• ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    64
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    For there to be a civil war, both sides need an army. The US president will have the US army, and the other side might as well have nerf guns. The civil war would last an afternoon.

    If there’s going to be anything, it’s an increase in domestic terrorism.

      • Donkter@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        That’s what’s going to suck. The war might only last a couple months but I can’t imagine months of bombings and violent demonstrations in every city across the U.S.

        • Bonskreeskreeskree@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          11 months ago

          The us gov is not going to bomb cities and kill innocent citizens and I’m frankly sick of seeing idiots repeating this insane concept.

          • ggppjj@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            11 months ago

            I think you may have added the “us gov” part from inference, vigilante citizens and vigilante cops have bombed American cities and citizens in the past, and will again.

          • Donkter@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            11 months ago

            Sorry buddy, it’s not going to be the U.S. government bombing cities and killing innocent civilians.

              • Schmoo@slrpnk.net
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                11 months ago

                The US has bombed its own citizens twice. First in 1950 it bombed the Puerto Rican towns of Jayuya and Utuado, then in 1985, the Philadelphia police dropped a bomb on a residential neighborhood while targeting MOVE.

                If we were to go down the road of military and police violence against US citizens it would be a much longer list.

    • V ‎ ‎ @beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Furthermore, the American Civil War was precluded by several decades of escalating tension between the states, not between parties in the federal government. The legal and organizational attributes of a state also served to enable separatist states to even attempt to raise an army (this was by design). Bubba and his buddies will, as you said, be armed with nerf guns comparatively

    • BeMoreCareful@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      11 months ago

      There’s also no real fiscal incentive. Morality and freedom are important and all, but we fight wars for financial gain.

      • MindSkipperBro12@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        11 months ago

        That and the three letter agencies have so much incompressible amount of power that any real revolution/civil war is damn near impossible.

        Plus, who really wants to abandon modern living to die in some urban street combat?

    • _NoName_@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      It would be a guerilla collective against a conventional force that’s consistently failed against guerilla tactics.

      There’s no way to know how long it’d last or how it’d impact politics, but targeted acts of terrorism in cities would likely become a more common tragedy. It would pretty much gaurantee US states increasing their police forces and personal rights eroding, and I’m not looking forward to that.