Who’s going to war?
In the Civil War, we had people to fight.
I’m still confused who’s going to be the opponent in this “civil war”.
It’s not my liberal friends. If so, it’ll be a short battle as they don’t own guns.
The liberal politicians? They don’t carry guns either.
I understand who our enemy is, but none of them appear to be armed. Kind of hard for me to understand that conflict as a civil war.
Sounds more like a coup to me, not a civil war but what do I know.
Historically, who is going to war is simply an armed group of people out to enforce their view. Doesnt matter if it's a short fight/conflict or a long one.
A coup is an act of war to those killed or enslaved.
A coup often turns into a revolution. Revolution is war.
Insurrection is war.
Ethnic cleansing on any scale is war.
What begins as a single murder, growing into killing a few unarmed people in a community, to killing a large group, to both sides escalating to two armed sides, to outright land warfare. Is war. Declared as war officially or not, those acts are war.
If "they" so choose, armed Virginians have other Virginians to fight, for 2nd amendment reasons.
Your liberal friends and liberal politicians not having guns doesn't matter. Didnt matter in Bosnia, Serbia, Herzegovina, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Congo, et al and ad nauseam.
Didnt matter in a number of places in US history. A lot of unarmed people have been slaughtered. That's acts of war.
Your postulation is semantics, based on a "definition" of war, being two armed govermental groups of opponents fighting.
Guerilla warfare is antifa killing you and yours for whatever reason. Guerilla warfare putting citizens of a country against each other is civil war by definition.
Any guerilla group attacking fellow citizens is an act of war.
Call it civil unrest, ok, riots where two sides shoot at each other, a riot, but in a lot of places, it's been called war.
Is it really..... if the Red Army Faction "Bader Meinhoff", attacked people in Germany and Italy, it was terrorism, but when similar groups did the same thing in South America it was guerrilla warfare or civil war.
Semantics.
Right now, Virginia is exercising constitutional rights, one side attempts to pass laws benefiting a political goal, business as usual.
Side two is exercising constitutional rights of open protest and politician discourse against those proposed laws. Appropriate response.
If either side starts shooting people to enforce that law or prevent it, that becomes civil war, by truth of fact.
Somebody might call the 30 minute shooting a criminal act, terrorism, a riot, a skirmish, a battle, but when it happens by fellow citizens and countrymen, to further a political agenda, it is an act of historical civil war.
Semantics based on your beliefs of what words mean.
But actions sane peeple prefer to avoid, until their beliefs allow no other choice, to enforce those beliefs.
AND THEN: !!!!
There is asymmetrical next generation warfare, which doesn't necessarily include weapons.
Would it be civil war by definition if a group of 2A Virginians got a really serious group of hackers involved and did next gen asymmetrical warfare against blackface and his political group with a huge DOS attack on their IT systems ??? Yesssss.......
Ymmv, vr, and best to you.
theconservativetreehouse.com
thebullelephant.com
