Why A Civil War Won’t Happen In The US.
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 27 июн 2024
- Go to my sponsor aura.com/briggs to get a 14-day free trial and see if your personal information has been leaked online.
10 Reasons A Civil War Won't Happen In The United States.
Will the United States have a second civil war? That seems to be a question that has been floating around these days. In this video, we will go over some things that would happen if a civil war broke out.
Find out the 10 reasons why a civil war won't happen in the United States in this video by World According to Briggs. Explore the factors that contribute to the country's stability and why a civil war is unlikely to occur.
#civilwar
#unitedstates
Do you need a local Realtor for the area you want to move to?
HomeAndMoney.com can help:
Use this link: homeandmoney.com/briggs/
Sponsorship Inquiries:
WorldAccordingtoBriggs@nanozebra.com
🔶My Other Channels:
📺 On This Day: @AboutToday
🏡Suite Life For Briggs: @SuiteLife4Briggs
MY OTHER SOCIALS:
Facebook- / world2briggs
X-@World2Briggs
Instagram-@world2briggs
#UnitedStates
Briggs
According to Briggs
Go to my sponsor aura.com/briggs to get a 14 day free trial and see if your personal information has been leaked online
‘Why the right wing kills more people than the Left- Radical Reviewer’ 8:01
Boooo
There will be a civil war, this was all just your opinion
That’s just the way things are =/
Thank you for your informative videos
You have previously made videos about the states with the most Black, White, ... populations
Please also make a video about the states with the highest number, percentage or ratio of mixed race people
I am sure it will be interesting because mixed race people are a product of cultural tolerance and liberty.
Something no one ever* mentions is how a possible American civil war could impact Native Americans in Native American Reservations 🤔. Who would they side with? Assuming they side with anyone else at all aside* from protecting their own sovereign interests (or protecting themselves as "domestic dependent nations" from any threats).
Half of these are why a civil war would be bad and SHOULDN’T happen…not why it WOULDN’T happen. Explaining all the bad things that would happen in a civil war doesn’t explain why it won’t actually happen. It’s kind of like saying, “If I get cancer, I’d have to go through chemo and radiation and might die…so I probably won’t get cancer.” And then picking up a cigarette and smoking anyway.
This comment though! I totally agree with this take.
I agree. A lot of what he saying in this video are legit concerns but I don’t think they can used as a justification why a CW2 scenario absolutely won’t happen.
I’ll put it this way, I’m divorced ( since remarried).
Before my first wife and I got divorced, I was aware of all the cons of taking such an action but was also aware of the consequences if I didn’t.
I still opted for the divorce.
🫡
Spot on
I have never known one person who died from smoking.
I think you forgot "Americans are lazy" once the keyboard warriors on both sides find out they have to leave the house would end it fast.
Amen too many Americans are phat
😂
Shots fired
You know what…I think I’m going to take a walk after this video
In all honestly... the laziness mixed with a relative comfort even most poorer people have when compared to the rest of the world gives most people with the means to pull it off too much to lose in trying. Those are the biggest reasons I believe holding us back.
I'm not worried about civil war. I'm worried about the kinds of violence we saw in the 1960's with political assassinations and riots in the streets.
Yes
Political assasinations have lead to at least 5 civil wars in human history.
I think that's a perfectly likely thing. It could happen again. The Trump megafans talk about it all the time.
Stochastic terrorism, which will mostly PISS PEOPLE OFF thereby having the exact opposite of the psychological effect desired by the perps.
People will get hurt, and killed, but that will galvanize the ordinary American, who only wants to have barbecue in his own backyard and watch Sportsball with his buddies while watching his kids grow up. Already ordinary folk have had enough Reich wing obnoxiousness, It just ain't cool. Damn near everybody has guns or some kind of weapon, the kids are more dangerous with a keyboard and a server than your MAGA Boomer with a Glock...and don't get me going about the drones and the kids making robots!
The would be Rebels will find that we live in a different world.
I mean, we kinda saw that in 2020
The items mentioned here, are all good reasons not to have a war. However, knowledge of these reasons has not prevented wars in the past. Once people get angry enough, reason goes out the window.
Exactly! In order for cool minds to prevail they have to be in charge. There's a growing population of Nihilists that simply don't care. If they can't have it their way than they will turn it into a dumpster fire thinking something better will be built out of the ashes.
The problem though is that it's not everybody who's upset. Yes there are some very specific clusters of people who are upset, but social media tends to amplify those voices. If everyone was upset, we really would be seeing people riot in the streets everyday. But we don't. It does happen from time to time, but not everyday.
I think a perfect example of this is that I know some people who are very Republican, they are very upset about the current U.S. government and want a change, but they are taking their 3rd cruise of the year just last week. Do they have a right to do that? Of course they do, it's their American right to do that... but let's be real, things aren't going all that bad for them. They just don't like the current government. Yes there are people who things aren't going well for, and they are ready to riot, but that number is still pretty small.
