Why are Americans deluded into thinking they could win a civil war?

I think a lot of people have missed the fact that there wouldn't be a determined population who would fight. The government would very quickly remove any instigators/leaders and break the back of any potential resistance or agitation.

The fact of the matter is that the population would not have the will to fight. To watch revolutions and civil wars around the world you notice that those that fight are in a position of poverty that's deteriorating. They really have nothing left to lose.

Despite what you think the majority of the American population lives very well. The entire country isn't going to fight en mass for a political ideal. For their life, yes. But it will never come to that. Your perceived 'freedoms' may be getting eroded over time but there will never be a scenario where the population is immediately disenfranchised to the extent that they've had enough and left with no other resort.

Also, the American military would not fire on civillians but the point everyone seems to be missing is that they would never be asked to. They would only ever be asked to fire on threats to themselves and the government. They would be asked to fire on dissidents who would be portrayed as trouble makers. The police or military would simply believe they were doing their job by assisting in removing them.

I still don't see any scenario whatsoever in todays USA where a civil war would take place, let alone a revolution.

Please tell me. What would drive Americans to such an extreme?

Originally posted by HattoriHanzou

Originally posted by inverslyproportional
reply to post by HattoriHanzou

 

Good for you, dont ever forget to watch out for your battle buddies, and they will never forget to watch out for you.

I think the actions of you and your wife are a true testament to the American soldiers heart, if only more would follow your example.

Good show.

Oh I was never in the military. Just paying one forward.

World needs more like you that pay it forward....you may not be in the military but know that I salute you!

reply to post by inverslyproportional


Yeah, man, no problem, i'm happy you like it

reply to post by region331


At this time it is all incremental assumption.but the POTUS is at a very dangerous precipice here.If he keeps pushing progressive party policy we won't have to do anything, he'll hang him self.And the Dems will get a backlash in 2014,hopefully with more intelligent people who are party shills.
But if he attempts a martial law scenario it will be a fatal mistake,despite statements to the contrary.Clinton's sexual games nearly cost him his presidency,although his reptile spouse didn't seem affected.
Let's all hope Bob Woodward is going to bag this one too.He's on it and working as we speak

Originally posted by Darkphoenix77

Originally posted by HattoriHanzou

Originally posted by inverslyproportional
reply to post by HattoriHanzou

 

Good for you, dont ever forget to watch out for your battle buddies, and they will never forget to watch out for you.

I think the actions of you and your wife are a true testament to the American soldiers heart, if only more would follow your example.

Good show.

Oh I was never in the military. Just paying one forward.

World needs more like you that pay it forward....you may not be in the military but know that I salute you!

I have been a long time military contractor in the ISR and software business so I know the score.

Amending the earlier post ,it should read NOT a party shill......I think it's the dang nerve agent pills.

Any us civil war will have many sides.

And have people on the sidelines that are hatching plots for there own gain after the two main sides are going at full bore.

Somoza the leader of Nicaragua was in a civil war with the Sandinista's and at the end of the civil war a bank robber named Daniel Ortega ended up in power.
"He was imprisoned in 1967 for taking part in robbing a branch of the Bank of America while brandishing a machine gun,"
After his release, Ortega was exiled to Cuba, where he received several months of guerrilla training.

It is still unknown if he even participated in any actual guerrilla fighting against the Somoza regime.

I have read through all the pages and I have noticed a trend
It seems that people who want violent revolution the most are the ones
who participate in ego stroking the most (mostly about how tough they are)
this has made me suspicious of the real reason behind those who call for violence

I have also noticed a terrible lack of foresight about what to do after conflict is over
and what to change from the current reality, not only immediate changes of the effects but
changes on the real causes that have brought the effects (in this case the effect being gun legislation)

If a violent revolution is to be successful not only on battle but on it's end goal, it will require
a leader with not only battle skills but most importantly vast knowledge of the real causes of the problems
Otherwise, the revolution is set to fail from the start

The problem is that all the people that have shown enough insight to be able to implement worthwhile changes are also adamantly against violence. Therefore, it is clear that violent revolution is unlikely to end well regardless of who wins.

Many other posters before me have pointed out that there are other ways to inflict change that do not involve pointless suffering and death. Yet, those methods are ignored

Could this be the classic case of wishing misfortune for the opportunity to emerge a hero?
if any of you are thinking that during an armed revolution you will emerge as important figures
with an elevated status do to you skills
then you ought to rethink why is it you really want violence and chaos

reply to post by quietlearner


Lol, did any of us ever say we were are or aspire to be politicians? I dont think any of us want the job, as most of us are perfectly happy being regular folks.

