Civil War Escalating - ANTIFA murders Trump Supporter in Portland

[etmo]

Revolutions do't start with a leader that decides to start one. They start with a bunch of small groups that somehow finds a leader..
Castro didn't start the Cuban revolution, he just managed to pull all the groups under his flag.
Right now there is no clear leader. If and when there is, the real shooting begins.

Exactly. In Cuba, there was a political goal. Something all these groups agreed was so important that they would all work together to create it.

These anarchists are the exact opposite. They have no goals to create anything, nothing they want to achieve, they just want to burn and vandalize whenever the mood strikes them.

And yes, some of them will be manipulated by those who do have a political goal, no question about that, but again, minority, and no civil war coming from that front.

 

[toddnjoyce]

What I keep reaching back to people with criminal backgrounds keep popping up in these mobs/crowds/riots.

Earlier this year, a lot of places stopped putting in to and started letting criminals out of the zoo because the virus, stupid. Give a criminal opportunity and they will do criminal things.

Government acceptance of criminal behavior is a relatively new behavior...makes me wonder why that change occurred, and in such a coordinated manner.

 

[Axxe55]

What I keep reaching back to people with criminal backgrounds keep popping up in these mobs/crowds/riots.

Earlier this year, a lot of places stopped putting in to and started letting criminals out of the zoo because the virus, stupid. Give a criminal opportunity and they will do criminal things.

Government acceptance of criminal behavior is a relatively new behavior...makes me wonder why that change occurred, and in such a coordinated manner.

I don't think it's all of government being accepting of criminal behavior, just those that support a leftist and socialist ideology, and are merely using these "protesters" as a means to an end. That end being Trump and our American way of life, and the things that we proud and patriotic Americans hold dear.

IF, or WHEN, they gain complete control, those "protesters" will no longer be useful, or needed and will be shut down immediately IMO.

 

[benenglish]

there were many people who were predicting tons of daily violence, and have been predicting it, since long before 2007.

I remember Chick tracts from the late 1960s or early 1970s predicting the imminent, violent overthrow of the government by the hippies.

 

[jrbfishn]

Exactly. In Cuba, there was a political goal. Something all these groups agreed was so important that they would all work together to create it.

These anarchists are the exact opposite. They have no goals to create anything, nothing they want to achieve, they just want to burn and vandalize whenever the mood strikes them.

And yes, some of them will be manipulated by those who do have a political goal, no question about that, but again, minority, and no civil war coming from that front.

You clearly are not watching the same news feeds as me. Or you just choose not to see.
They have a end game. Each group. Even the white guilt group. It's on videos. It is just not a cohesive end game.
All of them want to overthrow our system and replace it with one THEY think is more equitable.
There just isn't anyone so far that has been able to get the "peaceful" protestors to join the violent ones at night. Most have a line they won't cross. SO FAR.
If the groups can get a strong enough leader, one that has a cohesive message they can all agree on whether it's true or not, to erase that line, all bets are off......
From now until about Feburary or march could get real interesting. Makes me wish I was a bit younger and in better health.

Sent by an idjit coffeeholic from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

 

[jordanmills]

I remember Chick tracts from the late 1960s or early 1970s predicting the imminent, violent overthrow of the government by the hippies.

Those things were a trip. Who needs acid when you have Jack Chick?

 

[candcallen]

 

[FireInTheWire]

Yup... sounds like terrorist to me.

 

[etmo]

I remember Chick tracts from the late 1960s or early 1970s predicting the imminent, violent overthrow of the government by the hippies.

Yes, predicting the overthrow of the government / civil war has always been wrong
but predicting increases in violence has proven to be correct

What I keep reaching back to people with criminal backgrounds keep popping up in these mobs/crowds/riots.

...

Government acceptance of criminal behavior is a relatively new behavior...makes me wonder why that change occurred, and in such a coordinated manner.

I wonder the same thing. I think it might owe a lot to the political division that exists today. If Trump wants criminals in prison, then democrats want criminals to roam free. Certainly we see this with blm -- an organization which idolizes career criminals like George Floyd. The coordinated part...that gets murky, but some have found possibilities. Certainly this article by the Federalist was able to "follow the money" and find some relationships that aren't due to pure chance:

Foundation With Biden Ties Funding Leftist Agitators On U.S. Streets

While activists Ford funds desecrate cities and terrorize regular folks, the foundation gives millions to the ‘Defund the Police’ movement.

thefederalist.com

 

[Shady]

Yep.
A Trump win may do that.

