In the long term, the trade war will tank their economy

Yanks are already crying bout it tho

Americans have no backbone

What do you expect

Mamma mia

Pizza a pasta

@everyone Question Of The Day:

America has once again fallen into civil war between the Union and Confederate States; who do you think will win? What do you think will happen to the geography of the USA? Which countries would stay neutral? Why?

What a stupid fantasy land scenario. You might as well ask “who do you think would win in a fight, a Klingon or a Sith”

The Union would win just like they did last time

Assuming the same states are in each

This time the industries are in the southern states
I'd say the south

Doesn't matter if its a stupid scenario.

Personally I think the UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand would band together as a form of international police making sure the stocks don't completely get fucked, making sure Russia/China don't take the opportunity to strike while their down, etc

~~and then they'll take back the thirteen colonies (renamed to the Imperial States of America) as well as a few more and begin the Third British Empire~~

Yea no the entire would side with the union expect for maybe Mexico

And the north still has plenty of industry

Texas would be hard to beat but that’s it

Actually the closest thing to confederate could be an independent Texas but even then

I doubt it

( Texas is very pro American but another confederacy would throw that all out the window)

Depends on who the military sides with. Nothing else even matters.

Virginia would go to the union this time

And yeah southern industry is nice

But once northern industrial capabilities are restarted

They are fucked

"If World War III were to occur between NATO and let's say BRICS who would win? Why?"

It doesn't work anymore like this. Such scenario would end life on earth due to nuclear capabilities. That's the reason some scholars claim that nuclear power is all that's keeping us from a WW3.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_assured_destruction

@Orw33 I think it's fair to say that NATO won the Cold War against the Comintern without it resorting to MAD...

NATO won because gorbachev was bored

@Master Yeet the question referred to "World War III", not Cold War, which is arguably still ongoing.

@Orw33 I knew the question referred to WW3, I was pointing out that nuclear weapons don't mean war between nuclear powers would instantly degenerate into MAD

the only states that need to exist for the US is the original 13

@Master Yeet if you think WW3 can happen without nuclear intervention, you're optimistic my friend.

@Orw33 WW3 couldn't be prevented by MAD any more than the Cold War was

@Master Yeet Please read the Wikipedia article I posted:
"In 1949, after the unleashing of nuclear weaponry at the end of WWII, physicist Albert Einstein suggested that any outcome of a possible WWIII would be so dire as to revert mankind back to the Stone Age. When asked by journalist Alfred Werner, what types of weapons Einstein believed World War III might be fought with, Einstein warned, "I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones""

Indeed that is a famous quote - what of it?

@Master Yeet My nationalist friend, if you think that WW3 would prove anything other than human ignorance, you're deeply delusional.

Well, I certainly wouldn't *advocate* for WW3, but once again I would point back the the Cold War as an example of a global war between nuclear powers that was undertaken as a rational series of strategic decisions

yea and the only reason because it remained "rational" was because nobdy typed in the launch codes my dude

Indeed

As good a reason as any