Message from @Deleted User

Discord ID: 401570926883241994


2018-01-13 02:56:11 UTC  

It is clear that the federal military will embark on Civil War II with inappropriate organization and weapons. When the only tool you have is a sledge hammer, all about begins to look in dire need of smashing. The rebel guerrillas and militias on the other hand, will certainly have a more flexible and decentralized structure bordering on chaos. The Afghan resistance groups, for instance, never united against the Russians, but fought them to a standstill nevertheless.

2018-01-13 02:56:17 UTC  

Guerrilla leaders will actually lead their troops, and those not killed will, unlike regular officers, be able to employ lessons learned in future actions. Rebel officers will achieve their positions based on success in actual battle, not on their ability to stay awake during staff meetings or meet the latest racial quota.

2018-01-13 02:56:26 UTC  

Rebel soldiers will be volunteers who will not suffer their lives being thrown away in pointless operations like American regulars in Vietnam were, thus, on the whole, increasing the efficiency of rebel operations. Federal soldiers, on the other hand, will increasingly be politicized officers and conscripts who will have ample opportunities to desert or otherwise shirk their duty.

2018-01-13 02:56:46 UTC  

The federal military will be ensnared in several dilemmas: If they use volunteers, they won't have sufficient manpower. If they use draftees, they'll wind up with hordes of disgruntled shirkers just as in Vietnam.

2018-01-13 02:56:57 UTC  

If they resort to heavy weapons of mass destruction, they'll kill civilians and swell rebel ranks with dedicated fanatics just as they did in Vietnam. If they don't employ their heavy weapons, they'll be giving up one of their few military advantages and thereby increase federal casualties, lowering federal morale. If the federal forces consolidate their formations in large easily-defended firebases, they'll forfeit vast areas to the control of the rebels just as we Americans did in Vietnam. If the federal government disperses its forces, they will be vulnerable to concentrated rebel attacs.

2018-01-13 02:57:03 UTC  

If the federal government keeps its units integrated, they'll have firefights within their own ranks. If they use segregated units, they'll be admitting that the cause they're fighting for is a fraud.

2018-01-13 02:57:09 UTC  

**The Dynamics of Counterinsurgency**

2018-01-13 02:57:37 UTC  

The classic political means of ending any guerrilla uprising is a co-option of the rebel base of support - instituting reforms that extent legal rights and economic opportunities to the rebellious people, at least to the extent that they cease supporting the guerrillas, who are then defeated in detail, hunted down one band after another.

2018-01-13 02:57:46 UTC  

When co-option is not offered or is rejected, usually only the classic military tool of genocide of the rebellious people remains, or at least the number of them sufficient that the survivors are terrorized into submission.

2018-01-13 02:57:56 UTC  

In our war for Independence, the arrogant establishment of the British Empire refused to co-opt the American colonists, but lacked the resolve to embark upon a campaign of genocide. They committed the classic error of thinking that professional soldiers would easily defeat so-called ragtag militias and lightly-armed guerrillas. The limeys wound up playing tag in the boondocks, much as we Americans did in Vietnam.

2018-01-13 02:58:02 UTC  

We Americans made no such error in dealing with the Indians, who could not have been co-opted in any case due to vast cultural differences. The Indians were never directly defeated militarily. They were ethnically cleansed until they absolutely ceased all military activity.

2018-01-13 02:58:10 UTC  

In Civil War I, the Confederates accepted their conventional military defeat only because they were aware that their co-option and correct treatment were assured. Had that not been the case, they would have fought on as guerrillas.

2018-01-13 02:58:15 UTC  

It is a stark fact that most ethnically-based revolutions can be crushed only by ethnic cleansing or similar butchery, and that's exactly how most such rebellions are in fact crushed. It is also a historic fact that the more different the two sides perceive each other, the more often the tool of genocide is employed. As for co-option. Civil War II will begin precisely because co-option is being scornfully rejected as "cultural genocide," and it will proceed directly to ethnic cleansing for the same reason.

