What Might Civil War Be Like?

[mariomike]

When Trump won election our leftists vowed to move to Canada.

Not sure if preferring to live in Canada makes someone a "leftist".

But, as for immigrating to Canada, it takes more than wishful thinking,
https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/services/immigrate-canada.html

 

[Jarnhamar]

When Trump won election our leftists vowed to move to Canada.I don't remember any actually moving,I wish they had.

One couple did.
https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.4479375

We made it': U.S. couple fleeing Trump arrive in Halifax

Front page news right there.

 

[a_majoor]

One couple did.
https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.4479375Front page news right there.

It took them two years? Were they hiding in the wilderness? How did they manage to sneak through the minefields and barbed wire entanglements, avoid the savage guard dogs and roving land air and sea patrols meant to stop them? </sarc>

 

[beirnini]

Bernini,

I have difficulty following your line of reasoning: because the OP posted an (admittedly) controversial article on a possible US Civil war, he has dishonoured his oath to the Crown?  Do you have an "approved" list of topics that you would like CF members to only discuss, perhaps?

Can you explain in what way that he has dishonoured QR&O 6.04? Please be specific.

OP approvingly posts a detailed article about waging war and killing domestic "enemies" who, it must be said, are guilty of merely being his political adversaries. One could argue with almost any other regular poster here that such approval would charitably refer to the alleged debate-worthy content of the article itself or of the inclinations of the writer himself. But with OP his approval is not reserved for the debatable qualities of the article nor the writer, but as his lengthy and focused history of past posts, missives and entries against his political adversaries here can attest his approval assuredly lies at least in part in the aims of the article itself. His politics and political heroes include spreading disturbing and deplorable content like this. No one without a serious axe to grind would ever read and proffer this article as "a good look" into anything except as a good look into the pathological preoccupations of the writer in question. But OP did not intimate that, and frankly I seriously doubt he ever would.

The longer Oath of Allegiance includes the promise to "cause Her Majesty's peace to be kept and maintained". Approvingly spreading around the idea that one's domestic political adversaries should be killed is dishonouring that promise. Specific enough?

Tribalism and dehumanization are what make war prosecution possible. Active service members are the last people on Earth who should be cavalier with the tried-and-true processes of engendering tribalism and dehumanization. Whether or not OP agrees that is exactly what this article and many others just like it emanating from his political kin and allies are doing. Engender that tribalism and dehumanization within your domestic polity and civil war is a foregone conclusion.

Wondering "What Might Civil War Be Like" begins with determining who is fighting. If OP really cared about his oath to keep Her Majesty's peace maintained he should be much more careful about drawing, intentionally or otherwise, active service members into the fight.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

OP approvingly posts a detailed article about waging war and killing domestic "enemies" who, it must be said, are guilty of merely being his political adversaries. One could argue with almost any other regular poster here that such approval would charitably refer to the alleged debate-worthy content of the article itself or of the inclinations of the writer himself. But with OP his approval is not reserved for the debatable qualities of the article nor the writer, but as his lengthy and focused history of past posts, missives and entries against his political adversaries here can attest his approval assuredly lies at least in part in the aims of the article itself. His politics and political heroes include spreading disturbing and deplorable content like this. No one without a serious axe to grind would ever read and proffer this article as "a good look" into anything except as a good look into the pathological preoccupations of the writer in question. But OP did not intimate that, and frankly I seriously doubt he ever would.

The longer Oath of Allegiance includes the promise to "cause Her Majesty's peace to be kept and maintained". Approvingly spreading around the idea that one's domestic political adversaries should be killed is dishonouring that promise. Specific enough?

Tribalism and dehumanization are what make war prosecution possible. Active service members are the last people on Earth who should be cavalier with the tried-and-true processes of engendering tribalism and dehumanization. Whether or not OP agrees that is exactly what this article and many others just like it emanating from his political kin and allies are doing. Engender that tribalism and dehumanization within your domestic polity and civil war is a foregone conclusion.

Wondering "What Might Civil War Be Like" begins with determining who is fighting and on which side. If OP really cared about his oath to keep Her Majesty's peace maintained he should be much more careful about drawing, intentionally or otherwise, active service members into the fight.

That is a detailed response.

