I have my own thoughts, not perfect by any means and this doesn't imply retaining any borders, just a general sense of land gain.
This also has a lot of implications. First, the people group up and quickly coup before any military retaliation happens, and/or the coup has military support, second, the people don't immediately go at eachother and can negotiate peacefully, and finally, this all assumes that global powers don't just invade and gobble us up like candy while the land's up for grabs. (even THEN, I still assume other countries getting territorial gains.)
>>512923138I do see a nonzero chance that people on both parties align on hating the Jew (among other Pigs), and use that as a driving force to cause a proper revolution, rather than a civil war, but right now I'm seeing populist leftist members finally getting a hold in mayoral elections, beating out AIPAC lobbyists. It can easily turn into a Commies vs NatSoc situation still.
>>512925397I disagree on both fronts; Gas is one thing, but the United States, even if nuclear is fake (what the fuck), has regular-payload ICBMs that can absolutely target themselves in a situation where a revolution is likely, even at the cost of global reputation (see: Gaza). If the gov't collapses, whoever obtains those has the leverage. If it's multiple (and there are likely silos across the country), then there will be a scuffle and we will have our split-up. Otherwise, the opposition will Just Simply Die. If it's nukes? Forget about balkanization, one way or the other.
And in all of these scenarios, I guarantee that the people behind our breakdown will make like the Dickens to the middle east.