2018-01-13 02:58:24 UTC  

**Looting**

2018-01-13 02:58:32 UTC  

*"People who are vigorous and brutal often find war enjoyable, provided that it is a
victorious war and that there is not too much interference with rape and plunder." -
Bertrand Russell*

2018-01-13 02:58:38 UTC  

Another factor will make Civil War II self-propelled, at least in its early stages, and that is looting. This was the pattern in Yugoslavia where Serb militias systematically pillaged entire villages, and then burnt down the houses so the victims would have nothing to return to. Stolen items like television sets were loaded into stolen cars and driven away. A year's salary could be gotten in a few minutes with an AK47, not to mention that old military pastime of rape.

2018-01-13 02:58:45 UTC  

Gangs and militias will control lucrative black markets and protection rackets, giving them much incentive to reject peace. If Civil War II breaks out during a severe economic downturn, which is almost certain, many unemployed men will find it a dramatic improvement in their lives.

2018-01-13 02:59:00 UTC  

America is awash in unemployed young men who are economically useless due to their lack of capital and marketable skills. While utterly useless in the economic sense, they are definitely assets in the military equation, because vigorous, motivated, and aggressive young males are exactly what are needed in infantry combat. This studied neglect of economically useless young males will continue because the economic establishment considers any investment in them a drain on their precious corporate profits, and they import H-1B non-immigrant foreigners rather than invest in young Americans. Ironic as it may seem, the establishment is actively assembling the very army that will cut their throats. But it won't be merely for worldly gain or revenge that these young men will fight to their deaths in Civil War II. It will be for something noble, for something basic to higher human nature, no matter how perversely manifested. They will be self-motivated by a sense of purpose, a sense of purpose that is now entirely absent from their dismal and aimless lives.

2018-01-13 02:59:07 UTC  

These young males of all races have grievances, real grievances, and lots of them. They also have guns, real guns, and lots of them. As the ancient Chinese curse goes, "May you live in interesting times!" Well, I fully expect that the sole virtue of the multiethnic American Empire will be a decided absence of boredom.

2018-01-13 02:59:21 UTC  

**Economic Collapse**

2018-01-13 02:59:29 UTC  

Since undemocratic and multiethnic empires are always instable, they often topple into internal or external war when they encounter some additional source of instability. Certainly in the case of Mexico and probably America as well, that shock will be economic. If, or rather when, America undergoes a severe economic slump on the scale of the Great Depression of the 1930s, the establishment may make the mistake of cutting off various welfare and unemployment benefits in order to sustain its own luxurious life-style. This tragic miscalculation could well provoke rioting in every major city that will be impossible to stop prior to its exploding into all-out race war all across America. How many will die in Civil War II? In 1860 the population of the United States was just over 31 million. The combined battle deaths of the Union and Confederate Armies in Civil War I were approximately 215,000 (World Almanac and Book of Facts, 1990, p. 792). The U.S. Census Bureau projected population for 2050 is 393,000,000. Projecting from these figures gives 2.678.000 battle dead for Civil War II. This figure should be regarded as a baseline minimum because Civil War I's casualties were largely reserved for military personnel. Unhappily, such will not be the case with our next civil war.

2018-01-13 03:00:26 UTC  

Civil War II in America will set off a super depression that will plunge the entire globe into economic chaos, which will farther deepen the economic collapse here in America. The final result could well be mass starvation. During previous wars in North America, food production was low tech and localized. Most food was produced in the vicinity it was consumed in, and every area had many people who knew how to grow food. Food production, processing, and distribution were not much dependent on outside areas. Even so, large areas of the South came close to mass starvation during our first civil war.

2018-01-13 03:00:33 UTC  

Today, our food producing system in North America is high tech, specialized, and dispersed. Electrical power for our farms is usually generated many miles away. Fuel and spare parts for the farm machinery are likewise produced at great distances from our farms, often overseas.

