6
6
0
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 7
Hopefully it doesn't happen, but in case it does, I plan on being on the side that wants this country to be whole again.
(3)
(0)
1stSgt Nelson Kerr
I plan on being on the side that does not want to murder my wife and kids for the color of their skin and me for marring someone of a different race. The choice is very simple to me.
(3)
(0)
(0)
(0)
As with any war the innocent are the first to suffer, if this doesn't happen I truly don't think those that want it to happen will be very happy with what actually happens. This is not even taking into account outside influences that are licking their lips and making plans on what the will do to take advantage or influence events. There are a number of countries that would like to see the USA fall.
(2)
(0)
Captain,
Yes, the Left are "dividing the nation" by fighting for marriage, gender, and racial equality. If by "saner heads" you mean a qualified president with a moral, diverse, and ethical administration, then I agree that we need to "fall back" from where we are now. While I understand that people may believe in President Trump because he has mentioned bringing people together, actions speak much louder than words, sir. What has been achieved? What policies have been enacted that have brought people together? Congress is controlled by the Right, so what's the excuse? Well, frankly, they understand that President Trump is incapable, inexperienced, and unqualified.
I agree that every one should be given a chance and should have the benefit of the doubt, but when someone's presidential rhetoric remains their unfiltered, off-the-cuff campaign rhetoric, and when they continue to bash fellow politicians, parties, and peoples, how can someone think this person is bringing the nation together, sir? Sure, it might be "refreshing" to hear raw rhetoric instead of respectable, thought-out, tactful addresses, but what does it matter if it accomplishes nothing positive?
Don't mistake me as a "liberal," rather, I simply believe in unity and compassion. (If it's any concern, I am not registered to a specific party, guess you could call me a moderate or independent or something hahaha :)
You say the Left has been "setting one against the other...since its inception" and although yes, historically, it was the left that had been more prejudice or exclusive, it is common knowledge (and obvious) that the parties have switched these ideologies and it has been that way for decades. That is undeniable.
I can tell you are passionate and steadfast in what you believe, sir. The heart is strong and convincing, but facts are undeniable. Neither side has the only ability to solve this, and neither side is absent of radicals, but it is clear that where we are headed is not unity. You may be thinking (heck, even I think it a little) that I brought the president into this out of nowhere or I twisted the topic or missed the point, but I am positive you will agree with me that responsibility for what happens under someone's leadership goes to the man in charge, whether it be a squad leader, company commander, chief of staff, or even the president.
So, I think that in the context of the author's definition of "civil war," there will be one. And it is unfortunate, but this great nation needs a lot of fixing, I feel many will agree with that. I wish you the best and thank you for this thought-provoking post!
Yes, the Left are "dividing the nation" by fighting for marriage, gender, and racial equality. If by "saner heads" you mean a qualified president with a moral, diverse, and ethical administration, then I agree that we need to "fall back" from where we are now. While I understand that people may believe in President Trump because he has mentioned bringing people together, actions speak much louder than words, sir. What has been achieved? What policies have been enacted that have brought people together? Congress is controlled by the Right, so what's the excuse? Well, frankly, they understand that President Trump is incapable, inexperienced, and unqualified.
I agree that every one should be given a chance and should have the benefit of the doubt, but when someone's presidential rhetoric remains their unfiltered, off-the-cuff campaign rhetoric, and when they continue to bash fellow politicians, parties, and peoples, how can someone think this person is bringing the nation together, sir? Sure, it might be "refreshing" to hear raw rhetoric instead of respectable, thought-out, tactful addresses, but what does it matter if it accomplishes nothing positive?
Don't mistake me as a "liberal," rather, I simply believe in unity and compassion. (If it's any concern, I am not registered to a specific party, guess you could call me a moderate or independent or something hahaha :)
You say the Left has been "setting one against the other...since its inception" and although yes, historically, it was the left that had been more prejudice or exclusive, it is common knowledge (and obvious) that the parties have switched these ideologies and it has been that way for decades. That is undeniable.
I can tell you are passionate and steadfast in what you believe, sir. The heart is strong and convincing, but facts are undeniable. Neither side has the only ability to solve this, and neither side is absent of radicals, but it is clear that where we are headed is not unity. You may be thinking (heck, even I think it a little) that I brought the president into this out of nowhere or I twisted the topic or missed the point, but I am positive you will agree with me that responsibility for what happens under someone's leadership goes to the man in charge, whether it be a squad leader, company commander, chief of staff, or even the president.
So, I think that in the context of the author's definition of "civil war," there will be one. And it is unfortunate, but this great nation needs a lot of fixing, I feel many will agree with that. I wish you the best and thank you for this thought-provoking post!
(1)
(0)
Read This Next

Civil War
