@HistoPol @spiegelmama I would argue the civil war has already started, escalating out of a cold civil war dating back at least to the first teabagger wearing a rifle to an Obamacare town hall back in 2010.

Trump's behavior is the proof, he is the one turning a cold civil war into a hot one

@LukefromDC

A "cold civil war" is an interesting concept. I need to think about that.
In your opinion, at what point in time did the War between the States start?

For me, cold or hot, a war needs

a) two or more warring parties, aka armies, not just groups of insurgents, terrorists/freedom fighters, or dispersed units of a militia, and

b) an opposing "general" organizing an opposition force.
A state or sizable part of one seceding from the Union, is, in my view,...

@spiegelmama

@HistoPol @spiegelmama There have been a lot of recent cvil wars including some very violent ones where only one side has a regular army. Opposing it are at least one side and often more that which have a large number of small militias or guerilla cells. These can be wars with casualties in the tens of thousands and major infrastructure damage.

Think about the kind of damage just one 3 person crew with a mortar and a crate of shells can do. Now consider the impact of hundreds of such crews and a war with three or more sides.

In Northern Ireland during the troubles, some estimate the Provisional Irish Republican Army never had more than about 200 active duty fighters. Yet they had massive community support and forced the British government to the peace table. It took about 25 years of fighting to get to that peace deal.

@LukefromDC

On #War

(1/n)

I can see a lot of merit in your thinking, Luke.
I said "as a starting point."

"Think about the kind of damage just one 3 person crew with a mortar and a crate of shells can do. Now consider the impact of hundreds of such crews and a war with three or more sides."

If "hundreds of such crews" were coordinated by a "general" to some degree, that would be "an army" for me (think of Simon Bolivars rag-tag initial units, for instance.)--"An army" does... @spiegelmama

@LukefromDC @spiegelmama

(2/n)

... have to be built on the "Roman" example to constitute one.

Your example of the conflict in #NorthernIreland, I find convincing, though. By 20th century standards, 200 combatants constitute no army. They're a guerilla.

However, "TheTroubles" or "TheNirthernIrelandConflict" did not constitute a war by most measures:

"The violence never reached the most common currently agreed threshold of a ‘war’ – over 1,000 deaths in a year."

https://www.theirishstory.com/2015/02/09/the-northern-ireland-conflict-1968-1998-an-overview/

@LukefromDC @spiegelmama

On #War

(3/n)

... Today, a couple of drones can cause multi-billion dollar damage to #military equipment (to Russia, with love, LOL,) by itself, it would constitute an act of war. However, if the perpetrator had not been the intelligence forces of #Ukraine, but, say, an independent group of terrorists, it still would not have been a "war" in the true sense of the meaning. If it had been some "freedom fighters" (like #SimonBolivar initially,) it would merely be...