View Poll Results: How Imminent is Civil War in America?

Voters
9. You may not vote on this poll
  • By the end of November 2016.

    0 0%
  • By January 01, 2017.

    1 11.11%
  • By June 30, 2017.

    1 11.11%
  • There will be no Civil War, just business as usual.

    7 77.78%
Page 11 of 17 FirstFirst ... 678910111213141516 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 161

Thread: How Imminent is Civil War in America?

  1. #101
    Senior Member
    Theunissen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Last Online
    1 Day Ago @ 03:09 PM
    Ethnicity
    Germanic
    Ancestry
    North Western Europe
    Country
    South Africa South Africa
    State
    Transvaal Transvaal
    Location
    South Africa
    Gender
    Posts
    1,025
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    394
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    656
    Thanked in
    405 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Neophyte View Post
    The big problem with a U.S. civil war is: what happens with the nukes? And with a disintegrating U.S.: how do you dismantle a nuclear power?
    .....
    Who do you think is going to offer a "solution" for this and what will that be?

    People from the NWO crowd will do that. They'll say: give us control over the nukes OR THEY WILL END UP IN THE WRONG HANDS.

    perhaps some of those nukes will indeed be abused. Needless to say that this is a false dilemma. Guess what will be worse One guy having all the power, or several guys having some part of it?!

    All the popular post war ideologies of pacifism, anti-nationalism, anti-capitalism, multiculturalism, globalism, etc. all served one agenda but to promote "One World". Your most common NGO's like the churches, trade unions, universities etc. they all promoted that.



    Quote Originally Posted by Verðandi View Post
    DC Mayor Muriel Bowser says she fears the US is 'descending into a race war' as it's revealed the FBI is probing network of domestic terrorists and district police chief claims 70% of those arrested over the weekend were from other cities

    • Muriel Bowser said on Monday she feared the US was descending into a 'race war' after a violent weekend of clashes
    • Since Thursday, there have been 69 arrests in Washington DC relating to the riots
    • Police Chief Peter Newsham said on Monday 70% had come from other cities
    • He said the FBI was now helping them probe possible domestic terror groups
    • One man who was arrested on Saturday night in DC has also been arrested twice in Portland
    • Jeremy Vajko, 27, was dragged from his graffiti-sprayed BLM van
    • Police said he plowed it through a crowd of protester at 1.15am on Sunday
    • The same van has also been spotted in Kenohsa, but he is from Washington state
    • Vajko says he is peaceful and was driving at 5mph and giving out medical aid




    Washington DC Mayor Muriel Bowser has revealed her fear that the US is ‘descending into a race war’ as violence across the country continues and the FBI probes a potential network of domestic terrorists who may be traveling to protest hotspots.

    Bowser, a Democrat, was speaking at a press conference on Monday after a weekend of chaos in the nation’s capital which saw demonstrators clash with police outside Black Lives Matter Plaza.....
    What keeps the US from descending into 'civil war' is the fact that the overall majority of people still have a choice between rioting and 'minding their own business', which means getting an income and consuming it within the save perimeters of their homes. Except for having less Negroes, that is the difference between Liberia and the US as well.

    Right now I don't expect imminent war or collapse neither. But the preconditions for this are being fostered.

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to Theunissen For This Useful Post:


  3. #102
    Gothicist
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member
    Rodskarl Dubhgall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Danish Swede
    Ancestry
    Danelaw < Roslagen
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Y-DNA
    R-BY30613
    mtDNA
    K2a5a
    Country
    Vinland Vinland
    State
    Newfoundland and Labrador Newfoundland and Labrador
    Location
    West of New Sweden and Maryland
    Gender
    Age
    39
    Zodiac Sign
    Leo
    Family
    Married parent
    Occupation
    Wayne
    Politics
    North Sea Empire
    Religion
    Asatru Folk Assembly
    Posts
    4,002
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    10,010
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    440
    Thanked in
    384 Posts
    America now has official 'no-go zones' like in Sweden and Britain does too. I'm enjoying the fact that all the sanctuary cities and states are in complete meltdown and discredited, after demanding to abolish the electoral college as a means to control the country. As if they, relying on pure mobocracy, can effectively administer to the people...

