Is Civil War 2 possible in the USA?

Posted in the Rensselaer Forum

Comments

Showing posts 1 - 18 of18
PurpleOrange

Paducah, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
Jan 30, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Is a second Civil War possible in the USA?

If you think so, please say why, how you think the sides would line up (geographically and socially), what the critical issues would be, and what form the conflict would take.

If you do not think it is possible, please state your reasons why.

Thoughtful answers only please.
RedBlue

Pompano Beach, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
Jan 30, 2013
 
PurpleOrange wrote:
Is a second Civil War possible in the USA?
If you think so, please say why, how you think the sides would line up (geographically and socially), what the critical issues would be, and what form the conflict would take.
If you do not think it is possible, please state your reasons why.
Thoughtful answers only please.
Can I get a drink?
Bernard Continelli

Rensselaer, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
Jan 31, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

If it were over gun ownership exclusively, I'd take the Right's side, but on the (so-called) Culture Wars I'd support THIS link to a Times Union letter of mine that was published on August 10, 2011 ...

www.timesunion.com/opinion/article/Time-for-U...

... "FATA", as I would call the bill (Federal Anti-Theocratic Act) is something I would support with the same enthusiasm that Daniel Day Lewis' "Lincoln" character was adamant about an Amendment abolishing slavery.

First of all I believe FATA would restore the First Amendment's separation of church and state to that which our Founding Fathers would approve if they were alive today. It just does not make sense to say: "There can be no official State religion" yet that personal liberties CAN be abridged for no other reason that some ancient religious book says so, and if I do not voluntarily subscribe to that religion to boot.

I see a parallel between this and the fact that we won our independence from England before human slavery was abolished, yet this was (rightfully) corrected less that a century after that.

Secondly, for the past three decades the Religious Right has tyranically ruled the GOP / Starboard American mindset to the point where one can only speculate how many folks were indirectly driven to the true left-wing on other issues who might NOT have been if the GOP had continuously stayed the "quasi" (for Republicans!) libertarian course that commenced in the middle 1970s under President Gerald Ford.
Bernard Continelli

Rensselaer, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4
Jan 31, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

er ... there's TWO "N"s in "tyrannically" - wrote this in a hurry before work!
Senator Doofus

Albany, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
Jan 31, 2013
 

Judged:

1

The Civil War is presently occuring in the USA and takes the form of class(rich) v class(poor) and secondarly race (Black v white). The initial question is essentially a stupid one because the answer is so obvious.
Southerners perspective

Paducah, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
Feb 1, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Senator Doofus wrote:
The Civil War is presently occuring in the USA and takes the form of class(rich) v class(poor) and secondarly race (Black v white). The initial question is essentially a stupid one because the answer is so obvious.
Care to elaborate?

I think this question is serious, from somebody looking for serious, thought out answers. A kid doing research for a school paper or something like that.
Southerners perspective

Paducah, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
Feb 1, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Bernard Continelli wrote:
If it were over gun ownership exclusively, I'd take the Right's side, but on the (so-called) Culture Wars I'd support THIS link to a Times Union letter of mine that was published on August 10, 2011 ...
www.timesunion.com/opinion/article/Time-for-U...
... "FATA", as I would call the bill (Federal Anti-Theocratic Act) is something I would support with the same enthusiasm that Daniel Day Lewis' "Lincoln" character was adamant about an Amendment abolishing slavery.
First of all I believe FATA would restore the First Amendment's separation of church and state to that which our Founding Fathers would approve if they were alive today. It just does not make sense to say: "There can be no official State religion" yet that personal liberties CAN be abridged for no other reason that some ancient religious book says so, and if I do not voluntarily subscribe to that religion to boot.
I see a parallel between this and the fact that we won our independence from England before human slavery was abolished, yet this was (rightfully) corrected less that a century after that.
Secondly, for the past three decades the Religious Right has tyranically ruled the GOP / Starboard American mindset to the point where one can only speculate how many folks were indirectly driven to the true left-wing on other issues who might NOT have been if the GOP had continuously stayed the "quasi" (for Republicans!) libertarian course that commenced in the middle 1970s under President Gerald Ford.
I know us Southerners talk funny, but we read English just fine and I can't understand what this jibberish means. Mind putting it into words ordinary folks can understand?
Bernard Continelli

Rensselaer, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
Feb 1, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Except for a couple of typos - one corrected, one not (at the end of the second-last paragraph "less THAT at a century after that" should read "less THAN a century after that"), it made perfect sense to those who value COMMON SENSE above EVERYTHING else, EVEN something ancient persons like Mohammed OR Leviticus once said. Also, did you even bother to read my linked letter at all, or would that have been too difficult?!
Concerned

Troy, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
Feb 1, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

Not a "civil war" but a counter revolution against the usurpation of government by people who have no respect for Law, culture, truth or property. Their wish to become omnipotent has finally come up against the second amendment and can go no further while it is solidly intact. Anyone fluent in history and observant of our founding documents knows exactly the danger at hand. Legislating without regard for the supreme law, the peoples rights and lengthy debate is intolerable yet we've seen it go on in increasing frequency to date. At some point the government will do more than economic harm to innocent citizens. Just watch.
Lord Haw Haw

Albany, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10
Feb 1, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Concerned--you are right on the money. However, all changes presently occuring are good for the people. Moving away from the principles of the founding fathers is long over due, since Jefferson, Adams, Washington, Monroe, Pinckney,etc were slave holding racists who did not consider women equal to men,believed one must own property to voteetc. In plain words they were to a man racist, sexist pigs. The day of the running dog white cracker honkey is ending. Power to the people. Power to all of the people.
trucker bob

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11
Feb 3, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

BANG......haw haw
DanaRatalio

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12
Feb 3, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

trucker bob wrote:
BANG......haw haw
Great, another gay trucker who want to bang Lord Haw Haw.