We arent advocating a violent " uprising" ( even though it is impossible to rise agajnst yourself, as this is IUR ciuntry not THEIR country, the they are few, thus shoild have little if any say over what impacts the many. Your comming from tthe direction that kkngs used to use, I am king therefore I get to decide for everyone, we are not owned by the .gov, they are owned by us, this is a very large distinction from every other nation on earth. England owns its pee, lkme a farmer owns cattle, so do all of europes nations, and the mideast, and asia.........

We are simply stating what the consequences of their misguided actions will be, a warnjng to those idiots at the top, to be careful about their desires to control, we will decide who or what needs controlled jot them, as they have already proven themselves unable of doing that job a long time ago. If anythjng in this country needs to he controlled it is the .gov, not the people.

As for what we would do afterwards, I thought that was common knowledge, we reinstate the constitution and rule of law, where all men are equal, not those on top being more equal. If they were simply following the rule of law jow, none of these conversations, would have more than a couple of folks involved. They are not, they are not listening to the will of the people, but instead tryjng to talk down to us, as if to say " just shut up and do what I tell you".

Lol, ya Americans love being talked to like that, and it is a sure fire way to get punched in the face, while not getting any cooperation from them about anything.

Originally posted by region331
I think a lot of people have missed the fact that there wouldn't be a determined population who would fight. The government would very quickly remove any instigators/leaders and break the back of any potential resistance or agitation.

The fact of the matter is that the population would not have the will to fight. To watch revolutions and civil wars around the world you notice that those that fight are in a position of poverty that's deteriorating. They really have nothing left to lose.

Despite what you think the majority of the American population lives very well. The entire country isn't going to fight en mass for a political ideal. For their life, yes. But it will never come to that. Your perceived 'freedoms' may be getting eroded over time but there will never be a scenario where the population is immediately disenfranchised to the extent that they've had enough and left with no other resort.

Also, the American military would not fire on civillians but the point everyone seems to be missing is that they would never be asked to. They would only ever be asked to fire on threats to themselves and the government. They would be asked to fire on dissidents who would be portrayed as trouble makers. The police or military would simply believe they were doing their job by assisting in removing them.

I still don't see any scenario whatsoever in todays USA where a civil war would take place, let alone a revolution.

Please tell me. What would drive Americans to such an extreme?

I absolutely agree with your post. My grandfather was very high ranking military and his opinion of Congress was that they were pretty corrupt. I always found that humorous considering his final rank and position in the military but he was really, really not a fan of Congress. However, I would say that drones are a bit of a game changer in that regard though recent studies have shown that drone operators are still being psychologically impacted with PTSD even remotely using drones to do the actual fighting. Unless they figure out a way to dupe a soldier into thinking it's a video game (like Ender) or an AI smart enough to distinguish friend from foe--still not going to happen.

Agree even more with your approximations of what the people would be willing to die for. Most are very comfortable and as long as the mass majority are comfortable, they are not going to put their lives or their families lives at risk for some political ideology. It takes a much more extreme circumstance to push an individual into such a strait where they feel that the only way they can survive is through the risk of harm. That's why you can find mass civil unrest in places like Bulgaria, Tunisia, Greece, Spain, and more. Each of these countries reached a critical point at which, through extraordinarily high unemployment rates and "austerity" cuts, the people began to feel that their only choice left was to protest. And that's just protest (though a few have self immolated)--that's not even a civil war. Some of these countries have been in turmoil for years and it hasn't reached the point of civil war.

I honestly think that people who think that a revolution is going to occur really need to take a step back and do a reality check. I would say that we would need to be faced with extreme cuts to civil welfare programs (similar to what has occurred in the aforementioned countries), a hike in unemployment by at least 40%, and hunger to be impacting much more than a quarter of the population without any assistance. Those are the key things that initiate massive civil unrest and violence amongst the populous (think of the actual reasons for our revolutionary war, France's, and Russia's). None of those criteria are filled. Depending on what occurs politically, they may never be. That means what any would-be revolutionaries would end up being is a small number of individuals that would be perceived as extremists by a sizable portion of the country who would be threatening everyone else's way of life.

