I'd say it was damn nice of them to carry all that nice gear out to us! Now go back....

There seems to be much confusion about the structure of this country by its own citizens.  There was a time when the industrial base was in the cities (detroit and the automotive industry, Pittsburgh and steel etc...) however, the majority of industrial activity today is in the more rural areas.  All the liberal tree huggers don't want any industrial manufacturing down the road from their suburban house and city property is too expensive to maintain manufacturing facilities.  

As to how long it would take for the grocery store shelves to empty, all you have to do is watch when snow is forecast.  1 Day and the shelves are empty.  3 Days and the distribution centers are empty.  (Just wait til the truckers have finally had enough of the BS to stand together and strike...)  Munitions are more prevalent in rural areas.  Remember, these are the people more likely to hunt for food, not just sport.  They maintain higher quantities of ammunition than city people (as a whole.  I realize some members on here are city folk and still maintain large quantities of munitions).  

As far as the north beating the south, it was merely as a result of manpower.  The north lost 2 men to each the south lost, but they had more bodies to throw away than the south did.  At that time, the differences in city and country were not as great as they are today.  

The finest example of the potential war between country and city would be Red Dawn.  Geurilla warfare by a bunch of rednecks winning the day.  The same example set by our own revolution.  Those that live on the land, better know how to use the land to their advantage.

[}:D]

thats it?  thats all the fighting theres gonna be?  im deeply disappointed in yall (especially you crybaby little city boys)[;)]

Well maybe you would hear more if you defined which side the suburbs would be on.  There is no longer a clear divide of city and country.  City boys call my area the country, while country boys call my area the city.

SHUT UP YOU LITTLE CORN FED PUNK!
(Oh wait youre on MY side!....Sorry! [:)]

The little remark about farmers being preoccupied defending their daughters is not going to fly. You think Eli Mae can't take care of herself? Don't forget that granny will be sniping people from the kitchen window. Uncle Jed can hold his own. The only drawback will be Jethro so he will have to be the one doing the farm chores while everyone else is fighting. Oops, maybe not. He will be sent into the cities to use his double nought spy skills for the country folk. In actuality he will be fed misinformation by uncle Jed so that when Jethro is captured he will be tricked into giving away fake info.




WMA

Country is a state of mind!   We just cut off your cable and you city folks is done!

Pass that jug cleatus!   Bob [booze] [:D]

Where y'all been, boy? Them there Clampetts done gone and mosyed (how the hell do you spell mosy in the past tense?) on over to the Hills...Beverly Hills. Them city folk now.

CW

[LOLabove]

Sounds like you live smack dab right in the middle of the combat zone.[:)]

Red Dawn?  That's your best comparison?  I'm sorry, but Patrick Swayze and Charlie Sheen are not going to win the war for you.  They sure as hell will knock up your daughters, but that's about it.  

Don't forget, that we control the Mas Transit systems in the country, which would give us the major advantage in mobilizing people.  We control the Sea Ports, which would allow continued import of food and munitions.  Sure, we'll have to take the Country Folk out w/ Czech and Russian ammo, but we're used to shooting that anyway [;)].  Although, I'm sure Israel will hook us up w/ some Q3131A.

You might know the land better, but w/ all the GPS systems in our SUV's, we won't have a hard time finding you!  Plus, all we have to do is go to Barne's and Noble and buy a survival guide to read while we drink our cappucino and discuss our strategy.  

Another factor, is that we control most of the power grid for the nation.  Say Bye Bye to you electricity.  It's gonna be a cold winter boys, better hope your Carharts hold up!  Maybe Canada will shop out some of their power to you.

You city boys be sure and listen to what BigJ491
has to say!

When the time comes I will walk out to the end of my  property, cross I95 and [ETH]Just EASE off[/ETH]into the swamp.

I already have a stash out there with all the stuff I need to start a fire and shoot a pig (or a city boy)

Dont let that GPS find something you might not want to find now!

Oh and PS The survival guide is on the clearance rack right now for $9.95 Better hurry!

No insult intended, but there is sure a lot of Hank Williams, Jr. “A country boy can survive” chest beating going on here.   Long term, I would agree that country life could go on more “normally” than city life, but you have to survive first.  Nobody “wins”.  

The “real” country folks who live in very sparsely populated areas…  North & South Dakota, Montana, Wyoming and maybe parts of the Northwest, Kansas, Oklahoma and west Texas are hardly affected.  Wannabe country folks living on 250 acres 50 miles from town have problems and don’t fare much better than the “city folks”.  Yes, a single country guy could probably survive by hiding in a heavily wooded area, but he is no better off than the city guy that is out foraging for food, too.  

How about this for a scenario:     You, your wife and three kids live on a small farm near Tyler, Texas.  You grow peanuts and black eyed peas.   One day the SHTF; no more electricity, gasoline or fresh groceries.   You have 500 gallons of propane on hand and 200 gallons of gasoline and maybe enough food for a month.   However, you really can’t go anywhere since your security is tied to the farm.   Now, 50,000 people leave Dallas over the next few weeks looking for food and for escape from the city.   Of these 50,000 armed, motivated people, about 2,000 are headed your way.  Contrary to popular belief being expressed in this thread, not all of them are the clueless gang bangers you country folks would like to believe they are.  Many are very familiar with firearms (former armed services, former country folks, children of same, hunters and outdoorsmen).   Many are very well armed and skilled in outdoor living (perhaps better than you) and can easily travel a 350 mile radius with the car and fuel they have on hand.  They have enough food to last a week or so before they have to begin subsiding from the land.  

Now… you have several rifles and plenty of ammo, but you are only one person.  There is a road going up to your house (who cares about the fence & gate).   They don’t just drive up to your farm in broad daylight… it is a 24 hour-a-day assault.   Can you maintain your daily work routine (that your country lifestyle depends upon) while defending your family & property from these hoarding masses?  I don’t think so…          

Try to get along, you idiot.

Note to self: Find tc6969'a stash and steal it before the war starts!

You Country Folk will be hard to shoot, with you big ass belt buckles and all [;)]



Maybe at the next Gunstock, we can test our theories out and have a 10 acre paintball war b/t the city and country boys?  

We would cut off your Copenhagen supply and bomb your counry music transmitters.  That would bring you to your knees.

but you have to admit that at least San Fran, Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Santa Barbara, etc...would be a lost cause. That is, unless there is a large faction of Pink Pistol Members.

they can have san fran ,it will let their sheep get some rest.
[sex]

[wave]

Mass transit??? LOL! That won't even get you out of the city! And a bus is a big assed slow moving target. You're gonna take a bus to the park and ride where your pre-packed SUV is waiting? Your cappucino will be cold before you even get there, and as usual the bus will be late!

As for the power grid, how many wood stoves are there in the city? I bet the city guys get cold first, since the country guys will be the ones killing the power grid. Do city guys even own thermals? Boots?

Aw hell... They wouldn't get past Ma Duce!

And I Ain't talking 'bout no .50 cal! [;)]

"Nobody wins" would be correct. However, some will lose more than others, that is unquestionable. I think that you see us country boys taking a defensive posture. Won't be true in my case. If it comes down to the case at hand I'll be taking few chances and going on the offensive.
We will also be defending home ground so to speak in that the areas we live in will be very well known to us but not to the invading hordes you envision.
I would also submit that many of you urbanites and suburbanites would do alot of our work for us as there will be a gauntlet to evade and penetrate to make it out of the cities. There will be looting, murder, rape, burning, etc, etc. Making it thru that would lead you to a network of defensies which would by now have been set up to prevent your sharecropping asses from screwing up the country for everyone!

I did look over the site whcih led to this discuusion, however, and I am not sure that the general idea was just city vs country. My impression was more lib v con, people who want heavy gov't intervention and security vs. those who want to be free and are willing to face some risks in order to be so. In general, the self-reliant would gravitate towards the country and their political opponents gravitating to the cities for the perceived security of a police state. Battle lines would therefore be drawn but would unlikely be an overnight process. The map of the Gore-Bush 2000 presidential election shows that there is quite a polarization of society. I do find this VERY concerning. This country is pulling apart and if this trend continues, with city folk continuing to drain the rural area tax bases while imposing draconian restrictions which gradually dismantle the Consitution, then there will be a Civil War. It would seem inevitable to me. Question is how hard the gov't and their lackeys will push, and how fast they will do so. Alot of us, myself included, are willing to do whatever it takes to preserve freedom and our Constitution. WHATEVER it takes...

The bottom line though, is that some of the city people will ally themselves with the country folk and vice versa. In the event that this does ever occur I would much rather be where I am than where you are.
I know I have tried to prepare my family for all kinds of bad shit while hoping such as this doesn't occur. Civil wars can be extremely bloody and SHTF is not something I would relish. However, I DO NOT see gov't giving ANY of the power that they have usurped from the people back to the people. The opposite is happening.

let us leave it up to yall suburbanites..........suburbia can consist of people that can't make it without designer clothes, coffee with names i cant pronounce and bottled water, but it can also consist of somebody living there on necessity that gets away from it as often as possible

[>:/]



ive got CD's but that other part is just WRONG



oh come on, ive got at LEAST 15,000 gallons at any one time!  closer to 60,000 at peak capacity [:D]

In this situation, I am packing up my guns, guitars, cooking tools and books, clothes, and bugging out for the country.


I have a skill that them country folk may want-I can cook/bake and I can run it on a large scale no problem, easing up manpower for other tasks.  I know how to construct wood fired baking ovens at a basic level and other large kitchen arrangments.

There will be a LARGE thinning out of city dwellers as food gets short, and warlords take over the city.

We just have to watch for raiding parties!

My main point about gang bangers and mafia types is not to infer everyone in the city is that mentality, but everyone in the city that is not either persuasion will have to worry about them first before they can make a run to the country.  If you have to park 2 blocks away from your house (I'm using a relative in Queens for example,) good luck defending your house/ apartment and still get your vehicle loaded.  Once you get the knock on the door from the Latin Kings, collecting protection money, how long can you hold out?  How many waves of these guys will you stop before they bum rush the place or burn it down?  I can imagine the same thing happening to a house in the country, but I'd worry less if they have to travel 50-100 miles to get to me than drive around the block.

Regardless what side you're on, logistics and supply /resupply  is what wins wars.

I don't think gangbangers will have a chance against the common gun owners in the city. If SHTF all gangs causing trouble will fall victim to the Vigilantes. They would be hanging everywhere by the neck. Then the city folk already organized would go after the country folk.

Kind paints a pretty picture don't it?
I have lived in cities and I'll tell ya that if some local scum came by during such a SHTF scenario their brains would be all over my yard before they finished demanding money.



You'd go after us?! LOL. By the time you made it out of the city you'd find out that the roads are barricaded, there would be other obstacles funneling you into killing zones, and most of you that survived would retreat back into the cities only to find your homes gutted and burned, devoid of food. There's always rats though ain't there?![):)]

You might be a city slicker if the only thing you ever butchered was a piano recital.

You might be a city slicker if you can buy the largest tractor you will ever need at Sears.

The stereoptypes on both sides are fun to paint, but just aren't the truth.

Most people have connections across both "realms" - and alliances will form based on trust and mutual benefit.

Finally, country folk:  enough with the "we are all potential snipers" BS - I've BEEN to rifle ranges before deer season.  I KNOW the truth.

Us city folks may not advertise it as much with gun racks, NRA stickers, and such, but the numbers of us who are heavily armed - and well trained - may surprise you.

LOL........ You city boys realy think you could take us country boys? I dont see how that would ever happen.
1. City boys would have to fight in the day light because we all know you guys are scared of the dark woods.
2. City boys dont get up until 10ish by then we would have stolen all the thing you left the city with and nailed your old lady by 8am.
3. City boys cant sleep on the ground they might wake up with a stiff neck.
4. City boys see a snake, gator, or any other critter they would have a heart attack right then and there.
5. To live in the country takes a lot of hard work, real work.
The best thing you city boys could do is to just blow your own head off and save me a bullet that I could use on a good deer.

The key in this whole thing is how the masses of people think. If the country folk (me included) come together and combine our resources, we would be unstoppable.  With the resources available in neighboring farms, we could far outlast anything the city people could.  The only hope the city has is if they all combine forces and try to over run people by shear numbers.  One thing the "outdoor challenged" (LOL) need to realize is that it is quite easy to block the movement of a large number of motor vehicles.  Through the use of discs and a couple other tractors, most any road can be made inpassable. As soon as the city people unload and try and walk through the mess, they present themselves as easy targets for strategically placed individuals.  If the city people plan on "invading" the country, they should also realize that a man defending his home fights much harder than somebody coming to a "distant land."

do you REALLY think that the city boys, on average, come anywhere close to the country boys as marksmen?  if so, its really a laughable argument...................

most city people have never HELD a gun!!!!!!!!

I doubt there is much difference, on average, between the firearm skills of country folks and city folks that are experienced with firearms.   There are a lot more city folks that own weapons, so if only a few are skilled, they still outnumber the country folks.  

Also, when you talk about skills, you get different results depending upon which cities you are talking about.  Folks living in the suburbs of NYC may be one thing, but the skills of surburban city folks in cities like Lubbock, Houston, Phoenix, Tulsa, Denver, Cheyene, Shreveport probably rival country folks in most ways.  

I don't know where you get your info / experience.  I have lived and travelled all over this union, and I stand by my answer.  

Yes, many city people have never held a gun.  That just makes them easier to train.  I could have your average "never held a gun" person competent within days.  Country folk who think they know everything - and don't - are often impossible to train - they are rife with bad habits.  11 years in the Army has solidified that stereotype within me.  I have never been impressed by soldiers who talk about all the "huntin'" they did back home.  Only the ones who have competed in NRA type competitions seem to come in with GOOD habits.

Yes, many "country folk" are very competent with firearms.  Percentage-wise, much more so than in the cities.  Still, even 90 percent of 100 people is only 90.  10% of 1,000 people is 100.  Percentages work that way.  Also, it aint nowhere NEAR 90%.

The sheer numbers of people in the cities still means an overall greater number of skilled, competent individuals - in everything from raising food to shooting.

[b]The city has already won with the corruption of your youth[/b]

ADAM WHITE,
Your comments are about as crazy as you are! I
would bet that I could take any country boy, or hell even any country girl and they would more than likly out shoot your normal city boy. If I was you I would not put my life in the hands of someone just because they shoot often at a range. If I'm correct, at the range the targets don't shoot back, and further more I don't know any country boys that go to the range to sight thier weapons in, they go to the hunting club or in the back yard to sight them in. I have seen with my own eyes big city shooters with thier high dollar guns and high dollar hunting gear come out here to the country for guided hunting tours and don't know thier head from thier asses. To address your coment on us thinking we know everything your wrong. The country is our way of life and if you take it as us being know it alls well, THATS LIFE.
Talk all you want but when it comes down to it
we can show you better than we can tell you.

Who says we're going to do any shooting? Psywar, baby! We'll plant ghetto blasters and low-riders and rice burners all over the countryside and bombard you with rap 24/7 until you Country Folk beg for mercy. [+]:D]

CW

We allready fought this war back in the 1800's...

Some of you here haven't accepted that the 'country folk' lost...

[;)]

The Civil War was fought on these exact same terms...

The South ('Country Folk') had the better commanders and troops, but insufficient numbers and supply/production capabilities...

The North had some really TERRIBLE commanders (and an enemy sympathizer for a SecState), but they held the advantage in production and naval power...


THEORETICAl-HOPE-IT-NEVER-HAPPENS-SCENARIO-STARTS-HERE

If you look at the distribution of forces and military production in the USA, the 'City Folk' would win hands down, just like last time...

Example: in WI, the 'country folk' have more hunting/small arms experience....

The 'city folk' have Crites Field (F-16s), Mitchell Field (KC-135s and C-130s), not to mantion a decent amount of mechanized equipment from the assorted ANG and Reserve stations, and the various minor surface combatanants that dock at the lake michigan ports (all in major cities)...

And that's just WI... If you look at the rest of the country, especially Air Force installations, most of them are protecting a major city, and would presumably be under the control of that city's population... Ditto for major production facilities, etc...

The country folk would get a bunch of training bases & Army installations, and although the USAF missile fields are generally in 'the country', these don't matter unless you believe that this nation would nuke itself...

Deer don't shoot back either. Maybe coutry folk can shoot better. But you better have alot of ammo

Well, see above...

Rifles don't work very well vs F-16s, and the Air Force is allotted much like the Navy was back in the 1800's (i.e. the urban centers have the air power, just like the North had the naval power)... This scenario is 'Civil War Redux', and nothing's changed...

As for supplies, big cities have airports, seaports, and most of the nation's economic machinery... The south had most of the food production in the Civil War too... The North had the naval power, railroads, and could bring it in from elsewhere, while denying the South the ability to trade it's farm products for weapons & other military equipment (blockade)... You can fit alot of food in a jumbo jet or military transport...

City folk would have the AIRFORCE, heavy equipment, and sufficient combat skills (remember, in addition to the hunters and 'gun people', who are present on both sides, there are more professionally trained weapon owners in the city, between military reservists (most of whom come from medium-to-larger communities, and have an urban job outside of their service committment) and police) to hold it and the cities themselves...

With that, the war would be won...

How does that contrast with what I said?



Do you guys even READ my posts?

They can't. No pichers.

CW

I guess to answer the question about City vs Country you can look at Afganistan. The City boys own the city and the Country boys own the country.

The city boys don't go out with out an armed convoy and the coutry boys don't come in lest to bomb some city folkes.

Who is winning?

Tom

I'm a surburbanite (sp?), so I don't know what side I'd be "assigned" to in this interesting debate...

But my $.02:

I don't see how such small numbers of "country folk" could possibly defend such a large landmass.

I also don't see how the same number could effectively assault a city.

Unless the "country folk" banded together and formed their own little "cities", I don't see there being a large enough group to make a big difference in any outcome of the "war". Then again, would that make them "city folk" if they did band together?

I think air and sea transportation would effectively solve the food crisis some people are thinking about, if necessary.

The main problem I see is the "city folk" being their own problem. As others have pointed out... many will sit around and do nothing, or possibly rebel/riot. I think that could tie up a lot of the "city folk's" resources right there, just dealing with themselves.

But as far as an actual war/battle between the city vs the country... I can't see there being enough country folk to make a difference. They'd either be too spread out to make a difference, or band together and give up that huge ammount of land mass that they once had.

If they band together, most of the same arguments that others have made agains the city folk will then apply to them... lack of food, etc.

Personally, I'd like to see the (generally) more conservative "country folk" win out... but I can't see that happening.

How would the "country folk" win?

Farmers assaulting the city? I think we'd all agree that an urban assault would be MUCH more difficult. Farmers clearing each and every building...?

Heh, this all would make for an interesting movie, indeed.

Starve the cities out? I guess attempts could be made to shut down mass transit places like sea and airports.

The only solution I see is to hopefully have a few "country folk" who know how to operate any outlying military equipment, such as the nukes.

WMD vs the cities themselves is the only feasable solution I can see to this war being won by the "country folk".

First, us country bumpkins are not about to repeat the tactics or errors of the South in the Civil War. Geez, gimme a break[rolleyes]

Second, the idea that we will try to invade the cities is ludicrous. There is NOTHING there we want. NOTHING. Our main goal would be to keep as many of you there as possible. We don't want you! We have seen what you did to the cities. Stay there, dammit[:D]

Third, you may be able to take me out. But I will guarantee you that I will take alot of scumbags out before they'd get to me, if ever.

Fourth, I've got food, water, game, meds, guns, ammo, supplies. You'll play hell getting all your shit out of the city.

Fifth, I am a damn good shot![;)]

Finally, you guys have not understood the scenario. This will be a gradual process and will end up being conservatives v. liberals the way I see it. It will simply be that conservatives will migrate out of the cities for the most part and liberals will migrate into them for security and protection their so-called political interests. There is already considerable polarity in this regard and this will only increase in this scenario. Fact is, many of you city boys, here at least, would be joining us. To those who don't before it is too late...Well, it would be too late. Bummer.

I still know where I'd rather be and you've got to get to me, not vice versa. Lock n Load!

[i]As the city slick'n [s]british[/s] troops filed down the narrow defiles (in there SUV's) of the blueridge [s]drakensberg[/s]  mountains, the city slick'n [s]british[/s] soldiers were potted like rabbits by the country [s]boer[/s]  commandos whose marksmanship with long rifles was unequalled[/i] [:D]


How do y’all like it? It’s a story I’m writing about the Brits…. Errr I mean city slickers versus the Boer….errrr I mean country folk!

DAVE A,
You talk about your jets, train, and autos. Guess what? We got some to. Just thought you would like to know we have a few bases down here with the same stuff. Tell me about your factories, dont the mexican gov. own them now?
By the way we have some of them too. Alot of your jobs are now in the south , say thank you to your unions and the other cry babys up there for me. You keep talking about what happen in the 1800s, but that was then and this is now and the out come will not come close to the last one. Oh, by the we also have running water now.........lol
Adam White,
You asked how did it contrast? It means you go train some city boy with a rifle give me a call and I will put your choise country boy or girl  on the range with you and they will out shoot him. We country folk wish we were as great as you big bad city boys who know everything. Hell I bet you were the one who trained RAMBO OR MAYBE IT WAS SEAL-TEAM SIX THROUGH TEN OR OR WAIT MAYBE YOU TRAINED THE THE THE CHIPMUNKS..................LOL

Look,
If this were to happen those in the city that were smart and got out alive would come to the country and be for the most part welcome. People would ban together in thier own little clans and will fight to the end to protect what they have. I would welcome any of you at any time, but it would be the gangbanger type that would get thier a$$es handed to them for most of these types of people the only thing they know is to take. Those are the ones you will have to fight off not people like us. North, South, West, Whatever we would have to come together then go from thier. The movie that comes to mind is the MAIL MAN.  

Do you mean "The Postman"?

I gots nothing but love for my city brothern....[:E]

Then the scenario (according to you) doesn't make sense.

IF all the conservatives moved to the country... the cities would be a bunch of bleeding heart liberals who wouldn't shoot a deer, much less try to wage war on the country folk.

IF the migration happened as you say, and you have no intention of ever entering or assaulting the city...

WHAT EXACTLY ARE WE WARING ABOUT?

The country folk don't want a war, the city folk don't want a war... NOBODY WANTS A WAR. And to top it all off, nobody even NEEDS a war.

If you country folk wanted to keep the liberals in the cities, well then TRADE with them and give them food in exchange for power, or whatever... this keeps them in their comfy little city away from you.

If the city folk don't want to deal with the gun toting militia, they can likewise stay put and trade to keep everyone happy.

I'm sorry, but I'm not buying into this war at all. There's nothing that would cause the war, no reason to sustain the war even if it did start, and nobody willing to fight in the war (according to your scenario).

I still think it'd be nearly impossible for the minority who has a majority of the landmass to "win" the theoretical war... As the only way to "win" the war would be to beat the opposing faction into submission.

"Keeping the city folk inside the city" isn't a war, nor would it be a valid tactic for winning any such war (unless you could cut all the transportation to all cities).