[VanDeKoik]

No.

Because the people that keep bragging about having all the guns, are waiting for someone else to be the guy that shoots. When that guy actually fires that gun, instead of bragging about how much ammo he has, gets arrested and put in prison, then they will magically disappear.

People here are no more inclined to sacrifice their nice life for a shooting war, than anyone else. Civil war is just big talk. You cant even get people here to actively protest RINO senators.

[mewzilla]

Righties tend to have jobs. Lessens the opportunities for professional protesting.

[Phlyer]

People here are no more inclined to sacrifice their nice life for a shooting war, than anyone else.

This is the essence. When the time comes that it is not a choice whether we 'sacrifice our nice life' because it's already being taken away, then it may turn into a 'civil war.'

One of the most foolish discussion points going around is about which states would go which way in a Civil War II. The first "Civil War" was not a civil war at all. It was a War Between the States. People were fighting for their states more even than for the Federal or Confederate central government. A 'Civil war' is people against people, literally "civilians" against civilians.

That is what we face now. If the self-centered, entitled, socialist thugs start intruding on 'nice' peaceful neighborhoods, then we might have a civil war. If the 'nice' people in their nice neighborhoods fight back and a lot of people are actually shot, then one of three things will happen:

1) The rioters will stick to safer places to loot - like they do now - and things will remain turbulent but not at war.

2) The state will stand back and let people defend themselves, in which case their might be a true civil war.

3) After the civilian 'battle' the government will step in and arrest/destroy the 'nice' people who were defending their homes instead of the rioters (after all they don't arrest the rioters now). Then we might have a second Revolutionary War to throw off the oppressive government.

Of those options, only one leads to 'Civil War.' The good news - for some of us - is that those scenarios will play out in other locations long before they get to my home. By then the path forward will be obvious - painful, but obvious.

[mel]

You are right war is just bravado talking there won’t be a civil war.

[T-Bone Texan]

There is a saying: “As long as people have mortgages to pay, there will be no Civil War”.

Thus, I propose freezing all mortgage payments so we can get to business.

[joethedrummer]

Unfortunately, I believe you are RIGHT on the money.

Our sides’ leaders will NEVER fight a civil war along with us; WE, the people would have to do it ourselves. That means - we first must fight our own leaders as well as the deep state and their followers.

Its either gonna be that, or we end up a 3rd world banana republic not very long after Trump is gone.

He’s the boy with the finger in the dyke. Im serious.

[PapaBear3625]

Bingo. The side which wins, is the side which is actually willing to fight.

[joshua c]

or cut their cable tv

[joegoeny]

So what are you saying that the American people don’t have the guts or the energy to stand up to a bunch of socialists? I have a lot more faith in the American people than you do. Civil War is an ugly violent thing, people die people starve and disease runs rampant. Most sane people do not want to go down that road but if they have to they will.
If it comes to that, Civil War will be like a fire storm ripping across the country. And I do think that the Democrats have not thought this through, they have positioned themselves to win politically year after year but not an actual Civil War.