@Dmitry1983 Привет. I don't aprove of this "masturbation" on war. There is nothing good for people on average, when nukes detonate.

(May 18, 2023 at 12:46 pm)Dmitry1983 Wrote: Federal government is funded by American taxpayers. In case of insurrection it will lose its revenue and won't be able to do anything.

This ignores the fact that aside from the self-employed (a small minority of tax-payers), Federal taxes are collected by payroll deductions, meaning that unless said taxpayers quit their jobs, the Feds receive a constant influx of money, and military paychecks roll out on schedule.

(May 18, 2023 at 12:46 pm)Dmitry1983 Wrote: It's soldiers not insurrectionists that need banks and ATMs which don't work when power lines are destroyed.

Unless you're destroying powerlines in DC, you're not eliminating the disbursement of military salaries, which are by law nowadays by direct deposit. As for the local ability of soldiers to get money from local ATMs, they don't need to in the field, as they're fed and supplied by the logistics of the military. They are also often paid a per-diem, in cash, for daily needs not supplied by the logistics train.

Rebels, on the other hand, must pay for or seize their gas, ammo, food, and so on. By identifying those civilians involved in armed insurrection, it is quite easy to freeze their bank accounts, upon which they will be relying.

So you'll have to strike at the financial system itself in order to hamstring a military response. And that has pretty robust defenses built-in.

This is not even addressing the military competence, or C³I, of the insurrectionists.

(May 18, 2023 at 12:48 pm)Dmitry1983 Wrote: They couldn't disrupt anything in Vietnam and Afghanistan.

Apples and oranges. Your two examples feature nations of very different languages, ethnicities, and financial systems. Insurrectionists in America would be far easier to penetrate and debilitate precisely because it's easier to pass as an American in America. You're also ignoring the fact that most Americans would not see the American military as an occupying force to be fought, but rather the legitimate arm of governmental force.

It doesn't seem you've really thought this through.

Quote:Federal government is funded by American taxpayers. In case of insurrection it will lose its revenue and won't be able to do anything.

The Federal government wouldn't even need to dip into it's reserves in the time it would take to quash a rebellion on home soil.

Quote:It's soldiers not insurrectionists that need banks and ATMs which don't work when power lines are destroyed.

Yeah the  insurrectionists would need infrastructure too  and they self harming if they destroyed the power grid 


This is why people like you would never be chosen to lead a rebellion

Quote:They couldn't disrupt anything in Vietnam and Afghanistan.

You understand there is a difference between a foreign occupation and crushing a rebellion on home soil.So comparing these two things is just stupid.Also none of your type have the balls or bloody minded fanaticism it takes to endure the causalities the Viet Cong and the Taliban were.One bomb drop and you fuckers would be throwing in the towel. Because your all bark and no bite.

(May 18, 2023 at 12:48 pm)Dmitry1983 Wrote:

(May 16, 2023 at 8:26 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: Not nearly as easily as the US military can disrupt an armed insurrection.

Boru

They couldn't disrupt anything in Vietnam and Afghanistan.

That explains why their leaving from those places was such a non-event.

Me thinks Dmitry1983 might be well presented if they went and looked up some of the issues the 'South' had in the last tiff the Yanks threw.

Which was on the scale of bourgeoning 'States' martialing their loins against each other.

(May 18, 2023 at 2:41 pm)Peebothuhlu Wrote: Me thinks Dmitry1983 might be well presented if they went and looked up some of the issues the 'South' had in the last tiff the Yanks threw.

Which was on the scale of bourgeoning 'States' martialing their loins against each other.

Because the civil war went swimmingly for the Confederacy 

Oh I wasn't talking about 'Winning' and 'Losing'. Just the differences between the two sides in terms of what they could and could not do because of their various supply issues.

The South was relatively underdeveloped in terms of industry etc. imagine how badly off just a bunch of 'Good Old Boys' are going to be?

(May 18, 2023 at 2:52 pm)Peebothuhlu Wrote: Oh I wasn't talking about 'Winning' and 'Losing'. Just the differences between the two sides in terms of what they could and could not do because of their various supply issues.

The South was relatively underdeveloped in terms of industry etc. imagine how badly off just a bunch of 'Good Old Boys' are going to be?

I  meant that too as having no real industrial capacity and a lack of infrastructure severally hamstrung the Confederacy during  the battle of Gettysburg as it limited the amount and quality of the confederates equipment.It also severely hampered the number of troops they could mobilise for the battle.And those factors gave The Union a huge advantage.Also factor in The Union fought wars while Confederacy merely fought battles they realised no specific single battle was going to be a war winner so they focused on the big picture instead.

(May 18, 2023 at 2:52 pm)Peebothuhlu Wrote: Oh I wasn't talking about 'Winning' and 'Losing'. Just the differences between the two sides in terms of what they could and could not do because of their various supply issues.

The South was relatively underdeveloped in terms of industry etc. imagine how badly off just a bunch of 'Good Old Boys' are going to be?

The lines aren't (relatively) clean like that anymore.  The top three manufacturing states are california, texas, and ohio.  Defense contracts are largely held in both southern -and- trumpist states.  Most of the combat arms equipment, and nearly all of the combat arms operators..are both in and from the geographic -and- cultural south.  OTOH, cutting edge defense research (and intelligentsia in general) is mostly in the north now - culturally and/or geographically.  A change from conditions at the start of the civil war.

The south is in a much better position now than it was then, particularly with the loss of ohio and indiana, now at the hypothetical rear/interior.