Are we on the verge of a civil war?

[Foolishpride]

(08-15-2023, 08:49 AM)Mickeypoo Wrote: I know of no one who is getting raises even remotely big enough to keep up with inflation.  Pennies on the dollar.

If you are looking at the gov't faked inflation numbers then I am sure they make it look good.  That will happen when you ignore all the major household expenses in the inflation numbers.

My core bills have not gotten any better.  Not at all.  They continue to stay highly elevated or getting worse.

My electric and gas bill and still up 50% and 75% with no relief in sight with all this anti fossil fuel bs.
Gas is now up to 4.00.  Was 2.20 when Biden took office.
Groceries are still up 30%-100% depending on product.

In the real world where I live there is nothing that is getting better money wise.  Fake gov't numbers don't make it true.  My bills and grocery receipts don't lie.

Don't forget about interest rates that continue to climb.  Credit card debt at now over 1 trillion and those interest rates going up.

Or the vehicle prices that are still highly inflated.  I just built my identical truck.  2020 vs 2023.  11k more for the same truck.

With all that said I certainly hope you are right, but that has not started yet as I and many others have had zero relief on top of gas going up (in my area) almost 50 cents.  Nothing else has come down.  Me and my coworkers all received a 1% raise this year.  I'm down 700-800 a month since Biden.

True, but have you seen the new contract the UPS workers received?  They'll be making an average of $170,000 in pay and benefits annually, by the end of their 5 year contract.  Pretty damn good money!

[Millhouse]

No

I'll simply say that those that hold the real power in this country will never allow it to happen one way or another..

[*michaelsean*]

80 million seems high, and whatever the number is, there are only a handful of people willing to use violence over it. Most of us, if we don't like the way things are going, suck it up and try in the next election.

[*Nately120*]

(08-15-2023, 11:37 AM)michaelsean Wrote: 80 million seems high, and whatever the number is, there are only a handful of people willing to use violence over it.  Most of us, if we don't like the way things are going, suck it up and try in the next election.

I can picture some folks going on semi-targeted shooting sprees and convincing themselves they're fighting tyranny and expecting a pardon from Trump.  I like how we were wondering if Trump inspired violence in his followers 7 years ago and now MAGA folks are flat-out telling us 80+ million of them are ready to mow their fellow Americans down with heavy gunfire.

You're really showing those dumb doomsayers now, eh?  1 in 4 Americans over the age of 18 are ready, willing, and able to go to war?  Maybe.

[BengalYankee]

(08-15-2023, 08:49 AM)Mickeypoo Wrote: I know of no one who is getting raises even remotely big enough to keep up with inflation.  Pennies on the dollar.

If you are looking at the gov't faked inflation numbers then I am sure they make it look good.  That will happen when you ignore all the major household expenses in the inflation numbers.

My core bills have not gotten any better.  Not at all.  They continue to stay highly elevated or getting worse.

My electric and gas bill and still up 50% and 75% with no relief in sight with all this anti fossil fuel bs.
Gas is now up to 4.00.  Was 2.20 when Biden took office.
Groceries are still up 30%-100% depending on product.

In the real world where I live there is nothing that is getting better money wise.  Fake gov't numbers don't make it true.  My bills and grocery receipts don't lie.

Don't forget about interest rates that continue to climb.  Credit card debt at now over 1 trillion and those interest rates going up.

Or the vehicle prices that are still highly inflated.  I just built my identical truck.  2020 vs 2023.  11k more for the same truck.

With all that said I certainly hope you are right, but that has not started yet as I and many others have had zero relief on top of gas going up (in my area) almost 50 cents.  Nothing else has come down.  Me and my coworkers all received a 1% raise this year.  I'm down 700-800 a month since Biden.

[CJD]

(08-14-2023, 10:59 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: I will say upfront, I pray we are not.
Why do I ask? There are 80+ million people and growing that feel former POTUS Trump is getting a raw deal.
1. The F.B.I. approval rating is way under water, and appears to be getting worse by the day. It is the leadership, not the rank and file.
2. The D.O.J. approval rating in under water and showing major signs of weaponizing against conservatives, again leadership.
3. The country is in the tank with debt.
4. Citizens have more debt now that at any time in our history.
5. The average household is paying $707 more a month for essentials than they were in 2021 when Biden took office.
6. Democrats are hemorrhaging black, Latino and Hispanic voters to Republicans.

