aGENT Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 4 minutes ago, SabreFan1 said: No it couldn't. They are two completely opposite things.... People revolt, country splits and starts fighting itself. There will be Americans on both sides. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SabreFan1 Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 1 minute ago, J.R. said: People revolt, country splits and starts fighting itself. There will be Americans on both sides. You aren't getting the difference between the two types of wars/movements. Revolutionary = People united as one against those in power. Civil = People divided into separate groups with separate power bases. They are polar opposites. A non-violent united revolutionary movement is much more prevalent than a divided civil movement which almost always turns violent in the worst of ways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 Just now, SabreFan1 said: You aren't getting the difference between the two types of wars/movements. Revolutionary = People united as one against those in power. Civil = People divided into separate groups with separate power bases. They are polar opposites. A non-violent united revolutionary movement is much more prevalent than a divided civil movement which almost always turns violent in the worst of ways. I get it just fine. Not everyone is going to be on the side of 'the people'. It's highly probable that a violent revolutionary movement turns in to a civil war in the US IMO. And knowing the US, any revolution will certainly be bloody and violent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SabreFan1 Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 Just now, J.R. said: I get it just fine. Not everyone is going to be on the side of 'the people'. It's highly probable that a violent revolutionary movement turns in to a civil war in the US IMO. And knowing the US, any revolution will certainly be bloody and violent. The worst that the US will see in a Civil response is states trying to secede. Once that fails, people will get angry with the people in power. My hope is that will all end with both major political parties being dismantled. Things will get very testy in the US, but I don't see it turning violent like it did in the 19th century. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 Just now, SabreFan1 said: The worst that the US will see in a Civil response is states trying to secede. Once that fails, people will get angry with the people in power. My hope is that will all end with both major political parties being dismantled. Things will get very testy in the US, but I don't see it turning violent like it did in the 19th century. Good luck with that.... https://www.google.ca/search?q=us+protests+turn+violent&rlz=1C1GGRV_enCA751CA751&oq=us+protests+turn+violent&aqs=chrome..69i57.4800j0j4&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancaster Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 16 minutes ago, SabreFan1 said: You aren't getting the difference between the two types of wars/movements. Revolutionary = People united as one against those in power. Civil = People divided into separate groups with separate power bases. They are polar opposites. A non-violent united revolutionary movement is much more prevalent than a divided civil movement which almost always turns violent in the worst of ways. It's possible to have both a revolution and civil war to occur. Eg. Russian Revolution + Russian Civil War, Chinese Revolution + Chinese Civil War People united to overthrow the ruling party/system/whatever. Then they can't seem to agree on what to do after that part.... thus fighting begins. Whether they're separate events or just a long continuation of one... that's up for debate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SabreFan1 Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 5 minutes ago, J.R. said: Good luck with that.... https://www.google.ca/search?q=us+protests+turn+violent&rlz=1C1GGRV_enCA751CA751&oq=us+protests+turn+violent&aqs=chrome..69i57.4800j0j4&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8 Violence in a country of over 320 million people is inevitable. My hope is that some day, 320 million people will get fed up with the way the government is being run and will demand change. Best case scenario, it's done by the power of the vote. Worst case scenario, people flood into Washington DC en masse to protest and the government panics and tries to use the National Guard against it's own citizens. In this day and age, most, if not all, of the National Guard would refuse, especially since it's made up of citizen soldiers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SabreFan1 Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 Just now, Lancaster said: It's possible to have both a revolution and civil war to occur. Eg. Russian Revolution + Russian Civil War, Chinese Revolution + Chinese Civil War People united to overthrow the ruling party/system/whatever. Then they can't seem to agree on what to do after that part.... thus fighting begins. Whether they're separate events or just a long continuation of one... that's up for debate. Those kind of cases are separate by definition. Once one side wins they would break apart afterwards to compete over the new power structure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 4 minutes ago, SabreFan1 said: Violence in a country of over 320 million people is inevitable. My hope is that some day, 320 million people will get fed up with the way the government is being run and will demand change. Best case scenario, it's done by the power of the vote. Worst case scenario, people flood into Washington DC en masse to protest and the government panics and tries to use the National Guard against it's own citizens. In this day and age, most, if not all, of the National Guard would refuse, especially since it's made up of