Play Conflict of Nations for FREE on PC or Mobile: 💥 con.onelink.me/kZW6/b2549bde Receive an Amazing New Player Pack, only available for the next 30 days!
Binkov, please make Republican vs Democrats in US 2nd civil war as predicted by Baba Vanga. Your Texas (Republican) vs California (Democrats) is just the beginning.
Yah i kind of wish he placed New Mexico on the side of California and Arizona on the side of Texas. This wayTexas would have to try and help Arizona and California would have to try and alleviate New Mexico, before somewhere clashing head-on. While in the meantime Arizona nad New Mexico are fighting each other, 2 front wars. Sort of making Arizona and New Mexico the Balkans of the region and starting a bigger war lol... But if Arizona can hold of Cali in like trech warfare, while Texas steam rolls right through New Mexico, that could sort of change where the real fighting takes place. Basically in the hills of Arizona.
@Kronos The Phoenix damn, that one moment when your political party is so strapped for ammunition against the liberals that you have to say that the 2% of extremists that rioted represent the entire political party and all of the other peaceful protests just didn't happen And then your political party goes and ransacks the FUCKING CAPITOL OF AMERICA, and yall try to justify it with "WeLl thE eLecTiOn wAs RigGeD" Sorry bud, you're the delusional one
@@anibalhyrulesantihero7021 Call me back when Conservatives cause billions in damages, murder several dozen people, torch half a dozen cities, make hundreds homeless, and and thousands jobless. If the best you've got is that Ben Shapiro stole AOC's shoes, then you might need to try harder.
@@Nonamelol. and you dont think the Texas Federation and or Atzlan (California Republic depending on situation) would let Colorado continue to have that firepower? Trust me they wont especially given that other states knows as well and very likely everyone will be gunning to take that state
@@johndoe5432 Alright, and how exactly? Disagreement is completely normal in the political world. If there isn't Disagreement it's usually a one party or dominant party state.
@ContentEnjoyer-gm3ky You could do that, but they’d be hard pressed to actually do anything considering the urbanites have them outnumbered. And also you could say the same thing for the city people in Texas.
@@arya31ful Texas is Eastward (it was founded in Arizona and it's capital is Flagstaff), and the reason is because they already had enough trouble conquering Colorado (as Lanius says at the end if you side against the Legion).
@@randlebrowne2048 No, Austin is full of a bunch of hippie liberals, but they are our hippie liberals. Best for others not to mess with them. Keep Austin weird!
Its pretty insane to look at how much military hardware just two US states (albeit some of the richer ones) have compared to some countries... shows how powerful the USA is as a whole.
the real tell is that both California and Texas would be in the top 10 most wealthy nations without the US. (US would still be first or second though, even without Cali and Texas)
Texas and California have a disproportionate amount of US military hardware. Fort Hood in Texas is a massive training center for tanks, and as the video mentioned, California has a large part of the Pacific fleet.
It has as much to do with the size of the states...geographically speaking. The remoteness of parts of those states, and the mild climates, as anything else.
California gangsters with shit handguns and no training against Texans with training and accurate rifles and sidearms. No contest..over 2/3 of Cali is pussy liberals.
@@phsynode4964 Bring them into the war more so than having their towns literally shelled by two combatants trying to hit each other on their territory?
@Allen In 2003 some overgrown trees in Ohio cause some downed lines. This ended up causing a cascade failure that took out the power for 55 million people as far east as Massachusetts, as far south as Maryland, and as far north as Toronto. The large multi-state grids are particularly vulnerable to a cascade failure at any point in the line. To do as you suggest California would need to protect the skies over every major western node around the clock while also breaching air defenses over Texas and scoring a critical hit. Texas, on the other hand, could just protect its own airspace and score a critical hit anywhere else on the western grid and render California dark. Hell, you don't even need to crash the entire western grid. California is already unable to supply its own electrical needs, as is evidenced by this past summer's blackouts. Nail any supplier that sends power to California and they're on their back foot. It's just not viable for California to prevent its power from getting cut while simultaneously knocking out Texas'.
@@jama5191 I'm from the deep South. I can hit the center of the O on a stop sign from a mile away with a good rifle and I'm just an average shot compared to most folks I know. Ain't no Yankee got that kind of aim.
Bro, we literally have F-35’s on carriers in California. We can sail right up to Houston and deploy them there. Meanwhile F-35’s from Texas would be tied up fighting Californian planes over the desert of Arizona and New Mexico. So yes, California does have air superiority.
@@chairmanofrussia Bro, you ever heard of attrition? Texas has the infrastructure and military power to simply drain you of military resources, if the military forces of both states did go to war, I hope you know that California would fall into Chaos in days...
In reality this war would come down to an immediate race to reach the Air Force boneyard in Arizona. It has thousands of planes that are all slightly out of date, in storage or undergoing modernization. While they’re not as effective as the newest fighters there would still be hundreds of F-16s, dozens of B-52s and many other capable aircraft.
I also believe that it would be a immediate race to reach the Air Force Boneyard. Anything that could be re-activated even outdated is one more jet that can carry one more bomb or missile and is also one more opponent for each side to face. The Bombers would be the main prize as well. The race will be likely who can get there. hold it and try to squirrel away with as much loot as they could back to the state before one gets pissed off enough to raze it to the ground. However I have a feeling the California would reach it first due to logistically being better and having likely a faster response time. If it could the CR would use the base as a FOB and use it to stage attacks on incoming Texan forces as it began to grab anything that could fly, or drag away. I've seen the maps. the base has enough transports to move a significant amount of aircraft, Its likely by the time Texans did manage to push back CR forces the state would have picked most of the good stuff and razed the rest. California also has a really nasty surprise if you look for the Sierra Army Depot near Nevada. Take a look. Yeah its really damn unfair at how much resources the state actually has at its disposal. I know the state was a heavily militerised state, but when you actually look into it. Its shocking how well armed California actually is.
@@AZrakoon this hypothetical conflict would be less about political republican or democratic lines and more about acquiring resources, land and influence. Former political alliegences would be non-existent as in this situation the US no longer exist at least in the west as a power. Everyone is at this point carving out new powers. It's likely Arizona wouldnt have the capability to defend itself adequately against either force and California would provide massive benefits to Arizona as well as Texas in terms of food, political influence and resources not to mention protection as both states have substantial national gaurd forces and that's not including any former US forces that joined the states. If your correct about a civil war in Arizona it would make the state easier for conquest from either side and likely realistically in such a hypothetical situation Arizona likely would end up split as a buffer state between California and Texas or more likely conquered by Californa and used as a buffer state against Texas which likely would focus east and north. Texas would try, but more than likely the two former states would come to a treaty of Arizona and push interest elsewhere.
I remember in the joke when I served was; 20% came from the west coast, 20% came from the east, 30% comes from the middle and the rest come exclusively out of Texas
"In this fantastical scenario, the people residing in both states become fiercely loyal to said state". Uhm, have you ever talked to a Texan? We already are. Texas Uber Alles, y'all!
This didn't talk about morale and citizen motivation. I want a graphic of 4WD diesel pickups with 50 cal mounts and Gadsden flags vs a fleet of prius and Teslas with rainbow stickers!
There may also be a, for lack of a better phrase, "enthusiasm gap" between the two, favoring the Texans. I imagine Californians being more likely to draft dodge during this, whereas Texans have been dreaming of this moment for years.
The average person's loyalty is irrelevant. Most of the military personnel in any state are not from that state. I was in the USMC in California and I live in Texas now, pretty sure the fifth column would be the US military itself in California...
For the sake of his videos' he always has to assume equal morale. but you are correct, I have to imagine Californians are considerably less likely to want to be at war than the "Succession is in our constitution" Texans. By that Account though, AZ would likely side with Texas and NM would likely side with Cali, and that would make this video even more interesting.
