American Civil War

[Park Kraken]

Ok, a question for everyone. In your opinion, the following:

Will another American civil war happen soon?

Does America need another civil war?

What benefits/cons will apply to an American civil war as far as America and the rest of the world goes?

How will the world look after it is over?

Will it be a military, domestic, or political civil war?

[Pierce Tondry]

Ok, a question for everyone. In your opinion, the following:

Will another American civil war happen soon?

Does America need another civil war?

What benefits/cons will apply to an American civil war as far as America and the rest of the world goes?

How will the world look after it is over?

Will it be a military, domestic, or political civil war?

1. No.
2. No country ever needs a civil war as long as negotiation remains effective. Even then, moving elsewhere is a better option if your opinion is strongly in the minority.
3. Don't understand this question.
4. No real differences. America would be seen as the top dog who lost it. Since our economic importance is diminishing anyway, all we'd be looking at is an accelerated pace of that.
5. If it happened, a mix of political/domestic.

[Lilaena De'Ville]

Technically we're already at war - painting in broad terms its the 'liberals' against the 'conservatives'. The conservatives have the numbers but the liberals are the loudest. I don't think its a political issue, though it certainly influences politics, but rather a cultural and ideological/religious issue.

[Zem Vymes]

1. No
2. Reform, revolution, and assassination are always preferable to civil war. One of the four is always needed to keep democracy fresh. People have to distrust the government. Government has to fear the people. If neither do, then one of these elements have to happen or we're all lost.
3. To prune the tree, expunge the tyrants from the government and to remove their self-serving agenda.
4. That's really impossible to predict.
5. What is a domestic civil war, as opposed to a political or military one?

[Zem Vymes]

Technically we're already at war - painting in broad terms its the 'liberals' against the 'conservatives'. The conservatives have the numbers but the liberals are the loudest. I don't think its a political issue, though it certainly influences politics, but rather a cultural and ideological/religious issue.

The conservatives have the numbers, and the liberals are loudest. How do you come to that conclusion?

This isn't a war. It's just very polarized discourse. Ask John Brown what the difference is.

[Lilaena De'Ville]

I should have prefaced my post with "Of course its not a REAL WAR" - I am not an idiot and I do know the difference.

But one could say that it is a war of ideals, and the religious could say that it is a spiritual war.

[Jedieb]

Ok, a question for everyone. In your opinion, the following:

Will another American civil war happen soon?

Does America need another civil war?

What benefits/cons will apply to an American civil war as far as America and the rest of the world goes?

How will the world look after it is over?

Will it be a military, domestic, or political civil war?

1. No
2. No
3. In a fantasy world, which is the only one in which half of this country takes up arms against the other in this century, the country either gets split apart, or the Union is reunified after a bloody battle. Either way the Chinese could benefit greatly and emerge as the world's leading superpower. Remember, unlike our first civil war, nukes and the keys to them are on the table this time around. The country is also much more unified than it was during the 1800's. Conservative v. liberals, these are trivial differences in comparison to those the U.S. struggled with during those first decades after the constitution was ratified.

4. See #3.

5. Military war? Nuke fest, end of the world.
Domestic war? What the hell does that mean?
Political war? There's ALWAYS a political war going on. Washington's political rivals called him everything from an Censored to a wanna be monarch. Everybody remember how Hamilton met his fate? You could argue today's political climate is tamer to those early days. Two major parties going back and forth with minor parties and interest in the mix. This is the way it SHOULD be.

[Rod Stafford]

Funnily enough, I've been saying for a long time that civil war will come to England in the not too distant future. People here are getting so fed up with our government and its timidness with ethnic minorities and political correctness.

When an Englishman is not allowed by law to fly the flag of St. George because of complaints from some ethnic minority groups, then it's time for a severe overhall. Our governments are falling into tepid apathy when it comes to the feelings of its people and I'm fairly sure it won't be too long before they find themselves on the recieving end of a rude awakening.

[Zem Vymes]

Dru, fly down here this week and come shooting with me on Guy Fawkes day.

[Morgan Evanar]

I should have prefaced my post with "Of course its not a REAL WAR" - I am not an idiot and I do know the difference.

But one could say that it is a war of ideals, and the religious could say that it is a spiritual war.Wake me up, when, aside from the constant assault on the rights of the citzen, it's not bidness as usual. This is the same political idiocy that has been floating around since people put writing to something that can display letters.

[Liam Jinn]

Ok, a question for everyone. In your opinion, the following:

Will another American civil war happen soon?

Does America need another civil war?

What benefits/cons will apply to an American civil war as far as America and the rest of the world goes?

How will the world look after it is over?

Will it be a military, domestic, or political civil war?


Dude, I drunk post, but I can't follow you here. Civil War? That's kind of an extreme.

1. No

That's as far as that line of questioning goes.

[Park Kraken]

What I meant by domestic, is the people doing everything they possibly can up to but not using arms to try and ouster the goverment. Mass strikes, road blocks, big demonstrations, etc. We could learn a lot from France in that regard.

In that regard, I would wonder what would happen if all twelve million or so illegal immigrants just decided not to work should an exportation law be passed or whatever. Like, overnight.

[Jaime Tomahawk]

I should have prefaced my post with "Of course its not a REAL WAR" - I am not an idiot and I do know the difference.

But one could say that it is a war of ideals, and the religious could say that it is a spiritual war.

