Ag with kids said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Reality Check said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

Reality Check said:

---

TexasAggiesWin said:

---

Civil War, Secession all sounds great and well until **** hits the fan. That is the entire purpose of a movie like this, to explore exactly how brutal it would be.

---

Or we could all peacefully decide that Texas is better off being governed by Texans and have a Brexit type departure.

---

The long term viability of an independent Texas can be debated, but it is a fact that we would not be better off.

And Brexit has worked out so poorly for the Brits that within the next few years they are going to be forced to come groveling to the US and accept our existing terms for an economic alliance that will be far worse for them than the deal they had with the EU. At present the only reason it hasn't happened yet is their pride. But it's been an unmitigated economic disaster for them.

---

There was a big piece in the Journal about Brexit the other day. You thought inflation was bad here, wooooo boy.

---

As if hundreds and hundreds of problems created by a bloated federal government that was originally purposed to ensure fair trade among states and protection of its people from the very type of invasion we've seen for three years aren't infinitely worse than a temporary economic downturn.

And please explain why a peaceful exit of ANY state or territory from the union is a fantasy?

---

Because the United States would not allow it. It's fairly simple. The idea that the U.S. would let one of its bellcows (or any state) just walk away with a smile and pat on the back isn't realistic. The U.S. is going to fight tooth and nail to keep itself united. I realize we're arguing over which near-zero chance is more likely, but I have a harder time imagining a world where the U.S. allows Texas to up and leave than I do a world where it fights to prevent the Union's dissolution.

---

So, if Texas PEACEFULLY petitioned to leave the union, do you honestly think that the FedGov would FORCIBLY prevent it from happening by using the military?

I think that's very far-fetched...one huge difference now is in the make up of the military. At the time of the Civil War, most Union units that fought against the South were comprised of people from Union states. And the converse was true for the South.

Today, the US military is a hodge podge of people from all over the US. You likely couldn't field any units that wouldn't have Texans in them...or units that had numerous soldiers that AGREED with Texas.

And would the US military actually start firing on and killing other Americans to force them to stay? Could the brass get the rank and file to actually do that?

---

Good question. I believe that if Texas peacefully petitioned for secession to the federal government, the U.S. would laugh and move on to more serious matters.

To add an edit, as a former servicemember who served in combat zones, the Oath is to America, not to Texas. You might have some Texans who jump ship, but nowhere close to enough to make a difference.

---

So, would those soldiers fire at and willingly kill AMERICANS in order to force Texas to stay in the union? Would the Congress be able to even get enough votes authorize the military to perform that act? Since it would require an act of Congress to override the Posse Comitatus Act.

Would YOU, as a service member have fired upon people in Texas to enforce this?

---

I think the question, in our extremely unlikely scenario, works the other way around. Would Texans willingly kill to separate. The U.S. would economically seize assets long before they fire a shot in order to choke the state off and maintain it's logistical supply. Military bases, the oil fields, banking, medical, military contractors, etc. The private entities running those businesses would probably ask for federal help before even that happened (a scenario like this would have to play out over years). Would Texans kill Americans to get those assets back?

But, to answer you question, I would do what is necessary to preserve the Union. But, again, only, what, 56% of Texans voted R last presidential cycle? Would anywhere close to a majority of that 56% support a secession? Highly unlikely, especially with what it would mean for jobs and the state economy. As another poster mentioned, a group of true believers could terrorize people pretty hardcore.

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Reality Check said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

Reality Check said:

---

TexasAggiesWin said:

---

Civil War, Secession all sounds great and well until **** hits the fan. That is the entire purpose of a movie like this, to explore exactly how brutal it would be.

---

Or we could all peacefully decide that Texas is better off being governed by Texans and have a Brexit type departure.

---

The long term viability of an independent Texas can be debated, but it is a fact that we would not be better off.

And Brexit has worked out so poorly for the Brits that within the next few years they are going to be forced to come groveling to the US and accept our existing terms for an economic alliance that will be far worse for them than the deal they had with the EU. At present the only reason it hasn't happened yet is their pride. But it's been an unmitigated economic disaster for them.

---

There was a big piece in the Journal about Brexit the other day. You thought inflation was bad here, wooooo boy.

---

As if hundreds and hundreds of problems created by a bloated federal government that was originally purposed to ensure fair trade among states and protection of its people from the very type of invasion we've seen for three years aren't infinitely worse than a temporary economic downturn.

And please explain why a peaceful exit of ANY state or territory from the union is a fantasy?

---

Because the United States would not allow it. It's fairly simple. The idea that the U.S. would let one of its bellcows (or any state) just walk away with a smile and pat on the back isn't realistic. The U.S. is going to fight tooth and nail to keep itself united. I realize we're arguing over which near-zero chance is more likely, but I have a harder time imagining a world where the U.S. allows Texas to up and leave than I do a world where it fights to prevent the Union's dissolution.