    It's obvious that Nancy, as Speaker of the House, will openly try to force a coup d'etat between election day and the state of the Union address, to nullify the reelection of Trump in the obvious loss of Biden as with Hillary--who told him to demand a recount (of dead people, criminals and illegals) without ever conceding a loss. Last election cycle was a private war against Republicans and others, only they've whipped up enough of the rabble to become domestic terrorists--one step from having them become suicide bombers and crash the White House, if wanted. Gore and Kerry losing come to mind, just as a pretext for officially open uncivil war, hiding behind Obama as their likely dark lord to take over from behind the scenes.

    This time, however, I expect that intersectionality will make asymmetric warfare and not between state governments arrayed against each other, but Democrats will attempt secession wherever they have blue states and cities rioting. Violence and looting will be anywhere and everywhere, any time and randomly where their allies are. All that's needed is to look at the demographic situation, as blue metropolitan areas will surely become insurrectionist in red states and blue states will invade the homes of country folk in the red counties. America is already Bleeding Kansas redux and bushwhackers are on the move; 'John Brown's Body' will be sung with a different name, lyrics and tune.

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to Rodskarl Dubhgall For This Useful Post:


  5. #103
    Senior Member
    Theunissen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Last Online
    1 Day Ago @ 03:09 PM
    Ethnicity
    Germanic
    Ancestry
    North Western Europe
    Country
    South Africa South Africa
    State
    Transvaal Transvaal
    Location
    South Africa
    Gender
    Posts
    1,025
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    394
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    656
    Thanked in
    405 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Rodskarl Dubhgall View Post
    America now has official 'no-go zones' like in Sweden and Britain does too. I'm enjoying the fact that all the sanctuary cities and states are in complete meltdown and discredited, after demanding to abolish the electoral college as a means to control the country. As if they, relying on pure mobocracy, can effectively administer to the people...
    Indeed, the BLM pogroms may have served as a wake-up trigger to many WASP-folks. And I think many other non-GOP voters may have started to be disgusted by what the left is pulling off. Remember those are the folks that mostly think associatively - And the left/Democrats are now associated with violence, riots, arson, looting and yeah murder as well.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rodskarl Dubhgall View Post
    It's obvious that Nancy, as Speaker of the House, will openly try to force a coup d'etat between election day and the state of the Union address, to nullify the reelection of Trump in the obvious loss of Biden as with Hillary--who told him to demand a recount (of dead people, criminals and illegals) without ever conceding a loss. Last election cycle was a private war against Republicans and others, only they've whipped up enough of the rabble to become domestic terrorists--one step from having them become suicide bombers and crash the White House, if wanted. Gore and Kerry losing come to mind, just as a pretext for officially open uncivil war, hiding behind Obama as their likely dark lord to take over from behind the scenes.
    I wondered why they put a functional retard like Biden into the race. It doesn't seem to make sense to me. On the other hand: Hillary's defeat was also a loss for the Dems themselves and the Dems are sore losers. Now if Biden loses that won't be an image loss for them, since he's done and over with anyway. If they win they, can let him retire and move someone else in.

    The clumsy incoherent talking of Biden is tempting to be ridiculed by commentators. Perhaps the Dems speculate they can play the victim card by saying:"Look how they are treating this old man!" I mean, they pulled that off with the Swedish Down Syndrome (or whatever that disease is) girl, when she gets criticised for the BS she tells people in her publicity stunts.


    Quote Originally Posted by Rodskarl Dubhgall View Post
    This time, however, I expect that intersectionality will make asymmetric warfare and not between state governments arrayed against each other, but Democrats will attempt secession wherever they have blue states and cities rioting. Violence and looting will be anywhere and everywhere, any time and randomly where their allies are. All that's needed is to look at the demographic situation, as blue metropolitan areas will surely become insurrectionist in red states and blue states will invade the homes of country folk in the red counties. America is already Bleeding Kansas redux and bushwhackers are on the move; 'John Brown's Body' will be sung with a different name, lyrics and tune.
    All that's actually missing is White folks fighting back. But I think they still are recuperating from their libtarded, cucky hangovers.