reply to post by quietlearner


I don't want this to happen I'M WARNING YOU IT COULD if they continue and you follow their play.
My ego isn't the issue,it never was,that was thrown out the window when I volunteered to die for America.
I am at issue with the corruption and I would see it end,killing not withstanding.
I don't CARE who is doing it any more,how long it's been going on or really political opinions. It is coming to a really dangerous head now,perceived by us as they threatened ME for fighting for them,and they want me disarmed.
That is a very dangerous act in my country.If you don't see it that way fine. Don't listen,Just remember when you were informed by people who have the training to to do so, you denied it.

reply to post by WhiteAlice


Yes all the people in the countries listexd did was protest, and in a lot of cases riot a little, do you know why? It isnt because that is what they felt to be the appropriate response, it is because they dont have any choice, they dont have any weapons.

If there was 1/3 people in any of these countries, that owned an average of 3 guns each, do you really think they wouldntuse them against the same jackbooted thugs using them against the people?

You cannot use any other nation on earth as an example of what Americans would do, as we are not even close to the same, politically, socially or culturally. We re a different beast all together.

If you cant see the distinction, your either blind or intentionaly ignoring the blatant differences.

reply to post by inverslyproportional


You should probably re-read my post again as you will find that that is precisely what I was saying in regards to the aforementioned countries. They had no choice left and it became a matter of survival to protest as that was the only option that they had left aside from civil war.

We do not have those same conditions here in the states. Period.

Why are Americans deluded into thinking they could win a civil war? Well, for one thing, younger male men that have not had proper parental guidance tend to gravitate towards senseless violence and the like, such as what we see in with gang violence and the like. So they are often easily deluded as they are looking for most any reason to vent their violent rage. Just talk to them about the war on drugs and all the people in prison over that. That will get them going, and I understand that rage. But starting a civil war over that, bad idea, no winners there.

Also one needs to understand that America was born from a civil war, what we call the Revolutionary war, at least that's how the British see it. As such, our roots are from a Patriot rebellion. In fact, some point out that the Revolutionary war was a scam, and I tend to agree with that. And some Americans still have this false nostalgia about the good old Patriot days when we had slaves and killed Indians. Those types are duped by fantasies of civil war.

And now our country is geographically divided by race, left and right extremists, poor and rich, educated and high school drop outs, and Gun lovers and liberal pacifists.
As such we have various extremists taking the lead to demonize any opposing group with deceptive half truths (at best). And the Feds are often caught in the middle and thus demonized by any number of these extremist groups.

Mix this all up with news hype, and conspiracy theories involving a threatening sense of urgency, then people can get violent for the wrong reasons with some bad results for all.
Maybe the worst part of this is that people can find supernatural reasons to fuel there bend on a spiritual level. Holy wars and the like. So again, some people think civil war is a solution.

Thing is, even IF some group was able to cripple the Feds ability to quell a civil unrest, there would be no winners. Everyone would fight until they got tired of it and the same problems would still be there, and worse. History will teach you that, just look at the French Revolution and the years after. Here we would probably end up with states becoming countries and then those counties would go to war with each other. And don't think that couldn't happen, as the international military complex would still be making money in that world, just like they did in the Civil war.

For more insights related to this topic find this video:
Bill Moyers talk with social psychologist Jonathan Haidt
how-do-conservatives-and-liberals-see-the-world
and
CBC - Doc Zone - Conspiracy Rising

And if you don't agree with these opinions, I'm afraid you may be part of the problem. Understand that the biggest power you have is how you spend your money and your job. If you can't boycott what you don't approve of, then you have little power. For example, I for one don't drive anymore, I gave that up 8 years ago. And I work at home now. Voting can help, but it's better to not vote than to compromise your values. See, if enough people didn't vote, eventually we would have more choices, it's just my theory, so give me a break..
That's my opinion. I may find myself to be wrong and may change my mind later.

reply to post by WhiteAlice


No we dont, YET. Which really is the point here, they are trying their damnedest to get us there, and we arent having it.

Our .gov at present is following a dangerous course of action, where they over step, pissing on people and angering them, then they use the anger they caused, as a validation to further or step their place, all in the nMe of protecting us all from the angry people they created.

This exact tactic has been used many times throughout history to rationalize the need to further out the screws to the people, which only angers more, justifying yet another round of overstepo ing etc..

