"IF There Was A Second ACW In The Near Or Distant Future" Topic

Grossman gets the prize for being the first to prove why us earlier posters said this was a bad topic.

I'd try a Urban versus rural war, with the New York, San Francisco and Los Angelis megapoli squaring off against flyover country.

In addition to the words said by Optional field.
The United States, in fact, at the moment – the largest (or one of the largest) consumer in the world. The onset of a civil war will automatically lead to the fall of China, possibly India and the countries of Southeast Asia (they simply have nowhere to sell that bunch of goods that it produces). This, in turn, will lead to a blow to the Middle East and just do all the oil-producing countries.
Ie, there is a considerable probability that the shot of the first gun of Fort Sumter will bring down half the world.
So, please, do not start a war.

Well, speaking of economies….

As already stated, if Cal left the US it would become the 6th largest economy in the world. And the first? That would still be the US. Gives you some idea just how big that 800lb gorilla is…

Now, lets assume Dan's little fantasy….

If the US broke apart in a knock down, drag out civil war, the US economy would be totally wrecked. Which, in turn, would lead to a total collapse of the world economy. China, due to its heavy dependence on US markets, would implode. Along with all the little guys (Japan, South Korea, all of Europe (including the UK)) plus the all the other non-factor economies (South America, the rest of Asia, the Middle East, etc). And all this would the Great Depression look like a 10 pt drop in the Dow…

Yeah, fun times, that….

Like I said, odds are about the same as the Browns winning the Super Bowl…

If you want to get into the nitty-gritty of how the US would split, you're really looking at all the big cities going one way and the rural areas going another.

Western Washington state would be separate from Eastern Washington, dividing line is basically the Cascade Mountains.

Oregon can be divided into the Portland Metropolitan Area and everywhere else. The Portland Metro Area would likely get absorbed into the Seattle sprawl.

California would be divided into the southwestern cities (San Diego, LA, and San Fran) and the central valley.

Idaho would go the same as the rural areas.

Nevada… tough call. Las Vegas would likely go with the big cities, or try to, while the rest of the state would go rural.

Arizona would likely go rural, as would New Mexico.

Utah would almost certainly go rural, despite the Salt Lake City area (SLC is quite conservative, not like most cities).

Wyoming and Montana would go rural.

I will lay off here, as I don't know the local politics of other states well enough to guess more than "big cities versus rural areas".

I'd have to move back to Alabama from Wisconsin, I'm afraid

Unless you have completely switched to plastic,you are a wealthy man,as you are swimming in casting metal,which has various uses…..

Apache- Why? Sure, that group might not do that. But if allowed to do exactly what they want, is he that off track?

The second ACW is going on right now. It is a war of differing ideology that is independent of geographic location or region. The struggle is being engaged in the 24 hour news media and on social media. This is all out information warfare (IW) between the left and the right. The goal is to shape and create a narrative of the latest 'headline news' which shows how your side is right and the other side is wrong. It is directed at the centrist masses to sway their opinion and garner their support.

All warfare is based on deception. -Sun Tzu

If we're talking about an armies in the field kind of conflict, I really don't see that happening any time soon. The national mood is raw, and people are surly, resentful, appalled and incredulous, but except for the fringes I just don't sense the kind of rage that that kind of conflict would require. America also has a shot ton of bourgeois distractions to hold on to. Aren't the Dancing With the Stars announcements due out any day now? "If I am crossing a state line to go into battle, will there be wifi?" "I'm not shooting any anybody if GOT is on."

Also, I have heard nothing to indicate the US military is having internal factional problems. I'm sure there are strains, but as long as it remains a unified force in being, it's hard to envision real trouble. Of course, one large confrontation on a military post, or aboard a ship could upend that in a quick hurry.

That's not to say there isn't likely to be trouble. There are motivated and angry groups at the extremes who are likely to seek opportunities to press their agendas, agendae?, agendararum? by demonstrations, confrontations, perhaps even desecrations.

Let us hope they opt for style over outrage. 500,000 people visiting the Mar a Lago website within a 20 minute period would make a point, but no one gets their head busted, or worse.

Lion, Missouri, Arkansas, Oklahoma, and Kansas are all very much rural, as is Illinois. One or two counties dominate a predominantly conservative, rural state – you'd be hard-pressed to tell Pope or Hardin counties in southern Illinois from those in Kentucky.

