445
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 25 Aug 2025
445 points (100.0% liked)
politics
25385 readers
2371 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I'm reluctantly starting to think that a civil war is inevitable. Does Illinois assert that there is no emergency to justify Federalization of the National Guard? They should act first, then, and force the issue.
The only genuine emergency is Federal overreach. Illinois should mobilize its National Guard and State Police first, with the express mission of keeping their citizens safe from outside military and paramilitary forces. Arrest anyone from out of state who claims the authority to act within the state illegally. And also arrest anyone from a Federal agency who conducts their business without appropriate identification. Pass new laws enabling this if they don't already exist. When the Federal Government tries to counter-mobilize, tell them to pound sand.
This will force all this to the Supreme Court sooner rather than later. And if this court rules that this President can send military force to uncompliant states on a whim, then the civil war is officially on, because I don't think Blue states will roll over and take that.
That's what they're driving towards, yes. History may say that it's already started by now.
Historians will be arguing when the 2nd American Civil War started. For some, it was the end of Reconstruction. Others, the Business Plot. Yet closer to now, when the Heritage Foundation was created.
All I know, is that many pieces of shit were allowed to fester.
The failure of the attempt to remove Andrew Johnson after Lincoln's assassination.
Johnson believed in white supremacy, and he was lenient towards the southern ruling class to keep them in power so that they would suppress the freed slaves*. Leaving the southern elites in power ruined the only chance the U.S. had to overcome the taint of slavery and racism.
Think of the difference:
The traitors from the first civil war may have actually faced consequences for their attempt to destroy the nation in order to keep people enslaved.
A president actually being removed via impeachment would have made the presidency less secure which may have either discouraged some of the behavior presidents have engaged in, or it may have been more likely to have resulted in them being held accountable (of course, I'm thinking of Nixon, Clinton, and Trump).
they basically said they are looking into options to be prepared and the governor and mayor are giving statements in two and a half hours.
It already started. There are masked men in the streets with guns abducting citizens. They are tampering with infrastructure. They are stealing funds. What more do they have to do before you consider it a war?
I think war would require an armed and active opposition. Without that, it's not civil war. It's just oppression.
I think blue states will roll over and take it. I can't see an armed standoff happening on the highways or wherever the mobilized NG column arrives.
Trump and the fascist front wants to escalate against any resistance. Blue mayors and governors don't want to be made an example of, so they will slowly get boiled.
I don't think Illinois will roll over. Pritzker and the General Assembly have been on point. I'm very interested to see what the response is if Little t tries to send other states' National Guard troops into Chicago. I feel pretty confident that Pritzker will not allow IL Nat Guard to be federalized for this purpose. Newsom didn't authorize and yelled about it, but also didn't really move to stop it in the moment.
To be fair, I don't think Newsom and his administration thought they would go there, this quickly. Pritzker has the benefit of seeing how things went in LA, it's no longer a hypothetical.
Yes, that's definitely true. Other states now have California and DC as relevant examples, and can use that information to respond more firmly.
The thing is, I don't see an armed standoff happening either, because I think that when push comes to shove, if any Federal or out-of-state troops are ordered into a neighboring state where they are not wanted, and facing the proposed to shooting other guardsmen, the troops themselves will stand down.....
On the other hand, if I am wrong, at least we'll know about it sooner. And maybe the frog will jump out of the pot if the heat is suddenly cranked up too high.
I fear they'll just lie down and take it