Lol, you are talking about my Dad! 😂 He's retired, built a new house, doing well, watches a SHIT load of FOX "news", and loves to fantasize about civil war and cessation, but he isn't going to participate or anything. He is living high on the hog.
*secession @@coryphillips7945
@@Mike-kc5ew A civil war could definitely happen. But not in a democratic vs Republican. Most civil wars are started by young men who have very little to lose. We don't have riots much, but mass shootings are regular. I've had a discussion with a lot of young men who don't identify with either. No one wants to start it. But if started, they would become rebels in a heart beat. It won't be a war with front lines, but a massive war on terror at home. All it needs is a short guy with a silly mustache
This video is more about why it shouldn't happen and less about why it won't happen
FJB
When the banks close, government payments stop, atm''s stop working, and the financial system freezes, it's a whole new world.
At that point, all bets are off the table.
Exactly. Basically, this guy's entire point is that if there isn't sufficient reason to have a civil war, there won't be a civil war. But there won't be a sufficient reason until there is.
Another revolutionary war may happen though. Seems like everyone is agreed that we should never have had career politicians and political parties. They don't act in the best interest of the people, but are very good about exploiting division to remain in power.
We call them red blue states, but most of it breaks down into rural or urban areas.
Aka the second American revolution anyways imo I think it’s more possible than a second American civil war.
@@Zeron108 Well, that's another video!
@@darlalathan6143 I would love a video about a potential second American revolution.
It actually seems as if politicians are pulling for this and a 2nd American Revolution is very possible,it would also lead to easily installing authoritarianism after Marshall law is put in place.Its crazy how many people during covid actually supported Marshall law happening as well as how many people call themselves patriots but believe a dictator is a good thing...Most don't have the ability to reason anymore, and think if these thins happen it would just be business as usual and their lives wouldn't change.
If change doesn’t happen soon the people may have to take their government back from the tyrants running it into the ground …… civil or revolution are both a possibility ………
I have a hot take with no. 1. It won't be state vs. state. It would be rural vs. urban. Even when you look at the break down of states like NY and CA in elections, the only areas that are really blue are the cities. That's the same in all states. Some states, the cities dominate the politics simply because their cities have enough people. So, I don't think it will be state vs. state but county vs county. It'll look more like Missouri during the Civil War, farm vs. farm. You have to remember, people before the Civil War were more Loyal to the state they lived in.
As to the rest, I have no disagreement. I don't think we're heading for a civil war. I think people have a tendency to see things on social media and think that represents the real world when the opposite is true.
not a hot take. Thats probably more likely than state vs state. The divide on social media is rural vs city
that reminds of Cuba revolution, it was more rural vs urban too. *tho problem with is suburbia political is more of inbetween
Funny that California is the most populated and not just about beaches and traffic jams. Because most of California is nothing but Farmland, Desert, and Mountains not just big cites.
Totally agree. Or it could be done by left and right leaning businesses too. Be a cold war between money and slowly one side would win and another would lose by buying or alligning with certain suppliers and ignoring others at all cost (pun not intended). If it went Farmers vs cities farmers would have a huge upper hand. God forbid this from ever happening!
Illinoisans would fight each other.
Plague, war, famine - a common cycle in world history
I'm more worried about civil unrest, not so much a complete war
Canada isnt taking Rosie, Ellen, nor Oprah. 😂
America certainly isn’t taking any of Canada’s shit: Danielle Smith, Pierre Poilievre, and especially Romana Didulo.
Ba ha ha, good one!!!!
@@charleshamilton9274 Especially Justin, we already have one.
It breaks my heart that anyone is even talking about such a thing...
Loss of life is a deterrent to war, are you kidding?
Right? Lol
In a rich country like the US that is relatively safe, I would say it would be. If you witnessed someone being unlived outside your house do you run out and chase down the person who did it or call the police? We have been lucky to live in a country where there is some form of justice and order.
Looks at the current t " drug" war
Uh, yeah. One of the reasons the US is not going into Ukraine to help is the potential for loss of life. Nuclear bombs and what not. It has a higher potential then say Operation Desert Shield in 1990 as Saddam didn't have nuclear bombs. It is always part of the math.
Aren't they always talking about reducing the population?
It’s called predictive programming.
if it was red vs blue i think the blue would struggle to survive not the red. rural areas control the healthy food supply and the blue populous cities would run out of resources extremely fast not to mention gun ownership vs lack thereof
There are more guns in blue states than red states. It doesn't matter how many a single person has. It is how many bodies do you have and how much money do you have. I think it is a misconception the democrats don't have guns. By political party 41% of Republicans own firearms. 33% of Democrats own firearms, and 37% of independents. The food thing wouldn't play out as fast as you think.California is the largest producer of food in the United States, producing hundreds of commodities, including citrus, non-citrus fruits, and vegetables. California produces nearly 60% of the country's citrus, over 80% of its stone fruit, and more than 40% of its vegetable acreage. California's climate, natural resources, and history of innovation have supported its production for centuries. That is according to Rural Strong Media a conservative organization. The number 2 is Iowa, followed by Kansas, Nebraska, Texas, Minnesota, Illinois, Wisconsin, and Indiana. Eventually it would start to hurt the blue states but it would be years. At least 2 growing seasons.