  6. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Theunissen For This Useful Post:


  7. #104
    Senior Member
    Neophyte's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Last Online
    Tuesday, September 21st, 2021 @ 10:54 PM
    Ethnicity
    Scandinavian
    Subrace
    Nordic + some Atlantid
    Country
    Sweden Sweden
    Gender
    Age
    48
    Politics
    Blut und Boden
    Posts
    2,053
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    189
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    198
    Thanked in
    132 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Theunissen View Post
    Who do you think is going to offer a "solution" for this and what will that be?
    Hard to say. It could the the chiefs of staff telling the nation to "STFU or die!" or it could be the president issuing orders and being obeyed because the alternative is too grim to be contemplated. Possession in 9/10 of the law, so who ís in the Oval Office at the time will matter a lot.

    As things are developing now, the riots are making the BLM less popular by the day and the Democratic party is becoming more and more associated with the riots. At the same time, evidence from the riots is accumulating by the day. Security cam videos, cell phone records, chat logs etc. It is adding up all the time. I also notice that the President is starting to use the the term terrorism as he addresses the riots. And, since habeas corpus has been suspended, we might soon begin to see all kinds of interesting detentions.

    Right now, the leftists are being given all the rope they need to hang themselves.

    Come November, BLM will not be that legitimate any longer. Maybe it will even have become legitimate to use arbitrary force against them?

  8. #105
    Senior Member
    Theunissen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Last Online
    1 Day Ago @ 03:09 PM
    Ethnicity
    Germanic
    Ancestry
    North Western Europe
    Country
    South Africa South Africa
    State
    Transvaal Transvaal
    Location
    South Africa
    Gender
    Posts
    1,025
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    394
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    656
    Thanked in
    405 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Neophyte View Post
    Hard to say. It could the the chiefs of staff telling the nation to "STFU or die!" or it could be the president issuing orders and being obeyed because the alternative is too grim to be contemplated. Possession in 9/10 of the law, so who ís in the Oval Office at the time will matter a lot.
    This was about nukes landing in "wrong hands" and what responses to this could be. I btw. have no idea how many of those nukes would actually be operational by now. In my view there would be a decline in usability over time of nukes, since they contain radioactive materials. But the point is the fear factor of that type of weapons. And that will be abused. Probably by New-World-Order proponents.
    Quote Originally Posted by Neophyte View Post
    As things are developing now, the riots are making the BLM less popular by the day and the Democratic party is becoming more and more associated with the riots. At the same time, evidence from the riots is accumulating by the day. Security cam videos, cell phone records, chat logs etc. It is adding up all the time. I also notice that the President is starting to use the the term terrorism as he addresses the riots. And, since habeas corpus has been suspended, we might soon begin to see all kinds of interesting detentions.
    I'd assume that people get annoyed with the BLM/ANTIFA/Cultural Marxist/leftist crowd. But they probably planned on something like this as well. Annoy people to push them further to compliance with demands. Schools (and unfortunately many parents as well) educate their kids to "try to get along with everyone" - It's the "Why can't we all live in peace together"-theme. It's a deception of course, but it sounds so nice - well, that's the point of that kind of deception. The result is however that people follow the strategy of complying with demands of those that are harassing them in the hope that they will be left alone in the future. It's of course a false hope. Sure, there will be a nice/reconciliation phase after that only to step up demands and threats a while later. One can not defend ones way to victory. The best a defensive strategy can achieve is to get a settlement. But that means that you will still have to take a stand and of course clean up your own turf. I don't see Whites doing that right now. And by now, it should be pretty clear that Whites are a target. Something this has been denied for decades of course, but people with some cultural sensitivity should have noticed where the cultural industries wind is blowing.

    Quote Originally Posted by Neophyte View Post
    Right now, the leftists are being given all the rope they need to hang themselves.
    Come November, BLM will not be that legitimate any longer. Maybe it will even have become legitimate to use arbitrary force against them?
    That's the spin off I'd be hoping for. I'm not in the US. We got our own 'racial problem' here. And the situtation is different for a number of reasons. But people are observing what's happening in the US, since that is news and subject of discussions. And they can now draw conclusions which also will let them take sides. E.g.:
    1. "BLM is right. The US is the most racist country in the world, Blacks are targeted by racist White policemen.... bla, bla, bla"
    2. "I'm really tired of this racism BS. It's obvious a political game played, perhaps there is something fundamentally wrong with the social fabric/design in the US".

