5 ms·

American Civil War 2 is an impossible fantasy. You need regional divisions in the military, which we don't have. These new alliances don't make sense either.

pjc50 6y ago
An impossible fantasy to be sure, but one which the second amendment people love to talk up at every opportunity.
donw 6y ago
No, "American Civil War II" is an absolute nightmare scenario. I would go as far as to say we're in a cold one right now. I would not have imagined this possible four years ago, but now, given the level of division... yeah, it appears to be on the table. That's cause for fairly grave concern, by the way. Imagine that the election goes into a toss-up. Which it likely will. Both parties have been laying the groundwork to contest the election, between claims of "voter suppression" and "voter fraud". I don't think either team would accept anything other than an absolute landslide victory from the other side. And even then, maybe not. I could see the Western seaboard (plus Hawaii) seceding in the case of a Trump victory. In the case of a Biden victory, I'd expect years of domestic insurgency, which I'd still call a "civil war". Either way, I don't see any way out for the US right now that isn't outright ugly. I very, very much hope I'm wrong, of course, and that things calm down after November (regardless of who wins).
- peacefulhat 6y ago
  Why, because of the protests? If the protests had the potential to overthrow the government by force, they would be met with bombs and bullets. Civil wars are fought by armies and the US military is completely unified behind the preservation of the US government.
  - pjc50 6y ago
    Yes, but in the event of a highly disputed election, which government? (I don't think all the stuff above is very likely, because I think the Trump hold on power is a lot shallower than most, but I do think there's going to be polling station violence in some places, continuing conflict between federal and state law enforcement, and a lot of lawsuits after the election contesting individual vote counts, far more so than Bush vs Gore. Especially over postal ballots.)
  - donw 6y ago
    > Civil wars are fought by armies May I direct your attention to the Cultural Revolution? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Revolution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Revolution The possibility is there. > The US military is completely unified behind the preservation of the US government. I agree! But what happens if the question of "Who is the commander-in-chief" becomes unclear? That is the possibility that's on the table. If there's an absolutely clear victory in the next election and the loser steps down, then we're in way better shape. Posse Comitatus remains intact, and factional violence is left in the hands of domestic law enforcement (whatever that looks like at the time). Which is what I'm seriously hoping for. But if not... once again, I'm amazed to even be considering that possibility, but it's there.
    - peacefulhat 6y ago
      Cultural Revolution was not a civil war, and also...how would that possibly happen in America?As for who is the president, they would just defer to SCOTUS like in 2000.
      - donw 6y ago
        > Cultural Revolution was not a civil war That's splitting hairs. Mao's Red Guards -- student revolutionaries and young adults -- effected a drastic shift in power, from a more liberal government to Mao (a strong authoritarian), and something on the order of three million people died as a direct consequence. Moreover, China lost an unbelievable amount of its history, as revolutionaries purged the "Four Olds" (customs, culture, habits, and ideas).
        082349872349872 6y ago
        Pedantically, it's not splitting hairs when we do (at least did, last century) have an internationally accepted definition of a civil war: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23880237 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23880237
  - baybal2 6y ago