@@WorldAccordingToBriggs Plus, Canada would side with the blue states. We got food and oil, and strangely enough....guns. But, we'll need a ride. lol
😆😅😂🤣
@@randyt3558 Oh gawd, No one needs to give Canada a reason to drink all the maple syrup then release the geeses and start working on that Geneva Convention checklist
@@WorldAccordingToBriggsBlue states are predominantly red counties with major metro areas mostly being what make them blue. Look at CA. Born and raised in red counties within this highly progressive state, feels like a different state entirely if not for the effects the state rules and regulations have on us. Sure many red counties are going purple or blue thanks to the city folk fleeing the crime-ridden trash dumps they once paid a fortune to call home but people would be surprised how many in CA are conservatives or even democrats with different values than the city dwellers.
Countless people who already won’t put up with the leftist bs and are armed to the teeth, if it’s war idiots want it will be a blood bath on both sides. And if food access becomes an issue it will be Mad Max and TWD worlds combined minus zombies (save for the fent addicts). Not the outcome anyone wants. Those who actually prepped will be prey from the starving ones who never did. And those thieves will be target practice. Fun fun fun 🤦🏻♂️
Thanks for making this video. There are so many people seething at the idea of a civil war from the comfort of their couch. I think a lot of us in the US get caught up in our political differences that we forget that at the end of the day, we're all Americans and want essentially the same thing, a peaceful life. Literally no one wants to be in a war zone.
Only sociopaths.
Thanks for saying that, we forget easily.
From my perspective, the majority of the US is already a war zone, just not in the conventional sense. Also, not all the people in this country are Americans. Do any of us know what is crossing the southern border every hour of everyday? I am sure the government is doing everything in their power to keep us safe. Hahaha!!!!!
can we separate the armed militias amongst certain political parties and the rest of america? too many people are okay with that type of mercenary military rule
Don't forget, the banks will close, and Social Security, and disability checks will stop. People stay home when they have no money. They're entitled Americans. with overly big mouths....lol
And remember, the military has enough fire power, and drones, to stop any takeover.
All these reasons are what would happen IF we had a civil war, not prevent a civil war.
Yeah everyone wanting a civil war is stupid. I am a gun loving conservative christian from TN and same with all my friends but I have no desire to fight lol. I think having states rights that you can choose to live in a place that suits you best is what’s great about this country. Just don’t come after me, my family or friends and we’ll get along just fine. I also think open discourse is important and our media likes to separate us artificially wether left or right
Absolutely right - but that doesn't mean it won't happen. More people need to consider the danger and decide to work for peaceful solutions. I too have no desire to fight - but that lack of desire to fight could change in a heartbeat if, and only if, our rights were being violated and there was absolutely no choice. Let's all pray hard that this never happens....
It could still happen
@@colleenwelch2330 fearmongerer keep listening to the propaganda, your fellow americans have a lot more in common with you then media wants you to know.
Well if we are going full states rights we need to do popular vote on everything. Enough with this politicians having the say because they were voted in and proclaiming its states will. No its not. Its just one party that had enough votes still leaving millions of people disagreeing.
Don't forget, the banks will close, and Social Security, and disability checks will stop. People stay home when they have no money. They're entitled Americans. with overly big mouths....lol
And remember, the military has enough fire power, and drones, to stop any takeover.
Now that I made it to the end, the idea that money/wealth would prevent a civil war is laughable; our first civil war was not fought over slavery, per se, but because slavery gave a monetary advantage to southern businesses.
The issue of slavery was a bit deeper than a business advantage. The north had industrialized, so they no longer needed free labor to function which gave them the luxury to look at slavery as a moral issue. Granted, they were still importing southern cotton - so they still indirectly benefitted. The reality is the Civil War was fought over different reasons by different groups at different points in time. The call to action for the Union army was not to free the slaves but rather to preserve the Union, it wasn't until much later into the war it became about ending slavery. The South (CSA) was much more directly related to preserving slavery as stated by Jefferson Davis. Even "states rights" was mostly related to slavery - although the south also wanted to right to trade directly with other countries instead of sending cotton to the north. Granted, the southern soldiers largely didn't care either way as none of them owned slaves, but it was a paycheck. Many also forget about the several "southern" (slave) states that never succeeded.
@@JasonTaylor-po5xc Yes, you fleshed it out more thoroughly; the point I was trying to make is that, one way or another it's always about money.
