|
Post by Disciple of Fate on Dec 10, 2020 17:02:10 GMT -5
I feel like the population percentage thing is an argument people in the Confederacy could have made: "just look at how small the federal army is! Its going to be fine!" Well, the first major problem with this is that desertion and moral become much more serious issues here. Two, the Confederates would not have made that argument as, to be blunt, at the time the forces of the 'Federal Army' included militias, something their commanders fully realized.
While 6% or more is high for any given war, the US has a tendency to skew higher, historically. This is partially offset by the increasing cultural divide between liberals and conservatives in the US, since, to be fair, conservatives tend to be better armed and more effective with firearms. Due to a, to be frank, cultural aversion to guns among American liberals, they tend to either try and get someone else to do the dirty work, or resort to explosives. These are broad strokes, I grant, but when dealing with huge quantities of people, are generally good rules of thumb.
What I see boiling out is effectively cities under siege. In the countryside, conservative are more numerous, and are operating in an environment they're familiar with but FIBUA would result in a stalemate.
One of the more serious issues is that Conservatives would likely have better access to armor. The factories that produce things like the Abrams are in highly conservative areas. I would not expect them to remain secure for very long.
Yeah militias and the draft for the civil war, but then there are the national guard, reservists and a draft now. Making arguments based on population only works in a vacuum. Yes the actual military is small, but the apparatus behind it can accomplish much more, even if partially fractured. I feel like your argument is going from 1 to 100, skipping steps 2 to 99 in between. Yes, your conditions are applicable today. But today we have 10 white guys planning to kidnap a governor and start a civil war. That doesn't mean we slide into 30% of the population supporting a civil war tomorrow. If that slide towards civil war really begins, there is no telling if liberals won't start stocking guns. Units considered to remain loyal be moved to secure important points and facilities like the Abrams factory to be protected, moved or outright destroyed. To move to the point you're stepping to time is needed, preparations can be made. You don't just go to half your population revolting overnight. Trumpies might be crazy, but even they have shown ridiculously little appetite to actually go at it for their god. This will take years or even decades to build up to that critical mass. Civil wars never are that neat, it will never be conservative versus liberal, likely a good chunk of conservatives will remain at the side of the US government.
|
|
|
Post by Disciple of Fate on Dec 10, 2020 17:08:14 GMT -5
Part of what broke the Confederates was the fact that no one "you guys are assholes, no one wants to trade with you" thing if I'm not mistaken? My US pre WW2 history isn't great, but I think it was more the case of supporting the Confederacy was too much of a hassle and they didn't care that much. There was a Union naval blockade to stop Confederate trade, which was mostly adhered to. the Confederacy had an overinflated sense of selfimportance that they thought would force European hands to support them in the conflict.
|
|
|
Post by whemblycthulhu on Dec 10, 2020 17:19:19 GMT -5
Whemb is over on dakka whining about how mean we all are. Folks on this board literally wished for mine and family death. What else would you call it? Tender loving care? 10%? Maybe... But, the rest of the US population, way too many bodies and guns. Not to mention, is that not all US military personnel would engage in a fighting war with civilians.
|
|
|
Post by whemblycthulhu on Dec 10, 2020 17:21:03 GMT -5
I'm not a lemming, unlike much of the liberal posters on this board. Hillary. E-mails. Benghazi. Pot. Kettle. What's "Pot. Kettle" squared? "But her emails" Russian Collusion
|
|
|
Post by semipotentwalrus on Dec 10, 2020 17:31:16 GMT -5
Hillary. E-mails. Benghazi. Pot. Kettle. What's "Pot. Kettle" squared? "But her emails" Russian Collusion
How many Benghazi hearings and how many people jailed?
Compare to the Mueller probe: Manafort's jailed, Rick Gates pleaded guilty to Conspiracy, Michael Cohen got disbarred and jailed, Michael Flynn pleaded guilty to lying to Congress, George Papadopolous ended up in jail (14 days, but still) for lying to the FBI. Do we need to go on? One ended up dying with a whimper as soon as the Republicans had no need of Clinton as a boogeyman, the other ended up with a bunch of people in jail.
So yeah, pot. Kettle. Black. Lemming.
|
|
|
Post by whemblycthulhu on Dec 10, 2020 18:13:09 GMT -5
What's "Pot. Kettle" squared? "But her emails" Russian Collusion
How many Benghazi hearings and how many people jailed?
Compare to the Mueller probe: Manafort's jailed, Rick Gates pleaded guilty to Conspiracy, Michael Cohen got disbarred and jailed, Michael Flynn pleaded guilty to lying to Congress, George Papadopolous ended up in jail (14 days, but still) for lying to the FBI. Do we need to go on? One ended up dying with a whimper as soon as the Republicans had no need of Clinton as a boogeyman, the other ended up with a bunch of people in jail.
So yeah, pot. Kettle. Black. Lemming.
You're not comparing apples-to-apples wally. Benghazi was a political question, hence why Congress had oversight. The politics/policies that led up to the Benghazi ordeal was of interest, particularly that it happened during the heat of the 2012 election. As for the others, those were crimes that hand nothing to do with the Russian Collusion. Mueller found ZERO actual collusion. Instead, Mueller wrote the Trump possibly obstructed justice based on process crimes. Are you going to resort to naming calling too?
|
|
|
Post by semipotentwalrus on Dec 10, 2020 18:37:09 GMT -5
You're the one who started calling people lemming this time around whembly. If you'd prefer another idiom, I could go with "rocks. glass houses.". The point of contention was whether "liberal posters" were lemmings, unlike you. I pointed out that if you want to be consistent in that accusation then you'd probably qualify as a lemming yourself. That's not name calling. That's calling you out on calling other people names when you really oughtn't.