 

[Spencer100]

44% see civil wars, 31 think soon

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/june_2018/31_think_u_s_civil_war_likely_soon

 

[Remius]

44% see civil wars, 31 think soon

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/june_2018/31_think_u_s_civil_war_likely_soon

http://www.businessinsider.com/civil-war-2017-america-no-america-is-not-heading-for-new-a-civil-war-2017-8

 

[Spencer100]

So at one level we have civil and political violence and  the other we have Pickett's charge.  And Northern Ireland in the middle?  The business insider report is right but I also think the other report has truth in it too.  Urgh!  Can we just all get along? 

 

[beirnini]

That is a detailed response.

Thanks.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Never bring a pussy hat to a gun fight.

 

[daftandbarmy]

44% see civil wars, 31 think soon

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/june_2018/31_think_u_s_civil_war_likely_soon

It's OK. 50% surveyed believe in aliens, who will come and save us all from ourselves:

New survey shows nearly half of Americans believe in aliens

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/new-survey-shows-nearly-half-of-americans-believe-in_us_59824c11e4b03d0624b0abe4

 

[AbdullahD]

I dont know.. I think I'd have to be in the "believe in aliens" camp too.. not in a tin hat sense or that anyone is communication with them.. but space seems just far to big for us to be the only ones out there...

 

[SeaKingTacco]

I dont know.. I think I'd have to be in the "believe in aliens" camp too.. not in a tin hat sense or that anyone is communication with them.. but space seems just far to big for us to be the only ones out there...

I was thinking the same thing. Given the size of the universe, it is almost laughably ludicrous to think we are alone.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Considering we live in the boonies of our own galaxy, which is anything but unique amongst uncountable number of galaxies, I am unclear why anyone would come and visit us. Unless we are part of some space tourism jaunt; "Come see native species in their own environment".

 

[Baz]

I was thinking the same thing. Given the size of the universe, it is almost laughably ludicrous to think we are alone.

I would agree.

But I also think there is a good chance that space is so large that societies rise, prosper, and then fall (destroy themselves) without ever being able to meet their neighbors.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

I would agree.

But I also think there is a good chance that space is so large that societies rise, prosper, and then fall (destroy themselves) without ever being able to meet their neighbors.

That is what I like about you, Baz- always the optimist. 

 

[daftandbarmy]

I was thinking the same thing. Given the size of the universe, it is almost laughably ludicrous to think we are alone.

Only a pilot can feel alone on a planet with 9 billion people

 

[a_majoor]

So at one level we have civil and political violence and  the other we have Pickett's charge.  And Northern Ireland in the middle?  The business insider report is right but I also think the other report has truth in it too.  Urgh!  Can we just all get along?

There are spectrums of violence even in a civil war scenario. Deadly assaults on legislators (James T. Hodgkinson shooing Republican members practicing for a charity baseball game) and other, lesser acts of politically inspired violence and calls for violence from the Progressives is certainly edging into "Bleeding Kansas" territory, and examples like the PIRA campaign in Northern Ireland or other civil wars around the world suggest it does not take a large number of people to start and maintain political violence, but it does take a lot of resources to supress.

The fact that large numbers of Americans are already anticipating this is not a good sign. And the massive concentration of one faction in the cities and urban areas means that if the situation does boil over, the casualties will be enormous (mostly civilians trapped inside the urban areas without food, water or electricity).

 

[tomahawk6]

Where everyone is armed women and children will be civilians.

 

[daftandbarmy]

There are spectrums of violence even in a civil war scenario. Deadly assaults on legislators (James T. Hodgkinson shooing Republican members practicing for a charity baseball game) and other, lesser acts of politically inspired violence and calls for violence from the Progressives is certainly edging into "Bleeding Kansas" territory, and examples like the PIRA campaign in Northern Ireland or other civil wars around the world suggest it does not take a large number of people to start and maintain political violence, but it does take a lot of resources to supress.

The fact that large numbers of Americans are already anticipating this is not a good sign. And the massive concentration of one faction in the cities and urban areas means that if the situation does boil over, the casualties will be enormous (mostly civilians trapped inside the urban areas without food, water or electricity).

And the party that would benefit most from propagating worries about civil war and insurrection sparked by an allegedly repressive national 'oligarchy'?

Probably the Democrats.... and it will help them garner support in the run up to the mid-terms in November.