Realistically the California National Guard outnumbers the California based USMC bout 10 to 1. And the National Guard has more air assets than the USMC in California.
But there is no such thing as a solid red or blue state. The cities tend to be blue and outside tends to be red. That is certainly true here in Fl which is classified as a "red" state but in reality if we had a political party based war, it would be more county vs. county but even then, I have neighbors who are independent, Repub. and Dem.
If a war ever broke out between these two, one side would have about as many guns as inhabitants, the other would be unsure about which bathroom to use...
Binkov your videos have gotten so much better. You're on the algorithm again too so I say keep up the amazing work of those analyses and I stg you're gonna at least be at 550k to 525k when it slows again
@@danmorgan3685, I wouldn't say that to their faces because they're fiercely loyal, as a whole. The reason that many of them volunteer is because they're very patriotic, and they could not imagine staying in the nest until they're 40.
It would be brutal fighting in tuscon, Az and the only highway, I-10 linking them together would be littered with thousands of burned up vehicles on both sides.
Eh well some FPS games have proven to improve troop preformence...One of the reasons most armies have military simulators and why some games are supported by their countries militaries. Propoganda aside games do desansetize potential soldiers and can give some basic knowlage or experience.
@@usonumabeach300 You need to redefine how you use the word 'many', service members (current or former) make up a tiny amount of the population, especially compared to the amount of people who game. The original point still stands, the Californian gamers who spend their days snacking in their gaming chairs would piss themselves when confronted with experienced outdoorsmen that are well versed in firearms. Binkov's scenario's always assume that both sides have a strong will to fight, but in a real war it's always the people with the most determined population that wins, and the soy boys would run for their safe spaces the moment things got tough. Say what you like about Texas, but those people are fanatical about protecting their homeland, they wouldn't give an inch
@@command_unit7792There's a world of difference between a military simulator and Call of Duty. Have you ever actually been in an airforce combat simulator? Most video games are designed to feed your ego, they're trying to make you feel like an action hero. They don't teach you close infantry tactics, they don't teach you how to actually fire a weapon and they don't teach you how to be physically fit (all of which are vital). They're designed to make you feel good, so they're designed to be winnable and don't require real lateral thinking (just that you learn the game rules). Only the most violent games desensitise people, your average game isn't as gory as real life. Movies probably do more to desensitise than video games. You seem the kind of person who doesn't know the difference between playing Medal of Honour and actually being deserving of one.
@@goldenrepublic6848 that's what the French said irl. Granted, it was about the hilly part of Belgium but still. Btw I'm not Seppo just making a few jokes
Being another state and watching this happening is like watching two of your best friends fight each other while all your other friends are just staring at them.
California's militia would not even be an issue. They'd happily overthrow Californians govt at any given opportunity. Not to mention it'd be Calis 10 round magazine vs Texas 30 rd.
Californian gun laws. That’s my argument about militias. I feel confident in saying that Texans would be more than willing to form paramilitary groups or join the direct war effort, but imagine trying to draft Californians.
The question is can california get everything up and running before texas sets in. 1 match and 4 c4s could disarm everything. But just try and get all of your citizens in militias without power nor silicon valley.
@@castellomichel5851 What I was saying is that Because it has its own power grid, there are less targets to bomb. And you can't get everyone together through broken telephones lines or limited walkie talkies.
@@baneh1329 surprisingly we have the supplies to build pretty good IEDs and quite a few of us have at least 1 50 cal. plus we have a lot of unfunctional machine guns that are pretty easy to get working
You really not going to mention the gigantic disparity in firearms? California has some of the strictest gun laws in the nation. A lot of machine guns are in Texas, legally.
@@zachjordan7608 which is what a modern war would be like with conventional ground troops having to use anti insurgency tactics to keep up. Traditional ground forces would likely not be as important in an American Civil war
It's only useful for defensive, on the offense, most gun owners doesn't have the training, physical prowess, or organization to march thousands of miles.
Every Texas: Pick up their gun and join the fight. Texans- What you mean we have to walk? Can't I use my rascal scooter? "In Texas, approximately one in three residents is obese, putting the state in 10th place (tied with Oklahoma) for highest obesity rates in the U.S. The 16th annual State of Obesity: Better Policies for a Healthier America report by the Trust for America's Health found 34.8 percent of Texans were obese" California ranks 46th in obesity =p
Good video! It would be interesting to see a similar wargame where each state only has access to their respective National Guard units (and paramilitary units such as civilian militias) as opposed to ALL US military units based in the their states.
@@renaissancenovice7202 In fairness to this scenario, at the start he did say each state has access to all military units based within each state. But I do agree if a scenario is gamed out between both states without any outside intervention, it would not make sense to involve the Federal troops stationed within the states
Yeah. The mindset will matter a lot. Texas loves guns and a tough self image, and California is deciding if they want to wear pantyhose today. This is a barroom bet.
I will support Texas, even when I'm from Central Mexico. Also they have more meat than hippie California and I always support those who can feed bettter.
@@usecriticalthinking243 There are more soldiers serving in the military born in California then there are Texas. About 20,000 more to be exact. It’s not a crazy huge difference but it a difference. Percentage wise, Texans are more likely to serve though.
But Commissar Binkov says it's more likely a defensive war on both since both them can't push too far. So trench warfare may be? Imagine digging trenches all the way from Canada border to Florida
Biniov does not take into account many things. He is wrong with most things unfortunately. As a former soldier I can attest to what may play out more than his scenarios from first hand experience in things.
I think the air force edge and naval dominance give this one to Cali, though it would be interesting to see the breakdown with just national guard forces.
Its not realistic to expect California to support anything beyond maybe a few subs in the gulf, to far from bases for anything else. Also the f16 and f35 are built in texas, Texas stays defensive long enough to build up enough airpower and then goes on the offense. Even if the gulf is blockaded can still trade over land borders. On the gun issue, California bans the most military use type of firearms, semi auto rifles. Texas has a huge number of them, I've got five in my own house and I'm not unusual. There are also many manufacturers in the state. Infantry can also be trained in just a few months plus Texas has a huge veteran population and many have moved here from other states. Just a few points more points that would swing things in texas's favor.
I think you underestimated the tech and economic edge California has. While there's many tech companies in places like Austin, there's significantly more in California, and bigger ones at that. This coupled with unblockaded trade routes to Asia and plenty of money from the bigger economy means that after a few months of defensive posturing, California would be armed with highly advanced missiles and drones, ready to take on the offensive.
Well in advancement, I am not entirely sure that you'll have the most advanced drones. (At least by military standards.) You could have a lot of drones that are 'advanced enough'. ua-cam.com/video/ypAGf9O37Sc/v-deo.html
@@antikommunistischaktion "and all you have to do to take out California is take over the Hoover Dam" you make that sound like it'd be easy which it sure as hell wouldn't lmao.
@@thyreradim7885 It really wood be, southern California relies on the Hoover Dam for water and power, and southern California is where most of the people are.
I know this is a hypothetical scenario, but I would like to point out some things. 1) if this were to happen it would be a political war which means both states would likely see a huge influx of personnel agreeing with their side. 2) neither State would actually be able to use Federal resources meaning they'd be left with State Miltia and possibly National Guard Forces. 3) the types and locations of bases are not secret information so the plan from Texas would be to end the conflict before California's Naval assets could infiltrate the Gulf so California would need to make preemptive moves to get its Naval assets in position prior to the start of the conflict. 4) even if California were able to blockade the Gulf it would not hamper Texas' trade because Texas could use land based routes between other States and Mexico even going as far as using ports outside of the State for international trade. 5) both States would likely try to sway neighbors at least to join them or try to annex them to bolster their fighting capabilities which further exacerbates the political divide bolstering the forces for both sides. 6) niether side would actually win this war on its own because niether would actually make moves to invade the other and would focus on protecting critical infrastructure from attacks.