    There will be variation on this, but it's also a sort of arche-type people will take home. Bear in mind that the whole "Racism"-hype is a hangover from the 1960s. The word wasn't even used commonly by academia in the early 1950s. They spoke about "prejudices" and "stereotypes" then. Sure they existed, but they usually had some experiential base. That's why they were more common in areas with some "diversity" in the population. The left managed to shift the "prejudices and stereotypes" by using the media and the education system towards those that defended their broader ethno-community (Calling them racists, white supremacists and now - probably more appropriately White Nationalists). You see that first and foremost this is a game played with public perceptions and words - essentially spinning a narrative and changing the collective vision within a society. During the 1950s I guess, most White Western countries were highly homogeneous when it came to ethnicity and race. I realise that the US is a bit different regarding that, but they had ethnicities mostly self-segregated into their own suburbs all over the US. That merely changed AFTER the 'cultural revolution' of the 1960s, which changed the mind set with regards to race. Now those that would live among their own were portrayed as haters that wanted to "oppress Black people" and "hurt them", etc. Of course incidents like this were being provoked and found all the time - getting a lot of media attention, first due to sensationalism, later probably on advise of the editors. The later playing a game with what's to be placed and what not.

  9. The Following User Says Thank You to Theunissen For This Useful Post:


  10. #106
    Senior Member
    Tripredacus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Last Online
    9 Hours Ago @ 08:13 PM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Ancestry
    Germany, Poland, Italy
    Subrace
    Don't know
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    New York New York
    Location
    United States
    Gender
    Family
    Single adult
    Occupation
    Software Engineer
    Politics
    Fascism
    Religion
    I Am
    Posts
    337
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    28
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    75
    Thanked in
    47 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Rodskarl Dubhgall View Post
    America now has official 'no-go zones' like in Sweden and Britain does too.
    I'm sure it differs based on the city or state, but there have been various "no-go zones" in the US for decades. From my memory, a few particular ones haven't changed, except that maybe 10 years ago it was ok to be there between 7am and 3pm on a weekday. Even so, it is still a far cry from the early 90s and before when those areas were truly a "no-go" zone, where you needed an escort to go into certain neighborhoods, and then other neighborhoods you could not go even with an escort. Think about being a child and being told by your friend that he can only come over to your house to play, but you can't go to their house because you would be killed.

    And besides, the no-go zones in Europe (and Australia) seem to be communities that operate under Sharia law, which is not the case in the US. The arab communities in my area do not operate like that, and there is no problem with non-Arabs going into them. I have not heard of any areas in the US that have those types of areas like in Europe.

  11. #107
    Gothicist
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member
    Rodskarl Dubhgall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Danish Swede
    Ancestry
    Danelaw < Roslagen
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Y-DNA
    R-BY30613
    mtDNA
    K2a5a
    Country
    Vinland Vinland
    State
    Newfoundland and Labrador Newfoundland and Labrador
    Location
    West of New Sweden and Maryland
    Gender
    Age
    39
    Zodiac Sign
    Leo
    Family
    Married parent
    Occupation
    Wayne
    Politics
    North Sea Empire
    Religion
    Asatru Folk Assembly
    Posts
    4,002
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    10,010
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    440
    Thanked in
    384 Posts
    Pugetopolis has them now and Portland too, IIRC. Just run by Antifa. Besides, any sanctuary city and state is a 'no-go zone'.

  12. #108
    6th army lives matter
    Chlodovech's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Flemish
    Ancestry
    Frankish
    Country
    Holy Roman Empire Holy Roman Empire
    Gender
    Religion
    Catholic
    Posts
    3,827
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2,270
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3,333
    Thanked in
    1,540 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Neophyte View Post
    The big problem with a U.S. civil war is: what happens with the nukes?
    If the next American civil war looks anything like the civil war in Yugoslavia (a war of secession, as opposed to the Troubles in Northern Ireland), more than one warring party will possess nukes from the start.

    That will also be the case soon enough if the civil war is an insurgency against the government. Hence the insurgents would theoretically always be able to blackmail the authorities. Thus the civil war could be very short indeed. If three breakaway American states threaten to use nuclear weapons if they don't get independence, I bet Washington will accept independence (for the time being).