2018-01-13 03:00:41 UTC  

All the necessary items that must flow into our farms are generally produced at great distances from them. They all converge on our farms, which are themselves scattered all over America. The food produced again flows outwards in all directions to processing centers, and the processed food once again flows outwards in all directions over great distances to reach the consumers. All these steps are high tech and dispersed, a national and global web of highly specialized sub units as completely dependent upon each other as they are dispersed. Today, it is just about as impossible for communities to produce their own food with locally obtained inputs as it would be for them to produce their own space shuttle from locally fabricated components.

2018-01-13 03:00:48 UTC  

The disruptions of Civil War II will hamper the inflow of fertilizer, seed, spare parts, fuel and electricity into our farms. Food production will plummet, and the distribution of the little food produced will likewise be difficult, often impossible. Certainly, food will be used as a weapon and withheld from certain areas such as cities under siege.

2018-01-13 03:00:57 UTC  

Depending on the scope and duration of Civil War II, tens of millions could perish in a mass starvation unprecedented since the beginning of time. Millions more will die of disease due to immune systems weakened by lack of food. The very old and children will die off first. Soldiers, the most valuable and most heavily-armed portion of the population, will suffer the least.

2018-01-13 03:01:12 UTC  

In the worst case scenario organized government will vanish entirely, and the fighting will degenerate into what the Germans term Bandenkreig. Bandenkreig means a war of bands, which is not to be confused with organized guerrilla warfare. In Bandenkreig, independent, roving bands battle each other for access to food, loot, liquor, rape, and sheer survival something akin to futuristic Australian films such Mad Max.

2018-01-13 03:01:20 UTC  

Bandenkreig is no mere downunder hallucination. Bandenkreig is the form of societydestroying anarchy that has leveled much of Africa including Rwanda, Somalia, and Liberia where Bandenkreig has included human sacrifice and ritual killing (The New York Times, September 1,1995, p. 1.) (The New York Times, May 9, 1995, p. 4.). Some children in Rwanda were reduced to picking undigested pieces of corn out of human excrement for food. Mexican revolutions often go through Bandenkreig stages. Bandenkreig also developed during the Thirty Years War that depopulated much of Germany from 1618 to 1648. Bandenkreig is a real possibility in Civil War II.

2018-01-13 03:01:28 UTC  

Although it didn't receive much attention in the press, inhabitants of Serb-besieged Muslim towns in Bosnia ate the flesh of their own dead (Hans Askenasy, Cannibalism, Prometheus Books, 1994, p. 41). The Muslims resorted to cannibalism rather than surrender because surrender to the Serbs meant gang rape and mass murder - not food. In our first civil war, when Vicksburg surrendered, the starving citizens were given food, not raped and murdered. It is clear that Civil War II will be more like the war in the former Yugoslavia than our first civil war because of the intense ethnic hatred that will fuel it. As in Yugoslavia, food will be used as a weapon in Civil War II. I mention these hideous facts not to be sensational, but as a sober lesson of what America will come to when Civil War II sweeps across it.

2018-01-13 03:01:34 UTC  

**The Front**

2018-01-13 03:01:42 UTC  

The most likely scenario is that America will be split into three new ethnically-based nations - a Hispanic southwest, a black south, and a white North. Life in the border areas will not be boring. After the initial chaotic fighting stabilizes, a sort of World War I situation will take hold. The front line will most likely run all across the former America, East to West, separating white America from the Hispanic southwest and the black South. A North-South front separating the Hispanics from the blacks is also probable.

2018-01-13 03:01:53 UTC  

What follows describes one possible variation of the front. Many factors, such as the number of artillery pieces available, ammunition resupply, and a host of other political, military, and economic factors will almost certainly make the actual front less devastating than the hypothetical front described below. Still, bear in mind that in certain places and for limited times the actual front will resemble this worst possible front. In fact, in some instances it will likely be much worse. There are no technical reasons why it cannot be so.

