Not really. Nobody is stupid enough to try to fight a civil war. Even the globalist power mad democrats. It would get really brutal really fast. There aren't even any clear targets that either side could aim for. Which come to think of it maybe reduces the chance for bloodshed and I was wrong with the first sentence.
But if it did get bloody, the costs would be too high all around. You can't just go around killing people and making war without effecting Texas' energy infrastructure which provides for the whole continent. Both the physical infrastructure and people are important.
And what would the globalist gain? Momentary power over people who not only no longer trust them as government, but actively want to kill them? They would lose all consent of the governed
What? There's a plethora of conventional military targets in the United States. On top of that, why the fuck would the feds allow a state (any state) to secede? That only invites more secession.
Again, feds don't "allow" anything. The question is whether they're willing to nuke their own country (figuratively) to try to stop the secession. I'd bet no. It would clearly be a losing game.
There are military bases, but it wouldn't be clear which ones would be targets. It would all be down to loyalty. I would suspect most of the military would stand down. What would happen otherwise, different factions of troops start shooting each other in their barracks? Thats bonkers. Nobodys stupid enough to try this shit. Negotiations of who gets what fleets and bases would come later. The main "army" in such a war would be the people of the states. But any attempt to wipe out large numbers of them as a first strike would lose the loyalty of the entire state forever. The Feds could only ever manage to subjugate a state, and they'd forever never have their loyalty in anyway, and could look forward only to obstructionist from the people there from then on out. Do you know how easy it would be for the people of Texas to blow up their own train lines and pipelines to stop the export of oil and materialle to the feds? How you gonna stop them? And the militia of Texas would be unstoppable because they could easily strike anyine unannounced. Look at the protests at politicians houses. Now imagine instead, they kill the politician AND HIS FAMILY. The fuxk are you gonna do to stop them? They tried to fight a guerilla war in Iraq and couldn't manage that. Fucking Texans are basically made out of guns by comparison. Fuckin babies in Texas come out the damb would holding a rifle. The idea that you could subjugate Texas in any long term profitable way is bonkers.
No, the feds would opt for a repeat of the Civil War and do a scorched earth campaign. Also, you act like soldiers aren't just going to follow orders for the most part. Most of your active duty are liberal bootlickers. You might get some resistance at the National Guard, but that is obviously state dependent.
Also, how would secession be a losing game for the feds? They would simply tell the state no, then go to war with said state over it. You really think the United States government would let Texas secede from the union, thereby depriving the U.S. of a large portion of its natural resources, economy, and manpower and also at the same time create a major military and political rival on its border? Yeah, the alternative of civil war is definitely a more attractive prospect.
Not really. Nobody is stupid enough to try to fight a civil war. Even the globalist power mad democrats. It would get really brutal really fast. There aren't even any clear targets that either side could aim for. Which come to think of it maybe reduces the chance for bloodshed and I was wrong with the first sentence.
But if it did get bloody, the costs would be too high all around. You can't just go around killing people and making war without effecting Texas' energy infrastructure which provides for the whole continent. Both the physical infrastructure and people are important.
And what would the globalist gain? Momentary power over people who not only no longer trust them as government, but actively want to kill them? They would lose all consent of the governed
What? There's a plethora of conventional military targets in the United States. On top of that, why the fuck would the feds allow a state (any state) to secede? That only invites more secession.
Again, feds don't "allow" anything. The question is whether they're willing to nuke their own country (figuratively) to try to stop the secession. I'd bet no. It would clearly be a losing game.
There are military bases, but it wouldn't be clear which ones would be targets. It would all be down to loyalty. I would suspect most of the military would stand down. What would happen otherwise, different factions of troops start shooting each other in their barracks? Thats bonkers. Nobodys stupid enough to try this shit. Negotiations of who gets what fleets and bases would come later. The main "army" in such a war would be the people of the states. But any attempt to wipe out large numbers of them as a first strike would lose the loyalty of the entire state forever. The Feds could only ever manage to subjugate a state, and they'd forever never have their loyalty in anyway, and could look forward only to obstructionist from the people there from then on out. Do you know how easy it would be for the people of Texas to blow up their own train lines and pipelines to stop the export of oil and materialle to the feds? How you gonna stop them? And the militia of Texas would be unstoppable because they could easily strike anyine unannounced. Look at the protests at politicians houses. Now imagine instead, they kill the politician AND HIS FAMILY. The fuxk are you gonna do to stop them? They tried to fight a guerilla war in Iraq and couldn't manage that. Fucking Texans are basically made out of guns by comparison. Fuckin babies in Texas come out the damb would holding a rifle. The idea that you could subjugate Texas in any long term profitable way is bonkers.
No, the feds would opt for a repeat of the Civil War and do a scorched earth campaign. Also, you act like soldiers aren't just going to follow orders for the most part. Most of your active duty are liberal bootlickers. You might get some resistance at the National Guard, but that is obviously state dependent.
Also, how would secession be a losing game for the feds? They would simply tell the state no, then go to war with said state over it. You really think the United States government would let Texas secede from the union, thereby depriving the U.S. of a large portion of its natural resources, economy, and manpower and also at the same time create a major military and political rival on its border? Yeah, the alternative of civil war is definitely a more attractive prospect.