    > Civil wars are fought by armies and the US military is completely unified behind the preservation of the US government. Let me give you an examples of a Lebanese civil war Second, it's not that US potential adversaries have ever cease attempts to recruit 5th column in the general staff. A big double digit percentage of civil wars in 20th century were foreign power assisted, if not staged, and triggered by them. US generals with extreme right political views are ripe for taking for a country that seemed to ace recruiting rightist elements for its cause. You know what country I am talking about.
    - pjc50 6y ago
      The US generals seem to the left of, or at least nonplussed by, the Trump faction. The removal of the captain of the Theodore Roosevelt didn't help his support either. It's the patchwork of law enforcement who are more willing to cause street-level trouble. We've already seen one protest which involved people bringing guns to a state legislature. What if there was another one, in response to an "abolish the police" candidate winning locally, and the police backed the occupiers over the legitimate state government?
- kortilla 6y ago
  Why would the states secede? What do they have to gain? Calexit isn’t supported by even half of the California population. These scenarios are nothing more than fantasies for people who like to discuss war scenarios.
- 082349872349872 6y ago
  Three arguments against the western seaboard plus hawaii seceding: Kitsap Pearl Harbor San Diego
  - pnw_hazor 6y ago
    + JBLM
    - 082349872349872 6y ago
      I stuck to those naval bases (Bay Area HN'ers will notice the absence of Alameda and Moffett) because I'd guess others could, in principle, be relocated without notably affecting their missions[1], but the US would never tolerate losing its (not so?) Pacific harbours, especially the sub pens. Best (with non-generic probability) scenario for secession I can imagine at this point: under a foreign nuclear umbrella, the west coast agrees that (a) in exchange for retaining responsibility for the federal debt, the US gets all the nukes, and (b) Ecotopia gives the US a long term lease on the bases mentioned above, à la Subic Bay. As Hawaii was originally filibustered in to the Union, it might be poetic justice for it to join Ecotopia, but both finances and Pearl Harbor would far more likely leave it subordinated to the haoles in DC. (Unlike Vancouver with the Trans Mountain Pipeline, Ecotopia doesn't seem connected to the US' crude pipeline network, so that part would be easy. Financially, the west coast would find it easier to balance their budgets if they were independent. I doubt Ecotopia would retain any inland territories, but under capitalism and in the absence of blockades, money gets you through times of no food much better than food gets you through times of no money. I've discovered the items above en passant, so I haven't bothered running down the rest of the feasibility arguments — but I'm sure someone, or even multiple someones in multiple jurisdictions, has.) [1] Note that the B-52s have recently been relocated from Guam to somewhere in flyover country without, according to the USAF, affecting their missions. (What mission a 70-year old design could still have is above my pay grade.) Bonus track: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9SOryJvTAGs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9SOryJvTAGs
pelliphant 6y ago
I'm not saying that I think that it is probable, but if one where to look at other civil wars in history, would they all really be that different from current america?
havetocharge 6y ago
You don't need divisions in the military. You need divisions in society, of which in the US there are plenty.
carry_bit 6y ago
It would look nothing like the original American Civil War; this would be a 4th generational war. The most conventional it would look like would be the war against the Iraqi insurgency. Defections and sabotage within the US military combined with attacks on infrastructure would reduce its ability to function normally. In such a scenario, Humpty Dumpty is not being put back together again. The US would most likely break apart, assuming some foreign power doesn't manage to conquer all of its former territory.

