Who'd win in an armed revolution Sup Forums?

Who'd win in an armed revolution Sup Forums?

How long would it last?

What tactics would both sides deploy?

city people dont believe in guns only rural and suburban retards own them

>rural and suburban retards destroy the cities
>they all die 2 days later because they have no idea how to produce vaccines, antibiotics, nuclear power or electronics

>vaccines, antibiotics, nuclear power or electron
cause those are totally necessary to continue the human race.. I mean how on earth did we ever survive before 1945 I will just never fucking know

hes a leaf give him a break

>hes a leaf give him a rake
fify senpai

Penn's Reich when?

I'm not great military strategist, but it would seem to me that the cities are surrounded. Not off to a good start.

Penn's Reich when?
Most nuclear powerplants are far from cities the whole n.i.m.b.y shit at least here in PA .

The thing is that most of the people who know how to do anything useful are not exactly going to help the liberals with their stupid Marxist revolution. Though they may flee the country, but seeing as most of them are white, they will probably get stuck with nowhere to run. At that point you can convince a good chunk of them to join your side or at least negotiate exchanging their services for sparing their lives.

team blue would win because the blue helmets would come in to save us.

Cities also control the majority of supply routes and shipping ports from which rural areas rely on to get their goods and services.

Rural people don't even need to do anything. If rural america just "bug out" for 3 days the city yuppies would eat each other.

Rural america can win that war without even knowing it started, lulz.

Red would employ siege warfare, no doubt. Of course, not that they'd even need to, it's not like cities can sustain farms.

I don't think they'd do much saving.

...

Lefties wouldnt have any food

The red would wipe out the blue. It wouldn't even be close. Total massacre.

Someone should make Sup Forums Risk based off the electoral map

When the news tells me NK is gonna bomb LA,SF,PDX,and SEA . It's not the the worst outcome

That is the thing though.
Even though Cities require more resources, they also have orders of magnitude more accessibility to those resources.
From a purely military logistics viewpoint cities also have most of the central hubs for our military, San Diego alone would be enough to control most of the West Coast.

I'm a ruralfag too, I'm just being real here.

All the money is in the cities, which are contained defensible points. Folks would be paid off to secure them, and would do so. Blue needs to declare total war, though, to win.

How do you figure?

You tell me.

>rural people need vital supplies from trade routes
Where do you think they're being traded from? I'll give you a hint: rural areas in other countries.

Rural people need nothing. Suburbs need shit, rural areas do not. They are the builders and growers. The designers and "content creators" can starve on a bag of Intel™ chips per day in their cities.

I live like 20 minutes away from one in Iowa
give me luck brehs

Those red areas produce most of the countries food and oil. As for ports, there are a good chunk along the gulf of Mexico that are in the middle of red territory. Even if the cities in that area that hold the ports are blue, they would easily get overwhelmed and taken by team red.

Most major cities can get resources by water. I guess the question is who has (or first seizes) naval bases.

Cities are 90% populated by people who subsist by eating out every day and have no rations . The Mormons win doomsday

MFW the white male and females are doing so well with republicans is because the boomers are still voting and they will all be dead in a couple decades

The cities would win because they have 62.7% of the population and they are already clustered together to form roaming militias and huge armies. They also control the ports and supply lines. Rurals would lose just like in the Civil War

I don't think it would be wise for red to openly engage blue in warfare. I imagine red would sit back on all their food reserves and try to starve out blue. but there are still some rural areas that are blue. california could probably be self-sustaining.

i doubt the military would side with red either, considering the major population centers which are blue are the homes of these soldiers and the fact that the red and blue are not black and white political opposites, they just disagree on some issues. this wouldn't just be capitalists vs commies because blue in america is still red in europe.

Homefield advantage : Red
Weaponry advantage: Red
Supply and readiness advantage: Red
Tech advantage: Blue
Numbers advantage: Blue
Support advantage: Blue

Easily the Republicans for this alone: I'm willing to bet that the majority of the US Armed Forces would side with the Republicans too

The current boomers were hippies in the 1960s. It's natural for whites to get more conservative as they age. Shitskins keep voting Democrat, regardless of age, because GIMEDATS.

>in other countries.
Exactly you dumbass.
Other Countries. Not the US.
Which is what we are talking about.
The thread premise does not say "what if every countries rural and city areas all aligned to fight each other."

>Rural people need nothing.
What? Are you fucking serious?
I live in a rural area, know what would happen here if Cities stopped allowing transit lines to us? We would starve.

Virtually every connection point and trade route goes through major cities in the US. Sure some rural areas grow enough food to sustain themselves, but the majority rely on transit lines that run from cities and shipping ports.

>Republicans
>Advocate gun use
>Supported by veterans
>Working class rural types

>Democrats
>Hate guns
>Hate the army
>Middle class urban

The Democrats would be wiped out.

A fucking leaf. Of course.

minorities will become the majority by 2050

Trips sadly confirm.

