All-out civil war 15

Roger Stone, who worked in President Nixon’s Office of Economic Opportunity and was a campaign adviser to presidential candidate Donald Trump, predicts with conviction that if members of Congress vote to impeach President Trump, they will be inciting all-out civil war – and putting their own individual lives at risk:

We think he may very well be right.

Posted under Civil war, United States, Videos by Jillian Becker on Friday, August 25, 2017

Tagged with , ,

This post has 15 comments.

  • Zerothruster

    “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”
    Unfortunately, we don’t yet have one of those. The radical left seems better organized than the mainstream right.
    Remember Barry HO’s proposal of 2 July 2008 (before a veterans group, I think). He said: “We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.”

    • liz

      Yes, that was scary coming from him. His idea of national security was to destroy the “bitter clingers” and give their country away to Muslims, drug cartels, and the UN.

  • Here’s the catch; any 21st century American civil war won’t resemble the 1861-1865 war at all. And not just for technological reasons.

    The 1861-1865 war wasn’t really a civil war; it did not involve two factions fighting for control of one nation, as did the two Roman civil wars of the late Republic, or the English civil war. Our war was a war of secession, where one part of the nation tried to break away and form a new country.

    It was also a war with clear geographic boundaries, North against South (mostly, the West was a little confused) and mostly fought by established armies in the martial traditions of the time. The tensions of that conflict are still felt today.

    Any second conflict will be a true civil war. There will be few geographic boundaries, other than urban v. rural. This will be a conflict that doesn’t involve the military so much as gangs of irregulars; imagine Charlottesville if both sides had come armed and willing to open fire.

    And second civil war will be fought amongst us. Imagine pitched battles on the streets of our major cities; raids into the suburbs when the cities run short of food and water. Imagine a complete breakdown of emergency services in those cities as first responders encounter armed gangs willing to kill them for their vehicles, equipment and medicines. Imagine hordes of refugees fleeing the cities, into the countryside, under the misapprehension that somehow there is plenty of food to be had in the countryside, but having no skills whatsoever to find or grow said food. Imagine rural residents facing rampant theft and trespassing responding by forming their own armed militias to repel the invaders, and thus escalate the conflict into the countryside.

    There are only two ways any government could respond to this crisis:

    1) Impose martial law and restore order by force. Such force would have to be overwhelming, brutal and merciless.
    2) Respond weakly and fecklessly, as when Jefferson Davis pleaded with an angry, starving mob in Richmond in 1864, finally turning out his pockets to toss a few coins into the crown. Such a response would be worse than doing nothing at all.

    In either case, the United States as we knew it ends at that point.

    • May I quote this essay of yours as a post on this website? I would comment on it – favorably of course. Your description of what a violent civil war in America would be like now needs to be spread.

    • liz

      Frankly I think imposing martial law wouldn’t be a bad idea at this point, if it actually resulted in the crushing of these domestic terrorists posing as “antifascists”, shut down the propaganda media who play off them, and drained the government swamp of Obama operatives.

      • Yes. I agree, liz. All those things need – ever more urgently – to be done, and if martial law is the solution, then the sooner it’s declared the better.

        • Zerothruster

          This will be called fascist, of course. When the militant radical left advances to the point at which their aggression can be effectively opposed only by martial law or a countervailing organized political movement with sufficient coercive muscle, that movement could look like a militant right wing. Think of Franco’s Spain, or some Latin America regimes, like Pinochet. These are not the kinds of regimes that should be promoted out of some sheer love of tyranny (as the left would characterized them)…

          • I see your point. But how else can they be opposed and stopped when they become militant to the point of shooting? ?

            • Zerothruster

              Jillian, I can (now) see where my point was not made as clearly as I should have made it.
              I was not condemning that kind of political immune response, but endorsing it. The fact that it will be called fascist by the left is something that has to be taken as a given. They’re quick to call much less definitive responses by that pejorative.
              In any case, justifiable responses by duly authorized law enforcement should not have to wait for today’s Roter Frontkämpferbund or Antifaschistische Aktion to go ballistic. They’re already on the streets with other actionable offenses and weapons. 😉

            • I agree. Thanks, Zerothruster.

  • Cogito

    This closely parallels the end of the constitutional republic in Rome….civil wars followed by several dictators including Julius Caesar.

    The Empire finally emerged with the pretense of republicanism, but no one was fooled

    • I’ve been saying the same thing for nigh unto thirty years now.

  • liz

    I think they are already trying to incite a civil war – it’s what they want.
    Cause the complete breakdown of law and order, the collapse of civilization.
    Ushering in a collectivist Utopia? How people can be stupid enough to actually believe such worn out B.S., and convince themselves that the use of violence is justified in order to achieve it, is beyond me. They are mentally on the same level with terrorists.