Here is a liberal poll saying the Trump indictments are political interference.

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2023/06/17/harvard-poll-most-voters-say-trump-indictment-election-interference-believe-hell-be-acquitted/

I know a lot of conservatives. I do not or never have owned a gun. I know many they not only have a lot of fire power and ammo, they also have built bunkers. They literally are preparing for a civil war.

Our country is more divided than ever. Biden promised to unite the country, but instead weaponized the justice department to go after his chief political opponent. All the while, using the justice department to get away with money laundering and bribery.

Again, I hope I am wrong and things stay civil, I just don't believe it is possible if Trump is sentenced to 1 day in jail.

We may be on the verge of several violent protests, but they'll be put down just like Jan 6 was.

I don't believe we're anywhere near a civil war. The biggest reason being there's no way it would work. There was a time when state militaries were using equipment approximately equivalent to what your typical citizen had access to. So a rebellion could theoretically succeed if you had the numbers and the willpower to fight against the state military.

That time has long since passed.

If there was ever an uprising of citizens in an attempt to overthrow the government, they would be taken down by unmanned vehicles and targeted attacks where no military personnel would even need to be present. 

With all that said, I think the number of people who are outraged is being blown out of proportion. I don't think 80 million people think Trump is getting a raw deal. And I certainly don't think a significant portion of those people that voted for him would be willing to put their lives on the line for him. 

I just think we have a lot of media companies (and individuals on Twitter/X and social media) that realize the best way to drive engagement is to speak in grand, apocalyptic terms and exaggerating how many people are actually outraged by this or that.

Weaponizing outrage for profit.

[*Nately120*]

(08-15-2023, 08:49 AM)Mickeypoo Wrote: I know of no one who is getting raises even remotely big enough to keep up with inflation.  Pennies on the dollar.

I know this is a thread about my 70+ year old mother in law grabbing a machine gun and turning into Rambo for Trump, but what makes you think either of our parties, particularly the GOP, is able or interested in forcing corporations to give workers a larger cut of the profits?

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(08-15-2023, 12:05 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: We may be on the verge of several violent protests, but they'll be put down just like Jan 6 was.

I don't believe we're anywhere near a civil war. The biggest reason being there's no way it would work. There was a time when state militaries were using equipment approximately equivalent to what your typical citizen had access to. So a rebellion could theoretically succeed if you had the numbers and the willpower to fight against the state military.

That time has long since passed.

If there was ever an uprising of citizens in an attempt to overthrow the government, they would be taken down by unmanned vehicles and targeted attacks where no military personnel would even need to be present. 

With all that said, I think the number of people who are outraged is being blown out of proportion. I don't think 80 million people think Trump is getting a raw deal. And I certainly don't think a significant portion of those people that voted for him would be willing to put their lives on the line for him. 

I just think we have a lot of media companies (and individuals on Twitter/X and social media) that realize the best way to drive engagement is to speak in grand, apocalyptic terms and exaggerating how many people are actually outraged by this or that.

Weaponizing outrage for profit.

Respectfully, my eyes almost roll out of my head when I read these arguments.  They make numerous, and erroneous, assumptions about the way things like this actually work.  First, and most egregiously, it presupposes that the entirety of the military stays on one side.  In the event of an actual civil war that would not happen.  In fact, and forgive me for no longer having the link to this, the Pentagon has analyzed that if such an event were to occur with a Democrat as POTUS that the majority of the US military would side with the "rebels".  See the military is made up of the exact same citizens who would be uprising in such a scenario.  

Second, you don't understand how actually occupying territory works.  You need boots on the ground.  A drone cannot occupy territory.  A drone cannot search people for contraband and weapons.  A drone cannot search a building for the enemy.  You want to go scorched earth and use bombs to clear buildings and subdue territory?  Well, you just created a lot more enemy soldiers.