The civil war amongst just the hood areas in a doomsday situation would engulf cities is a few days .

it's why we need to fund free abortion clinics in black and hispanic neighborhoods

If a race war doesn't kick off.

The cities will be under siege without supplies. The only difference is the cities will become prisons instead of objectives to take.

>Those red areas produce most of the countries food and oil
Wouldn't really matter. Cities would simply ramp up imports.

Think of it like this. The rural areas could possibly sustain themselves form their own products.
But cities have default access to every major shipping port. Which gives them access to virtually every other countries resources.

It's a rosy picture you're painting for the cities, but I don't think things would be that rosy. It's more likely that they'd fracture for a variety of reasons. The sheer chaos that the black communities would unleash alone would drive many of the more civilized inhabitants into the red counties. Niggers riot hen it rains a lot, you think they're going to sit still for a nationwide revolution? Plus cities would be much easier to infiltrate. You think that won't happen? You think Bubba's not going to snipe at air traffic control towers and shut down airports? You think Jimbo's not going to deliver IEDs into shipping yards? You think Cleetus isn't going to assassinate the financiers of blue team, and whack out a few CEOs and bomb their centers of commerce?

All minorities combined?

>Every liberal to take up the riding crop from his cuck shed gets put down
>College gender studies departments and baristas suffer a hiring shortage
>business as fucking usual because anyone with money or real world skills is a dumb redneck unlike the liberal ubermench with their 66 genders and CUZ MUH SEX JUNK IS SO UH UH UH" "science".

The niggers would turn on the libtards as soon as the gibs ran out. Not only does that wipe out half the cannon fodder of the left, it also will guarantee chaos in city infrastructure. Also, the tech advantage wouldn't really mean much in this case without military strength.
It would be a fucking massacre.

US military wouldn't besiege a US city or allow others to.

>I live in a rural area.
>We would starve.
Then you're not rural. US provides more food per capita than any nation that does or has ever existed. We are #1.

If you lack a farm nearby in THAT environment, you are not a rural area.

It's rather difficult to get imports when the military is blockading your ports. The military would side with the Republicans. Democrats might get some of the Army cooks or Navy Transgender Compliance Officers.

Without power, food and water which can easily be stopped. Cities will turn into hell. The liberals will end up killing each other.

>SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED vs muh gun control
It's in the bag for us

California completely relies on water from other places for agriculture and drinking

This. It'll be Katrina, but without the National Guard and police to attempt to restore order. The niggers will just loot everything they can and the structure would completely collapse.

In the top ten biggest cities, none have more whites than niggers, and none have more than 35% whites.

I'd say it would turn out much like the Peloponnesian War. Sure the cities, much like Athens, had access to the oceans and could simply import food in - however, what do you think happens to all of those people who get penned in together? I'll tell you: disease. That, and a huge increase in crime. Much like the plague that struck Athens when they walled off their city from siege by the Spartans (who would be the Reds in this case).

Whatever it may be, though, a civil war would be disastrous for America, and it would most likely tear the union apart,or at the very least, severely weaken it.

It is so scary for me as a Democrat living in a rural area. I have been living in a constant state of fear since Trump won the election.

Armed forces everywhere vote heavily right-wing.

Dems control literally all the ports though. what happens when a foreign country wants to win our favor and starts shipping aid/weapons our way while the reds are stuck in the interior?
fug the phrase "roaming militias" makes me feel really /comfy/ for some reason. MAD MAX WHEN?

Exactly.. the libs think the nigs are on their side, but they will turn when the gubbmint cheese runs out.

Good

Southern California does. Northern California, as well as Central California (aka the San Joaquin Valley) can sustain themselves fairly well.

t. Kulak in Commiefornia

>Implying the vast majority of the military doesn't take their oath to the Constitution seriously
>Implying there are nu males in the military
>Implying corn fed country boys wouldn't retake the nation in a 21st century version of Sherman's March to the sea but with the end point being in New York instead of Georgia

>the opposite happens
>no city retards know how to grow food and die anyway
or
>white birthrate skyrockets as Leftism dies out
>African mortality rate increases too with less gibs

>he thinks all the factories and nuclear powerplants are still inside the cities

Oh sweetie, oh honey

Use media against people as the red tries to figure out how to make its own entertainment while pretending it cares what the blue has to say.

You guys should read this for a quick rundown

>control the ports
The military is predominantly right-wing.
Also, remember: no country bets on the loser unless they are specifically tied to the loser's fate. Only countries that already have a strategic interest in a leftist government would try to prop it up, and even then it wouldn't be openly.

Cities still have the money. The first strategy would be to push out and secure vital infrastructure. Reds can be bought out as necessary.

Too damn pixelated

>All rural areas are farmland.
Ok. I live in the mountains.
There is not enough arable land and wildlife to sustain us. That is a fact. Any rural community that does not act as a food production area would starve.
Not to mention that virtually every agriculture company is based in a city.
I'm not saying it would be easy. I know there would be choas in cities.
But there are logistical realities that can't be overcome by saying "Well we are self sufficient so there".
The US relies heavily on foreign trade for things that are not food. Yeah we grow a shit ton of corn and have a lot of cattle. Great. But as I said above, most, if not all of those farms and cattle are owned by corporations based in cities.
Militarily, its not even a contest. Our armed forces are not rural based. And if a situation came where our command had to choose between cities and rural areas, its pretty obvious where they would start: Where their assets are.