citizen soldiers. The country is already massively split in any number of ways. Expecting all of those 320 million people to get on one side together, and in a non-violent manner, is naive IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SabreFan1 Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 Just now, J.R. said: The country is already massively split in any number of ways. Expecting all of those 320 million people to get on one side together, and in a non-violent manner, is naive IMO. Naive or not, it's my hope that some day in the future, it will happen. It's a very good country that is being run and controlled by increasingly bad people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 Just now, SabreFan1 said: Naive or not, it's my hope that some day in the future, it will happen. It's a very good country that is being run and controlled by increasingly bad people. Optimistically, I'd like to think in this day and age, with the technology, education and access to information etc we have that a truly 'peaceful revolution' could occur. I'm not sure that's reality though. Especially considering America's panache for, and love of, violence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancaster Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 3 minutes ago, SabreFan1 said: Violence in a country of over 320 million people is inevitable. My hope is that some day, 320 million people will get fed up with the way the government is being run and will demand change. Best case scenario, it's done by the power of the vote. Worst case scenario, people flood into Washington DC en masse to protest and the government panics and tries to use the National Guard against it's own citizens. In this day and age, most, if not all, of the National Guard would refuse, especially since it's made up of citizen soldiers. Unless they start using Private Military Contractors. Maybe initially brought in to protect VIP and property.... but placed into harm's way. Something triggers a spark and bullets goes flying. People misreporting the culprit as US soldiers/national guards... people start protesting which turns into rioting and then when the police can no longer handle the situation... the military is brought in. Martial law is established.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SabreFan1 Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 Just now, J.R. said: Optimistically, I'd like to think in this day and age, with the technology, education and access to information etc we have that a truly 'peaceful revolution' could occur. I'm not sure that's reality though. Especially considering America's panache for, and love of, violence. Ideally it gets done through the use of the ballot box. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SabreFan1 Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 Just now, Lancaster said: Unless they start using Private Military Contractors. Maybe initially brought in to protect VIP and property.... but placed into harm's way. Something triggers a spark and bullets goes flying. People misreporting the culprit as US soldiers/national guards... people start protesting which turns into rioting and then when the police can no longer handle the situation... the military is brought in. Martial law is established.... Wow, you went went worst case scenario awfully fast. Private contractors are always a possibility, but there are only so many out there that are available. Most of them are overseas. If Millions of people marched on Washington, a private soldier would have to have a personal death wish to actually start shooting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 3 minutes ago, SabreFan1 said: Ideally it gets done through the use of the ballot box. Whoops. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 2 minutes ago, SabreFan1 said: Wow, you went went worst case scenario awfully fast. Private contractors are always a possibility, but there are only so many out there that are available. Most of them are overseas. If Millions of people marched on Washington, a private soldier would have to have a personal death wish to actually start shooting. There's historic precedent and it's already happened in smaller scale in the US...it's not that far fetched. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SabreFan1 Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 Just now, J.R. said: Whoops. That didn't go well for him. If he runs again in 2020, I'm not sure how he'd do. There are still hard feelings among his supporters from when he endorsed Clinton after the Democrats used every dirty trick to keep him from getting nominated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 1 minute ago, SabreFan1 said: That didn't go well for him. If he runs again in 2020, I'm not sure how he'd do. There are still hard feelings among his supporters from when he endorsed Clinton after the Democrats used every dirty trick to keep him from getting nominated. If the Dems endorsed him over Clinton, is Trump still Pres...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SabreFan1 Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 Just now, J.R. said: There's historic precedent and it's already happened in smaller scale in the US...it's not that far fetched. Nothing's impossible, but on a big enough scale, it would be highly improbable for something like that to happen. The country flipped it's collective lid after Kent State and that was on a relatively small scale individual protest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SabreFan1 Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 Just now, J.R. said: If the Dems endorsed him over Clinton, is Trump still Pres...? I've often wondered that myself. The polls had him even farther ahead of Trump had he won the nomination. The polls were incredibly unreliable though in 2016. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.