pjc50 6y ago

An impossible fantasy to be sure, but one which the second amendment people love to talk up at every opportunity.

donw 6y ago

No, "American Civil War II" is an absolute nightmare scenario. I would go as far as to say we're in a cold one right now. I would not have imagined this possible four years ago, but now, given the level of division... yeah, it appears to be on the table. That's cause for fairly grave concern, by the way. Imagine that the election goes into a toss-up. Which it likely will. Both parties have been laying the groundwork to contest the election, between claims of "voter suppression" and "voter fraud". I don't think either team would accept anything other than an absolute landslide victory from the other side. And even then, maybe not. I could see the Western seaboard (plus Hawaii) seceding in the case of a Trump victory. In the case of a Biden victory, I'd expect years of domestic insurgency, which I'd still call a "civil war". Either way, I don't see any way out for the US right now that isn't outright ugly. I very, very much hope I'm wrong, of course, and that things calm down after November (regardless of who wins).

peacefulhat 6y ago
Why, because of the protests? If the protests had the potential to overthrow the government by force, they would be met with bombs and bullets. Civil wars are fought by armies and the US military is completely unified behind the preservation of the US government.
- pjc50 6y ago
  Yes, but in the event of a highly disputed election, which government? (I don't think all the stuff above is very likely, because I think the Trump hold on power is a lot shallower than most, but I do think there's going to be polling station violence in some places, continuing conflict between federal and state law enforcement, and a lot of lawsuits after the election contesting individual vote counts, far more so than Bush vs Gore. Especially over postal ballots.)
- donw 6y ago
  > Civil wars are fought by armies May I direct your attention to the Cultural Revolution? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Revolution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Revolution The possibility is there. > The US military is completely unified behind the preservation of the US government. I agree! But what happens if the question of "Who is the commander-in-chief" becomes unclear? That is the possibility that's on the table. If there's an absolutely clear victory in the next election and the loser steps down, then we're in way better shape. Posse Comitatus remains intact, and factional violence is left in the hands of domestic law enforcement (whatever that looks like at the time). Which is what I'm seriously hoping for. But if not... once again, I'm amazed to even be considering that possibility, but it's there.
  - peacefulhat 6y ago
    Cultural Revolution was not a civil war, and also...how would that possibly happen in America?As for who is the president, they would just defer to SCOTUS like in 2000.
    - donw 6y ago
      > Cultural Revolution was not a civil war That's splitting hairs. Mao's Red Guards -- student revolutionaries and young adults -- effected a drastic shift in power, from a more liberal government to Mao (a strong authoritarian), and something on the order of three million people died as a direct consequence. Moreover, China lost an unbelievable amount of its history, as revolutionaries purged the "Four Olds" (customs, culture, habits, and ideas).
      - 082349872349872 6y ago
        Pedantically, it's not splitting hairs when we do (at least did, last century) have an internationally accepted definition of a civil war: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23880237 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23880237
- baybal2 6y ago
  > Civil wars are fought by armies and the US military is completely unified behind the preservation of the US government. Let me give you an examples of a Lebanese civil war Second, it's not that US potential adversaries have ever cease attempts to recruit 5th column in the general staff. A big double digit percentage of civil wars in 20th century were foreign power assisted, if not staged, and triggered by them. US generals with extreme right political views are ripe for taking for a country that seemed to ace recruiting rightist elements for its cause. You know what country I am talking about.
  - pjc50 6y ago
    The US generals seem to the left of, or at least nonplussed by, the Trump faction. The removal of the captain of the Theodore Roosevelt didn't help his support either. It's the patchwork of law enforcement who are more willing to cause street-level trouble. We've already seen one protest which involved people bringing guns to a state legislature. What if there was another one, in response to an "abolish the police" candidate winning locally, and the police backed the occupiers over the legitimate state government?
kortilla 6y ago
Why would the states secede? What do they have to gain? Calexit isn’t supported by even half of the California population. These scenarios are nothing more than fantasies for people who like to discuss war scenarios.
082349872349872 6y ago
Three arguments against the western seaboard plus hawaii seceding: Kitsap Pearl Harbor San Diego
- pnw_hazor 6y ago
  + JBLM
  - 082349872349872 6y ago
    I stuck to those naval bases (Bay Area HN'ers will notice the absence of Alameda and Moffett) because I'd guess others could, in principle, be relocated without notably affecting their missions[1], but the US would never tolerate losing its (not so?) Pacific harbours, especially the sub pens. Best (with non-generic probability) scenario for secession I can imagine at this point: under a foreign nuclear umbrella, the west coast agrees that (a) in exchange for retaining responsibility for the federal debt, the US gets all the nukes, and (b) Ecotopia gives the US a long term lease on the bases mentioned above, à la Subic Bay. As Hawaii was originally filibustered in to the Union, it might be poetic justice for it to join Ecotopia, but both finances and Pearl Harbor would far more likely leave it subordinated to the haoles in DC. (Unlike Vancouver with the Trans Mountain Pipeline, Ecotopia doesn't seem connected to the US' crude pipeline network, so that part would be easy. Financially, the west coast would find it easier to balance their budgets if they were independent. I doubt Ecotopia would retain any inland territories, but under capitalism and in the absence of blockades, money gets you through times of no food much better than food gets you through times of no money. I've discovered the items above en passant, so I haven't bothered running down the rest of the feasibility arguments — but I'm sure someone, or even multiple someones in multiple jurisdictions, has.) [1] Note that the B-52s have recently been relocated from Guam to somewhere in flyover country without, according to the USAF, affecting their missions. (What mission a 70-year old design could still have is above my pay grade.) Bonus track: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9SOryJvTAGs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9SOryJvTAGs

pelliphant 6y ago

I'm not saying that I think that it is probable, but if one where to look at other civil wars in history, would they all really be that different from current america?

havetocharge 6y ago

You don't need divisions in the military. You need divisions in society, of which in the US there are plenty.

carry_bit 6y ago

It would look nothing like the original American Civil War; this would be a 4th generational war. The most conventional it would look like would be the war against the Iraqi insurgency. Defections and sabotage within the US military combined with attacks on infrastructure would reduce its ability to function normally. In such a scenario, Humpty Dumpty is not being put back together again. The US would most likely break apart, assuming some foreign power doesn't manage to conquer all of its former territory.