If a civil war were to actually happen it would be long and bloody.  It would never be as simple as a drone operator pushing a button.  God help us if it ever occurred.    

[NATI BENGALS]

(08-15-2023, 08:35 AM)Mickeypoo Wrote: The fact that you don't understand or maybe even comprehend that there are people like that on both sides shows how biased and partisan you are.  You must have not paid attention to the summer of love.

How many people do you think are willing to declare a civil war to defend Joe Biden?

[KillerGoose]

(08-15-2023, 08:49 AM)Mickeypoo Wrote: I know of no one who is getting raises even remotely big enough to keep up with inflation.  Pennies on the dollar.

If you are looking at the gov't faked inflation numbers then I am sure they make it look good.  That will happen when you ignore all the major household expenses in the inflation numbers.

My core bills have not gotten any better.  Not at all.  They continue to stay highly elevated or getting worse.

My electric and gas bill and still up 50% and 75% with no relief in sight with all this anti fossil fuel bs.
Gas is now up to 4.00.  Was 2.20 when Biden took office.
Groceries are still up 30%-100% depending on product.

In the real world where I live there is nothing that is getting better money wise.  Fake gov't numbers don't make it true.  My bills and grocery receipts don't lie.

Don't forget about interest rates that continue to climb.  Credit card debt at now over 1 trillion and those interest rates going up.

Or the vehicle prices that are still highly inflated.  I just built my identical truck.  2020 vs 2023.  11k more for the same truck.

With all that said I certainly hope you are right, but that has not started yet as I and many others have had zero relief on top of gas going up (in my area) almost 50 cents.  Nothing else has come down.  Me and my coworkers all received a 1% raise this year.  I'm down 700-800 a month since Biden.

It is largely going to depend on industry, I think. I work in oil & gas and received a 13% raise this year. Also, job hopping is the best way to get more money (industry specific). I am making 3x what I made back in 2020. Of course, that isn't due to anything that Biden or Trump did. I just work in a high paying industry. I am also not alone in this. Many of my colleagues have left for jobs that have offered significantly more money, in the realm of $40k-$50k more per year. Hell, one guy was making $60k and got fired, only to pick up a new job at $120k. That's an example of the exception, but still. 

I know you and I have had this conversation before, and I actually forgot to respond last time. I know it is incredibly frustrating to deal with and to be told that this isn't anyone in particulars fault but it isn't. At least, not many of the subjects you are referring to. Gas isn't controlled by the president and right now, there are at least two refineries down. All of the things you mention are a part of a global market that is largely determined by supply & demand. Several developed nations around the world are experiencing inflation issues, not just the U.S.

I also want to say that though I voted for Biden, I don't want this to come across as an ardent defense for him. I just think that we are getting so polarized (not you specifically) that any issues we run into, we blame whoever is in charge when it is unduly criticism. 

High gas prices? Fukkin' Biden. 

Insert some random complaint here? Fukkin' Trump. 

The realities of governing and global markets are incredibly complex and can't easily be boiled down to blame a singular person. Speaking on gas specifically, the United States is currently at an all-time high average of crude oil production through the first five months of the year. We are producing a ton of oil. There are just other factors that are causing supply to lag behind demand. I have had people tell me "When Trump wins, watch gas go back down." and it very well could be true because that is nearly a year and a half away. A lot can change in that timespan. Hell, gas prices went up under Trump, but no one ever mentioned anything. Gas had been so cheap in the last couple of years under the Obama administration that it didn't really bother folks. 

[*Nately120*]

(08-15-2023, 12:23 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Respectfully, my eyes almost roll out of my head when I read these arguments.  They make numerous, and erroneous, assumptions about the way things like this actually work.  First, and most egregiously, it presupposes that the entirety of the military stays on one side.  In the event of an actual civil war that would not happen.  In fact, and forgive me for no longer having the link to this, the Pentagon has analyzed that if such an event were to occur with a Democrat as POTUS that the majority of the US military would side with the "rebels".  See the military is made up of the exact same citizens who would be uprising in such a scenario.  

