Let’s say that Obama’s forces use, oh, 20 strategic nukes against the republican heartlands, and that they further use the biowarfare mean they say they have abolished but proably have really not. Let’s say 25 million dead in 5 days.
Still fighting?
I’ll remind you that 25 million is *less* than what Obama and Ayers deemed necessary kills in order to deploy their “new order”.
Two can play that game. Any half-way intelligent science teacher or engineer could easily put together something that would leave New York City, Boston, Atlanta or Los Angeles uninhabitable for 100 years. Look at the IEDs coming out of Iraq and Yemen. Biowarfare would kill people in red and blue states.
“Let’s say that Obama’s forces use, oh, 20 strategic nukes against the republican heartlands,”
Where do you suppose he gets those nukes, because he sure isn’t getting them from the US military?
What targets in the heartlands would result in 25 million dead? It would have to be cities. Cities are primarily Dem populated.
...and that they further use the biowarfare mean they say they have abolished but proably have really not.
Spreading a viral disease to the entire population of the country? That would sure get a lot of support from Dem voters. Who would be left that supported him?
There goes the means of food production for the eaters.
I doubt nukes will be involved... but let’s go with the hypothetical. He can’t really go for populations centers, because those are mostly his voters (and his armies). He can’t really go after rural areas, because the body count will never be worth the use of the nuke. Maybe a few suburban areas in Oklahoma (where he took ZERO counties) that have sufficient population, and just the use of one will be a tool for fear and oppression... but again, I think it brings more opposition than it destroys or frightens. (Not that Libs ever use much logic...)