Californian's are pretty well armed too, but individual gun ownership doesn't mean anything in a conventional war. It's about resources, logistics and manpower. Both states are very formidable when it comes to that and despite the rep of California being a bunch of woke soyboys. The military recruits heavily from California and trains many troops there because of the diverse biome that allow training in various environments. The state is also less on the heavier side, I used to be a buck 50 before moving to Texas and gaining 0 pounds on the food here. Anyways I wouldn't count Texas out either but it's certianly not because of the big mouths that own 20 taticool guns and vote republican. Those people are a liability if anything.
I did like this video, but I do have to say it's a pretty bold assertion to think that all the military in California would actively choose to fight a war for California against Texas.
it's not an assertion, it's an assumption, in order to make the video possible. Well, he could have done a NG v NG matchup, but maybe those are harder to research (or too puny to be interesting)
@@SomeGuy-ty7kr Thinking that all those people, from the rest of the country, would side with Cal, just because they are stationed there is dumb! How many of the people in the cal. NG are even from the big urban areas like SF and LA? How many of them even give a rat's ass for the views of the people who are running their state? America has an all volunteer military! What percentage of Californians enlist? How many of them serve in their own state? What percentage of them share the values of the people who control their state?
Federal forces in each state being included in this scenario ruined the whole thing. Texas National Guard vs California National Guard would have been interesting. This scenario is a farce,
I was thinking the federal forces (USN, USAF, USMC and USA) of each state would be left out and the Army/Air National Guard units plus militia groups would go at it. That would likely be a more realistic scenario.
Well, our sock puppet left out Green Beret's how many in each state in service and retired. They would be with the military and well are force multipliers. He also forgot that in Texas deer hunting is almost a religion. Texas would have an edge in that regard. You make a very valid point Tito and the Yugoslav partisans tided down a lot of germans during WW II.
Something you didn't take into account when talking about militias with military experience is the demographics of the veterans in each state. Average veteran age in California is over 65, they are WWII & Vietnam vets. In Texas the largest age group is the 35+ category, they are Iraq & Afghanistan vets with experience on modern equipment and tactics.
@@retardcorpsman Not even remotely. In WWII or Vietnam there was conscription, you would serve your few months, live or die and then get on with your life. Today we have a volunteer military that has been at war for 20 years. Instead of fighting a civilised war like WWII where the Geneva convention was mostly respected and the enemy wore uniforms, surrender means you will be rappeed, tortured, killed, your corpse rappeed again before your body is dragged through the streets naked. A modern special forces vet doesn't write love letters home to the swet lady he agreed to marry before he went to war. He is bitter from getting dumped and duped by a fat feminist who robbed him and is comfortable with his killboner.
disposabull You also kinda forgot WW2 was one of the only times the US fought against an enemy that was equal, if not superior in many aspects, against the US. In the following remaining wars, no other nation America faced was as militarily competent or organised as Germany was. You also forgot most MOH in WW2 were hundreds of times much more impressive than any medal of honor received in future wars. No American soldier in the wars after WW2 took out a “cream of the crop” German armoured brigade with an MG alone and won like Murphy did. Fighting violent extremists is impressive and all..but that’s no comparison to the German army at its prime. They were just as violent and just as extreme in their ideologies but was much more orderly and heavily armed.. You also forgot most of the men from WW2 came straight from the great depression, meaning they were roughing it out on the streets before they even joined WW2. In the 1940’s, Hollywood stars were shooting out with the Krauts and racking up the medal of honors for their service. Would a 1990’s or 1980’s hollywood star do the same? Volunteer or not, I have no doubt the roughened up boys from 1930-1940s California and New York who took out a fully mechanised brigade with an MG would beat up any 1980+ Commiefornia lad who’s best accomplishment was taking out a squad of poorly led Iraqi republican guards.
@@retardcorpsman If you think there was anyone in the WWII era capable of going toe to toe against guys like Tim Kennedy or Jocko you are delusional. The Nazi's fought according to the Geneva convention, hence why there were so many prisoners taken by both sides. Have you ever heard of a camp set up by ISIS or the Taliban for POW's? Thought not. The veterans from the modern era have much better nutrition and training, they are a lot faster, stronger and better warriors. You seem to be forgetting that the majority of soldiers in WWI & WWII would deliberately fire their rifles over the heads of the enemy because they didn't want to hurt anyone.
disposabull Tim Kennedy and Jocko only make up a small number of the entire modern army roster. If we’re talking about the 20s-40s generation going head to head with the 80s to 2000s kids, Im betting 90% of the prohibition era guys would be mopping up the spoiled kids of 80s and 90s no doubt. Not to mention Kennedy’s skills with the gun pale in comparison with the likes of Murphy. Murphy took the most effective fighting force of the 1940s head on with a machine gun alone, What would Tim do? Boast about his MMA skills while Murphy’s ‘bout to load a .50 BMG to his head? POW camps or not, taking out a Taliban position will never be as impressive as taking on an entire German armoured division or fighting and winning against the Fallshirmjaegers, aka the navy seals of their time. Being scary isnt a match for training and weaponry, both of which the Germans excelled in their time. You also forgot that the US military beyond the 1950s was responsible for the pull-out of Afghanistan and Vietnam whereas the US continued an ongoing war with the Germans and the Japs in WW2 without thinking of pulling back once. The soft 80s and 90s generation is responsible for California’s stance on pacifism whereas any 1920 or 1940 Californian would be all up for nuking Afghanistan and Vietnam to kingdom come. You’re pitting up the greatest generation of all time vs a snowflake generation who was triggered by rap music. How exactly are the 80s and 90s guys gonna compete exactly?
Play Conflict of Nations for FREE on PC or Mobile:
💥 con.onelink.me/kZW6/b2549bde
Receive an Amazing New Player Pack, only available for the next 30 days!
Could Modern Indonesia Hold off against the Japanese in World War II??????
Turkey vs egypt plzz
C.S.A vs Fire Nation
ua-cam.com/video/Ilu8A0g9W5E/v-deo.html
Binkov, please make Republican vs Democrats in US 2nd civil war as predicted by Baba Vanga. Your Texas (Republican) vs California (Democrats) is just the beginning.
Arizona/NewMexico: “I feel like Belgium”
And Netherlands
Yah i kind of wish he placed New Mexico on the side of California and Arizona on the side of Texas. This wayTexas would have to try and help Arizona and California would have to try and alleviate New Mexico, before somewhere clashing head-on. While in the meantime Arizona nad New Mexico are fighting each other, 2 front wars. Sort of making Arizona and New Mexico the Balkans of the region and starting a bigger war lol... But if Arizona can hold of Cali in like trech warfare, while Texas steam rolls right through New Mexico, that could sort of change where the real fighting takes place. Basically in the hills of Arizona.
Best joke! Lol take a bow 👏 👏 👏 👏
Then who's going to be the Soviet Union? Florida?
*chuckles in danger*
Ahhhhhh yes the great Californian leader Arnold Schwarzenegger versus the great Texan leader Chuck Norris
Clash of the titans
With Arnold California would have a chance but with these commies no.
against chuck norris there is never a fight only defeat
Arnie vs. GW Bush
Yeah, well, if Newsom is leading California they might as well surrender on day 1.
Be honest, a lot of Texans dream about this happening
Won’t happen they hate themselves too much
That's the thing. Most conservatives are usually more bloodthirsty.
@Kronos The Phoenix Says the guy whose political party has vandalized the Capitol recently.
@Kronos The Phoenix damn, that one moment when your political party is so strapped for ammunition against the liberals that you have to say that the 2% of extremists that rioted represent the entire political party and all of the other peaceful protests just didn't happen
And then your political party goes and ransacks the FUCKING CAPITOL OF AMERICA, and yall try to justify it with "WeLl thE eLecTiOn wAs RigGeD"
Sorry bud, you're the delusional one
@@anibalhyrulesantihero7021 Call me back when Conservatives cause billions in damages, murder several dozen people, torch half a dozen cities, make hundreds homeless, and and thousands jobless.