I'm sure a lot of military folks would like to turn on their employer and oath to install Trump, but thinking about it and doing it are two different things.  Trump doesn't even pay his lawyers, so being sure that people with families to support would willingly renounce their allegiance to the USA in hopes that team Trump will win and then they'll be compensated for switching sides, so to speak, isn't a certainty, either.

I mean, if it's just a left vs right war then yea, a lot of men in the army would be mowing down unarmed women.  I'm sure Jesus will be on his way soon after we do this.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(08-15-2023, 12:37 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I'm sure a lot of military folks would like to turn on their employer and oath to install Trump, but thinking about it and doing it are two different things.  Trump doesn't even pay his lawyers, so being sure that people with families to support would willingly renounce their allegiance to the USA in hopes that team Trump will win and then they'll be compensated for switching sides, so to speak, isn't a certainty, either.

I mean, if it's just a left vs right war then yea, a lot of men in the army would be mowing down unarmed women.  I'm sure Jesus will be on his way soon after we do this.

Thinking about it and doing it applies to anyone who would be engaged in such an armed conflict, not just military members.  If we run with the civil war scenario then anything we're discussing falls under that.  I also don't see either ideological side as itching to mow down unarmed women and children.

[CJD]

(08-15-2023, 12:23 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Respectfully, my eyes almost roll out of my head when I read these arguments.  They make numerous, and erroneous, assumptions about the way things like this actually work.  First, and most egregiously, it presupposes that the entirety of the military stays on one side.  In the event of an actual civil war that would not happen.  In fact, and forgive me for no longer having the link to this, the Pentagon has analyzed that if such an event were to occur with a Democrat as POTUS that the majority of the US military would side with the "rebels".  See the military is made up of the exact same citizens who would be uprising in such a scenario.  

Second, you don't understand how actually occupying territory works.  You need boots on the ground.  A drone cannot occupy territory.  A drone cannot search people for contraband and weapons.  A drone cannot search a building for the enemy.  You want to go scorched earth and use bombs to clear buildings and subdue territory?  Well, you just created a lot more enemy soldiers.

If a civil war were to actually happen it would be long and bloody.  It would never be as simple as a drone operator pushing a button.  God help us if it ever occurred.    

I'm sorry for risking injury to your eyes :)

The military is an arm of the state. They have their own internal means of dealing with those who step out of line and the bulk (if not all) of the leadership of the military will likely remain loyal to the government they work for. There may be individuals within the military who join the uprising. We know for a fact that extremist right wing people are known to infiltrate the military, just like there are often off duty police officers who join violent protests. The difference is they do not drive up in their police vehicles to do it.

As for holding ground, I guess ti depends on what this civil war looks like. If it is an unorganized, loosely associated string of isolated violent uprisings all over the country, or perhaps more tightly focused around DC, holding ground is not necessary. You just eliminate the threats and disperse the crowds.

If it's a highly organized group of people who quarter off an entire section of the country (likely the Southeast?) to use as their base of operations from which they attempt to seize territory on their march to DC to demand the government be turned over to them...then sure. But I find it extraordinarily unlikely that this group of uprisings will ever constitute a majority of the country, which will make their success incredibly difficult. Not to mention, they will likely receive little to no support from outside of the country (Trump is famously unpopular in virtually every developed nation), so the allied nations will be sending the real US support, money, goods etc whereas this rebellious faction would be forced to work with what they started with before embargos and other supply chain issues would begin affecting them.

But you know what? This is not my expertise and I'm self aware enough to know that you (and many others) have more experience in this general realm than I do, so maybe you're right, and entire bases and divisions of the military all across the country would flip for Trump and they'd use state owned military equipment to fight the military divisions that stayed loyal to the United States. Anything is possible.


But I don't find it likely. Especially not for someone as nakedly crooked and corrupt as Donald Trump.

[*Nately120*]

(08-15-2023, 12:41 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Thinking about it and doing it applies to anyone who would be engaged in such an armed conflict, not just military members.  If we run with the civil war scenario then anything we're discussing falls under that.  I also don't see either ideological side as itching to mow down unarmed women and children.

You'd have to tell me who conservatives picture when they fantasize about fighting a civil war, because one side of this army is going to skew male and armed and the other side will skew female and unarmed.