---

So, if Texas PEACEFULLY petitioned to leave the union, do you honestly think that the FedGov would FORCIBLY prevent it from happening by using the military?

I think that's very far-fetched...one huge difference now is in the make up of the military. At the time of the Civil War, most Union units that fought against the South were comprised of people from Union states. And the converse was true for the South.

Today, the US military is a hodge podge of people from all over the US. You likely couldn't field any units that wouldn't have Texans in them...or units that had numerous soldiers that AGREED with Texas.

And would the US military actually start firing on and killing other Americans to force them to stay? Could the brass get the rank and file to actually do that?

---

Good question. I believe that if Texas peacefully petitioned for secession to the federal government, the U.S. would laugh and move on to more serious matters.

To add an edit, as a former servicemember who served in combat zones, the Oath is to America, not to Texas. You might have some Texans who jump ship, but nowhere close to enough to make a difference.

---

So, would those soldiers fire at and willingly kill AMERICANS in order to force Texas to stay in the union? Would the Congress be able to even get enough votes authorize the military to perform that act? Since it would require an act of Congress to override the Posse Comitatus Act.

Would YOU, as a service member have fired upon people in Texas to enforce this?

---

I think the question, in our extremely unlikely scenario, works the other way around. Would Texans willingly kill to separate. The U.S. would economically seize assets long before they fire a shot in order to choke the state off and maintain it's logistical supply. Military bases, the oil fields, banking, medical, military contractors, etc. The private entities running those businesses would probably ask for federal help before even that happened (a scenario like this would have to play out over years). Would Texans kill Americans to get those assets back?

But, to answer you question, I would do what is necessary to preserve the Union. But, again, only, what, 56% of Texans voted R last presidential cycle? Would anywhere close to a majority of that 56% support a secession? Highly unlikely, especially with what it would mean for jobs and the state economy. As another poster mentioned, a group of true believers could terrorize people pretty hardcore.

---

Fighting the fed gov who is trying to remove our constitutional rights is not terrorism, but nice try.

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Reality Check said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

Reality Check said:

---

TexasAggiesWin said:

---

Civil War, Secession all sounds great and well until **** hits the fan. That is the entire purpose of a movie like this, to explore exactly how brutal it would be.

---

Or we could all peacefully decide that Texas is better off being governed by Texans and have a Brexit type departure.

---

The long term viability of an independent Texas can be debated, but it is a fact that we would not be better off.

And Brexit has worked out so poorly for the Brits that within the next few years they are going to be forced to come groveling to the US and accept our existing terms for an economic alliance that will be far worse for them than the deal they had with the EU. At present the only reason it hasn't happened yet is their pride. But it's been an unmitigated economic disaster for them.

---

There was a big piece in the Journal about Brexit the other day. You thought inflation was bad here, wooooo boy.

---

As if hundreds and hundreds of problems created by a bloated federal government that was originally purposed to ensure fair trade among states and protection of its people from the very type of invasion we've seen for three years aren't infinitely worse than a temporary economic downturn.

And please explain why a peaceful exit of ANY state or territory from the union is a fantasy?

---

Because the United States would not allow it. It's fairly simple. The idea that the U.S. would let one of its bellcows (or any state) just walk away with a smile and pat on the back isn't realistic. The U.S. is going to fight tooth and nail to keep itself united. I realize we're arguing over which near-zero chance is more likely, but I have a harder time imagining a world where the U.S. allows Texas to up and leave than I do a world where it fights to prevent the Union's dissolution.

---

So, if Texas PEACEFULLY petitioned to leave the union, do you honestly think that the FedGov would FORCIBLY prevent it from happening by using the military?

I think that's very far-fetched...one huge difference now is in the make up of the military. At the time of the Civil War, most Union units that fought against the South were comprised of people from Union states. And the converse was true for the South.

Today, the US military is a hodge podge of people from all over the US. You likely couldn't field any units that wouldn't have Texans in them...or units that had numerous soldiers that AGREED with Texas.

And would the US military actually start firing on and killing other Americans to force them to stay? Could the brass get the rank and file to actually do that?

---

Good question. I believe that if Texas peacefully petitioned for secession to the federal government, the U.S. would laugh and move on to more serious matters.

To add an edit, as a former servicemember who served in combat zones, the Oath is to America, not to Texas. You might have some Texans who jump ship, but nowhere close to enough to make a difference.

---

So, would those soldiers fire at and willingly kill AMERICANS in order to force Texas to stay in the union? Would the Congress be able to even get enough votes authorize the military to perform that act? Since it would require an act of Congress to override the Posse Comitatus Act.

Would YOU, as a service member have fired upon people in Texas to enforce this?

---

I think the question, in our extremely unlikely scenario, works the other way around. Would Texans willingly kill to separate. The U.S. would economically seize assets long before they fire a shot in order to choke the state off and maintain it's logistical supply. Military bases, the oil fields, banking, medical, military contractors, etc. The private entities running those businesses would probably ask for federal help before even that happened (a scenario like this would have to play out over years). Would Texans kill Americans to get those assets back?