    A government can't really ever nuke its own people and infrastructure though, the elite doesn't want to lose the backbone of its own wealth and power. Although who's to say what would happen if the remnants of the government and its supporters (or any other faction), fielding a miltia just like everyone else after a period of warfare and disintegration of the state, are about to lose the war and can never hope to reunite the country again - and are in the process of being overwhelmed? All the more so if the government is led by an SJW president. It may look to its own NBC arsenal, not so much to win, but to survive in a rump state U.S.A. However, retaliation could be swift...

    Quote Originally Posted by Neophyte
    This problem, properly understood by the chiefs of staff and the political leadership, will lead them (the armed forces, federal law enforcement etc.) to impose continuity of government on the people no matter what.
    They certainly would if they could. But they can't. The government will have already lost as soon as the first shots of the civil war are fired. In any American civil war scenario beyond one of low intensity warfare as seen in Northern Ireland, the U.S. army will fall apart. In the case of a rightwing uprising, at most 40% of soldiers are expected to remain loyal to the government. Continuity of government is a total pipedream then.

    Quote Originally Posted by Neophyte
    Once past a certain point, order will be imposed and all protests will be met with as much force as is required to quell them. And that includes nuclear weapons.
    Absolutely unthinkable, Neophyte. No nukes will be used to quell protest, ever - not even against secessionist states. At the time when the government would consider using NBC weapons there won't be much left of the government anymore, it will only control some coastal cities and regions by then. And even then they may just not do it out of fear for revenge. The insurgents may exterminate its last strongholds in return.

    I think everyone involved in the war would've come to the conclusion that it's best to carve up the U.S. and sign a peace treaty long before that point, instead of risking nuclear annihilation. It's the rational thing to do and hence the most likely outcome.

    Quote Originally Posted by Neophyte
    And with a disintegrating U.S.: how do you dismantle a nuclear power?
    Other countries may intervene, with or without a U.N. mandate, while at the same time strengthening/supplying/protecting their favorite faction(s) in the civil war. It's hard to believe they'll be able to get their hands on all of America's nukes however. The logistics of these operations would be problematic, if Germany, the UK, Russia, France or China step in, while the U.S. government and/or certain belligerents may be completely hostile to this or that foreign presence, viewing them as invaders, actively resisting them in some capacity. These foreign troops may be destroyed upon arrival or at sea. The political implications too are not for the faint of heart. No foreign actor would be able to intervene in time to completely retrieve America's nuclear arsenal anyway.

    Quote Originally Posted by Neophyte
    This is also the reason as to why we will never see any real revolution in Russia.
    Perhaps. But would the Russians, Latin-Americans or the Chinese feel the same way about the risk of nuclear proliferation in U.S. in case of civil war, enough for them not to fan the flames? Maybe not. And if they enter the conflict themselves in a Syria style, it will always be to beef up this or that party, ensuring the U.S. will never regain its former borders. At the very least they will be arming their favorite side.
    “As brothers and sisters we knew instinctively that if we were going to stand in darkness, best we stand in a darkness we had made ourselves.” - Douglas Coupland

  13. The Following User Says Thank You to Chlodovech For This Useful Post:


  14. #109
    Active Funding Member
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member
    Elizabeth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    European American
    Ancestry
    United Kingdom, Czechoslovakia, Netherlands, Germany, France
    mtDNA
    H1c12
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    Florida Florida
    Gender
    Age
    51
    Zodiac Sign
    Aries
    Politics
    Pro-Trump, Nationalist
    Religion
    Folkish Heathen
    Posts
    1,129
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,030
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,138
    Thanked in
    560 Posts
    There won't be a civil war. The leftists/Marxists/Democrats/BLM/antifa may protest after the election because President Trump will win re-election.

  15. The Following User Says Thank You to Elizabeth For This Useful Post:


  16. #110
    Senior Member
    Neophyte's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Last Online
    Tuesday, September 21st, 2021 @ 10:54 PM
    Ethnicity
    Scandinavian
    Subrace
    Nordic + some Atlantid
    Country
    Sweden Sweden
    Gender
    Age
    48
    Politics
    Blut und Boden
    Posts
    2,053
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    189
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    198
    Thanked in
    132 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Chlodovech View Post
    If the next American civil war looks anything like the civil war in Yugoslavia (a war of secession, as opposed to the Troubles in Northern Ireland), more than one warring party will possess nukes from the start.
    I am leaning more to the Nothern Ireland scenario; though I would more look to RAF in Germany.

