Speaking with friends and adversaries (liberals) about what the US would look if a 21st-century civil war broke out, I thought it might be an interesting strategic topic to kick around.
There is no North/South or even an East/West dividing line where populations are at odds. If there are physical borders at all, they appear to be along urban/non-urban boundaries; larger cities versus small cities, towns, suburbs and rural. So how would a war operate in such a divided way? War zones would look interesting, something like this:
us.jpg
Personally, I don't believe it would involve a lot of actual fighting, which would not create much opportunity for the US Armed Forces to get involved (perhaps limited bombing of infrastructure). It would mainly be a war of resources. What do cities have that non-cities need, and vice versa? Electrical power, fuel, food, drinking water, communications (i.e. telephone and Internet), transportation, supply lines, etc. In most cases, non-cities would have an advantage. But in population and actual numbers, non-cities are too spread out. Unless cities were under actual seige, concentrations of combatants could easily leave and secure some nearby resources, perhaps holding them with air power. Cities would rely heavily on air power and transportation since vehicle transportation would be too difficult, so non-cities would rely on ground-to-air missiles to interrupt that.
Any other speculations?
There is no North/South or even an East/West dividing line where populations are at odds. If there are physical borders at all, they appear to be along urban/non-urban boundaries; larger cities versus small cities, towns, suburbs and rural. So how would a war operate in such a divided way? War zones would look interesting, something like this:
us.jpg
Personally, I don't believe it would involve a lot of actual fighting, which would not create much opportunity for the US Armed Forces to get involved (perhaps limited bombing of infrastructure). It would mainly be a war of resources. What do cities have that non-cities need, and vice versa? Electrical power, fuel, food, drinking water, communications (i.e. telephone and Internet), transportation, supply lines, etc. In most cases, non-cities would have an advantage. But in population and actual numbers, non-cities are too spread out. Unless cities were under actual seige, concentrations of combatants could easily leave and secure some nearby resources, perhaps holding them with air power. Cities would rely heavily on air power and transportation since vehicle transportation would be too difficult, so non-cities would rely on ground-to-air missiles to interrupt that.
Any other speculations?
Comment