If the best you've got is that Ben Shapiro stole AOC's shoes, then you might need to try harder.
That moment when 2 US states have more firepower than most countries.
If nukes were allowed, they'd say, "Don't mess with North Dakota." At the peak of the cold war, it was the third largest nuclear power in the world.
Because that’s 2 important us states 😂 compare colorado’s fire power to other countries and now it’s a whole different story.
America is stacked
@@Nonamelol. As a Colorado citzen I find this offensive, we will crush them with our Rockies.
@@Nonamelol. and you dont think the Texas Federation and or Atzlan (California Republic depending on situation) would let Colorado continue to have that firepower?
Trust me they wont especially given that other states knows as well and very likely everyone will be gunning to take that state
Texas: Use a gun. And if that don’t work, use more gun.
Good one
OK Engie! XD!!!
Engineer gaming
Texans stumbling into battle with 5 hand guns and 8 rifles strapped to their bodies.
The engineer is engi here
"America isn't that polarized"
America:
I don’t think anyone is saying that anymore lmao
Nobody ever says that. Even though it is true.
We will see the end of the "United" States within our lifetime.
@@johndoe5432 Alright, and how exactly? Disagreement is completely normal in the political world. If there isn't Disagreement it's usually a one party or dominant party state.
Texas: "Hold my beer!"
California: "Hold my kombucha!"
California declares war on Texas
Texans: You just ye’d your last haw
You made me actually laugh out loud 🤣
Texas: So much for the tolerant left
Yaint know how to spell
Your profile pic suits your comment perfectly
Texas would no longer be part of the U.S if all our tomahawks vaporize texas lol. 🤣
Texans in these comments coping because California wouldn’t just sit down and cry as they march into San Francisco.
Deadass😂
@ContentEnjoyer-gm3ky You could do that, but they’d be hard pressed to actually do anything considering the urbanites have them outnumbered. And also you could say the same thing for the city people in Texas.
Love how he made Texas red and California blue
@@HamanKarn567 He meant it about Texas being conservative and California liberal
@@theodoreroosevelt4260 : Remember when red was the color of communism, and now it's the color of the Russian's conservative allies in America?
@@andrewszigeti2174 anticommunist/antisocialist, totally russian allies. Ignorant fool.
@@andrewszigeti2174 tell me how are they Russian conservative allies?
@@quarkfnts : And yet they openly revere former KGB agent Vladimir Putin and support his interference in our elections.
But the true question remains: could the NCR beat the Legion after the battle of Hoover dam?
Now we're talking! Especially wwiii in fallout looks like it could really happen irl
Shoddycast covered it brilliantly. Seriously - check it out 🙂
ua-cam.com/video/pgw3NgYTR6U/v-deo.html
But it begs another question. Why the Legion didn't try to expand eastward towards Texas instead.
Edit : "eastward"
@@arya31ful Texas is Eastward (it was founded in Arizona and it's capital is Flagstaff), and the reason is because they already had enough trouble conquering Colorado (as Lanius says at the end if you side against the Legion).
Now we’re asking the real questions!! 💯💯
Well, If you weren't in FBI's watchlist until now, you probably just made it, gratz😅
That's true
He doesn't sound american, I don't think they care
@@Sonofthebear Gitmo don’t discriminate on nationality its equal opportunity.
@@Sonofthebear CIA then because i think he is russian
Unfunny meme
He isn't american. He's german
"Don't mess with Texas"
California: "Hold my soy latte"
And let me fix my man bun first...
@@conservativetexan629 a man bun or human hair bun🤣
Texas is great until the stumble upon a Californian I lived it first hand lmao!!
Lol
@@ivakaste6218 sure bud. The average Texan has 26 guns
Imagine getting a heart from Binkov
Imagine no more!
I'm jealous.
Holy shit you made it! Talk about a Christmas miracle right there!
Wait wait wait, what happens here?!?!?!?!
@@falfon4706 You did well son.
California declares war on Texas.
Texans: Years of academy training well spent!
“California has declared war on Texas”
*entire state of Texas let’s out a collective yee-haw as Austin and San Francisco are nuked
For that matter, many Texans would actually cheer on a nuclear false-flag attack on Austin.
@@randlebrowne2048 Yeah, them big cities tend to be pretty democratic.
@@randlebrowne2048 No, Austin is full of a bunch of hippie liberals, but they are our hippie liberals. Best for others not to mess with them. Keep Austin weird!
Texan : Sounds like a win win
As a Texan, just like to mention that I dont think ive ever heard anyone actually say "yee haw".
Its pretty insane to look at how much military hardware just two US states (albeit some of the richer ones) have compared to some countries... shows how powerful the USA is as a whole.
the real tell is that both California and Texas would be in the top 10 most wealthy nations without the US. (US would still be first or second though, even without Cali and Texas)
Texas and California have a disproportionate amount of US military hardware. Fort Hood in Texas is a massive training center for tanks, and as the video mentioned, California has a large part of the Pacific fleet.
@@kokofan50 This. If we looked at the dakotas we'd be counting police departments haha.
It has as much to do with the size of the states...geographically speaking. The remoteness of parts of those states, and the mild climates, as anything else.
Binkhov = Insanity
Texans in general: So anyway I started blasting.
Californians in general: So I put on Tupac hit em up and let these Texans know whats really gangster
🤣
California gangsters with shit handguns and no training against Texans with training and accurate rifles and sidearms. No contest..over 2/3 of Cali is pussy liberals.
@@Jaystonishing Texas is going to save America
@@TRUMP2024-m1y yeah okay ... right after you book your flight to cancun like Ted Cruz? Or by imposing your far right views onto others?? Gtfoh
México would be like "can I annex the loser?"
They can take back California
The Federal Government:
Fuck no.
@@TheSkyGuy77 I mean if Texas/CA are slugging it out i highly doubt the fed exists any longer lol
As a Mexican trust me we don’t want anything to do with those territories
They’re all yours
Texas and California: yeah let’s have a war smack in the middle of New Mexico!
New Mexico: CHILL OUT I NEED MY ROOM!
New Mexico and Arizona:
welp, guess the neighbors are fighting
lets just not resist either side.
Yup
More like
New Mexico: Mom ! Dad ! Stop fighting in my room !
@@DigitalYojimbo yeah lol!
California vs Texas vs New Mexico's Narcos
Small caveat: Texas could crash the western electrical grid and greatly hamper California's war effort. Texas, however, has a self-contained grid.
@Hitler Tacos and Ponies so? U gonna use them in a war?
Yes, but that would likely bring neutral states into the war, because of their lack of power
@@phsynode4964 Bring them into the war more so than having their towns literally shelled by two combatants trying to hit each other on their territory?
@@phsynode4964 hopefully my state teams up to defeat California. They deserve an asset king by my estimate
@Allen In 2003 some overgrown trees in Ohio cause some downed lines. This ended up causing a cascade failure that took out the power for 55 million people as far east as Massachusetts, as far south as Maryland, and as far north as Toronto. The large multi-state grids are particularly vulnerable to a cascade failure at any point in the line. To do as you suggest California would need to protect the skies over every major western node around the clock while also breaching air defenses over Texas and scoring a critical hit. Texas, on the other hand, could just protect its own airspace and score a critical hit anywhere else on the western grid and render California dark. Hell, you don't even need to crash the entire western grid. California is already unable to supply its own electrical needs, as is evidenced by this past summer's blackouts. Nail any supplier that sends power to California and they're on their back foot. It's just not viable for California to prevent its power from getting cut while simultaneously knocking out Texas'.