If I know you are gonna get mad enough to fight me after I spit on you, then I spit on you, I am not justified in acting as if I am innocent when you whoop me. I poked you with the right stick in the right place to get the reaction I desired, because I knew I could use your reaction to justifymy reaction, of pulling a gun and shooting.and shooting you for assaulting me.

Which works really well when your intention to start was to justify controlling everyone, for your own egotistical need to dominate your fellow man. Most politicians have this problem, they cannot live life and be happy unless they are " better" than everyone else, and get to force their oppinion, no matter how messed up, on everyone else.

reply to post by againagain


That's actually exactly what I see in the US right now. It's very divisive politically and on several counts. As a severe moderate, I see all sorts of radical political interplay from a variety of sources that, at the end of the day, means that there is very little that unifies the majority of people in the US. Well, expect maybe being unhappy with Congress. The entire thing is such a mess, either through political machinations, media influence (both mainstream and fringe), and more that even if you have 86% of the country being unhappy with Congress' behaviors and activities, the reasons for their unhappiness are likely to be extremely varied. Visually, I see it as maybe 5-6 group types all trying to play marbles at once. They just ricochet off of each other.

reply to post by inverslyproportional


I actually agree with what you're saying as well. It would honestly seem like they are intentionally trying to anger us all into a corner. It actually alarmed me a great deal initially but then I realized the above. No matter what it may seem, it does not appear to be a concerted effort but really an interplay of many groups that result in persistent ineffectual results.

reply to post by againagain


You seem to have considered your opinions carefully and they make a lot of sense.

But tell me do the general population actually talk about 'civil war' in the US? If so what is the basis for it.

America has a lot of problems but so does every other country in the world. Everywhere has corruption because to an extent that's how the world works - everywhere. Mindful that you can't please all of the people all of the time, it's self-evident that some groups of people are going to feel angry at some point. That's the very essence of politics. What I don't see, is what could warrant an armed mob taking to the streets, breaking the law.

Looking at your news and the (probably polarised) views from posters on this site I get the sense of a lot of negative aspects to life in the US. A very violent society that's descending into deeper violence. A society where everyone has to look after themselves. A society where police brutality is on the rise. A society where Official-Corruption is overt.

These views may or may not be true and may only be the views of a small number of people rather than the general population. I can only go by my interpretation of what people are telling me on here. On that basis I could see how 'one' could have a feeling that society is breaking down.

Is society breaking down over there to this extent?

reply to post by WhiteAlice


I read what you say here and likewise agree. And I guess it's because we are from that same moderate camp. See I got interested in this extremist left vs right thing after seeing Jonathan Haidt talk on TED and with Bill Moyers. Jonathan Haidt is the same age as me, and he's also an educated intellectual and a moderate. So of course I like what he had to say, as he didn't challenge my values, and only supported them. It felt good to know I was not alone. I even went to his site yourmorals.org and took their test. Sure enough, the results showed I was a moderate, right down the middle. As such, I have a better understanding why people choose camps and fight for their side. Likewise, I have also learned that it's healthy to step out of our comfort zones to hear views that do challenge us. I still don't get those crazy extremists values though, but I still listen and give it thought. But I think there are real threats out there that can help unite us. How about a war on meteors?

reply to post by region331


It's not as bad as ATS makes it look
it's not longer "the land of opportunities" but it is still better than many other places in the world
the world is in a recessesion after all
I see many problems with corruption, that is true
and I also think that a change is laws would not fix everything
because it's not just politicians but also a social problem about values
that's my opinion

Originally posted by quietlearner
reply to post by region331

 

It's not as bad as ATS makes it look
it's not longer "the land of opportunities" but it is still better than many other places in the world
the world is in a recessesion after all
I see many problems with corruption, that is true
and I also think that a change is laws would not fix everything
because it's not just politicians but also a social problem about values
that's my opinion

What quiet said. Total agreement. What I have seen personally from the general population is some anxiety and some anger towards Congress, politicians in general, and whatnot. Interestingly, I've had more people say things that fall along the lines of conspiracy theory directly to me, including strangers. I've never encountered that before so I'd say that conspiracy has been going rather mainstream. People are talking about these things more, definitely, but not so far as saying that a civil war needs to happen. Mostly just people worried that something is going to go very wrong and having a pretty heavy distrust of the government. That's all based on personal 1v1 conversations--not ATS. Like quiet said, ATS and other internet sources can make it seem more amplified than it is.