Trump repeats claim that impeaching him will lead to civil war

boing
101

RANT

You guys are upset, and rightly so - but are you guys serious? You are discussing “the second civil war” as if it’s clear to happen, and contemplating if parts of the executive will be part of a coup? In what kind of failed state do you think you are living? You’ve got some cultural tensions alright, but have you ever left your otherwise culturally homogeneous surroundings for a place which is even remotely as complicated as a city dating back to Babylonian times? What the actual fuck are you talking about, “droning armed antifa”?
The US are not all hunky-dory, and you’ve got a serious mental gun issue in larger parts of the populace, resulting in probably more shot people than even some areas which do have civil war, I get that. But have you lost your marbles actually discussing a civil war like a self-fulfilling prophecy of the beardless baphomet orang in the so-called White House?

I haven’t been so angry about a BBbbs discussion in ages. Fuck me, I’m of to bed. Don’t @ me until I calmed down and you found your marbles again, if they haven’t been dissolved to CO2 in the acerbic and acidic societal discourse-imitating noise. For three fucks sake, vote the reality TV beedlebum out of office. And get your priorities straight again, cause we ain’t got time for that shitshow, and NOBODY in their right mind is going to start a civil war about asshat-inn-charge. Plus, the seriously ill assholes who would try to start a civil war are a minority even if a near-majority has been represented in the last vote for the wailing shitflinger. They belong in prison if they try, and trusting FUCK YEAH AMERICA there will be such an institution (albeit privatised) which will house them if necessary.

Shit, am I angry.
I should re-open my twitter account and rant a bit about how ranting is for loosers, even if they won the presidential election some years ago.

/RANT

3 Likes
102

And they know that the current administration has their back.

14 Likes
103

When the president of any country starts suggesting there will be a civil war if he/she doesn’t get their way, it’s reasonable to speculate how likely that is and if it does happen, how it would manifest. I think his civil war, if at all, will look like his inauguration crowed. A few lame wacko’s at best. But there is nothing wrong with discussion.

14 Likes
104

Dude… you think you’re angry?!?

Try being a marginalized person who is legally a citizen of the US with all the supposed rights that come with that designation, and still being treated like a second class citizen for the entirety of your whole life… just because your skin is something other than White, and because you don’t have male genitalia. Try living everyday feeling as if you’re stuck in a trap that’s growing ever smaller by the day. Then try watching pretty much everything you’ve ever been taught turn out to be a lie.

You might be irate, but I really don’t think you want to get into that particular pissing contest, my friend.

I’ve been angry since EVER.

23 Likes
105

Literally none of us are arguing FOR a civil war. Most of us are angry that the current president is tweeting that this is a possibility. We, like everyone else on this planet, want to live a life where we can pursue our own personal happiness and not have to worry about violence.

21 Likes
106

we’re discussing something the volatile and erratic man currently serving as president of the untied states said about his supporters starting a second civil war as if to coerce us to get back in line by threatening us with his armed and dangerous political base and you’re acting as if somehow we’re the ones threatening the country with armed rebellion. your anger makes sense but the target of your anger makes no sense whatsoever. the participants in this conversation are not threatening a new civil war nor are we arguing in favor of a new civil war. the source of this execrable concept is president trump.

i realize that it is rarely useful to simply gainsay someone else’s argument in an attempt to stop a fruitless proceeding but, seriously, stop acting like we’re demanding a civil war. attributing that to us is factually baseless and illogical to the extreme.

16 Likes
107

A civil war would have some options.

Charles I, or full Romanov?

5 Likes
108

Yes, both my mom and dad served in the Army during WW II. And they would have vigorously opposed Trump’s abuses of the Constitution.

10 Likes
109

Thread:

12 Likes
110

Not sure it’s particularly relevant to the post but goddam I’m going to post it:

2 Likes
111

Six people nationwide will protest violently, but Herr Trump will paint that as the largest protests the United States has EVER seen. Period.

