but they can get it shipped into the ports from interested outsiders.
That scenario throws a monkey wrench into any CW2 gaming.
 

Dennis Olson

Chief Curmudgeon
_______________
Those coastal cities may indeed be cut off from food/fuel by the Red citizens, but they can get it shipped into the ports from interested outsiders.

Though what you say is true, that’s only to a certain point. Half the population (over 160,000,000 people) live on the coasts. No one on Earth can provide that scale of modern “Berlin Airlift”.
 

Cardinal

Chickministrator
_______________
Those coastal cities may indeed be cut off from food/fuel by the Red citizens, but they can get it shipped into the ports from interested outsiders.

Though what you say is true, that’s only to a certain point. Half the population (over 160,000,000 people) live on the coasts. No one on Earth can provide that scale of modern “Berlin Airlift”.

True, I was just thinking about previous big wars and outsider interference. I believe the Nawth was able to effectively blockade the south during the first go-round of CW. And I don't know enough about logistics to even venture a guess about weather a "critical" number of cities could be supplied by outside interests to make a difference.
But I was only positing a passive (supply the Blues)response on the outsider's part. What if it were more "active" and the Reds have to fight on more that one front?
 

Dennis Olson

Chief Curmudgeon
_______________
There will be no “front”. That concept is for uniformed armies meeting on distinct battlefields. That won’t happen.
 

The Mountain

Here since the beginning
_______________
The problem with that assessment is that trust in media is still at catastrophic lows. Only the Left would actually believe what the media reported.

I don't think so. I think a lot of minimally-political Middle America will still accept what the media tells them, because "they wouldn't outright lie like that, would they". The further right on the spectrum you go, the less credibility the media is given, but if David Muir gets on the 6pm news and tells America that "White Nationalists destroyed a convoy of food destined for inner-city relief centers today", and they have "video" of the attack, just how much of middle America do you think will believe it?

I really don't think there is a (noncom) middle anymore. I think we are radically divided between left and right...

In terms of opinion, I think you're right, but in terms of willingness to pick up a rifle and head for the Village Green, I think there's a big swath of the public whose political leanings are vague at best, and who care more about the lights staying on and the grocery store having food, than they do about ending what they would consider some alleged "attack on the Constitution" by the Antifada.
 

Dennis Olson

Chief Curmudgeon
_______________
I’ll say this: this country is split nearly perfectly in two politically. As polarized as the country is, I think that the “political ambivalence” of which you speak will not be widespread. Almost everyone is going to play; they’ll really have no choice. Each side will basically know who the players are on the other side (at the neighborhood level) and roundups of “undesirables” on both sides will be attempted. At that point, sitting it out becomes a non-option.

You and many others are going to have to drop your biased “filter of the past” when looking at all this. An UNbiased look says it’s going to be the bloodiest war in history, and NO ONE will have the luxury of sitting it out, no matter your personal thoughts or beliefs.
 

Cardinal

Chickministrator
_______________
In terms of opinion, I think you're right, but in terms of willingness to pick up a rifle and head for the Village Green, I think there's a big swath of the public whose political leanings are vague at best, and who care more about the lights staying on and the grocery store having food, than they do about ending what they would consider some alleged "attack on the Constitution" by the Antifada.

That is true always and forever, which is why the RW was fought by 3%. Everyone else was more interested in keeping the candles lit and working their farms. Nothing has changed cept 'candlepower.'
 

Sam2

Free Range Prisoner
CWII is underway, now. The country died in CWI, with the death of States' Rights and thus, the Constitution.
CWII has many fronts that most people do no see as fronts. They have been making war on us, for more than 150 years.

Edit: Target selection will be the hard part.
 

Trivium Pursuit

Has No Life - Lives on TB
Eventually, several of the things listed above come to happen, I think.
I don't want it to happen, because:
It gets ugly. It gets personal
Millions will die
But what I am most certain of is this: The Left in this country will not win it. Even they will see, those who survive, that it was a massive disaster for them. That they lost everything that ever mattered to them.
 