This question is poorly framed, but I interpret it to mean cities and rural areas essentially balkanize overnight and then duke it out.

In that scenario, cities would have the definite advantage for the same reason the North had a definite advantage: cities are more developed and have larger influence.

I'm trying to objectively take in the arguments that blue team wins, and I don't see them having a chance in Hell. I was born a city slicker and now live off-grid in the Rockies, and when it comes to resourcefulness, city boys can't hold a candle to Bubba and Cleetus. In a desperate, wartime situation, resourcefulness may be your most important skill, and urbanites ain't got it. That doesn't even take into account the packs of feral niggers roaming around, or the fact that country folks are way more proficient with firearms than city folk. I see the red team trying to win, and the blue team trying to survive.

The military will go to whoever can promise them the most. Or just seize any given base in their territory.

#justdeplorablethings

Neither. The cities would be filled with chaos and disease, and the rural areas would be cut off from trade and resources. America would be fucked in another Civil War.

they could just seize control of all the power plants and maintain their control on the ports to keep the electricity and the food/water coming. They've got the superior numbers to do it. Even the non-coastal cities all at least have huge rivers passing through them to get their supplies

why would the military, most of whom come from the big cities, ally with red, a minority of the population? just because they lean right doesn't mean they would be comfortable fighting against their own families.

Most power plants aren't in the cities.

that's why I said they would "seize control" of them

>The military would side with the Republicans.
This isn't about republicans vs democrats.
This is about cities vs rural areas.

I know this is hard for people like you to understand. But cities and rural areas are not 100% one way or the other.
You are aware that the number of firearms in cities actually is higher than the average in rural areas right?
This is due to military and police force armories dwarfing those of rural areas.
I live in California, and while that is true, most of that water is used for farming, not supplying cities. Farming of course being conducted in mostly rural areas.
This is true. While I still believe cities would be in a good position. Really only China and Russia would win.

why would they ally with blue and fight their own families?

>most of the military comes from big cities

u wot?

>123456789

for real

ha! jokes on you the majority of rural areas have farms and/or ranches near by

Condescending fucks like you are the reason we're even having this conversation.

Who would fight for blue? Niggers, spics and SJW type whites? Do you really think they would have a chance?

Shipping doesn't matter if you have nothing to trade. Then add in that their industries are going to have a hard time securing the resources they need to even produce their goods. Which will leave their whole economy reliant on expensive imports.

Its true mate.
Look it up.
If you are poor in a city most of the time the only way into the middle class is to get your college paid for by G I Bill or whatever they call it now.

I am being exactly as condescending as the people I am responding to bud.

Oh, shall we all just jump into war with no planning or forethought then? Shall we simply hope that it will all be sunshine and roses?

You always expect the worst, retard. Plans don't survive first contact with the enemy, but if you are prepared for the worst case scenario, your chances of survival, and ultimately, victory, increase substantially.

>Cities have nothing to trade.
K.
I'll let them know that so they can stop being the lions share of our GDP.

well they can always just buy things with their money

I think Conservatices would just block off the major routes in and out of metropolises, attrition would be fucking enormous, chaos would ensue in less than a day.
Bunch of micro anaconda strategies, Liberals would probably appeal to the wider international community, would probably have a good amount of control over the federal government so rely heavily on that.
Obviously mutiny would be common regardless of who the army owed allegiance too.
In-fighting would probably be fucking enormous for both sides too. Maybe reds could capitalize on this more, recruiting whatever cucked whites are fighting for blue.
Maybe Blues can utilize the coast, I don't know what sort of a navy they'd have left.

Sure, that may be the case for rural areas with farmland. However, that is not the case for areas such as mountains.

I live in a large city(Portland OR). The people here are very soft compared to the rest of Oregon and would get steamrolled in a civil-war scenario. At least all the bums would starve to death should the city become under siege.

Nothing to trade? Beyond pure cash, cities have IP, real estate, art, any number of services, educated professionals of every trade, etc. Which is why they have the money in the first place.

>it's true, look up it

That means you don't have any evidence. You can't possibly have any evidence, because the government doesn't even keep those statistics. The most they do is recruits per state per capita.

The GDP contains all kinds of things that won't matter so much in a survival situation. Food and ammo would be the highest priorities, while the latest version of Windows, furniture, dildos, etc. won't be so important. Where is the food produced in this country? Not in the cities.

None of that holds any value in a civil war scenario. Add in the liability of having 45% of your population bring either Feral niggers or Feral spics, and you've got a mess on your hands.

Step one. Rural America stops delivering food to the cities.

Step two. The cities surrender.

It would be that easy and would last less than a day.