The other thing that is interesting is the unit mix in an Urban vs rural war. Imagine entire battalions of snipers versus motorized infantry in converted automobiles.

Murvihill,

Well, the "rurals" would also be closest to all the oil wells, water sources and best farming lands.

So the city dwellers would have no fuel for those "converted automobiles". And with low food and water, they will have decimated each other* long before they tried to expand outside into the countryside. The rapid spread of disease in urban areas might probably be what finally makes them venture out. The "rurals" will try to keep that from spreading.

Dan
* Unless … foreign aid poured into those cities fairly quickly, in the form of humanitarian assistance, weapons and "peacekeepers".
TMP link

CC .. i don't think you can equate overt organised state military intervention by Germany & Italy, with volunteers secretly (often against their own government's policy) making their way to Spain.

Interesting conversation. I had my students do a project on something related to this during the spring. I tossed out the question about how did Hillary won the state of Maryland when she only won a small handful of its counties? They found maps like these.

link

After digging though some data tables they noted a trend. The more densely populated urban counties tended to be very Democratic/Liberal while the more rural and less densely counties tended to be more Republican/Conservative. Heck, you could even see it in the political signs that popped up all year.

I think this maps shows that this is a nationwide trend…

I don´t see how either side could form a coherent state any type. There really aren't any ¨red¨ or ¨blue¨ states (Maybe Hawaii being blue). Just mixes of the two types with some states being more of one color than another. Many states are actually rather purple!

The cities are needed for the economy while the country provides useful resources. Neither side really has control over the resources and populace that they need to function. Although I guess you could argue that the mid-west is closest to being like that as it is vastly more red than blue.

They only way coherent states of red or blue could be formed would be by serious ¨ethnic¨ cleansing. That would result in some of the worst violence seen in a developed nation.

Could you see swarms of city folks attacking and taking farms and rural areas and driving out the local populace.. all the while being attacked and sniped at by rural landowners and farmers? Cities being placed on blockade to starve out the population? This war would also have a strong racial component as cities have large block of minorities who would support a liberal ¨front¨ while the rural districts in the US are widely ¨white¨.

I´m thinking Yugoslavia on steroids, but with worldwide consequences. I don´t think other nations could stand aside in this one. America´s nuclear arsenal falling into the wrong hands could be catastrophic. Although a ¨neutral¨ USN could be strong enough, assuming it could keep its bases secure and was properly supplied,to keep the US safe from foreign intervention. I doubt it would be neutral. It would probably fragment with various elements and bases being absorbed into whoever could take them. Ditto for the federal government and it agencies. D.C. itself would be firmly ¨blue¨ but surrounded!

Honestly the two sides need to learn how to deal with each other because we are stuck with each other like the two bickering heads of a Ettin.

Otherwise the result will be more horrible than anyone would to contemplate.

Google death robots FTW. Sadly.

Let's not get too serious ….

Today Prime Minister Trudeau of Canada and President Scott of the Peoples Republic of Vermont welcome the joining of their Countries and their Northern Protectorates into the US of English Heritage (abbreviated to US of Eh!).

Speaking as a Canuck, we already have all the semi populated moose pasture we could every possibly need…… and a few million square miles left over.

I think this maps shows that this is a nationwide trend…

Thanks for providing an illustration for my point, TGunner!

So, yeah, it wouldn't even be a state-by-state split, if we got to the point of shooting at each other. It'd be urban v rural, and given that several of the most liberal parts of the US don't allow firearm ownership at all, well, the shooting would be rather one-sided.

So … which countries do you think would rush to send in "volunteers" and armaments to fight for one side or the other?

Dan
TMP link

It is likely that Mexico would take action along the southern border, Russia would make moves on Alaska, China would do that same on the various Pacific Island holdings to include Hawaii. It is possible that nations would "secure" our bases in their countries.
Cuba would surely move to secure Gitmo. I don't know what would happen to Puerto Rico. Depending on the situation, it seems plausible that Canada or the "Commonwealth" or even NATO would move to secure areas of strategic importance to the alliance.

Since this is a miniature site that deals with wargaming as its primary focus my responses so far have been geared towards armed conflict.