And it was also fought because people like daniel boone (went from kentucky to missouri) & davy crockett (from tennesse to texas) tried to spread skavery across the country & slowly more out west. Whuch is one of the reasons so many died in texas, oklahoma, missouri, kansas, etc. Western states back then did not want slavery & were prepared to fight to keep it from spreading westward too!!
Actually the US civil war was engineered by the Euro central banks because the US senate kept kicking them out. So they engineered the war.. attached themselves to the north with $, formed the "federal" reserve bank, purchased the senate and sold it all off to the population as emancipation. because the general populace are clueless idiots, always have been.
@@dwjoseph59
It’s a noble cause thinking white men went to their deaths to prevent slavery from spreading west but is that the reality?
Does anyone believe white men even went to war to free the black man?
States rights was the primary cause of the war with slavery being thrust forward late in 1862 when it looked as though the north may lose the war. Lincoln needed a rallying call for the north hence the emancipation proclamation making the war a morality issue now.
Totally disagree that a national divorce is double speak for civil war. Countries have peacefully divided in the past. I agree that nobody in the US wants to see a war, and if things get anywhere near that, you'll see more and more people opting for the national divorce.
There are progressive areas in predominantly Republican states and conservative areas in predominantly democratic states. A separation wouldn't be some easy black-and-white split. Also, the United States splitting into 2 haves would all but ensure China's rise to being the largest economy in the world (something neither political party wants to see).
At least a third of Texans are quite liberal and at least a third of Californians and New Yorkers are quite conservative. So how are they going to divide the states again❓
There will be a mass annexation by Idaho, which will expel Boise and move the capital to Coeur d'Alene.
I'd say that at least a third to a half of Vermonters are conservatives and would do literally anything to protect their own interests. The hell with everyone else
What about Illinois?
It would largely become urban vs. rural IMO
@ThomasPotato Which is a rational belief...but the rural would go under due to lack of tech knowledge. They would still need to live in and compete in a world market that relies 80% on tech.
I greatly appreciate what you said about giant corporations and billionaires ruling this country. People treat me like a heretic for even hinting at it.
They answer to Karen
The title of this video is misleading. These examples are the consequences of a civil war - not why one won't happen.
💯
You gave a good rundown of things that would collapse in case of a civil war. The problem is that so much of this is already in varying stages of collapse, all of which together, would bring about a second US civil war.
No, it wouldn't. The CIA did research on the likelihood of a country experiencing a Civil War what they found was that countries that were either pure democracies or pure autocracies were not the most likely systems to experience the Civil War, but rather anocracies, systems that are neither fully democratic nor fully autocratic (for example, Nigeria and Thailand are considered anocracies).
Highly optimistic and positive of this country, I think the complete opposite.
Or the US could become Haiti...
Too late
Most Americans can't afford Ozempic and the military already has a crisis due to the obesity problem.
See the news that Ozempic only costs 4.00 per dose to make and bring to the sellers?
What's ozempic? Don't tell me, I don't care. And I am just one of the reasons why you don't want a war against the rural populations.
If there was a collapse in the food supply and widespread shortages, nobody would need Ozempic.
Briggs, I hope and pray you are correct. Thank you for all your great videos.
Late Republic Stage of Empire. We are paralleling a late republic, like the Roman or British. All the red area grows the food. It will be very short war, all the truckers and farmers would have to do is stop delivering food to cities.
True! These people today have not even experienced rationing yet, which is associated with every war in history. Oh, the inconvenience.
This is a silly extrapolation to make in the modern world and also, it wouldn’t matter. Imports exist and farmers rely on city-based buyers and corporations to effectively grow and sell the crops. Truckers rely on city-based infrastructure, etc.
The hungry hoards of the cities will just go take it from the fat old rednecks that are trying to starve them.
The government would be behind them, and they won't have enough people or guns to stop them.
Imports exist. And if that were to happen, the rest of the country can shut down the utilities. Food and medicine need to be kept cool.
@@Anon-md5ep Yeah, tell that to the people of Berlin in May 1945. Yeah, there were truckers then, too.
great release, I like it. Thanks for your job
Great vid. Will put some minds at ease.
When i lived in Brooklyn, i had a semi-plan in place in case of the world ending or something. I was going to pack what i could carry, stop in the Beonx for a friend, and his husband and head north to my parents in vermont. From there, i knew we would have a safe water supply and food. I'm now in California and have no idea what I'd do except to get the hell out of LA
Avoid Utah, take the secondary roads in Nevada, and don't stop until the Great Lakes.
@@Jamhael1what's wrong with Utah?
@@sitdowndogbreath Deseret.
The comments are going to be interesting
Greetings from Space-Lazer lady's district (GA 14). Thank you for the vocal tone of the video rather than your usual up beat, sing-song presentation style. Most of us pampered Westerners have no idea how bad large-scale combat truly is on the civilian population.