I think Californians and Texans have waited for this for a long time...
From Texas: Can confirm
It wouldn't be just Texas. The entire South would smash California into about 16 San Francisco piles of crap. People down here are wanting a war
The north east wouldn’t watch idly make sure to choose your battle.
@@jama5191
I'm from the deep South. I can hit the center of the O on a stop sign from a mile away with a good rifle and I'm just an average shot compared to most folks I know. Ain't no Yankee got that kind of aim.
Californians haven't because we don't live with Texas on our minds all the time lol
“California has air superiority”
Texas: has Lockheed Martin building F-35s in Fort Worth.
Also F35s at Ellington Field in Houston to protect the coast.
and several major airbases
@@justarandomtechpriest1578 California has a shit ton of major air force bases as well, including ones that have B-2 bombers.
Bro, we literally have F-35’s on carriers in California. We can sail right up to Houston and deploy them there. Meanwhile F-35’s from Texas would be tied up fighting Californian planes over the desert of Arizona and New Mexico. So yes, California does have air superiority.
@@chairmanofrussia Bro, you ever heard of attrition? Texas has the infrastructure and military power to simply drain you of military resources, if the military forces of both states did go to war, I hope you know that California would fall into Chaos in days...
In reality this war would come down to an immediate race to reach the Air Force boneyard in Arizona. It has thousands of planes that are all slightly out of date, in storage or undergoing modernization. While they’re not as effective as the newest fighters there would still be hundreds of F-16s, dozens of B-52s and many other capable aircraft.
I also believe that it would be a immediate race to reach the Air Force Boneyard. Anything that could be re-activated even outdated is one more jet that can carry one more bomb or missile and is also one more opponent for each side to face. The Bombers would be the main prize as well. The race will be likely who can get there. hold it and try to squirrel away with as much loot as they could back to the state before one gets pissed off enough to raze it to the ground.
However I have a feeling the California would reach it first due to logistically being better and having likely a faster response time. If it could the CR would use the base as a FOB and use it to stage attacks on incoming Texan forces as it began to grab anything that could fly, or drag away. I've seen the maps. the base has enough transports to move a significant amount of aircraft, Its likely by the time Texans did manage to push back CR forces the state would have picked most of the good stuff and razed the rest.
California also has a really nasty surprise if you look for the Sierra Army Depot near Nevada.
Take a look. Yeah its really damn unfair at how much resources the state actually has at its disposal.
I know the state was a heavily militerised state, but when you actually look into it. Its shocking how well armed California actually is.
Tucson is blue, but a lot of people are also right leaning. That would be a civil war in its self.
@@AZrakoon this hypothetical conflict would be less about political republican or democratic lines and more about acquiring resources, land and influence. Former political alliegences would be non-existent as in this situation the US no longer exist at least in the west as a power. Everyone is at this point carving out new powers. It's likely Arizona wouldnt have the capability to defend itself adequately against either force and California would provide massive benefits to Arizona as well as Texas in terms of food, political influence and resources not to mention protection as both states have substantial national gaurd forces and that's not including any former US forces that joined the states.
If your correct about a civil war in Arizona it would make the state easier for conquest from either side and likely realistically in such a hypothetical situation Arizona likely would end up split as a buffer state between California and Texas or more likely conquered by Californa and used as a buffer state against Texas which likely would focus east and north. Texas would try, but more than likely the two former states would come to a treaty of Arizona and push interest elsewhere.
If Texas gets them first, California can just bomb them with cruise missiles
Meh, bomb it.- Texas
I think Binkov now needs to make a Wisconsin v Michigan war for the Upper Peninsula to compete with this
And a North vs South Dakota.
It belongs to Wisconsin! On Wisconsin!
I was just thinking that
Cheese vs cars who will win
Nothing would get done, everyone would just be getting drunk every day
“Patrolling the Mojave almost makes ya wish for a nuclear winter” - Texas ranger 2236
Texas: Coke
California: Diet Coke
This is the South: Dr Pepper!
Florida: cocaine
The rust belt: Meth
Georgia: Coca-Cola
But Diet Coke only in 8oz servings. Once per day, with a background check and extra taxes.
People: I hope 2021 will be better
Meanwhile in 2021
Binkov: Hey check out this second US civil war scenario
lol ikr
Fun fact Texas actually has it's own standing military force. The Texas Guard. This force is a seperate force dedicated to the state itself.
Is the Texas National Guard. Almost every state has them.
@@tetraxis3011 No, the national Guard and Texas Guard are different. Texas also has National Guard with the Texas Guard. The TX Guard isn't Federal.
stateguard.cmd.ca.gov/public/
YEE YEE
If LA street gangs unite, they would bully texas national guard lol
I remember in the joke when I served was; 20% came from the west coast, 20% came from the east, 30% comes from the middle and the rest come exclusively out of Texas
so you are saying 30%?
Lol california covers most of the west coast.
@@shredder8525 ignoring Alaska I guess?
True, I met a lot of Texans in the Army.
So 30 percent?
Damn it, just destroy hollywood already
I would consider it a victory if they just bombed that and Silicon Valley
destroying hollywood is the post war fun....
Yes 🙏
@@007kingifrit I find war crimes disgusting but I’m behind this if no innocents get hurt.
@@ferretman6790 don't worry, there arn't any innocents in Hollywood
"In this fantastical scenario, the people residing in both states become fiercely loyal to said state".
Uhm, have you ever talked to a Texan? We already are.
Texas Uber Alles, y'all!
If only Texas became Prussian lmao
And Texas is not going alone, but let’s pray it never happens.
That's not even impossible though. Texas had waves of German immigrants
in the 1700s and 1800s.
I can agree
Californian here. This is like wondering who would win in a fight between your best friend and your girlfriend and the answer is "No! please stop!"
True.
lmfaooo hahhaah
Merry Holiday Binkov. Proud Texan, loved the video.
All we need is a few pounds of snow to defeat the Texans.
OOOOOOOOOOOOF
Lmaooo
Works for Californians as well...
Wouldn't that work for both sides?
All we need is a few fires to defeat California.
This didn't talk about morale and citizen motivation.
I want a graphic of 4WD diesel pickups with 50 cal mounts and Gadsden flags vs a fleet of prius and Teslas with rainbow stickers!
There may also be a, for lack of a better phrase, "enthusiasm gap" between the two, favoring the Texans. I imagine Californians being more likely to draft dodge during this, whereas Texans have been dreaming of this moment for years.
Texas alles
The word you’re looking for is morale
The average person's loyalty is irrelevant. Most of the military personnel in any state are not from that state. I was in the USMC in California and I live in Texas now, pretty sure the fifth column would be the US military itself in California...
@@spiffyracc thanks for pointing it out.
For the sake of his videos' he always has to assume equal morale. but you are correct, I have to imagine Californians are considerably less likely to want to be at war than the "Succession is in our constitution" Texans. By that Account though, AZ would likely side with Texas and NM would likely side with Cali, and that would make this video even more interesting.
Surprisingly enough, this comments section, isn't as toxic as the comments sections on most of Binkov's other videos.
Comments will be toxic if you mention these few places:
-Southeast Asia
-India
-China
@XJT习近平思想 and the uk
that’s because we’re americans
@@wongijen9167 also turkey.
@@Laking1234 We? I'm not American, plus I've seen plenty of toxic/dumb American comments on other Binkov videos
Realistically, the majority of the USMC would not fight for cali
Realistically the California National Guard outnumbers the California based USMC bout 10 to 1. And the National Guard has more air assets than the USMC in California.
Shiver me timbers m8
realistically no marine would fight another state.
Funny man
@@willdbo I just know California lives in your head rent free.
Hey Binkov! You might as well do the Blue vs. Red states civil war :/
sweet! Now do a civil war of red states vs blue states.
