EDITORIAL: The Civil War of 2016

Interesting and kind of creepy food for thought.

This part jumped out at me, and I wonder if it struck anyone else:

Twenty years ago, then-Air Force Lt. Col. Charles J. Dunlap Jr. created a stir with an article in Parameters titled “The Origins of the American Military Coup of 2012.” It carried a disclaimer that the coup scenario was “purely a literary device intended to dramatize my concern over certain contemporary developments affecting the armed forces, and is emphatically not a prediction.”

I might like to see if I can find that article. Sounds like an interesting read.

Pretty easy to find.

Link here

You were right, an interesting read!

would it be possible to have the entire world as one nation,, and every person ( not give everyone a gun per say) "saluted" into the military? who then would be the bad guys to war with? Its a macro idea of a nation,,, everyones on the same team,, everyones a good guy,, everyone cooperating for the peace and prosperity of mankind's civilization? too much to ask ? to easy if actually attempted? too boring with no conflict and drama? You tough guys love challenges but the challenge of attempting to implement world peace through information, education, diplomacy, righteousness is just too much to ask? -------- Point your fingers at them " they started it,, adam and eve started it" I say if you have any control over yourself,, and believe the men you point your fingers at are capable of controlling themselves,,, I say all of you finish it.

Originally posted by TheComte
The world needs a big revolution every hundred years or so.

It's the USA's turn.

But who to revolt against? The Govt. employees, the politicians, the rich, the liberals? How do you identify the enemy.

No, the so called revolution would soon breakdown into a race war against people of color promoted by those with the same mind set of the skin heads, neonazis, KKK, Birchers, some militias, even some rightwing groups within the military and some Religious nut bars that want to bring on Armageddon.

www.guardian.co.uk...

abcnews.go.com...

www.veteranstoday.com...

www.washingtonsblog.com... -rile-them-up-to-justify-war-against-iran.html

There will be warning signs of the coming "revolution" and I plan on being aware, bailing and watching it on TV from some bar in a country south of here. I'm so glad I don't have children because like you said TheComte, "Its the USAs turn" and I wouldn't want them to watch the cities burn and a once great country fall into needless bloodshed, chaos, and anarchy.


Should we work for Peace and Justice?................Nah! we got the guns, let's use em....

Wow many people ridcule me about the a possibility of coming civil war two in america whe even army officers are talking about it

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan

This was just a couple of intellectual types drinking wine and layering supposition on top of its self. Then they apparently go drunk enough to think that Americans would demand the US Army come in and kill their own friends and family.

Sounds to me like a couple of professors just got a one way ticket to fringeville.

It appears that Washington and the Department of Defense used a one way ticket to fringeville on 9/11. It appears they don't have any plans to return.

Originally posted by jcarpenter

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan

This was just a couple of intellectual types drinking wine and layering supposition on top of its self. Then they apparently go drunk enough to think that Americans would demand the US Army come in and kill their own friends and family.

Sounds to me like a couple of professors just got a one way ticket to fringeville.

It appears that Washington and the Department of Defense used a one way ticket to fringeville on 9/11. It appears they don't have any plans to return.

That may be true. I am not commenting on 9/11, as i don't even have my own clear thoughts on it.

But as it regards this, it looks like the good Colonel wanted to get in the proverbial pants of a local professor, and allowed himself to be taken down the road of ridiculous supposition. I wonder if he got what he was angling for? He certainly has paid a price of reputation, and she certainly was able to use his rank to sell her ideas.

Really wouldn't surprise me.

The Lie.



The Truth.

To be fair, military leaders are always discussing "what if" scenarios. There's probably a written plan of action in case we're attacked by Paraguay.

What the military doesn't see coming is that the Tea Party will not try to take South Carolina, they will take Hawaii. Seriously, if you're going to take a state, pick Hawaii. That way, when the US invades, you just put on a Hawaiian shirt and claim you were a tourist.

reply to post by CALGARIAN
Remember the backlash from the Branch Davidian Waco debacle? Somethings can never be undone in the minds of true Americans.

i watched this mess unfold on live TV and was appalled.

this act, perpetrated on US citezens, should never be forgotten and never repeated regardless of which side your may take in regard to the Davidians beliefs.

Originally posted by starwarsisreal
Wow many people ridcule me about the a possibility of coming civil war two in america whe even army officers are talking about it

Oh I don't ridicule it. It is entirely possible considering how polarized the population has become. I don't think it's likely because most people are all talk and no show.

Originally posted by binkman

Originally posted by SWCCFAN
Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God!

If you could break free of the superstitious prison in which you are being held, you´d find the irony of that statement as staggering as I do.

what irony? We all have the choice to accept god ( or which ever deity you wish in place of god). tyrants don't exactly give you that choice.

The term Civil War implies some equivilance of force between the two sides. The overtly stated situation in this article is nowhere near equivalent.

