America’s Next Civil War Will Be Worse Than Our Last

The American Spectator ^ | 07/26/18 | H. W. Crocker III

[PUGACHEV]

I recall the MLK riots in Washington. We could see smoke rising over the fires in the city from my suburban high school. A bunch of us decided to go downtown for a closer look, but were turned back by soldiers in jeeps posted at Chevy Chase Circle.

The brother of one of my classmates was in the National Guard and was shot in the boot by an arrow while patrolling on 14th Street. Go figure — those were interesting times.

[Forward the Light Brigade]

My idea: The Liberals lose the election, use deep state and FBI/CIA to take over and pull the president from the white house. Purged Congress and the Media support the new appointed President Elizabeth Warren as a “restored” Government. Some states do not follow this line (in the South and west) and form a newly restored Government in Texas. They elect Donald Trump Jr. President of the CSA (as a new yorker he will be seen as a unifying symbol) Then the war starts in earnest with fighting in California, Maryland, and Colorado. Canada will back the Union, Russia the CSA and this could spin into a general war. Loss of life 7 million.

[redgolum]

Buffet is in Omaha.

It is VERY blue. The odd electoral vote system in Nebraska is set up so the Omaha counties don't flip the state blue in federal elections.

That is my comment about “The rest of the state might strike the match!” For locals, Omaha is not considered “Nebraska”. Warren Buffet and his kind run the town, and while they are very nice people (met him a few times), they are not in any way conservative. There is a constant fight back home to limit the Omaha libs from making Nebraska the next Illinois. Well, that and getting a football team that is fun to cheer for.

And protecting infrastructure is hard to do when a issue 1,000 miles away means your natural gas goes down. Same with power. While the red states are in a much better situation than say, CA (we have to much severe weather to depend on just in time deliveries of food stuffs), the depth of supplies that is produced in one state is very small. The days of having a state or county being self sufficient in most things ended with the rail roads.

Unless you send the 1st Nebraska Calvary on an expedition to support and conquer all lands east of the Continental divide, things will be mess. And if we do that, we will give New York to Virginia.

[BroJoeK]

from the article: "In the end, the war was fought over a single legal issue: whether the states that had freely ratified the Constitution to form the Union could freely leave the Union if they felt it no longer served their interests."

castlegreyskull: "The last one was really a failed war for independence.
I think traditionally, Civil Wars fight for control of the entire country."

DiogenesLamp: "This is correct. "

FLT-bird: "Correct."

Pelham: "+1"

I see our Lost Cause brigade has already arrived to reaffirm one of their biggest lies -- that it was all just for "independence".
No it wasn't, from the beginning it was a existential military assault on the United States.
In the war's first 12 months 52 larger battles were fought, 30 in Union states & territories.
Late in 1864 there were still battles fought in the Union states of Kansas & Missouri.

All told the Civil War's 384 battles were fought in 18 Union states & territories and, oh yeh, in 11 Confederate states.

[DiogenesLamp]

That is still not the map I asked you for.

[BroJoeK]

DiogenesLamp: "That is still not the map I asked you for"

But it's the one that matters, the rest is nonsense.

[BroJoeK]

BDParrish: "In the north, people felt that the president had authority to raise troops to put down what amounted to another whiskey rebellion."

It wasn't just a rebellion, it was also an invasion of the Union.
See my post #104 above.

[DiogenesLamp]

It doesn't matter to me. Where battles were fought is not relevant to WHY someone insisted on starting a war.

[OIFVeteran]

The other thing that happened was south Carolina sent “representatives” to try and talk the other slave states into leaving the Union also. That is plan and simple treason in my book.

[BroJoeK]

mideus maximus: " the problem with these “another civil war is coming” histrionics is that they fail to recognize there are no geographic boundaries between the opposing sides— they are interspersed.
If there is fighting, it won’t be war; it will be anarchy."

Bingo! Spot on.
Here are the sides:

[BroJoeK]

central_va: "GA and NY are two great examples. "

No, potentially extreme examples.
In the vast majority of states sides could be more evenly matched.
Of course it's all fantasy, none of this will happen under current conditions.

[sauropod]

Bkmk

[BroJoeK]

bigred44: "The Republicans beat the Democrats in the last Civil War (1861 - 1865)."

No, no you have it all wrong.
It was those evil Union Democrats lead by their devil Ape Lincoln who defeated the freedom loving Republican Confederates and forced them back into slavery.

You don't believe me?
Then ask DiogenesLamp, Pelham, FLY-bird or central_va.
They'll tell you the real "truth" of it.

[BroJoeK]

The Great RJ: "Many prominent leftist politicians, FBI agents and more than a few left wing journalists will be sumarrly executed or spend years in desolate prison camps."

Total fantasy, at least under current conditions.

[Tammy8]

Yeah I would not expect any other countries to get involved, if they did they would most likely support the lefties the way the world is now. I just don’t see it being any support beyond verbal cheering, maybe supplies. The thing is to me most lefties in the world (not just ours) talk a good talk about helping people but when it comes time for them to actually do something, not usually. They are more likely to fund raise to help then pocket the money.

I don’t see how the left could get organized militarily enough to do Sherman to the Sea fighting. The left is made up of so many groups with different agendas and they are fighting with each other now. If they try to go Sherman to the Sea I would bet conservatives would step up the game pretty quickly and all bets would be off at that point. I don’t see conservatives playing nice if people are being slaughtered.

[BroJoeK]

DiogenesLamp: "I don't perceive there to be any immediate danger.
In fact, i'm optimistic that some things are on the mend."

So am I.
Ask me again on November 7, 2018. ;-)

[Tammy8]

There is such a thing as a tipping point, a line not to be crossed. It has always been that with every war.

[Tammy8]

I would bet money the illegals and most of those of illegal parents that were only born here, not feeling like Americans- would flee out of here like their hair was on fire. They would not be here if they were fighters, those here are those that fled their own country when things got tough.

[BroJoeK]

cld51860: "I wonder if anyone was rolling their eyes in 1860."

The general attitude among Northern Republicans in 1860 was: we've heard Southerners crying wolf ("secession") for many years.
Time to call their bluff.

[Tammy8]

I have spent some time talking to people who do not vote, never heard any reason other than those people are convinced things are already past the point of their vote mattering. Most have felt that way for many, many years. Very jaded, does not mean they would sit out any sort of unrest.