Or is the idea that conservatives just make liberals surrender and the war is won that way and Trump is installed in a less bloody manner?  

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(08-15-2023, 12:44 PM)Nately120 Wrote: You'd have to tell me who conservatives picture when they fantasize about fighting a civil war, because one side of this army is going to skew male and armed and the other side will skew female and unarmed.

Or is the idea that conservatives just make liberals surrender and the war is won that way and Trump is installed in a less bloody manner?  

If it broke down they way you're describing then it wouldn't be much of a war, would it?

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(08-15-2023, 12:42 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: I'm sorry for risking injury to your eyes :)

The military is an arm of the state. They have their own internal means of dealing with those who step out of line and the bulk (if not all) of the leadership of the military will likely remain loyal to the government they work for. There may be individuals within the military who join the uprising. We know for a fact that extremist right wing people are known to infiltrate the military, just like there are often off duty police officers who join violent protests. The difference is they do not drive up in their police vehicles to do it.

As for holding ground, I guess ti depends on what this civil war looks like. If it is an unorganized, loosely associated string of isolated violent uprisings all over the country, or perhaps more tightly focused around DC, holding ground is not necessary. You just eliminate the threats and disperse the crowds.

If it's a highly organized group of people who quarter off an entire section of the country (likely the Southeast?) to use as their base of operations from which they attempt to seize territory on their march to DC to demand the government be turned over to them...then sure. But I find it extraordinarily unlikely that this group of uprisings will ever constitute a majority of the country, which will make their success incredibly difficult. Not to mention, they will likely receive little to no support from outside of the country (Trump is famously unpopular in virtually every developed nation), so the allied nations will be sending the real US support, money, goods etc whereas this rebellious faction would be forced to work with what they started with before embargos and other supply chain issues would begin affecting them.

But you know what? This is not my expertise and I'm self aware enough to know that you (and many others) have more experience in this general realm than I do, so maybe you're right, and entire bases and divisions of the military all across the country would flip for Trump and they'd use state owned military equipment to fight the military divisions that stayed loyal to the United States. Anything is possible.


But I don't find it likely. Especially not for someone as nakedly crooked and corrupt as Donald Trump.

The genesis of such a conflict would go a long way towards determining how large it became.  Without knowing what kicks it off everything else is an exercise in extreme speculation.

[*Nately120*]

(08-15-2023, 12:45 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: If it broke down they way you're describing then it wouldn't be much of a war, would it?

Well every day we see how peaceful citizens who are miding their own business and attempting to live their lives fare against the armed and the violent.

[CJD]

(08-15-2023, 12:46 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: The genesis of such a conflict would go a long way towards determining how large it became.  Without knowing what kicks it off everything else is an exercise in extreme speculation.

So then you agree that we're nowhere near a civil war? Because, in order for there to be extreme speculation necessary, we must be far from an incident necessary to incite such a reaction?

If the spark needed to incite this civil war were present and growing larger by the day, only mild speculation would be necessary, don't you think?

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(08-15-2023, 12:54 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: So then you agree that we're nowhere near a civil war? Because, in order for there to be extreme speculation necessary, we must be far from an incident necessary to incite such a reaction?

I think we're closer to it than we have been since the end of the 1800's, but no, I don't think we're as close as many think we are.

Quote:If the spark needed to incite this civil war were present and growing larger by the day, only mild speculation would be necessary, don't you think?

The thing about this is the spark could be anything.  Use George Floyd for example.  There have been many instances of law enforcement going over the top caught on film.  Why did the Floyd tape generate a response previously unseen in recent history?  It was certainly egregious, but no more, or less, than some other examples.  Point being is that you never know exactly what will be the spark that ignites the powder keg.  That being the case being closer to this outcome than we have been in over a hundred years should generate healthy concern, even if the possibility of it actually kicking off isn't great.

[HarleyDog]

(08-15-2023, 12:25 PM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: How many people do you think are willing to declare a civil war to defend Joe Biden?

I know a few on this board that would still defend Joe even if they caught him sniffing their grandkids.