just wondering what you think
2007-01-23 14:40:13 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities ➔ History
No. It simply isn't possible. Too much has changed since then.
The vast majority of combatants in that war were civilian soldiers and state militia. All those state militias were put under the control of the US military, and are now known collectively as the National Guard. There are a few state militias now which were created later and are under the command of the governers, but compared to the US military, they're a joke.
Of course, there is still private gun ownership, it's documented and controlled. The majority of guns owned by Americans are handguns, hunting rifles and shotguns, and collectibles. People attempting to fight the US military with those weapons wouldn't last long.
A "rebel" army couldn't communicate without being monitored. It's pretty safe to say that any movement in that direction would be squashed before it every became a real threat.
By force of arms, and not by law, the supremecy of the Federal government was established in 1865. Secession was an arguably legal right of states back then, but it isn't now.
2007-01-24 04:48:08 · answer #1 · answered by rblwriter 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't think so, at least not right now. This country and everybody in it would be very foolish to go into another war we can't afford. There are no jobs now. You send everybody to war, the deficit will increase to a point of absolutely no return. A war will solve absolutely nothing in this case. No matter who is in the White House, you will have people who will never be happy no matter what the outcome would be. We live in a nation of spoiled brats. If the government or others don't do what we want them to do, then we start kicking and screaming. It's time to be adults and deal with our problems like the adults we're supposed to be.
2016-05-24 02:55:42 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Very probable. A lot of hardliners of both sides. Discontent, hatred, economic problems, Jesus! ...
Could happen tomorrow as I see it. there a lot of powerful states. Take California for example, if California becomes an independent state apart from the central government, it would be the fifth economy in the world. I hope it never happens, war is always poor people killing poor people. Revolution is in fact a revolution, is to spin the social pyramid and change an elite for another. Evolution is better.
2007-01-23 14:58:59 · answer #3 · answered by Jose 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No one wants a civil war but if prejudice and racism continue on the same track, people can only become more exasperated and flip out.
I would also call it a revolution. The term "civil" war just irks me.
2007-01-23 14:51:12 · answer #4 · answered by othaphish 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Americans saw what the Civil War did to the country and its people. I doubt they want to have a repeat.
2007-01-23 14:45:21 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
well we are not at a civil war but the crap going on in iraq and the other places are killing a lot of ppl just like in the civil war
2007-01-23 14:47:45 · answer #6 · answered by blitzmaster20 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Very likely....
Though It may not be in a traditional sense i.e. armed militias overthroughing a central government.
Many individual states carry alot of authority now adays.
2007-01-23 14:51:24 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes.
2007-01-23 14:47:45 · answer #8 · answered by da_hammerhead 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Some think we already are, we just haven't formed ourselves into militas yet.
2007-01-23 14:45:06 · answer #9 · answered by douglas l 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, unless we don't mind all speaking spanish.
2007-01-23 16:14:31 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