Is the term civil war being used like doubleplus good, (precise and accurate thought not allowed) or is there an implication of a wider than one city movement?

I honestly don't think this is so far out there that it cant happen. There is a massive effort to fan the wild fire.

We have a few towns down south and out west that are a people unto themselves and would die to prove a point. The armed forces would see a huge divide between them should they be deployed for such an event.

Reality is stranger than fiction.

reply to post by Semicollegiate


If it was not described as a revolution but rather retribution for a common evil of police abuse of power, it would have supporters in every state city and town.

Once Obama is out of office, the discussion of who are treasonous insurgents will shift to commie Occupiers not Tea Party patriots.

reply to post by olaru12

Should we work for Peace and Justice?................Nah! we got the guns, let's use em....

Except here's the problem:

Many people in the cities want to see more social programs. They want more money to be spent on public housing, clothing programs, food programs, etc. I'm applying a sweeping generalization - but the voting record illustrates that anywhere between about 60 and 80% of the populations in cities are very supportive of extensive government aid programs.

People in more rural areas want to be left the hell alone. They like their elbow room, and generally have a rather negative disposition towards individuals encroaching on their personal space.

The two are mutually incompatible.

But yet, if you are an American citizen - you pay taxes into the American system that gets to be used for American programs.

You have to pay your 'fair share' as well.

And that's where things start to go south in a #ing hurry. The first Civil war was fought over this very same issue. Slavery is often cited as being the cause for war - but it was really just a key trigger issue as black slavery was important to the southern economy (and attacks against it were interpreted as attacks against the economic security of those regions). The issue was horribly ironic considering that open slavery existed in the North for another hundred years (until legislation eventually banned the concept of the Company Store in the coal industry).

Anyway - the point is that you have two populations who have decided that they want to live in mutually exclusive ways but still try to claim they are the same country (or state). Which doesn't work.

The only outcome of such scenarios is some kind of altercation that results in one party submitting to the other in some capacity. Since we're talking an idealistic schism in a nation with 50+% firearm ownership with easily 6 firearms for every individual available - the most likely form of altercation is war.

And, if necessary, I'll fight it.

I won't play the same game as a lot of the mindless, though. I'll form my teams and be quick, decisive, and efficient. Kill who needs to be killed and move on before anyone else has time to realize you are a target of opportunity.

Ironically - my main targets would likely be leaders of other rebellious groups. Can't afford to have short-sighted idiots running around with battalions of partisans going bonkers. That's counter-productive.

I'd play mostly a psychological war against the "established enemy" (in my case, likely overzealous socialists). But I must admit I see considerable difficulty in a number of the hard core socialist groups getting much in terms of armed support for a cause to force people to enjoy the benefits of socialism.

So an armed conflict of that sort is probably not necessary at all (which is why I see myself taking out radicals on 'my side' more than I see taking out radicals on 'the other side' - I'm content to let them fail on their own so long as they keep out of our business).

But that could change if they were to invite other countries to the party for peacekeeping efforts. That could make things rather entertaining. Though I'm not entirely sure how that would work and if it could be arranged both politically and logistically.

Originally posted by starwarsisreal
Wow many people ridcule me about the a possibility of coming civil war two in america whe even army officers are talking about it

Army Colonel's write a lot of junk. They have one goal, to be Army Generals, so they do whatever they can to attract attention from the flag officers they work for.

I read a scenario while I was in Panama that had the banana republics joining together to grab the canal.

So yes, there are many many wild scenarios floating around there.

reply to post by AGWskeptic


For our Final Evaluation Problem, we had an "I Believe" button in the command spaces. This was whenever Fleet Training Teem did something ridiculous (like had one of our guys have a negligent discharge from his M-4 in condition 3).

One notable instance was when we got our first intel inject beginning the drills. - to the effect of: "Yesterday, one mechanized division took a city 60 miles to the NorthWest with an armored division in support."

Our Chief Warrant's response: "Well, I guess our first drill must be the bug out!"

Further discussion: "If this were real, I'd be frantically digging into that mountain and filling it in behind me." [to the effect of - exact quote can't be recalled.]

Not sure who wrote the whole scenario... but it was comical, and FTT had to do numerous injects and over-rides to run their drills (though this is also because every unit going through these work up drills purposely tries to make it as difficult for FTT as possible).

And that is another aspect that many people don't consider.... a lot of the scenarios out there are not really intended to be preparation for a scenario but as a basis for drills to train in general operations. The training we did could easily apply to multiple real-world scenarios and was designed to test and challenge our ability to adapt to situations and coordinate.

Though our scenario was entirely fictitious - perhaps for reasons like this.

reply to post by Aim64C


Yeah, It's all about putting the resources on the field of battle and seeing if the real world communication and coordination matches what's on paper.

And if it doesn't you at least have a baseline to work from.

When I was in, AAR's (After Action Reports) were a bigger deal than briefings, the brass wanted to know what worked, and what didn't.

It's all theory until you get boots on the ground.