I agree with reason #1. Politicians love their money. This alone would stop any real civil war. This was a fascinating video to listen to. Thanks
These are all good reasons for not having another civil war, however, I don't think all of these reasons will prevent it from happening. The historic curve of an empire will not be any different here, there are early indications that the US empire may have already begun its decline. IMHO global adversaries and domestic anarchists are feeding deviciveness to prevent solidarity against an enemy, and corruption of government is upsetting opportunities for prosperity and support a thriving middle class economy.
2:05 You sure about that? Remember Covid?
Good 'Reasons': Very Informative :
Tks. much.
Very well said!!
I agree, Briggs. You're military, which makes me listen snd respect your opinion on this even more. Also, I don't think there are many people here willing to put their lives on the line. Thank you for your service, Briggs 🇱🇷 (we need a salute emoji)
🫡
Thank you
@@Cnw8701 Thanks-- I'm guessing you sent a salute emoji. (My phone is a very old android-- no salute here, unfortunately.) But I'd like to salute Briggs and all our retired, active, and former military. Thank you 🎖️🇱🇷
Being ex military doesn't grant you anything other than being ex military. I completely disagree with the causes given here and I'm ex military too. Doesn't make me right, or wrong.
@@2Hearts3 Lol no problem.
As someone who identifies as a political atheist... you're absolutely spot on. Tthere is quite a few people who just don't give a shit about politics or the theater of controversy. We just want to live our lives and bugger on. Love that you went here because it's certainly part of our collective zeitgeist these days. Perhaps because it's an election year? Maybe.
Great commentary and "Faster than cheetah on Adderall, that two capachinos into it's day!" had me rolling 🤣.
It always irks me when people say that 'A Civil War Won’t Happen' in X country.
You cant know that.
No one in Libya in 2009 could have predicted that 'in 2 years time, we will have a decade-long civil war'.
As for the US: could happen this election like it could happen in 20-30 years from today.
I think almost all these points are right but i feel in most wars people dont think about the smart thing or right thing to do. Most people are thinking with there feelings us vs them not logic. If everyone though about the points in your video we would never have a war but sadly i do think a civil war is posible :/ every thing needed to have one is one the table you just need the right spark to start it. Side note i do love your videos great work.
I could see more rioting in the streets, but not a civil war.
I mean, the left has been doing that for several years now.
Rioting in the streets can be quite effective. I believe that in the U.S. in the '60s and '70s, that riots helped "conservative" (as in timid) politicians to be brave enough to pass radical legislation; civil rights laws, anti-pollution laws, equality laws. I think they helped end the Vietnam war sooner, making it more palatable to call it quits instead of doubling-down.
Nothing Civil about war
Not gonna lie, this video actually made me feel better about the way things are going in the US these days.
Well done.
how dare you dash all these peoples hopes and dreams. lol gonna lose alot of subs for this one Briggs
😂😂😂
Certainly burst my bubble😢
Yea sure🤔🤣🤣
@@kristensorensen2219 ladies out here trying to off murican's ding ding ding we found em. tsk tsk tsk
Thanks again for all your on-point videos that are also hilarious. 🎉😊 As a vet, I avoid most "military" movies cause I just get mad & scream BS! for a few weeks.
I thought this was a very interesting video. In general I agree with your conclusions with a few caveats. I can't picture something as organized as the type of civil war you talk about, I can picture low intensity conflict caused by societal unrest; enough to dsirupt things but not enough to cause martial law and bringing the military into it, at least initially.
One thing you did not comment on is where the military would land in this hypothetical conflict, and that could be a deciding factor in this.
Great video!
Well, who woulda thought 1984 would be non-fiction?
Im a Vietnam vet, yes an old boomer. From what I’ve seen those that throw around civil war rhetoric have never seen war. War is a savage, terrible enterprise. Unfortunately a portion of mankind thinks it is a reasonable solution to disagreements. It is neither reasonable nor a solution. Those who even mention civil war should be sent to the frontline in Ukraine for at least 6 months. I will wager 95.5% of them will reconsider war as an option. The remaining 4.5% are those with psychopathy as estimated in a 2021 study published in Frontiers of Psychology.
I’ve never been in a war, I don’t want to be in a war.
I’ve seen what it’s done to a few friends of mine….
Let’s just say I’m their number one and leave it there.
75% of all Americans are already living paycheck to paycheck. The coming collapse of the dollar (and many other currencies) will result in hundreds of millions of desperate people with nothing to lose who are armed to the teeth. It isn"t going to be pretty .....
The collapse of the dollar is coming 😂
So many people could use an economics course these days.
@@Anon-md5ep I've been hearing that since the 90s and it still hasn't happened yet.
@mikejordan5121 Person in 1860:
People have been talking about a Civil War since the [18]30s, & it still hasn't happened yet.
If you don’t think we will fight for our way of life you’re naive. We don’t need approval from corporations or politicians or even all citizens.