We already did that once
But there is no such thing as a solid red or blue state. The cities tend to be blue and outside tends to be red. That is certainly true here in Fl which is classified as a "red" state but in reality if we had a political party based war, it would be more county vs. county but even then, I have neighbors who are independent, Repub. and Dem.
That would be based.
@@tjmoo3576 Part 2 Electric Boogaloo!
I think we know what side is pro 2A lol
If a war ever broke out between these two, one side would have about as many guns as inhabitants, the other would be unsure about which bathroom to use...
Underrated comment.
Binkov your videos have gotten so much better. You're on the algorithm again too so I say keep up the amazing work of those analyses and I stg you're gonna at least be at 550k to 525k when it slows again
Guys when he said Texas was the biggest continental state. It means Texas is biggest in the US homeland, as for Alaska is not
You also have to consider that something like 40% of the marine corps comes from Texas.
In my OSUT platoon half our bay was from Texas
USonuMabeaCh, yeah I was wondering about defections, and I think CA would suffer far more than TX.
USonuMabeaCh, I think the TX morale would also be far higher than CA, and that's a force multiplier.
How many of them joined to *escape* Texas?
@@danmorgan3685, I wouldn't say that to their faces because they're fiercely loyal, as a whole. The reason that many of them volunteer is because they're very patriotic, and they could not imagine staying in the nest until they're 40.
I'm just here for the comments, y'all.
- A former Californian, current Texan.
"You have to go back"
- Donald Trump
@Idk Idk As long as you haven't brought stupid leftist ideas that have f*cked up california. Welcome.
I hope you don't continue to vote for the same liberal policies that you ran from.
These comments are indeed as salty as i was expecting.
And no I’m not a god damn Democrat.
Nah, don't come back... we don't like traitors anyways.... we're about to go full Tupac on Texas and hit em up ... west side for life!
Bruh fighting in southern Arizona and new Mexico would probably be the worst parts
Yes, yes it would.
Totally.
It would be brutal fighting in tuscon, Az and the only highway, I-10 linking them together would be littered with thousands of burned up vehicles on both sides.
@@smokeypuppy417 And that's before the fighting even starts! 😂
@@RobinTheBot lmao. As an arizonan, can confirm
New York: “Hey Florida are you seeing this? This is great!”
Florida: *unintelligible mumbling*
New York: “ugh, bath salts again? Really?”
Illinois: *eating popcorn*
Don't rule it out, Binkov. There's already a California to Texas exodus.
Austin, a colony of California
@@EchoTravelsUSA damn commies💀💀
Texas will soon might become blue
In 2020 this wouldn’t even be surprising
Thats right phuck California
@@matthewwarren7879 Politics aside I wouldn’t live in California or Texas lol
People must understand that FPS gamers aren't real soldiers
People must understand that many people who play FPS games are current or former servicemembers.
Eh well some FPS games have proven to improve troop preformence...One of the reasons most armies have military simulators and why some games are supported by their countries militaries.
Propoganda aside games do desansetize potential soldiers and can give some basic knowlage or experience.
You say that but I swear I can run faster when holding a knife.
@@usonumabeach300 You need to redefine how you use the word 'many', service members (current or former) make up a tiny amount of the population, especially compared to the amount of people who game.
The original point still stands, the Californian gamers who spend their days snacking in their gaming chairs would piss themselves when confronted with experienced outdoorsmen that are well versed in firearms.
Binkov's scenario's always assume that both sides have a strong will to fight, but in a real war it's always the people with the most determined population that wins, and the soy boys would run for their safe spaces the moment things got tough. Say what you like about Texas, but those people are fanatical about protecting their homeland, they wouldn't give an inch
@@command_unit7792There's a world of difference between a military simulator and Call of Duty. Have you ever actually been in an airforce combat simulator?
Most video games are designed to feed your ego, they're trying to make you feel like an action hero. They don't teach you close infantry tactics, they don't teach you how to actually fire a weapon and they don't teach you how to be physically fit (all of which are vital). They're designed to make you feel good, so they're designed to be winnable and don't require real lateral thinking (just that you learn the game rules).
Only the most violent games desensitise people, your average game isn't as gory as real life. Movies probably do more to desensitise than video games. You seem the kind of person who doesn't know the difference between playing Medal of Honour and actually being deserving of one.
One thing you didn’t factor in is if a service man is a Texan he will not turn on Texas
He would turn on Texas
Let’s goooo, love ur vids Binkov!!!
California captures the Alamo, Texas gets triggered, conquers California and establishes the Republic of Texifornia 😂
"The Republic shall be reorganised into the First Texan Empire! For a safer more secure society"
@@deltoroperdedor3166 good luck getting through the mountains
@@goldenrepublic6848 that's what the French said irl. Granted, it was about the hilly part of Belgium but still. Btw I'm not Seppo just making a few jokes
@@deltoroperdedor3166 It's Texas then.
As long as the Apaches get a piece of the pie, the warriors are more than happy to ally with Texas.
What a crazy video to end a crazy year
Being another state and watching this happening is like watching two of your best friends fight each other while all your other friends are just staring at them.
You know things have gotten bad when Binkov starts doing hypothetical wars between states.
California's militia would not even be an issue. They'd happily overthrow Californians govt at any given opportunity. Not to mention it'd be Calis 10 round magazine vs Texas 30 rd.
You mean 50 rdm?
lol
100 Rd drums 150 Rd drums. Lol to the California compliant shit.
Californian gun laws. That’s my argument about militias. I feel confident in saying that Texans would be more than willing to form paramilitary groups or join the direct war effort, but imagine trying to draft Californians.
The question is can california get everything up and running before texas sets in. 1 match and 4 c4s could disarm everything. But just try and get all of your citizens in militias without power nor silicon valley.
@@orcashamudeluxeu567 california is connected to the western power grid , texas has its own , your analogy is only correct under texas
@@castellomichel5851 What I was saying is that Because it has its own power grid, there are less targets to bomb. And you can't get everyone together through broken telephones lines or limited walkie talkies.
@@castellomichel5851 they'd loose alot of coordination. Friendly fire.
@@orcashamudeluxeu567 but your assuming it citizen militias its not its the military based is California
14:04 Giant Death Robot from Civ 6 game!!!
I predict people being BIG MAD in the comments section, either conclusion.
Next: France vs Turkey
He literally done a video like that a few weeks ago.
@@demun6065 Thank you so much
When you forget just about every Texan owns an armory in their home.
Which does jack shit Vs military
@@haydenhayden1767 you have something that can go through a tank? An apc? Or even an armored jeep? How bout a jet? You have anything against that?
@@baneh1329 lmfao try holding territory then. You do know vehicles need infantry support right? IEDs are also a thing.
@@baneh1329 surprisingly we have the supplies to build pretty good IEDs and quite a few of us have at least 1 50 cal. plus we have a lot of unfunctional machine guns that are pretty easy to get working
@@mandalortemaan7510 if your willing to bet your life on it, feel free
You really not going to mention the gigantic disparity in firearms? California has some of the strictest gun laws in the nation. A lot of machine guns are in Texas, legally.
militias with guns are only really useful in guerrilla operations
@@zachjordan7608 which is what a modern war would be like with conventional ground troops having to use anti insurgency tactics to keep up. Traditional ground forces would likely not be as important in an American Civil war
@@zachjordan7608 you really don't understand Texans.
It's only useful for defensive, on the offense, most gun owners doesn't have the training, physical prowess, or organization to march thousands of miles.
@@usonumabeach300 more and more blue votes from texas over the last decade, at this rate it will be blue by 2030
Every Texan: pick up their gun and join the fight
Californians: wait a sec this is a gun free zon-(bullet hit in the chest)
All California had to do was fire the 300 cruise missiles at Texas Infrastructure and energy infrastructure
Texas couldn't beat half of foot of snow.