    As long as extremists are winning politically, violence does not escalate too much. It was only after 1968 as the Communists in Western Europe understood that the political struggle, i.e. revoltion throguh the ballot box or mass action in the streets, was closed and that the working classes were not interested in Communism, that they took to arms. Their goal was to provoke a totalitarian reaction from the state that would "prove" that it was a dictatorial police state. This did not happen, and the commies lost again.

    A massive republican victory in November would put Antifa/BLM in that "feeling of '68".

    That will also be the case soon enough if the civil war is an insurgency against the government. Hence the insurgents would theoretically always be able to blackmail the authorities. Thus the civil war could be very short indeed. If three breakaway American states threaten to use nuclear weapons if they don't get independence, I bet Washington will accept independence (for the time being).
    This would require an organized opposition that can negotiate with one voice. I distributed insurgency consisting of a number of loosely affiliated groups cannot do that. A new confederacy, again lead by the Democratic party, with nukes under central command. My guess is that a new Civil War will not look like that. Instead we are talking of a situation akin to what would have been the case if all the European terrorist organizations of the 70's had had their own nuclear aresenal.

    With whom do you then make your peace?

    A government can't really ever nuke its own people and infrastructure though, the elite doesn't want to lose the backbone of its own wealth and power. Although who's to say what would happen if the remnants of the government and its supporters (or any other faction), fielding a miltia just like everyone else after a period of warfare and disintegration of the state, are about to lose the war and can never hope to reunite the country again - and are in the process of being overwhelmed? All the more so if the government is led by an SJW president. It may look to its own NBC arsenal, not so much to win, but to survive in a rump state U.S.A. However, retaliation could be swift...
    No, not its own people. But rebels from a secessionist state. Sherman marched through Georgia just fine.

    Some say that this is, or at one point was, Assad's strategy in Syria. He wanted to wreak so much death and destruction on the rest of the nation that he and his fellow alawites could withdraw to their own state/area in the mountains without having to fear their devastated negiboiurs.


    They certainly would if they could. But they can't. The government will have already lost as the first shots of the civil war are fired. In any American civil war scenario beyond one of low intensity warfare as seen in Northern Ireland, the U.S. army will fall apart. In the case of a rightwing uprising, at most 40% of soldiers are expected to remain loyal to the government. Continuity of government is a total pipedream then.
    The assumption here is that the right rebels agaist the state. Now we are talking about an extreme fringe movement rebelling against the sitting administration. The armed forces would only be asked to restore order.

    Absolutely unthinkable, Neophyte. No nukes will be used to quell protest, ever - not even against secessionist states. At the time when the government would consider using NBC weapons there won't be much left of the government anymore, it will only control some coastal cities and regions by then. And even then they may just not do it out of fear for revenge. The insurgents may exterminate its last strongholds in return.
    My suspicion is that various thinktanks and agencies have been analyzing this problem since mid 1940s, and that it has been given a lot of serious thought over the years. We cannot, in a few days, expect to match three generations of analysis. There is no telling what the concerned parties will do once faced with a fait accompli.


    I think everyone involved in the war would've come to the conclusion that it's best to carve up the U.S. and sign a peace treaty long before that point, instead of risking nuclear annihilation. It's the rational thing to do and hence the most likely outcome.
    Not unlikely, no.

Page 11 of 17 FirstFirst ... 678910111213141516 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Is Another Revolutionary War Imminent?
    By Verðandi in forum The United States
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: Saturday, January 9th, 2021, 01:31 PM
  2. Germans in the US Civil War
    By Primus in forum Modern Age & Contemporary History
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: Saturday, August 29th, 2020, 11:52 PM
  3. Civil War in Sweden
    By ProEuropa in forum Politics & Geopolitics
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: Tuesday, July 23rd, 2019, 10:48 PM
  4. 'Black Power Cartel' Says Black-White Race War Imminent
    By Nachtengel in forum The United States
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: Friday, July 30th, 2010, 07:37 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •