A 3rd civil war

I will be using a different refutation format:1. Satilite movement1. my opponnent mentions a satellite but he doesn't clarify how it will detect movement and how it can see through trees as the militias would know they would need ot use cover to move around. 2. Also he mentions they have no route. Actually the soldiers won't have planned out routes, they would just follow the road. The militias would stay off to the scrub near the road, doing ambushes as the walk. Well this was just an add on to the argument, not a rebutal.3. My opponent also mentions recruitment. Yes small towns would not be major targets by the army and th emilitias would recruit from those small town increasing their numbers. 2. interrogation Yes they won't interogate everyone in the group. Also most agents would be with their families in the rukus as the mobs lynching their family doesn't sound appealing so they would go and desert to protect their families. The loyalties argument works better on my side. Also sure even if they don't contact the US or the UN they can still look suspicious. Also they would have to because a silent spy is worthless. So they would have to contact the US or the UN at some point, leaving them vunerable. 3. Tactics I know military stratigists aren't stupid but when your trying to pacify a whole country your gonna have to spread out. Also even the best military stratigists can't totally be sure of an attack, terrible argument. Do you think David Petraus knew when the terrorists would come and attack him? Also German General Rommel in WWII didn't know when patton was going to ambush him. Or the persians at granicus didn't know when to expect alexander the great. History is on my side, luckily history repeats himself. Also how would you know Canada and mexico would help? If the american society crashed so would everyone else for one reason, america is the biggest manufacturer and the biggest consumer. America GDP: 14.66 trillion dollars CIA world factbook World GDP: 75.54 trillion dollars CIA world factbookIf you took out 14 trillion dollars from that the world is in trouble. In the last ressecion america went down, china went down as we fuel their economy, canada and mexico died as we fuel their economy, and europe failed too. So all of the people you mentioned would be affected by this. History repeats itself. 4.Mobs you mention weapons, some will have it, others wont. A good percentage would have guns but others will have non-conventional weapons. Occupy Wallstreet had flag poles, you could also bring kitchen knifes etc. Heck a wine bottle after its broken wouldn't be pleasant. So people would have weapons. You will them pull the "well the army has more guns" Well I hope they are good enough to hold off 200,000 people. The army base in ABQ (airforce base) employes about 23,000 people. Obviously many will be computer guys and other non gun trained jobs. SO in reality the people with guns would he lets just pretend 15,000. So 15,000 people with guns vs 200,000 pissed of new mexicans with clubs. That is a 13.33333...:1 ratio. so they would be swarmed. the number of people is from: http://en.wikipedia.org...Also how would they have good defenses if half of them deserted to help their families (see loyalties argument again) and the other half have poor morale. It just wouldn't work. Yes the UN would approve the helping of the US but that's not the reason it would take a while. It would be the actual invasion and the planning. The D-day invasion in planning alone took 1 year, and they only had to cross a small channel, the UN would have to go accross the whole atlantic ocean. Also yes they would have to plan because if they cannot land in certian areas under militia control as that would ruin the day. So the planning would take a while. good link for more info: http://www.worldwarhistory.info... 5. the desertianscivil war is a ba argument as buchannon let the south have their own agendas also an athoritarian goverment would just speed up the process. It would be a propagana thing the militias or the anti-goverment ralliers could use.Also yes the rebles and the loyalists would clash but you just said an ahtoritarian goverment would take place so more people would be rebles. Also look at the revolution these clashes happened but the loyalists god tarred and feathered. They had few in number. 6. Raiding of naval bases yes that's exacltly what I am saying, also little weapons lol my AR-15 would play rough, and my 2,000 rounds of ammo lol. Small weapons? Also Norfolk, the biggest US naval base (well a big one) has 30,000 people working there. according to http://www.globalsecurity.org... This base borders many cities including annapolis. anopolos has a populatio of about 38,000 according to a wikipedia article. it also borders baltimore, population 620,961.So a lot of people would be swarming the place, even if only 50% of baltimore goes and 10% of annapolis goes the place would he overun. 7. aurmor and grenades etc. No I do not expect there to be enough for every person, do you expect the US to no desert? So even without this stuff they will still be swarmed as in one od the early rounds I proved a huge like 100:1 ratio vs the US and the UN. Also do you know how easy you cna make molitov cocktails? or thermite bombs? It is quite easy the Army would have a tough time. 8. Libyalibya oh yes um libya no libya - herman cain sorry had to do thatbut I provided many othe examples above. So even if the voters agree with you here I had many other examples. So I see no need to argue when I have many other examples. It's a good example for the black market and the smuggling of weapons, guns, grenades, aurmor, RPG's etc. So even if is isn't a good military example it's a good black market in the time of civil war. 7. Vietnam examplenot to be a political bashing but the UN are pinkos and would not allow us to do that as it is against interational law. Also they used the chemicals to kill trees but it didn't work. It has killed many generations of vietnam children and causing many problems, and the US would wan't a recovery that wouldn't destroy them. So there is an advantage not to do this, and the UN is involved this time and would prohibit the usage of those weapons and tactics. 8. Gun modificationmany people could do it, me, my neighbor, my grandpa, all of texas (lol), all of my neighborhood. Also if you looked above I showed the modification of an AK-47 and all you needed was a twist tie, everyone could do that. So case closed, the militia would have fully auto weapons. 9. Civil war WW3 etcit would technically be a civil war but the UN troops have men of many nations so technically it would be a WW3, but not literally, only via UN troops. Also I did answer to your Iran argument. Yes the terrorists would because they say: we hate america, civil war = lots of emrican deaths, helping militia = anarchy america, yes our dream. So it would benifit the terorists goal of mass american casulties and the end of current american goverment. Also in those times they could recruit people for terrorism so it's a win win for them. Well how would the US react when at war, also how would europe as they are in economic chaos without america, africa is terrirost in some areas so they wouldn't react. And also you could discuise it. Make a cruise boat, a motor boat, the drug cartells use submarines now, yes If you don't belive that look it up, so there are many ways they could help. Plus mexico border security would be non-existant so they could also go through there. now a few probeems, out of room and my computers having a problem. So I have to end here :( I cant scroll up now SO i assume this is my last argument then so thanks for the debate :)