I agree, what happened at Benghazi was of interest, partially for the reasons you mention. The Republican party then took it and ran with it until it was dead, reanimated it and kept going until it died again, and then kept going with the corpse.
The "process crimes", as you refer to them as (lovely piece of non-lemming talking point there, by the way) included lying in connection to the Mueller probe. I'd like to know how Mueller finding no collusion means that the whole thing was a "lemming train" when the investigation was literally obstructed to the point that several people went to jail and Mueller kicked the whole thing to Congress to deal with because he thought it wouldn't be right to go after someone who wasn't allowed to defend himself in court.
|
|
|
Post by Least censored on the planet! on Dec 10, 2020 18:48:03 GMT -5
Despicable The Lemming. I like the name. Sound like a cool Sonic fan OC! Hey despic the lemming, wanna be featured in fan-fiction work? Whemb is over on dakka whining about how mean we all are. Link ? All the “US military versus percentage of the population” seems just unrealistic stuff. The real question would be how the military and police split. If the military and the police do fully support the government, no moral qualms about killing civilians including potentially family members, they are going to win, or at least not-lose, but it's never going to be the case, so moot point. How the police, military and the population split is the important part, not "united military against united population" thought experiments.
|
|
|
Post by semipotentwalrus on Dec 10, 2020 18:51:06 GMT -5
He's not wrong though, you guys ARE assholes.
|
|
|
Post by Emblematic Wolfblade on Dec 10, 2020 18:54:05 GMT -5
Despicable The Lemming. I like the name. Sound like a cool Sonic fan OC! Hey despic the lemming, wanna be featured in fan-fiction work? Whemb is over on dakka whining about how mean we all are. Link ? All the “US military versus percentage of the population” seems just unrealistic stuff. The real question would be how the military and police split. If the military and the police do fully support the government, no moral qualms about killing civilians including potentially family members, they are going to win, or at least not-lose, but it's never going to be the case, so moot point. How the police, military and the population split is the important part, not "united military against united population" thought experiments. www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/794223.page starts on page 6 I think. He's not wrong though, you guys ARE assholes. That's fair. I'll gladly accept that title after the shit despicable like whem or carlos have pulled and defended.
|
|
|
Post by Least censored on the planet! on Dec 10, 2020 19:10:12 GMT -5
Thanks. He's not wrong though, you guys ARE assholes. I genuinely tried to have a conversation with despic the lemmings but his bad faith ended up making them impossible, so I've resorted to name calling. But I've never insulted his family, I don't think I ever wished him harm, and I never used a deeply personal event in his life against him. I don't think I'm an asshole, or at worst I'm a light one. Some other members here have done all those things…
|
|
|
Post by whemblycthulhu on Dec 10, 2020 19:12:29 GMT -5
You're the one who started calling people lemming this time around whembly. If you'd prefer another idiom, I could go with "rocks. glass houses.". The point of contention was whether "liberal posters" were lemmings, unlike you. I pointed out that if you want to be consistent in that accusation then you'd probably qualify as a lemming yourself. That's not name calling. That's calling you out on calling other people names when you really oughtn't. Fair enough. I'll stop. I'll even edit my signature. Will you and others? That's political and it's up to voters whether or not they should be punished for it. Anything else is just partisanship. "Process Crimes" is literally a term used in the legal sphere buddy. It refers to an offense against the judicial process. These crimes include failure to appear, false statements, obstruction of justice, contempt of court and perjury (among others). That doesn't change the fact that Mueller found any criminal violations on a Russian compiracy with Trump campaign. The mere fact that House Democrats chose NOT to use the Mueller report during Impeachment should tell you a lot about the veracity of the Mueller report.
|
|
|
Post by whemblycthulhu on Dec 10, 2020 19:15:37 GMT -5
Thanks. He's not wrong though, you guys ARE assholes. I genuinely tried to have a conversation with despic the lemmings but his bad faith ended up making them impossible, so I've resorted to name calling. But I've never insulted his family, I don't think I ever wished him harm, and I never used a deeply personal event in his life against him. I don't think I'm an asshole, or at worst I'm a light one. Some other members here have done all those things… For the record, no you didn't wish me and others harm. It was just name calling. Hell, you apologized for something you shouldn't have when I misunderstood you about my ex.
|
|
|
Post by theauldgrump on Dec 10, 2020 19:25:48 GMT -5
My wife has started calling the post election drama 'The Snyder Cut'....
For the first time, I am tempted to defend Zak Snyder.
The Auld Grump
|
|
|
Post by semipotentwalrus on Dec 10, 2020 19:27:17 GMT -5
I know what a process crime is, I was pointing out that the only people that make a point of calling them that for no particular reason are Republican partisans. Using that particular choice of words while insisting that you do not parrot conservative talking points is a bold strategy. You're the one who started calling people lemming this time around whembly. If you'd prefer another idiom, I could go with "rocks. glass houses.". The point of contention was whether "liberal posters" were lemmings, unlike you. I pointed out that if you want to be consistent in that accusation then you'd probably qualify as a lemming yourself. That's not name calling. That's calling you out on calling other people names when you really oughtn't. Fair enough. I'll stop. I'll even edit my signature. Will you and others? You know how you claimed that it was unfair that I claimed that you keep not reading things before posting in the Dakka thread? I don't have a signature. Never had one on this forum.
|
|