Dozdoats

On TB every waking moment
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3KKPpjN5PTc
R/T 00:47
Bitter Hillary Clinton Trashes America’s Heartland, Calls States That Didn't Vote For Her “Backwards”
Published on Mar 12, 2018
Dismissing America's Heartland to a foreign audience, Hillary Clinton says states that didn't vote for her are "backwards." Clinton brags she won the coasts & places that are "moving forward."
 
Last edited:

Dennis Olson

Chief Curmudgeon
_______________
DD, is there some reason you posted the vid with a time index starting in the middle of the clip?
 

Dozdoats

On TB every waking moment
DD, is there some reason you posted the vid with a time index starting in the middle of the clip?

Apparently whoever posted it to the place I first found it did it that way and I just copied their link.

I've gone to the original source now and copied over the link from there, I think that fixed it.
 

Bardou

Veteran Member
Someone mentioned that goods would be brought in through ports. Cut the ports off, cut the roads off to the ports, nothing going in and nothing coming out. There will be no JIT, it will be total chaos. The author of the article is correct, the Democrats would lose. The nation wasn't lost during the first civil war, lots of liberals will be eliminated and too scared when looking down a barrel of a gun that they don't have to defend themselves. Don't forget, 60% of youth today wouldn't qualify to be in the military, they don't have the strength to hurl a grenade, or hike 1/2 mile carrying a 50# pack.
 

The Mountain

Here since the beginning
_______________
...Target selection will be the hard part.

So, start now.

As soon as the weather warms up (or while it's still cool, for those of you south of the Mason-Dixon or out in the SW), go canvass your neighborhood and tally up you neighbors' "tells", those little details and hints that reveal political persuasion. If you can, do an actual survey (or pay some college-age kid to do it for you). Map out (preferably using a non-hardcopy method) what kind of people live where. If you do this, cover at least three or four streets out from where you live, so you can see the big picture. If you're rural, go at least 2-3 miles out. You may think you live in a deep Red area, but you might find some surprises.
 

The Mountain

Here since the beginning
_______________
Someone mentioned that goods would be brought in through ports. Cut the ports off, cut the roads off to the ports, nothing going in and nothing coming out. There will be no JIT, it will be total chaos. The author of the article is correct, the Democrats would lose. The nation wasn't lost during the first civil war, lots of liberals will be eliminated and too scared when looking down a barrel of a gun that they don't have to defend themselves. Don't forget, 60% of youth today wouldn't qualify to be in the military, they don't have the strength to hurl a grenade, or hike 1/2 mile carrying a 50# pack.

Isolating the ports would require going deep into "enemy" territory, and likely having to face real opposition. You can bet that the mayors of the big port cities will concentrate a significant portion of their military resources on their main lifeline.
 

Millwright

Knuckle Dragger
_______________
Isolating the ports would require going deep into "enemy" territory, and likely having to face real opposition. You can bet that the mayors of the big port cities will concentrate a significant portion of their military resources on their main lifeline.

Will the mayors have "military"?
 
I don't think so. I think a lot of minimally-political Middle America will still accept what the media tells them, because "they wouldn't outright lie like that, would they". The further right on the spectrum you go, the less credibility the media is given, but if David Muir gets on the 6pm news and tells America that "White Nationalists destroyed a convoy of food destined for inner-city relief centers today", and they have "video" of the attack, just how much of middle America do you think will believe it?

I read an article some time ago about TPTB and their false flag abilities, in this case making a computer-generated imagery (CGI) video of a US flagged cruise ship getting attacked at sea with cruise missiles or something similar. The point being made was, "they" have the capability to make a convincing enough graphic to push us into whatever war they wanted. Scary stuff, enough people would be convinced it was real, and demand retribution.



In terms of opinion, I think you're right, but in terms of willingness to pick up a rifle and head for the Village Green, I think there's a big swath of the public whose political leanings are vague at best, and who care more about the lights staying on and the grocery store having food, than they do about ending what they would consider some alleged "attack on the Constitution" by the Antifada.

And when the lights aren't coming on, and the grocery stores are long empty? ;)
 
Top