2018-01-13 03:01:59 UTC  

The front will have two main features. The first will be the noman's land, an abandoned area between the forwardmost trench and bunker lines of the opposing sides just as in World War I. The second feature will be an active military zone on both sides of the no man's land extending from the front line back about as far as the enemy's artillery can reach.

2018-01-13 03:02:04 UTC  

Nomans land will vary in width according to circumstances. In flat, deforested land such as deserts it will usually be wider, say 5 miles, about the maximum effective range of light mortars. When the front runs through cities, no man's land is generally at its narrowest, often no more than about 100 yards. During the battle of Stalingrad, no man's land in some cases constricted to the thickness of a wall. In some contested buildings, German and Russian soldiers were separated by nothing more than an interior wall.

2018-01-13 03:02:11 UTC  

I expect automatic cannon to have an impact on the dimension of no man's land similar to that of machine guns during the First World War, and mortars will also have much impact on the dimensions of the future no man's land. The effective combat range of 20mm cannon is just over a mile, and mortars 5 miles. Therefore, we shall assign a width of 1 to 5 miles to the future no man's land. Currently, the heaviest common artillery has a range of about 30 thousand meters or 19 miles, which will determine the width of the military zone on both sides of the front. Therefore, 19 miles for the two military zones times 2 = 38 miles. (I omit the width of noman's land to simplify calculations.)

2018-01-13 03:02:29 UTC  

The total length of this front will be in excess of the aproximately 3,000 miles east to west dimension of the current United States. Actually, it will be longer when you allow for its twists and turns, plus the length of the north-south front separating the black south from the Hispanic southwest, and the fronts surrounding besieged cities and enclaves. However, for our purposes we shall use the conservative 3,000 mile figure. A width of 38 miles times a total distance of 3,000 miles equals a total area of 114,000 square miles. If you multiply this figure by the average population density of the current continental United States, 86 persons per square mile, you get an approximation of how many people will be living, but not for long, on this future artillery range - 9,834,699 people (Actually, there will be more; these are the 1990 census figures).

2018-01-13 03:02:36 UTC  

The point of these computations is to give some idea of the impact of this vast artillery range that will slice up America - the front. All the people living in the front will be displaced - displaced because they will be subject to intertent artillery bombardment. To put a human face on these numbers, consider that this artillery range is about the same size in area and population as the states of Kentucky, Louisiana and West Virginia all combined.

2018-01-13 03:02:42 UTC  

Now consider the economic impact that the appearance of this front will have. It is clear that if the above three states were turned into artillery ranges today, it would plunge America into a severe recession. About 10 million people would be displaced and become refugees, and all the production of the factories and farms of these states would be lost - either destroyed outright or completely idle, as there would be no workers to operate them. Now consider that all railroads, power lines, highways, and various pipelines crossing the front will be cut. Operation and transport costs for all businesses will soar.

2018-01-13 03:02:49 UTC  

The front will be an apocalyptic landscape of smashed buildings, burnt houses, downed bridges, and cut power lines. Weeds will overgrow all. Former pet dogs now abandoned and feral will roam in packs, many of them rabid. Clouds of mosquitoes will breed in numerous shell holes. Bleached human bones covered with shards of cloth will be seen here and there. And at places there will be mass graves, all unmarked, and most quickly forgotten after the soldiers that filled them are likewise killed.

2018-01-13 03:02:56 UTC  

As a prudent mental exercise, every reader of this book should consider his proximity to this future front. If Civil War II started tomorrow, my home in Northwest New Jersey, for example, would be within artillery range of Dover, New Jersey, which might very well be under the control of Hispanic militias. Where would they get this artillery? Well, there are a number of national guard armories and federal military reserve armories in the greater New York area that do have tanks and artillery pieces stored on their premises; that's where they'll get them. In addition, they might succeed in capturing some of the large U.S. Navy vessels that frequently dock in New York's harbors. And they might receive them from foreign governments sympathetic to their cause.

2018-01-13 03:03:03 UTC  

**The Four Phases of Civil War II**