Are any of your truckers straight? When I worked the Triple Rock Truck Stop is Memphis, I thought that dudes would be hitting on me all day, but just as many tried to f**k my husband, who worked the grill.
DanaRatalio

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13
Feb 3, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

Concerned wrote:
Not a "civil war" but a counter revolution against the usurpation of government by people who have no respect for Law, culture, truth or property. Their wish to become omnipotent has finally come up against the second amendment and can go no further while it is solidly intact. Anyone fluent in history and observant of our founding documents knows exactly the danger at hand. Legislating without regard for the supreme law, the peoples rights and lengthy debate is intolerable yet we've seen it go on in increasing frequency to date. At some point the government will do more than economic harm to innocent citizens. Just watch.
Stop...you're making me horny.
Bernard Continelli

Rensselaer, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#14
Feb 3, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Lord Haw Haw wrote:
Concerned--you are right on the money. However, all changes presently occuring are good for the people. Moving away from the principles of the founding fathers is long over due, since Jefferson, Adams, Washington, Monroe, Pinckney,etc were slave holding racists who did not consider women equal to men,believed one must own property to voteetc. In plain words they were to a man racist, sexist pigs. The day of the running dog white cracker honkey is ending. Power to the people. Power to all of the people.
STOP this line of ignorant, TRULY-"liberal" bullshit - I'm so sick of it. Humanity is evolving slowly - GET USED TO IT - and thus don't expect persons who lived hundreds of years ago to think exactly like we do today.

It really is NOT accurate to say that our Founding Fathers were
hypocrites because they demanded freedom from Great Britain, but still held slaves and denied women the right to vote. That's just the way MOST PEOPLE THOUGHT BACK THEN.

The important thing is that (chronologically) slavery was abolished, women did get the right to vote, and the 1964 Civil Rights Act was passed. If you're going to bash anybody let it be the Rand Pauls (SO bo-tarded compared to daddy Ron whom I respect) who realistically wants to revoke the latter of the three!

Slow evolution is to be EXPECTED, but spiteful DE-evolution is SO much more evil by comparison, and only morons see no difference between the two. Let me put it this way: Suppose hundreds, perhaps thousands of years from now humanity unanimously embraces either vegetarianism or veganism. Would it make sense to chastise some truly-great person of today and negate everything good that they did simply because he or she was an omnivore in an era when omnivorism was considered the norm?
t bob

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15
Feb 3, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

Dana, I talked to you once back on party row!! I remember it so well because if anything were to make me gay YOU were it. Hugs and kusses you toothless cow.
Nina

Albany, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16
Feb 4, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Senator Doofus wrote:
The Civil War is presently occuring in the USA and takes the form of class(rich) v class(poor) and secondarly race (Black v white). The initial question is essentially a stupid one because the answer is so obvious.
I feel bad that you insult Purple Orange's initial question. Do you not know that people now are afraid to speak out for fear of
the government? What I see is socialism which does not work just
look at Europe? Summer is a comin' keep an eye on LA and Chicago.. Our country is already divided. More taxes means
bigger government. There is too much intrustion in our lives and
more money derived from taxes increases this intrustion. I understand Purple Orange's question....Take care and God Bless
Molon Labe

Albany, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#17
Feb 4, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

A new civil war is not only possible, it's likely. It may however, be a bloodless war.
Senator Doofus wrote:
The Civil War is presently occuring in the USA and takes the form of class(rich) v class(poor) and secondarly race (Black v white). The initial question is essentially a stupid one because the answer is so obvious.
This is fairly accurate. When the dropouts, the do-nothings and drug addicts think their opinion is as important as the opinion of productive, the hard working, and the job creators; things get out of balance. The underclass is destroying this country, and in turn needs to be squashed. No more welfare, no more free rides, no more babies on my dime.
Lord Haw Haw wrote:
the founding fathers... believed one must own property to vote
This is the only thing you said that's accurate. The founding fathers were right! Those who don't own anything have the right to vote to take away from those who do own things. Why do you think these bloated school budgets continue to pass in Albany year after year? Because so few of those voting on the school budget have any skin in the game. Property owners should have one vote for each property they own. They alone shoulder the burden of paying these obscene school taxes.
Bernard Continelli wrote:
The important thing is that (chronologically) slavery was abolished, women did get the right to vote, and the 1964 Civil Rights Act was passed. If you're going to bash anybody let it be the Rand Pauls (SO bo-tarded compared to daddy Ron whom I respect) who realistically wants to revoke the latter of the three!
All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others, right?

Rand Paul is absolutely right about the civil rights act. While I'm not favorably disposed to discrimination, that logic also extends to the notion of protected classes that is enumerated in the civil rights act. It needs to be repealed in the interest of fairness for all.
dunadd

Greensboro, NC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#18
Feb 14, 2013
 
PurpleOrange, Prussia 1860-1940 striking parallels to what is happening in US today. As far as answering directly, i prefer not. i believe the future is obvious.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 1 - 18 of18
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••
•••
•••

Rensselaer Jobs

•••
•••
•••

Rensselaer People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••