It's way too easy to sit back and say a civil war could never happen. I would just simply invite you to go back and look at Romania 1989, where one day everybody was subservient to its dictator, and then the very next day, Christmas Day, the people finally had enough and they executed him. These types of things can happen very, very fast and with very little warning. So don't ever say we could never have a civil war in this country.
Im ex military and don't agree that civil war won't happen. I wouldn't get too comfortable.
I'm not ex military and I agree with you
It seems almost inevitable
@@allancastillo3419No it isn't. These are divisive times in terms of politics, but it's not to the level of causing a Civil War. I suggest you take a break from reading fear-mongering nonsense and touch grass.
I fear you're misinformed. Look around. The prices of everything have sky rocketed. Illegals entering just to vote for democrats and radicals chanting "death to america". If its not civil war, its a revolution and something is bound to happen.
@fisher3317 with everything happening at warped speed I would keep an open mind.
What happens when the people turn against the corporations? Why are all these huge billionaires building bunkers?
We'll see how well this video ages after 11-8-24...
Where you gonna go as an American, do you believe any other country is going to take us, like we take them? Your a fool if you do
I’m sure others wouldn’t want U.S. citizens screwing up their country.
But… they let thousands of illegals in🤷🏼
its almost like this place aint bad and people should stop complaining and intentionally sabotaging it because they don't have anything to live for besides sex drugs church tv and emptiness. if only they respected intelligence education and spiritual fulfillment instead of idolizing greedy creeps and tax dodgers and criminals
Mexican American. Dual citizen. I’ll see you in the beaches of Baja California.
@@RogerWareInc
👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻
I have several friends who are frustrated or disenfranchised enough to think that a civil war is possible. I know an even bigger group of people (who fill the entire political spectrum) that think some kind of "national divorce" is worth considering. There is one question that seems to force a rethink of their position: "Would you be willing to break up the United States if it meant losing your Social Security benefits?" Obviously, the older people tend to react stronger to this idea. I think a lot of the frustration and anxiety people have regarding the government is that they are ultimately dependent on the government and feel like they have no control.
It's guaranteed to happen. The next time the gov't tries to enforce a pandemic on people, that will trigger everyone to say no and it will start the beginning of the end of gov't. People simply will not allow themselves to be controlled anymore. None of it will matter anyway after 2030. Life as you know it will end then and for many it will end literally. Everyone will spend their days trying to survive and growing food.
What are the differences that your friends think are important enough to destroy our country?
@@les0101s , actually, one of the things that leaves me concerned is the fact that the conversations never go anywhere useful when you ask what the problem is. They will jump from one questionable grievance to another and never offer anything of substance. Most of them spend way too much time listening to slanted media and hating the other side for no good reason.
@@danwei999 That's what I see too.
Some say that the Civil War never truly ended in the first place.
On the first battle of the Civil War, The Battle of Bull Run, people actually picnicked on the hill to watch the “supposed” battle that was going to take place, only to run in horror when they actually started ending one another.
1 sentence- "everyone is a fed"
Yup
The one area everybody is forgetting how hard it will hit is medication. DO you know how many Americans are on some kind of medication they can't get off of without dier results. I know how to use a "pew pew" but that is not doing to do me a lick of good in a month after my diabeties meds runs out.
Many people around the nation are already experiencing delays in the ability to refill insulin, and other drugs. There are actual shortages of antibiotics everywhere. We still rely much too heavily on other countries, one in particular, for most of our needs. I don't see this topic as one that would stop the war. I see it as one that could fuel it.
Civil wars are predicted on a win lose scenario, but often they end in a lose lose scenario with huge unintended consequences. We have so much to be thankful for. Why not at least try a win win scenario even if we can’t agree on some things?
It's not Red vs. Blue state. It is rural vs. urban. There wouldn't be any set piece battles. Instead it would be a steady attrition of resources on both sides raising the cost of living. The winner would be those that could supply their basic necessities.
I think you need to actually watch the movie. I also think a few of the thoughts, such as concern about loss of life, general polarization and the middle not really caring and us global influence is short sighted. Do you think all Americans were on board during the first civil war? Where would you say the us global standing is now? Has the concern about loss of life ever deterred a conflict. They often escalate, civil war may not happened tomorrow, but events add up and you look up and now we are against each other. And as far as warfare, we obviously wouldn’t be fight mainly fist to fist, we live in a digital world… overall, these reasons you give is more so reasons why we shouldn’t, not necessarily that we won’t.
Love that the ad was for the nonsense civil war movie. I'll treat it like the movie "2012"
Or an “Inconvenient Truth.”
intersting thoughts and some solid reasons.
in Europe everyone also thought that there will be no more wars because the times have changed and we don't wanna ruin our economy. Yet Russia have attacked Ukraine so I think everything is possible, especially with today's extreme polarization of the society in the US
Oh boy, I love your spicy topics.
for the algorithm
I expect this will be the most controversial video you've ever posted. Thank you, Briggs, for your backbone and good sense🏆 i think you're right. If this country were really willing to fight, it would already have happened. Really-- how long are we going to sit back and watch the deterioration of this country and still at some point in the future stand up and fight for it? It appears highly unlikely.