Every Texas: Pick up their gun and join the fight.
Texans- What you mean we have to walk? Can't I use my rascal scooter?
"In Texas, approximately one in three residents is obese, putting the state in 10th place (tied with Oklahoma) for highest obesity rates in the U.S. The 16th annual State of Obesity: Better Policies for a Healthier America report by the Trust for America's Health found 34.8 percent of Texans were obese"
California ranks 46th in obesity =p
@@jeremydyar7566 Nah, we would wait 30 minutes, it would melt off..
Good video! It would be interesting to see a similar wargame where each state only has access to their respective National Guard units (and paramilitary units such as civilian militias) as opposed to ALL US military units based in the their states.
Agreed. If it's a war between California and Texas, with no outside intervention, why would you include Federal troops?
@@renaissancenovice7202
In fairness to this scenario, at the start he did say each state has access to all military units based within each state.
But I do agree if a scenario is gamed out between both states without any outside intervention, it would not make sense to involve the Federal troops stationed within the states
@@badvvolf494 same
I'm adding a comment here just to try to bring attention. I doubt binkov will do it (too much like a repeat), but maybe one day.
Texans are always imagining some kind of scenerio like this. Californians pay no thought to Texas. It's a one-sided rivalry.
When ?I was in the Marines One out of every five was from Texas it seemed.
It still is that way
I guess the Texan self-image as bad-asses tends to increase the recruitment rates.
I got out in 2013 from 2/1 and it’s still that way.
Yeah. The mindset will matter a lot. Texas loves guns and a tough self image, and California is deciding if they want to wear pantyhose today. This is a barroom bet.
@@icecold9511 And texans are still crying about fraud.
Mexico: *sweats nervously*
Your comment is good, but u r furry xd
No, I think Mexico rubs its hands gleefully.
Either that or they're pissed their newly acquired colonies are destroying each other.
What about venezuela
I will support Texas, even when I'm from Central Mexico. Also they have more meat than hippie California and I always support those who can feed bettter.
I’ve been waiting for this let’s go Texas
Hand in hand, brother 😈
Let's kick some Demoidiots ass
Hahaha jake just make sure ted Cruz doesn’t take vacation to cacaun.
No you don't, you really don't lol
Next: Alaska vs Hawaii
Question, how many military members, who joined in Texas, are currently stationed in California?
I was in the Marines and would say 1 in 5 of the Marines in Camp Pendleton were Texans. So the Marine element in California would depleted.
Its not off of marines stationed those stats are from the state marines lived when they enlisted
@@usecriticalthinking243 There are more soldiers serving in the military born in California then there are Texas. About 20,000 more to be exact. It’s not a crazy huge difference but it a difference. Percentage wise, Texans are more likely to serve though.
Pretty sure the soldiers stationed in cali would count for cali.
he said in the video that the people in the state become loyal to it
Florida: *sips margarita*
Colorado: Fuck this lets smoke some weed.
*snorts cocaine
Utah: *Throws book of Mormon*
We have more guns in fl then TX 😁
And smokes meth
I'm on the FBI watchlist now
While half of Texans can grab a gun a fight for Texas while many Californians don’t even know what a gun is
You do know that there are republican and Democrat former military in California, right? We love our guns.
The distance from Sacramento to Austin is 50% more than from Berlin to Moscow. Gonna need a lot of gas to get an army to either one.
Texas produces 40% of US oil production.
Yes but the climate is much more hospitable.
But Commissar Binkov says it's more likely a defensive war on both since both them can't push too far. So trench warfare may be? Imagine digging trenches all the way from Canada border to Florida
You realize texas is the largest gas producer in the us?
Biniov does not take into account many things. He is wrong with most things unfortunately. As a former soldier I can attest to what may play out more than his scenarios from first hand experience in things.
Texas might have a “slight” edge with private ownership and militia training? 🤣
I think the air force edge and naval dominance give this one to Cali, though it would be interesting to see the breakdown with just national guard forces.
What about State Guards?
(aka State Defense Forces
aka
State Militias?)
Its not realistic to expect California to support anything beyond maybe a few subs in the gulf, to far from bases for anything else. Also the f16 and f35 are built in texas, Texas stays defensive long enough to build up enough airpower and then goes on the offense. Even if the gulf is blockaded can still trade over land borders. On the gun issue, California bans the most military use type of firearms, semi auto rifles. Texas has a huge number of them, I've got five in my own house and I'm not unusual. There are also many manufacturers in the state. Infantry can also be trained in just a few months plus Texas has a huge veteran population and many have moved here from other states. Just a few points more points that would swing things in texas's favor.
California has the edge. Our Navy Seals would run circles around your militias lol. 🤣
One Navy Seal Platoon would easily capture smaller texan town's. People really do over estimate the power of civilian militia lol. 🤣
I think you underestimated the tech and economic edge California has. While there's many tech companies in places like Austin, there's significantly more in California, and bigger ones at that. This coupled with unblockaded trade routes to Asia and plenty of money from the bigger economy means that after a few months of defensive posturing, California would be armed with highly advanced missiles and drones, ready to take on the offensive.
Well in advancement, I am not entirely sure that you'll have the most advanced drones. (At least by military standards.) You could have a lot of drones that are 'advanced enough'.
ua-cam.com/video/ypAGf9O37Sc/v-deo.html
One state has enough weapons and ammo for the other 49, the other state can't decide what bathroom they should use. Choose your side wisely.
Texas
MY PRAYERS HAVE COME TRUE FINALLY.
This is not as unlikely as you may think, especially considering the current political climate in the US right now...
Except other states would be allowed to join in and all you have to do to take out California is take over the Hoover Dam.
And most of the military probably won't even be on the Californians side for sure
@@antikommunistischaktion
"and all you have to do to take out California is take over the Hoover Dam"
you make that sound like it'd be easy which it sure as hell wouldn't lmao.
@@thyreradim7885 It really wood be, southern California relies on the Hoover Dam for water and power, and southern California is where most of the people are.
@@antikommunistischaktion Deny them the ability to recharge their ev cars and they will fold.
Well in texas everyone has a gun so...
Wait, wait. I’m only suppose to have one??? Where am I going to put the other 48?
Sporting rifles in how many random calibers?
@@Warder-hn7pe donate to the new militia?
Have fun trying to bring down a jet with such gun.
California got more men than texas got bullets.
Texas can't even survive a little cold weather. Cripple the whole grid with a little ice.
California can't handle the heat. It is STILL ON FIRE
@@randyjackson7026 gender-diverse flame
@@randyjackson7026stfu yall get category 4 hurricanes just stop
I know this is a hypothetical scenario, but I would like to point out some things. 1) if this were to happen it would be a political war which means both states would likely see a huge influx of personnel agreeing with their side. 2) neither State would actually be able to use Federal resources meaning they'd be left with State Miltia and possibly National Guard Forces. 3) the types and locations of bases are not secret information so the plan from Texas would be to end the conflict before California's Naval assets could infiltrate the Gulf so California would need to make preemptive moves to get its Naval assets in position prior to the start of the conflict. 4) even if California were able to blockade the Gulf it would not hamper Texas' trade because Texas could use land based routes between other States and Mexico even going as far as using ports outside of the State for international trade. 5) both States would likely try to sway neighbors at least to join them or try to annex them to bolster their fighting capabilities which further exacerbates the political divide bolstering the forces for both sides. 6) niether side would actually win this war on its own because niether would actually make moves to invade the other and would focus on protecting critical infrastructure from attacks.
This is so unfair. Practically everyone is texas is strapped.
get strapped or get clapped my good sir.
