Posted on 02/02/2020 9:52:53 AM PST by Sean_Anthony
Are Battle Lines Being Drawn?
What started in whispers is now appearing in print…American Thinker, Market Watch, Huffington Post, Washington Times, National Review, Daily Wire, Breitbart, Real Clear Politics, and The New Yorker, among others. They are writing about the possibility of a second civil war in this country, a redo of Democrats’ nullification of federal law, the insistent opposition and rejection of the lawful election of a president, the movement of many of our citizens to a more agreeable state, and acts of violence.
These elements of civil war are now with us once again…nullification, separation, rejection, and violence. We can argue on the order, but the same elements that 159 years ago transported this country from peace and unity into the hell of armed conflict have reappeared, complete with a great social issue of our own…abortion.
All those elements you mention would not have caused war without division in the chain of command and the formation of opposing armies.
The left is already using guerilla warfare. antifa is guerilla warfare. And trying to take over the government the way hitler took over germany, threats, onesided “deals” and thuggs on the streets damaging property. Watch for the democratic headquarters in some district to be burnt down just befor the election , the dems will do it themselves and blame Trump supporters. ITS GOING TO HAPPEN!
This is quite likely.
There are liberals and conservatives found in every corner of the country.
While we talk of red states and blue states, there are many liberal enclaves within some red states, and big numbers though a minority, of conservatives in blue states such as California.
Hi.
“It will be like Vietnam, it will be guerilla wars fought across the country.”
I agree.
The next “Civil” war will make the War Between the States look like a walk in the park on a nice spring day.
Millions in casualties.
5.56mm
Agreed. Walter E. Williams was making a hypothetical statement. Also note that he wrote that in September 2000.
I think part of the problem with that is if states like CA secede, there could be scenarios like them welcoming in Communist Chinese warships into San Francisco Bay.
The way I see it, is if we start fighting amongst ourselves, how long will it be before Russia or China jumps in?
OK, then what happens?
Spammer. You never reply. You just post then run. I find it humorous that your posting an article from Canada about a US civil war.
Your a seagull. Flying by, screeching, shitting on the forum then flying away.
Not going to happen. It would be a mistake to think that Russia could afford or want to fight a war in N.A. Silly. They could not do it. China? What a joke.
Re: “Can we at least talk about secession instead of jumping right into the war?”
As I recall, Lincoln went to war “to preserve the Union.”
In any event, like you, I support a peaceful separation of the former “United” States.
The Globalists are Greedy.. They want it All.
Interesting “preservation” techniques....
You are a fool to think it will be anything but Rwanda times 10000
Walter E. Williams gets it....
http://walterewilliams.com/it’s-time-to-part-company/
from link:
“Americans who wish to live free have two options: We can resist, fight and risk bloodshed to force America’s tyrants to respect our liberties and human rights, or we can seek a peaceful resolution of our irreconcilable differences by separating. “
What poppy cock. The USA can organize for war like no other people on earth.
The USA can organize for war.
What is being talked about is not the United States.
You are talking about a divided country.
The USA can organize for war.
What is being talked about is not the United States.
You are talking about a divided country.
First, it would help if you didn’t butcher Jefferson’s quote. What he actually said was,
“(I)f any state in the union will declare that it prefers separation with the 1st alternative, to a continuance in union without it, I have no hesitation in saying ‘let us separate.’ I would rather the states should withdraw, which are for unlimited commerce & war, and confederate with those alone which are for peace & agriculture.”
Second, the quote is meaningless without context - and doesn’t mean what you want it to mean with the added context. Here Jefferson is posing a hypothetical - and one that he realizes is fanciful in its construction. He is stating that if we can chose the ideal (however impossible) from the abhorrent then of course why not go with the ideal.
He closes his letter to William H. Crawford with this:
But possibly these may be the dreams of an old man, or that the occasions of realising them may have past away without return. a government regulating itself by what is wise and just for the many, uninfluenced by the local and selfish views of the few who direct their affairs, has not been seen perhaps on earth. or if it existed, for a moment, at the birth of ours, it would not be easy to fix the term of it’s continuance. still, I believe, it does exist here in a greater degree than any where else; and for it’s growth and continuance, as well as for your personal health and happiness, I offer sincere prayers with the homage of my respect and esteem.
Here he reiterates the fanciful root of his argument and differentiates it from a more reality based pragmatism.
From: https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Jefferson/03-10-02-0101
I would also refer you to his letter to John Taylor in 1798 where he said,
“Perhaps this party division is necessary to induce each to watch and relate to the people the proceedings of the other. But if on a temporary superiority of the one party, the other is to resort to a scission of the Union, no federal government can ever exist. If to rid ourselves of the present rule of Massachusetts and Connecticut, we break the Union, will the evil stop there? Suppose the New England states alone cut off, will our nature be changed? Are we not men still to the south of that, and with all the passions of men? Immediately, we shall see a Pennsylvania and a Virginia party arise in the residuary confederacy, and the public mind will be distracted with the same party spirit. What a game too will the one party in their hands, by eternally threatening the other that unless they do so and so, they will join their northern neighbors. If we reduce our Union to Virginia and North Carolina, immediately the conflict will be established between the representatives of these two States, and they will end by breaking into their simple units.”
The last sentence is the most poignant - when we focus on our differences in place of our shared concerns we will pick and tear away at one another until we are nothing.
I will say this - he does offer a spark of hope for a potential parting of the ways with this line:
“Better keep together as we are, haul off from Europe as soon as we can, and from all attachments to any portions of it; and if they show their power just sufficiently to hoop us together, it will be the happiest situation in which we can exist. If the game runs sometimes against us at home, we must have patience till luck turns, and then we shall have an opportunity of winning back the principles we have lost. For this is a game where principles are the stake. Better luck, therefore, to us all, and health, happiness and friendly salutations to yourself.”
From: http://college.cengage.com/history/ayers_primary_sources/jefferson_taylor_1798.htm
Still, the main thrust of his words support unity, not division.
For example the CSA formed a government and an effective Army just as fast as the USA did in the 19th century. I would say in today’s environment 2 months tops.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.