Your number 1 has never occurred to me, at all, sadly! Great point!
You kept mixing up blue and red states and I immediately found a nrw video
VERY interesting, Briggs! While I agree, it’s tough for me to make an intelligent argument against it. I math real good but that word thang is difficult for me. 😂 Now I can just send them a link… great stuff! 😁
The healrhcare systen is aleeady overwhelmed.
Hey Briggs, you say that the rest don’t care? Those are people I despise the most, take a fucking position. Care! People have got to start caring, apathy is the death of a nation more than taking a side on an issue.
As soon as there was no power, there would be no food or fuel and that would be the end of it. I'd say 3 days.
Something no one ever* mentions is how a possible American civil war could impact Native Americans in Native American Reservations 🤔. Who would they side with? Assuming they side with anyone else at all aside* from protecting their own sovereign interests (or protecting themselves as "domestic dependent nations" from any threats).
Drink.
@@MissCleo24 hopefully, but I am doubtful* that Native Americans would be left alone to be honest
TOTALLY AREE! Not gonna happen
Hey Briggs, I am 63 and I love "On this day'. Don't sell yourself short.
Cheetah on adderall..Now that paints quite a picture!
I did multiple combat deployments in the GWOT. Put me in coach.
It’s never been about red vs blue, it’s freedom vs a tyrannical government. We will fight for freedom.
Too vague. Like politicians saying, "I will fight against crime."
The things you discuss here are happening every day all over the world because of wars and we have our fingers as the US of a in many of those wars. It doesn't take a giant leap of to realize that those very things can indeed happen in the United States.
Tough to go out and fight tyranny, when you are glued to your couch, a Door-Dash'd Big Mac in one hand, and an X-Box controller in the other.
Thank you, Briggs!!! I appreciate this perspective so much
It's just a pipe dream certain people.
Agreed
So are his Top states blah blah blah and a trashy Blue state is tops. Briggs is a lefty.
Don't forget, the banks will close, and Social Security, and disability checks will stop. People stay home when they have no money. They're entitled Americans. with overly big mouths....lol
And remember, the military has enough fire power, and drones, to stop any takeover.
@@jamesh1641 It’s not his fault Mississippi is a shithole and Massachusetts isn’t.
..."faster than a cheetah on Adderall who's two cappuccino into his day " I like that metaphor. It's really funny.
You do have very valid point sir
My guy it’s been happening since 2008 little by little and we are on the brink
Sigh.
No. We're not.
But you go ahead and keep buying guns and ammo for your backyard bunker, while going to the grocery store for food. 🙄
@@thomashiggins9320 nah I can only shoot one gun at a time 😀. Natural selection though ….
@@thomashiggins9320Good point. These 2nd Amendment freaks think exactly like this. LOL.
Get off the internet and actually talk with people please
We're already in a "cold" civil war.
A civil war sounds crazy. A Revolution could happen, these are two different things.
I totally agree with you...
*Disclaimer: I don't follow this channel nor ghost follow this channel, but it popped up on my feed today and the thumbnail got my attention*
_ _ _ _ _
Here's why I agree with you
#1 never overlook the warning signs, as times have changed the warning signs have changed, like different symptoms for the same disease...
#2 Americans only endure but so much whether their in the right or wrong before they rebel, Example: police critical incidents daily
#3 small-scale Civil Wars happen every day., gangsters, protest, mass shootings, politicians.
#4 it really wouldn't take much for citizens to organize themselves, it wouldn't take much for certain branches of the government to organize with the citizens, it really wouldn't take much for a civil war to break out Democrats vs Republicans., it really wouldn't take much for any form of rebellion after a large group of people sees something wrong and decide enough is enough that's how America was founded in the first place
Interesting video! There have been some academics who have looked at what causes civil wars in nations and one, Dr. Barbara Walter (not to be confused with Barbara Walters, the late journalist), has turned those tools to looking at the US. You present great reasons why there would likely not be a full blown civil war in the US. I agree that the likelihood of the US having a civil war is low, but high levels of civil strife (just short of a civil war) are possible. Also, I don't believe it would divide by states' geographies. For one thing, look below the surface of many states, especially those with large urban areas, they function quite differently from the surrounding less urban areas. To oversimplify, the large urban areas tend to be blue while the less urban areas are more likely red. If you look at states like Arizona, Texas, Georgia, or Florida would the urban areas (where most of the people now live) fight for Team Blue while the less urban areas fight for Team Red? How would that shake out? No, civil strife in the US might more closely resemble the "troubles" in 1900s Northern Ireland with cyberwar added for good measure. What we will have to combat are those who say, "if my side doesn't get what it wants, we come out shooting."