5 Likes
112

He’s said this crap before and I think he believes it.

6 Likes
113

i spoke with some ex military friends about this. no, it won’t. he would be arrested. small bands might shoot off a bit, but they would be crushed. the military takes the whole line of succession thing fairly seriously.

picture a bunch of west virginians clutching ar 15s running from a helicopter with thermal goggles only they’re fat and falling down and that’s how that “civil war” would go down

2 Likes
115

Trump spends a quiet moment of Executive Time in his favorite farting spot - the White House Gas Garden.

Trump%20farting%20privately
Trump farting privately.jpg750×394 50.8 KB

9 Likes
116

I hear you, but there will be violence. For some people who are really “out there” for Trump (you know who), this will be the ultimate affront. They will not think, they will just react. There will be family members who will be lost to each other forever. There will be intra-familial murder. There will be a redneck apocalypse. Wall Street is already threatening the Democrats if Warren is nominated. It will be system-wide.

The author above is a lapsed Republican on MSNBC almost every day (which is weird enough in itself). It’s a compelling argument for Trump’s survival-at-all-cost mindset. Nothing about our norms and expectations for safety is untouchable, at this point.

2 Likes
117

To be clear, I am not suggesting it as tactic.

I’m just saying that if used as a tactic, there are varying degrees of both use, and response. It isn’t just instant drone strikes from a tyrannical government.

I agree with the above. Through I wonder if something like the MOVE assault was done today if it would have the same rather mild aftermath as in the 80s. With the call for more police accountability, I don’t fee like bombing a roof top would have been a viable option today. Or if it was, it would be met with A LOT more protest in the aftermath and more than just people resigning, but pushes for criminal charges. Maybe not :confused:

Someone should have told the Syrians to read a book, and they could have avoided all that unneeded blood shed.

It’s funny you mentioned India, because their independence derived from a long history of armed revolts, and ultimately came about as part of the aftermath of the bloodiest war in human history (WWII). Britain’s Empire was no long tenable at that point and let go.

Finally, the point of the original poster I replied to was that a truly tyrannical government would make short work of an armed revolt (which I actually agreed with, to a point). But if their hypothetical tyrannical government is drone striking an armed rebellion, then they would also be beating, jailing, and killing protestors.

Fair point. But if the government is tyrannical, they also aren’t going to put up with peaceful protests either, which history bears out as well.

ETA - This is a double edge sword, because the violence in Waco by the government was a motivation for McVeigh’s later terrorist actions.

Yep. Antifa is being labeled as such. Are they? I don’t think so for the most part (it’s a non-structured movement, so there are bound to be a few nuts among them.)

Once again getting lost in the weeds, but I’ll reiterate my point that despite Trumps bluster and a small percentage of nuts willing to let his hot air fill their sails, no one wants a civil war. Thing’s aren’t nearly bad enough for some mass scale revolt. Impeachment won’t remove him from office. He doesn’t have the brains or integrity to resign. So the best/quickest way is to vote him out.

If something more bizarre like he refuses to step down happens, then we can revisit the idea.

118

Especially if people keep declaratively stating that as if it’s already a fucking fact, or a forgone conclusion which has already come to pass.

6 Likes
119

If you lived among these radical Trumpians, as I do, you might not be so quick to condemn.

120

As opposed to the bewilderingly successful armed revolt they’ve had? Yes, someone should have told them to read a book. Instead they listened to the lazy, cowardly, delusional gun nuts, and look where it got them.

if the government is tyrannical, they also aren’t going to put up with peaceful protests either, which history bears out as well.

I understand you are hard-of-learning, but the point of the examples of India, East Germany, the Baltics, and Hong Kong (and Syria, thanks!) is the exact opposite. Tyrannical governments will absolutely not put up with violent rebellion. Peaceful protest has a much better track record.

4 Likes
121

I’m not condemning, and I’m directly related to the kind of folks you speak of.

8 Likes