It may be time to pull the spam cans out of the closet.

What do you think will happen when on Nov 3 Trump is way ahead because R tend to vote at the polls and over 4-6 weeks time of mail in ballots being counted and found every day Biden eats away at the lead and then 6 weeks latter Biden is declared the winner.

 

[TheDan]

They have a end game. Each group.

Yep. They think they're starting a Marxist revolution.

 

[cycleguy2300]

I'm sure in 2007 you might have said that, but I would argue that's because in 2007 you were not as aware of events, and more importantly, their causes, as you are now.

Let's strip away what might be considered obvious -- BLM is nothing new, Black Panthers and other militant black orgs have been around for a long time. Democrats acting against the interests of America -- this is also old news.

But there were many people who were predicting tons of daily violence, and have been predicting it, since long before 2007. Studies showing that violent media causes children to behave violently (and even young adults) have been around since the '60s. America has been dodging the issue for decades, "oh, we'll label these movies 'R' rated" and pretend that solves the problem -- that sort of thing. Back in 2005, the California State Legislature passed AB 1179, which banned the sale of violent video games to anyone under age 18 and required clear labeling beyond the existing ESRB rating system. Hey, even CA sometimes gets it right. That law was fought all the way to the Supreme Court, and the video game companies won.

So the studies which showed that violent media was creating a generation of violent people didn't move the needle on a societal scale. School shootings started happening, and the idiots wanted to (and still want to) blame guns. With some help from the motion picture lobby, the video game lobby is too powerful to overcome -- they win fights in courtrooms around the globe. Read Assasination Generation if you want the whole scoop.

So now we see nightly videos of young people, raised on violent media, causing chaos in democrat controlled cities. Very much as predicted by the science. Look at the facts -- they're not anti-Trump or pro-abortion or anything cohesive except pro-anarchy. This is the key to why there can be no civil war -- there is no "other side". The democrats are not going to take up arms -- they know we'd win any war. These violent young people don't believe in a cause, they aren't going to lay down their lives for anything, they're just anarchists, looking to destroy and break and burn.

Yes, all this is muddled because there are very deep divides in the political arena right now, and as much animosity in the political arena as we've seen in our lives. That makes the smokescreen which gives cover to the people actually doing most (but by no means all!) of the killing and burning and looting.

Look at the scum Kyle shot -- these aren't people hoping to achieve a political goal, they are wolves, hoping to find a victim. But there were many people out that night who were looking to advance some political agenda, and at some point on that spectrum, there may be some convergence, no doubt, but that's a tiny minority.

Look at the Mogadishu .... I mean Minneapolis... riots. Criminals, documented by Dustin Sanchez of JP Rifles. Small bands of criminals roving around, causing chaos and destruction, then swooping in for their Nikes or iphones or to set a few fires and get out. Sure, tons of "normal" rioters, tons of protesters, too.

And the proof is in the pudding. If these anarchists were out to help Biden, they would have stopped by now, because even the MSM can see the polls which show America is aware that democrat-controlled cities are contributing to the violence with stupid democrat ideas. So there can't be civil war because there isn't anyone to fight it. There is no coherent "other side" that is willing to fight.

But again, there are hundreds of thousands of these people, raised on violent media, who are perfectly ready to smash, burn, loot and kill. So it looks like an army, because there's just so many of "them", but "they" don't even care about each other, and are just as likely to kill each other as they are to kill "us". Remember chaz -- there were two BLM kids murdered in chaz. There were rapes, assaults, etc, etc, and all that happened after the police had long since pulled out.

And it was Seattle that was occupied, just to be clear. Sorry about the length; I'd be interested to hear if any of that seems reasonable to anyone.

Correct me if I am wrong. But what I see when you say that is they just need a leader to unify these small groups with a common purpose to take it to the next level. Either unify them as one group with factions, or as a confederation calling a truce with each other for a time.

Sent from your mom's house using Tapatalk

 

[cycleguy2300]

Revolutions do't start with a leader that decides to start one. They start with a bunch of small groups that somehow finds a leader. Look at the different groups that are now following BLM.
Castro didn't start the Cuban revolution, he just managed to pull all the groups under his flag.
Right now there is no clear leader. If and when there is, the real shooting begins.
Unless it gets squashed first. And hard.

Sent by an idjit coffeeholic from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

^^^This^^^

Sent from your mom's house using Tapatalk

 

[F350-6]

Is civil war unavoidable?