The reality is people will end up gravitating towards areas where like minded values and ideals exist. You find your red state to be intolerant you move to a blue state. You don't like blue state laws and taxes you move to a red state. I am seeing more and more of this trend as time goes on. Only a handful of people really want the violent demise of each side. The problem is when one side imposes its values, goals and end game on the other side and sees nothing as being to underhanded to achieve a desired result. Demonizing your opposition and rendering it impossible for them to be heard will lead to violence. Refusal to engage in any kind of a dialogue will ultimately divide the country. No its not as simple as North or South or East versus West.

I always wondered about a 2nd ACW, but I see this as not really a possibility unless a disaster struck the US and fractured our government I know there are groups in the US who have their own agenda and would like to be separate from other parts of the country, but these groups don't have the infrastructure nor support to do anything except launch a few attacks here and there. The key, I believe, is the US military. As long as it remains loyal to the US government then I don't see any states being able to wage war against the government. Yeah a militia group can have tons of guns, but what do they have to fight against a couple of Army brigades equipped with M1A2 Abrams,UAV support, and artillery and air support? They would be slaughtered. In order to have an effective civil war numerous states would have to combine their resources and build military units which will be extremely hard to hide form the US government. They would have to find pilots and planes because they ant just waltz into an AF base and steal F-22 and F-35s. I think in the end the most that would happen would be a few small groups running around attacking places, but in the end getting slapped down.

What might be fun is to imagine a breakup into various regions – New England, Northwest, Californias, Dixieland, PrairieLand, Grande Nove Mexico etc – thay have to have borders where a bunch can meet/battle, then assume US manufacturing is only in certain Regions and others have to import – so maybe the NorthWest again has Russian influence (ie Russion kit), Novo Mexico buys Japanese & Chinese, New England buys British, Dixie buys French (the Louisiaana Purchase…) with some residual US kit to mix n' match.

And there's Canada and Mexico and maybe independent Texas….

Sod the economics and demographics, it's time to send the Leclercs over the Rio Grande!

Here are some ideas from various sources of a divided United States that could be used for tabletop gaming battles and roleplaying campaigns.

The Choose Your Own Adventure book "Escape" took place in a U.S. that had divided into three countries: Dorado (a totalitarian nation), Rebellium (a loosely-organized collection of nations), and Turtalia (a democratic nation).

The 1987 ABC mini-series "Amerika" occurred 10 years after four nuclear EMP weapons were detonated over the U.S. The massive EMP permitted the Soviet Union to invade the U.S. The country was divided into 12 zones that eventually became separate nations. I have a screenshot of the map from the mini-series how the U.S. was divided I can share with TMP members if anyone is interested.

Many TMP users are probably familiar the gameworld of Car Wars in the 2030s had a divided U.S. Texas, Louisiana, and Oklahoma seceded during a civil war in the early 2000s to become the Free Oil States. Utah expanded its borders into neighboring states to become the semi-autonomous region called Deseret.

While attending a Seattle-area gaming convention approximately 10 years ago, I received a boardgame called "Civil War 2061". I have not played it but the map could be used with other gaming systems.

After the nuclear weapon attacks, the CBS television series "Jericho" had the Restored States of America (RSA) versus Texas and the remaining states of the United States of America. I believe the RSA was all states from the Pacific to the Mississippi River. The USA was all states east of the Mississippi River.

Owenmp

Here's the Jericho map and you're exactly right about the split that occurred there.

Dan
TMP link

Or course, in other series (like Revolution), the breakup is considerably more fragmented.

Humpty Dumpty scenarios leave more room for potential involvement by foreign powers in the affairs of one or more of the fragments, which then leaves very little hope for a full restoration.

Dan

The war wouldn't break out overnight. First would come "terrorist" attacks against soft targets and riots. As this went on the blues would arm themselves for protection. Maybe not as well as the reds, but enough. As far as the Army and Marines go, yes they are full of reds, but have plenty of non-whites who would go blue. The first big battles would be at army bases as the sides fight for dominance (again starting slowly with fistfights, going to baseball bats and clubs, and finally guns). The Air Force has been heavily influenced by the Christian Right so they would probably go red. The navy is the wild card. They might join the fighting, or stay out and try to keep other countries out of the fight.

Kahunna

Fry our entire power grid and all those things that you describe will happen within 72 hours.

Dan