Only in the minds of the handful of people on both sides deluded enough to actually believe that nonsense. There's no war as such. There will be a backlash when Christians realise how for a ride they have been taken by the right wing and the Truth in His word attempted to be hijacked by those who don't truly care except for how many votes there is in it. It was only 25 years ago the Christian vote was solidly 'liberal', because Jesus himself was as 'liberal' as you could get in His day and would be still today.

What makes me say that is that even in a conservative Evangelical church, there's still a welcome for a left(*) leaning, car racing, firey divorcee that doesnt agree with the world views of the pastor, but they welcomed him anyway. The hijacking of the Church by the Right wont last long because those who dont want the 'liberals' dont have the power of the real Christians who actually do what Christ commanded and welcome the needy. Issues like Gay rights, abortion and such are wedge issues used by cynical politicains who dont care for Christians unless we vote for them.

Ethics and morals furthermore are also very much NOT a left or right thing, they are universal. Being say anti abortion is a issue of concious and indeed, being anti abortion is not a mark of being of a certain political leaning, but of a certain moral leaming. Morals and Ethics, as we have seen with the Foley scandal and also the various corruption scandals that have engulfed the Right wing conservatives are not solely a thing of a certain leaning (or lack thereof) but are above left and right, are notions all should strive for.

Truth, Honesty and openess, three things I've lately come to realise I treasure the most are just simply not things that can be put in boxes, labelled and put in one or another area. Nor can belief in a right to life, or wether your allowed to pork your bumchum in the privacy of your own home be likewise packaged. and in the end, Christians also should not allow themselves to be boxed and labelled. I believe the time's coming that there will be more who realise this and tell the Right enough is enough, it's not solely your religion, it's of GOD and God only.

(*) If you want to frame me in left and right views, this is where I would be,. But I cant be defined so easily and I wont be.

[CMJ]

This is one of the most ridiculous topics in the history of SW-Fans.

And Eb is soooo right about the Founding Fathers being contentious. As much as we try and make them out to be this great group that got along, blah, blah blah - they were downright nasty to each other. Imagine this...Jeffeson was the VP and leader of the OPPOSITION party under John Adams. Nice cabinet meetings eh?

Thomas Jefferson had a whisper campaign against him done for "possible" illegitimate children with one of his slaves(which nowadays we basically openly admit he had them). He was also called an atheist in the press. He has a famous quote along the lines of people from opposing parties would go down different streets to get to the Congressional building to avoid seeing and talking to each other.

Washington was mostly free of the Monarchist/elitest label, but boy John Adams had to deal with it. Somehow it was leveled at him, a mostly middle class family guy while Jefferson escaped it despite his massive estate in VA.

There will always be turmoil in Washington, because quite frankly, that's what's needed.

[Zem Vymes]

There isn't nearly enough turmoil in Washington. We need a lot more to get this country back on course, I think.

[Park Kraken]

This is one of the most ridiculous topics in the history of SW-Fans.


*Whistles* This would be considered one of the most sane topics on TRF.

Ok, now to answer my own questions with my own opinions:

1) Possibly

2) No

3) Benefits: We'll stop poking our noses into other people's buisness for a while, and people may come to miss us in our absence, and be less picky when we return. Cons: Our nuclear arsenal may be forfiet, our borders will be weakened, (although would the terroists attack a dying country?), our economy will die, (although, our debt may be forgiven after it is all over), and our military will probably be weakened as well.

4) China will invade Taiwan, North Korea will invade South Korea, depending on how long our occupation lasts, Iraq will erupt into full blown civil war, and the other NATO powers will be strecthed to the breaking point. Japan will be pushed overboard by this. But after the Civil war ends, hopefully not in a MAD situation, America will still be in a position to help her allies.

5) Political at first, then domestic and finally military.

[Khendon Sevon]

Our debt would not be forgiven. Japan, China, etc all want to collect the money we owe them. There's no way they'd go, "We don't care about the billions of dollars you owe us."

Our nuclear arsenal forfeited? Where's it going? Russia!?

It doesn't matter. America will never enter a civil war. No one can fathom the creation of a new, seperate American nation, let alone a war between Americans.

[Morgan Evanar]

This is one of the most ridiculous topics in the history of SW-Fans.

And Eb is soooo right about the Founding Fathers being contentious. As much as we try and make them out to be this great group that got along, blah, blah blah - they were downright nasty to each other. Imagine this...Jeffeson was the VP and leader of the OPPOSITION party under John Adams. Nice cabinet meetings eh?

Thomas Jefferson had a whisper campaign against him done for "possible" illegitimate children with one of his slaves(which nowadays we basically openly admit he had them). He was also called an atheist in the press. He has a famous quote along the lines of people from opposing parties would go down different streets to get to the Congressional building to avoid seeing and talking to each other.

Washington was mostly free of the Monarchist/elitest label, but boy John Adams had to deal with it. Somehow it was leveled at him, a mostly middle class family guy while Jefferson escaped it despite his massive estate in VA.

There will always be turmoil in Washington, because quite frankly, that's what's needed.IMO the more gridlock the goverment is engaged in the better. When either party has too much control we have large amounts of unchecked idiocy in play. Unless I'm incredibly happy with what is going on, I will always vote for gridlock on the national level.

[CMJ]

That was kind of my point Morgan. :)

[Jedi Master Carr]

I agree with CMJ and Morgan about the gridlock it is probably a good thing. As for a civil war, it would take some kind of huge upheaval which would be impossbile to predict and I don't see anything like that on the horizon anyway. Our country is on a decline but it is more like England's decline from its great power status of the 19th century. It is the nature of civilizations, great powers rise and fall, although I think our fall will be more gentle than the Roman Empire.