No, not at all. The media wants to make you think we're on the tipping point because that keeps you tuned in. But in reality, what percent of the total US population is involved in these protests and counter protests? My guess is it's lower than the percentage of population that is involved in some sort of gang.

It's kind of like school shootings. They publicize them and talk about them so much, you'd think that every school district in the US would have had one by now. But again, it's just a small minority getting lots of attention because ratings are more important than truth.

 

[etmo]

Correct me if I am wrong. But what I see when you say that is they just need a leader to unify these small groups with a common purpose to take it to the next level. Either unify them as one group with factions, or as a confederation calling a truce with each other for a time.

I'm in no position to correct you, but I personally doubt these rioters have much in common besides a desire for violence, looting, vandalism, etc. Maybe there's some BS that would unite them, but even if there was such a thing, I can't see it lasting through the stress of the first 30 seconds of anything remotely like a war.

Some of them are just stupid young people who will look back on this time in their lives and shake their heads in shame
Some of them are "true believers" -- out for political change, defund the police, blm, who knows what
Some of them are convicted criminals -- see Kyle's list, this group is not under-represented! -- out for an easy score, they couldn't care less about politics
Some of them are anarchists -- out to vandalize and burn, they don't believe in politics or laws or any system
etc

I'd like to hear anything that might unite such people enough to have them fight a civil war against us. Something that would get them to step forward, be counted, and put their lives on the line. Criminals aren't going to fight in a war, neither are anarchists. So it's some of the true believers with some of the stupid kids. A bunch of radical leftists, virtually none of whom have any military background, are going to take up arms and fight against Americans for the future of this nation?

This isn't Cuba in 1947. Castro and the guerillas can't hide in the sugar cane. I don't see how this civil war talk has any grounding in reality, and maybe you should correct me if I'm wrong on that.

The vast majority of this nation is going to continue with their lives, rioters or not. They are going to have to organize on a national level to stop Americans from going on with our lives, otherwise they can continue to torture cities run by idiot democrats like Portland forever for all I care. They're going to have to up their game in a very big way. I'll be waiting and watching with interest.

 

[Axxe55]

I think the tipping point IMO is when law-abiding citizens have had enough and start putting pressure on the leadership in their cities to put an end to this nonsense.

Hopefully, that point will be reached in November when Trump is re-elected and maybe the gloves will come off with regards to the BLM and ANTIFA. Right now, I think many are playing the waiting game to see what Trump will get done in regards to them.

 

[toddnjoyce]

...I personally doubt these rioters have much in common besides a desire for violence, looting, vandalism, etc...

Motivational theory suggests that a common uniter isn’t necessary, instead mobilizing multiple factions using disparate motivators attractive to each of the groups can be enough to achieve seemingly unrelated goals.

Motivators can be money, promise o/lack of consequence or punishment, offers of a power-sharing agreement, notoriety or fame, as well as a wide array of other rewards.

Understanding the over-arching goal that ties the various geographically and demographically separate areas is what needs to be identified, essentially the why behind the why is this happening.

Network analysis is a good way to do connect the dots; unfortunately it takes a pretty concerted effort to feed the intelligence stream all the info necessary to make that effective and efficient.

 

[TheDan]

 

[etmo]

Motivational theory suggests that a common uniter isn’t necessary, instead mobilizing multiple factions using disparate motivators attractive to each of the groups can be enough to achieve seemingly unrelated goals.

Agreed, but no such disparately-motivated group has ever effected a civil war. Oh, sure, sometimes mercs are hired to augment the main body, but in all such cases, a singularly-motivated group is in control. I don't see any such group.

Understanding the over-arching goal that ties the various geographically and demographically separate areas is what needs to be identified, essentially the why behind the why is this happening.

Begs the question, unless I'm misunderstanding something, which isn't unlikely... There's an assumption in this statement that such an over-arching goal exists, and that is not evident. What have you noticed that has made you believe so?

 

[cycleguy2300]

Agreed, but no such disparately-motivated group has ever effected a civil war. Oh, sure, sometimes mercs are hired to augment the main body, but in all such cases, a singularly-motivated group is in control. I don't see any such group.




Begs the question. There's an assumption in this statement that such an over-arching goal exists, and that is not evident. What have you noticed that has made you believe so?

1)
Movements dont always have to become friends. People like being winners and will leave one movement to join one that is more or less similar but looks more promising.



2)
A knowledge that some feel America is the enemy.

Sent from your mom's house using Tapatalk