Is a second civil war realistic? And if so what do you think will set it off?

[Celista]

People are becoming viciously divided like never before between the intelligent and the ignorant.

What side is the intelligent one and which side is the ignorant one? You are giving far more and far less credit to each side of the coin than is deserved.

[Deleted]

No it wont Happend, Do remember there are ways to Dethrow a president that does not involve A Civil war...

also even with all the Gun happyness of the repuplicans would not matter vs the american military would loose, IS a drean that " if i have My gun, i can defend my home, from the big man!!!" people dont stand a chance.

[Independent voter]

Somebody famous said something like "Every time we have an election it's a civil war." It was a comment in response to "why is America so stable when other countries aren't?"

[Deleted]

Not realistic, it would be incredibly one sided.
Republicans have far more guns & experience with them than Democrats, democrats would be slaughtered.
If it was between those two.

Pretty much this. It would've been less of a war and more of a lengthy execution

[Unhinged]

What side is the intelligent one and which side is the ignorant one? You are giving far more and far less credit to each side of the coin than is deserved.

Both sides are ignorant and facts/evidence is irrelevant. The system is completely broken.

- - - Updated - - -

Pretty much this. It would've been less of a war and more of a lengthy execution

Not even close to the mark. Democrats have both the money and body count. It would literally one bunch of skilless idiots fighting another group of skilless idiots. With one side having more money and more idiots it is clear who will win.

[InDecisive]

No, because if it ever reached that point it would be a war between people who have guns and know how to use them and people who don't have guns and wouldn't know how to use them.

[Atrea]

it would be a war between people who have guns and fantasize about having to use them and people who have guns and don't want to use them, because guns can be fun without having to have "killing people" as one of their functions.

I fixed that for you.

Some people can own a gun for purposes other than "self defense" against some vague, invisible threat, you know.
Those same people are okay with common sense legislation, such as licensing and registration of firearms, because they realize that their hobby should not endanger others, and precautions need to be taken to at least TRY to prevent such an occurrence.

But don't think for a second that just because some people wave their guns around in other people's faces, that they're more proficient than those who prefer a more restrained approach.

I'll put money on a hobbyist shooter over some cross-eyed goof with a concealed pistol, a bad attitude and an itchy trigger finger any day of the week.

[Kalis]

Looking at US homicide levels, are you sure they are not already having one?

[Mormolyce]

Not even remotely likely.

Who wants to fight a civil war? You might miss an episode of Game of Thrones.

[Sirfailalot]

I mean if it was going to happen, probably the assassination of Trump setting off a rebellion from people who have largely felt ignored for decades now seeing what LITTLE glimmer of hope they've just found stamped out by those they perceive as the ones keeping them down. Or the rioters finally fucking with the wrong town getting mowed down, triggering the rest of the left into rioting until THEY start getting shot and eventually arm themselves.

[Milchshake]

Meh the problem is too many Americans are egocentric, and think the next civil war will be about THEM, or THEIR beliefs. They're also too wrapped up in US history and dwell on the last US civil war.

But in recent history of the world. Food scarcity has been the most prevalent cause for civil war or the failure of a state. So I'd wager that food or water insecurity would be the most likely cause of the next civil war. More worrisome since multiple agencies are forecasting stronger drought conditions ahead.

[Kalis]

Or the rioters finally fucking with the wrong town getting mowed down, triggering the rest of the left into rioting until THEY start getting shot and eventually arm themselves.

Replacing 'arm' with 'harm' is more realistic.

[Deleted]

There will absolutely be a point where the US will break up into smaller nations. No way you can keep such a large country with so many strongly opposing cultures, religions, political views and other shit together.

Would be natural if a civil war would be part of that process, so I would say yes.

[rowaasr13]

Rofl. Mate, guns decide battles. They don't decide wars. Economies do. Just ask the USSR--OH WAIT, YOU CAN'T.

You can. It is called "Russia" and according to hysterical weeping of your news agencies, they've just installed you a president.

[Tailswipe]

Not realistic, it would be incredibly one sided.
Republicans have far more guns & experience with them than Democrats, democrats would be slaughtered.
If it was between those two.

I have a feeling that the US military would outgun both sides.

[The Oblivion]

nah, not a chance. too lazy now. life is really good. comparably at least to how life was previously. it would be pretty dumb to kill each other in america, because honestly, most of our 1st world "problems" would have been laughed at when there were real issues.

[Sirfailalot]

Replacing 'arm' with 'harm' is more realistic.

Entirely possible. Assuming I'm taking that the right way. I mean we had one just the other day harm himself quite nicely with fire. It's...4:21 in the morning here, I could be reading that entirely wrong to be fair.

[Kalis]

Entirely possible. Assuming I'm taking that the right way. I mean we had one just the other day harm himself quite nicely with fire. It's...4:21 in the morning here, I could be reading that entirely wrong to be fair.

I meant they are more likely to go a bit emo than full on Tibetan protester, but you're in the right ballpark.

[Independent voter]

The people in the military aren't left wing for the most part, the silent majority in America hates the left wing. I think a left wing revolt would end in a lot of dead left wing people.

[Deleted]

The people in the military aren't left wing for the most part, the silent majority in America hates the left wing. I think a left wing revolt would end in a lot of dead left wing people.

This. Liberals, as in Left wing/socialists/feminists/identity politics bullshit, not Democrats in general are a loathed very vocal minority.

Bring it on, I say.