I like the cheetah joke. 😅
😂👍
You've only given one civil war scenario based on a conventional model that is kind of connected with the Hollywood movie now in theaters. Warfare comes in many flavors and when you really look at the political and ideological divide in our country, I doubt it will ever come as a consolidated blue against red engagement. Based on what we now see and experience, I think it is far more likely we could experience a concerted attempt to overthrow the government, both federal and state governments, because of their abandonment of the rule of Constitutional law. Blue state politicians and liberal judges seem to ignore Constitutional law and case law if they do not agree with it based on their ideological perspective. For example, placing boundaries on free speech, making laws against gun ownership. Additionally, the decline in trust for a fair democratic election process with the combined left leaning laws and rules causing dramatic changes in American culture and the erosion of traditional values will likely be the catalyst that will lead to anti government forceful action. This kind of action against standing government structures could follow the asymmetrical model of warfare. Look at what Al Qaeda, the IRA and Hamas has done and is doing. It will not take a large group of soldiers and arms to target change to the course of government we are now experiencing. Forcefully removing politicians that align themselves with leftist world global ideological movements including socialism and communism could go on for decades. The concentrations of cities in blue states make them particularly vulnerable to this kind of warfare. So, there is far more realistic scenarios than what you've described. As for the current movie ... hog wash.
Terrorism isn't warfare.
Terrorism is *crime* .
@@thomashiggins9320 Okay, your definition but not true
Don't forget, the banks will close, and Social Security, and disability checks will stop. People stay home when they have no money. They're entitled Americans. with overly big mouths....lol
And remember, the military has enough fire power, and drones, to stop any takeover.
@@thomashiggins9320 George Washington was a "terrorist" according to the Tories. It all depends on who writes the history.
@HarleyRiderMC No.
When a private individual or group does not have the sponsorship of a government ("non-state actors") and they engage in *planned acts* of political violence -- especially acts of political violence that target civilians, private sector facilities, or general government assets and *not* "hardened" military targets -- they commit acts of "terrorism."
A "terrorist" is, by *formal definition* , a "non-state actor" who engages in *planned acts* of political violence.
If the violence is *not planned* but is instead a spontaneous outbreak, it's either an assault or act of vandalism (if done by an individual) or it's a riot (if done by a group).
Because all of these actions are committed by *non-state actors* , they are *crimes* .
Generally, if an act of political violence results in no harm to persons, it'll be considered vandalism and not terrorism, although that standard is hardly universal.
If the actor uses *non-violent* means to draw attention to or otherwise further a political goal, that person *is not* a terrorist.
In the United States, that person's actions may or may not be considered a crime.
If done in a public place, it's usually Constitutionally-protected free speech. If done on private property, it may be the crime of "trespassing."
If an individual or group is sponsored by or works for a government, and commits planned acts of political violence on behalf of that government, but does so clandestinely while not wearing a uniform, the *state-sponsored actor* has engaged in either "espionage", "sabotage", or "assassination."
If the act of planned violence is perpetrated by a uniformed member of another government's military, it is not an act of "terrorism" , it's an act of *war* .
The notion of "state-sponsored terrorism" first appeared during the Cold War, and was a *tactic* adopted by the Soviet Union's intelligence agency, the KGB, as a means to use violence in pursuit of political goals through the use of puppets that would reduce the risk of escalation to nuclear conflict.
Other nations played along with the KGB's fiction, even though it was essentially bullshit the Russians made up whole-cloth, because to consider them acts of espionage, sabotage, or assassination by the USSR (which they *actually* were) would force a traditional confrontation that could easily escalate to warfare and *nobody* wanted that, during the Cold War.
So, the notion of "state-sponsored terrorism" was a bunch of disingenuous BS that *didn't even exist* before about 50 years ago, and only persists because governments find it a convenient concept that allows them to murder people without the trouble, expense and inconvenience of engaging in formal warfare.
This helps illustrate why the idea of a "War on Terror" is *also* disingenuous BS. One can not "make war" on a *tactic* .
Also, the notion of a "War on Terror" allows for actions that blatantly violate international law, and frequently provisions of the U,S. Constitution.
After all, if terrorism is a crime (which it is) then terrorists are *criminals* who should receive due process.
As such, incarceration without criminal charges or legal representation, which may even include torture and extra-judicial murder, is *blatantly* unconstitutional.
Basically, "terrorism" has never been anything other than a crime, but it's now used as a convenient label that lets governments violate *their own laws* , one way or another.
And you fell for it.
Concerning the first civil war, I thought one of the major advantages that the north had over the south was industrial in nature. The north had far more factories and production capabilities, thus being able to better provide for their forces in the field.
I would hope a civil war will not take place, however I wouldn't discount the probability of one. Many of us have seen things within the country over the past several years that we thought couldn't happen, but did.
"It can't happen here."
The final words of every foolishly complacent peoples in history 😂.
For real. 😢