Why Democrats Would Lose the Second Civil War, Too
It’s obvious that the central tenet of the Democrat
Party platform is now hatred and contempt for Normal Americans. Taking their
cue from the elites in Europe and Canada who are stripping dissenters of their
free speech rights and religious freedoms, the leftist elite is moving to
solidify its hold on power here with the eager assistance of tech companies and
the moral support of the Fredocons who yearn to return to pseudo-relevance as
the ruling class’s slobberingly loyal opposition.
In California, the leftist government is practically
firing on Fort Sumter. And nationally, these aspiring fascists are especially
eager to disarm Normal Americans – doing so would be an object lesson in who’s
the boss, as well as solving that frustrating problem of the Normals having the
ability to resist.
Probably because I’ve spent time where they actually
had a civil war, many people ask me – people whose names you know – whether I
think this turmoil will all end in a Second Civil War. They are seriously
concerned, and not without cause – the left’s hatred for Normal Americans and
its dedication to totally stripping the people who are the backbone of this
country of their ability to participate in their own governance is threatening
to rip the country apart.
Do I think there will be a civil war? No, but there
could be. This is the Age of Black Swans, and anything is possible – we could
easily see the country split into red and blue. Civil war is unlikely, but
never underestimate Democrat stupidity and hatred. The Schlichter family
learned that lesson a century and half ago, the last time the Democrats decided
to try to impose their hatred of basic human rights on the rest of the country,
when an army of Democrats burned our family hometown.
Oh, they paid for it. And they would pay again.
Democrats are 0-1 in insurrections, and if they went for another round, they
would be 0-2. It’s a matter of terrain, numbers, and morale.
Democrats, who think history began when Obama was
elected, don’t understand the dangerous game they are playing when they talk
about how they want to impose their brown shirt vision upon red America. The
keyboard commandos of the left seek to hand wave away the massive strategic
challenge of imposing control by force upon a well-armed, decentralized
citizenry occupying the vast majority of the territory, so they babble about
drones and tanks as counterinsurgency trump cards. But there are no trump cards
in war. There are men, with rifles, standing on patches of dirt, killing the
people trying to push them off. That’s the ugly reality of war. And multiply
the usual brutality of war by ten when it’s a civil war.
There are two Civil War II scenarios, and the left is
poorly positioned to prevail in either one. The first scenario is that the
Democrats take power and violate the Constitution in order to use the apparatus
of the federal government to suppress and oppress Normal Americans. In that
scenario, red Americans are the insurgents. In the second scenario, which we
can even now see the stirrings of in California’s campaign to nullify federal
immigration law, it is the blue states that are the insurgents.
The Democrats lose both wars. Big time.
Let’s talk terrain and numbers. Remember the famous
red v. blue voting map? There is a lot of red, and in the interior the few blue
splotches are all cities like Las Vegas or Denver. That is a lot of territory
for a counter-insurgent force to control, and this is critical. The red is
where the food is grown, the oil pumped, and through which everything is
transported. And that red space is filled with millions of American citizens
with small arms, a fairly large percentage of whom have military training.
Remember what two untrained idiots did in Boston with
a couple of pistols? They shut a city down. Now multiply that by several
million, with better weapons and training.
Let’s look at the counter-insurgent forces in the
Democrat oppression scenario should they attempt to misuse our law enforcement
and military in an unconstitutional manner to take the rights of American
citizens. There are a lot of civilian law enforcement officers, but the vast
majority of the agencies are local – sheriffs, small town police departments.
They will not be reliable allies in supporting unlawful oppression of their
friends and neighbors.
The major cities’ police departments are run by
Democrat appointees, so the commands would be loyal. But the rank-and-file? A
small percentage would be ideologically loyal. More would be loyal because
that’s their paycheck – they could be swayed or intimidated to support the
rebels. Others would be actively sympathetic to the insurgents. This is true of
federal law enforcement agencies as well.
And the military? Well, wouldn’t the military just
crush any resistance? Not so fast. The military would have the combat power to
win any major engagement, but insurgents don’t get into major engagements with
forces that have more combat power. They instead leverage their decentralized
ability to strike at the counter-insurgents’ weak points to eliminate the
government’s firepower advantage. In other words, hit and run, and no stand-up
fights.
For example, how do a bunch of hunters in Wisconsin
defeat a company of M1A2 Abrams tanks? They ambush the fuel and ammo trucks.
Oh, and they wait until the gunner pops the hatch to take a leak and put a
.30-06 round in his back from 300 meters. Then they disappear. What do the
tanks do then? Go level the nearest town? Great. Now they just moved the needle
in favor of the insurgents among the population. Pretty soon, they can’t be
outside of their armored vehicles in public. Their forces are spending 90% of
their efforts not on actual counter-insurgency operations but on force
protection. Sure, they own their forward operating bases, and they own a few
hundred meters around them wherever they happen to be standing at the moment,
but the rest of the territory is bright red. As my recent novel illustrates,
American guerillas with small arms are a deadly threat to the forces of a
dictatorship.