It’s basically a bunch of soy boys versus fucking Rambo
@@enclave1165 yes lol
Californian's are pretty well armed too, but individual gun ownership doesn't mean anything in a conventional war. It's about resources, logistics and manpower. Both states are very formidable when it comes to that and despite the rep of California being a bunch of woke soyboys. The military recruits heavily from California and trains many troops there because of the diverse biome that allow training in various environments. The state is also less on the heavier side, I used to be a buck 50 before moving to Texas and gaining 0 pounds on the food here. Anyways I wouldn't count Texas out either but it's certianly not because of the big mouths that own 20 taticool guns and vote republican. Those people are a liability if anything.
@@enclave1165 pretty much. Texan militias would get roflstomped by the marines
I did like this video, but I do have to say it's a pretty bold assertion to think that all the military in California would actively choose to fight a war for California against Texas.
Yeah, not to mention that any Californian paramilitary groups would probably be more likely to start a guerrilla war against their own state
it's not an assertion, it's an assumption, in order to make the video possible. Well, he could have done a NG v NG matchup, but maybe those are harder to research (or too puny to be interesting)
@@SomeGuy-ty7kr Thinking that all those people, from the rest of the country, would side with Cal, just because they are stationed there is dumb! How many of the people in the cal. NG are even from the big urban areas like SF and LA? How many of them even give a rat's ass for the views of the people who are running their state? America has an all volunteer military! What percentage of Californians enlist? How many of them serve in their own state? What percentage of them share the values of the people who control their state?
@@haroldhahn7044 what part of "its an assumption" are you not understanding?
BLM and Hispanic from Texas would side with Cali though
😒😒😒😒😒😒 come on don't provoke people , just because we have our differences doesn't mean we want to kill each other. As a Californian I love Texas
Federal forces in each state being included in this scenario ruined the whole thing. Texas National Guard vs California National Guard would have been interesting. This scenario is a farce,
Most of the federal troops in California would join Texas.
@@krtacct seeing as 1 in 5 are Texan, I'd agree
@@krtacct no Washington DC will join California 🍆
As long no mailman gets involved, it'd be a stalemate in Hoover Dam.
Nah just destroy it. Texas doesn't need it.
Everyone knows the Cali bois will just naruto run Area 51 and call in the mothership
Big brain
I was thinking the federal forces (USN, USAF, USMC and USA) of each state would be left out and the Army/Air National Guard units plus militia groups would go at it. That would likely be a more realistic scenario.
I was expecting that to! :D
If the US gov really left the 2 out to fight, I bet more states would side with cali.
I would hope the Marines would attack California from within.
@@orcashamudeluxeu567 that aged well lol
@@s2ertf dam I really just said that oof.
California doesn’t host any EA-18G squadrons, they’re based in Washington
No but California does have more than a few dozen nuclear launch sites, across the state and the mtn. ranges.
@@theponieinator9484 So, we're just gonna pretend the beginning says "no nukes used'?
@@superdude899 forgot this video existed. You realize there will be at least a few people who would try to launch a nuke?
@@theponieinator9484 and do you realize that this essentially would never happen?
@@superdude899 the 2 states going to war or the nuke?
Talk to Tito and the Partisans about organizing civilians into an effective fighting force. It can be done with the right motivation.
Well, our sock puppet left out Green Beret's how many in each state in service and retired. They would be with the military and well are force multipliers. He also forgot that in Texas deer hunting is almost a religion. Texas would have an edge in that regard. You make a very valid point Tito and the Yugoslav partisans tided down a lot of germans during WW II.
There is an ad for me right now. Haven’t watched the video yet and I know it’s Texas.
Edit: I was wrong.
like a scenario from supreme ruler 2020 another awsome vid hope you had a good christmas :)
Something you didn't take into account when talking about militias with military experience is the demographics of the veterans in each state.
Average veteran age in California is over 65, they are WWII & Vietnam vets. In Texas the largest age group is the 35+ category, they are Iraq & Afghanistan vets with experience on modern equipment and tactics.
Now what if those veterans were back in their prime at 18+ tho.
I wonder who’d win.
Im putting a bet on the WW2 vets tho.
@@retardcorpsman Not even remotely.
In WWII or Vietnam there was conscription, you would serve your few months, live or die and then get on with your life.
Today we have a volunteer military that has been at war for 20 years.
Instead of fighting a civilised war like WWII where the Geneva convention was mostly respected and the enemy wore uniforms, surrender means you will be rappeed, tortured, killed, your corpse rappeed again before your body is dragged through the streets naked.
A modern special forces vet doesn't write love letters home to the swet lady he agreed to marry before he went to war.
He is bitter from getting dumped and duped by a fat feminist who robbed him and is comfortable with his killboner.
disposabull
You also kinda forgot WW2 was one of the only times the US fought against an enemy that was equal, if not superior in many aspects, against the US. In the following remaining wars, no other nation America faced was as militarily competent or organised as Germany was. You also forgot most MOH in WW2 were hundreds of times much more impressive than any medal of honor received in future wars. No American soldier in the wars after WW2 took out a “cream of the crop” German armoured brigade with an MG alone and won like Murphy did.
Fighting violent extremists is impressive and all..but that’s no comparison to the German army at its prime. They were just as violent and just as extreme in their ideologies but was much more orderly and heavily armed..
You also forgot most of the men from WW2 came straight from the great depression, meaning they were roughing it out on the streets before they even joined WW2. In the 1940’s, Hollywood stars were shooting out with the Krauts and racking up the medal of honors for their service. Would a 1990’s or 1980’s hollywood star do the same?
Volunteer or not, I have no doubt the roughened up boys from 1930-1940s California and New York who took out a fully mechanised brigade with an MG would beat up any 1980+ Commiefornia lad who’s best accomplishment was taking out a squad of poorly led Iraqi republican guards.
@@retardcorpsman If you think there was anyone in the WWII era capable of going toe to toe against guys like Tim Kennedy or Jocko you are delusional.
The Nazi's fought according to the Geneva convention, hence why there were so many prisoners taken by both sides.
Have you ever heard of a camp set up by ISIS or the Taliban for POW's?
Thought not.
The veterans from the modern era have much better nutrition and training, they are a lot faster, stronger and better warriors.
You seem to be forgetting that the majority of soldiers in WWI & WWII would deliberately fire their rifles over the heads of the enemy because they didn't want to hurt anyone.
disposabull
Tim Kennedy and Jocko only make up a small number of the entire modern army roster. If we’re talking about the 20s-40s generation going head to head with the 80s to 2000s kids, Im betting 90% of the prohibition era guys would be mopping up the spoiled kids of 80s and 90s no doubt.
Not to mention Kennedy’s skills with the gun pale in comparison with the likes of Murphy.
Murphy took the most effective fighting force of the 1940s head on with a machine gun alone, What would Tim do? Boast about his MMA skills while Murphy’s ‘bout to load a .50 BMG to his head?
POW camps or not, taking out a Taliban position will never be as impressive as taking on an entire German armoured division or fighting and winning against the Fallshirmjaegers, aka the navy seals of their time. Being scary isnt a match for training and weaponry, both of which the Germans excelled in their time.
You also forgot that the US military beyond the 1950s was responsible for the pull-out of Afghanistan and Vietnam whereas the US continued an ongoing war with the Germans and the Japs in WW2 without thinking of pulling back once. The soft 80s and 90s generation is responsible for California’s stance on pacifism whereas any 1920 or 1940 Californian would be all up for nuking Afghanistan and Vietnam to kingdom come.
You’re pitting up the greatest generation of all time vs a snowflake generation who was triggered by rap music.
How exactly are the 80s and 90s guys gonna compete exactly?
As an idahoan and combat veteran I will assist Texas in fighting the communist state of california.
Mate, ya woudn't have a spare MRE and a place to lay my head for a while would ya.
I'm not an American, but the divisive of this video even bothered me here but you go on, its nice to me
It doesn't bother us
I want Binkov's voice as my Siri or Alexa!
Winner: binkov's subs