But the military is so big it would overwhelm any
rebels, right? Well, how big do you think the military is? And, more
importantly, how many actual boots on the ground can it deploy? Let’s put it in
terms of brigade combat teams, which total about 4,500 troops each. There are
about 60 brigades in the Army, active and reserve, here and abroad, and let’s
give the Marines another 10 brigades, for about 70 brigades. Sounds impressive.
But that’s deceptive.
Let’s put aside a big consideration – the existence
of red states that would provide for an insurgent government structure and
possibly attract the loyalty of some National Guard and even federal brigades.
For example, if President Hillary Clinton put down her chardonnay long enough
to sign a ban on privately owned guns, it’s not unreasonable to expect the
governor of Texas to reject federal authority – after all, California just
taught us that this is totally cool. But in this case, look for several
brigades located there to hoist the Lone Star flag.
So, now the blue states are facing unconventional and
conventional forces.
Let’s ignore that problem and focus on a different
challenge. Even a normal unit has about 10% non-deployable members. Now, if
these troops were assigned to combat operations against other Americans, you
would have significant additional losses through desertion. Many of the senior
leaders would participate – the Obama generation – and there is a certain type
of junior officer only too happy to curry favor by sucking up in defiance of
their oath (which is to the Constitution, not to some leftist president). You
can identify them because they usually have “strategist” in their Twitter bios.
But a lot of key, capable officer and NCO leaders, and enlisted troops, would
vanish. That is proper. It is a violation of their oath to unconstitutionally
oppress fellow Americans; their duty would be to refuse such unlawful orders.
So, you have significantly understrength units going
in. Now, how many of the troops in a brigade are actually even front line
combat troops? About a third – the rest are support. So a brigade is really
about 1500 riflemen tops before you count losses. Cut those in half for sleep,
training, and refitting at any one time (which is very generous) and your
brigade is really 750 troops on your best day with everyone showing up.
Realistically, it’s 300.
That holds one mid-sized town. And there are hundreds
of mid-sized towns. Plus there are millions of Normal Americans who would fight
back. Nothing would move without their permission – a few guys shooting up big
rigs along the interstate would shut down the entire trucking industry. Bottom
line: there simply are not enough military forces to clear and hold red America.
What about drones and bombers? Both are useful. But
the minute a bombing strike kills some red civilians the families of
counter-insurgent drone operators and pilots will be knocking at the base gates
to be let inside. Now you’ll need many of those brigades to protect the
civilians you now need to protect from retribution.
Civil wars are harsh. That’s why you avoid them.
How about the blue insurgency scenario? That goes
even worse for the Democrats. You have the federal government apparatus in the hands
of red America, and the insurgents are the opposite of decentralized and armed.
They are conveniently centered in gun-unfriendly blue cities. In other words,
the blue civilian population is much less of a threat.
A red counter-insurgency avoids the problem of a
decentralized insurgency and insecure logistical lines. In the case of
California, whose secessionist antics are approaching the point where President
Trump could legitimately employ his power to crush insurrections, the tactical
problem is relatively simple. For example, San Francisco is a hotbed of
treason, but the populace is largely unarmed and is trapped in a confined area.
You put a brigade on securing the Golden Gate and Bay Bridges, then put a
brigade on the San Francisco Peninsula to cut off the I-280 and US-101
corridors. Next you go to the Crystal Springs Dam and cut off the water. Then
you watch and wait as the tech hipsters run out of artisanal sushi rice and
kombucha.
After about a week, they surrender. After all, you
can’t eat and drink smugness. LA is just bigger in scope – more corridors to
cut off, but in the end the population concentrations in large liberal urban
areas that are their strength also make them extremely vulnerable to logistical
pressure.
Then there’s another factor, an intangible but a
crucial one. It’s commitment. The Democrat threat to peace is based on its
policies designed to deprive Normal Americans of their right to speak freely,
to worship freely, and to defend themselves and their rights with firearms. Make
no mistake – millions of Normal Americans are willing to risk death to defend
those rights. In fact, many swore to do so when they entered our military and
law enforcement. But who is the leftist big talker willing to die to impose the
fascist dream of censorship, religious oppression, and disarmament on Normal
American citizens? Is the screeching SJW at Yale going to suit up in Kevlar? Is
the Vox columnist going to grab a M4? Is the Hollywood poser going to switch
her gyno-beanie for a helmet?
No. Hell, we just heard our liberal opponents
explaining why a cop shouldn’t be expected to go fight a scumbag murdering kids
because it’s scary. America might split apart, but it’s highly unlikely Team
Kale n’ Vinyl would fight should their big talk finally push Normal America too
far.
Comments
Post a Comment