But, to answer you question, I would do what is necessary to preserve the Union. But, again, only, what, 56% of Texans voted R last presidential cycle? Would anywhere close to a majority of that 56% support a secession? Highly unlikely, especially with what it would mean for jobs and the state economy. As another poster mentioned, a group of true believers could terrorize people pretty hardcore.

---

So, the federal government would effectively nationalize private businesses? And this is Texas - very little of our land belongs to the FedGov - so all those oil fields are on private land...

Texans might kill to get the assets back - but, that would be because the FedGov actually STOLE those assets...a little different proposition from Texas just asking to walk away.

And, interesting that you didn't rule out killing other Americans to force them to stay American.

BTW, all of the actions that you described the US FedGov doing would be unconstitutional. So...you're advocating for the FedGov to violate the Constitution and possibly kill Americans who live in Texas in order to enforce those unconstitutional acts? And you might be willing to be one of those doing that killing?

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Reality Check said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

Reality Check said:

---

TexasAggiesWin said:

---

Civil War, Secession all sounds great and well until **** hits the fan. That is the entire purpose of a movie like this, to explore exactly how brutal it would be.

---

Or we could all peacefully decide that Texas is better off being governed by Texans and have a Brexit type departure.

---

The long term viability of an independent Texas can be debated, but it is a fact that we would not be better off.

And Brexit has worked out so poorly for the Brits that within the next few years they are going to be forced to come groveling to the US and accept our existing terms for an economic alliance that will be far worse for them than the deal they had with the EU. At present the only reason it hasn't happened yet is their pride. But it's been an unmitigated economic disaster for them.

---

There was a big piece in the Journal about Brexit the other day. You thought inflation was bad here, wooooo boy.

---

As if hundreds and hundreds of problems created by a bloated federal government that was originally purposed to ensure fair trade among states and protection of its people from the very type of invasion we've seen for three years aren't infinitely worse than a temporary economic downturn.

And please explain why a peaceful exit of ANY state or territory from the union is a fantasy?

---

Because the United States would not allow it. It's fairly simple. The idea that the U.S. would let one of its bellcows (or any state) just walk away with a smile and pat on the back isn't realistic. The U.S. is going to fight tooth and nail to keep itself united. I realize we're arguing over which near-zero chance is more likely, but I have a harder time imagining a world where the U.S. allows Texas to up and leave than I do a world where it fights to prevent the Union's dissolution.

---

So, if Texas PEACEFULLY petitioned to leave the union, do you honestly think that the FedGov would FORCIBLY prevent it from happening by using the military?

I think that's very far-fetched...one huge difference now is in the make up of the military. At the time of the Civil War, most Union units that fought against the South were comprised of people from Union states. And the converse was true for the South.

Today, the US military is a hodge podge of people from all over the US. You likely couldn't field any units that wouldn't have Texans in them...or units that had numerous soldiers that AGREED with Texas.

And would the US military actually start firing on and killing other Americans to force them to stay? Could the brass get the rank and file to actually do that?

---

Good question. I believe that if Texas peacefully petitioned for secession to the federal government, the U.S. would laugh and move on to more serious matters.

To add an edit, as a former servicemember who served in combat zones, the Oath is to America, not to Texas. You might have some Texans who jump ship, but nowhere close to enough to make a difference.

---

So, would those soldiers fire at and willingly kill AMERICANS in order to force Texas to stay in the union? Would the Congress be able to even get enough votes authorize the military to perform that act? Since it would require an act of Congress to override the Posse Comitatus Act.

Would YOU, as a service member have fired upon people in Texas to enforce this?

---

I think the question, in our extremely unlikely scenario, works the other way around. Would Texans willingly kill to separate. The U.S. would economically seize assets long before they fire a shot in order to choke the state off and maintain it's logistical supply. Military bases, the oil fields, banking, medical, military contractors, etc. The private entities running those businesses would probably ask for federal help before even that happened (a scenario like this would have to play out over years). Would Texans kill Americans to get those assets back?

But, to answer you question, I would do what is necessary to preserve the Union. But, again, only, what, 56% of Texans voted R last presidential cycle? Would anywhere close to a majority of that 56% support a secession? Highly unlikely, especially with what it would mean for jobs and the state economy. As another poster mentioned, a group of true believers could terrorize people pretty hardcore.

---

Wanted to separate these two responses so they didn't get conflated in one post...

You do realize that when the colonists fought the British for independence, the split between support for the colonists and support for the crown was probably around those numbers...possibly even less support for WAR to gain independence.

Ag with kids said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Reality Check said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

Reality Check said:

---

TexasAggiesWin said:

---

Civil War, Secession all sounds great and well until **** hits the fan. That is the entire purpose of a movie like this, to explore exactly how brutal it would be.

---

Or we could all peacefully decide that Texas is better off being governed by Texans and have a Brexit type departure.

---

The long term viability of an independent Texas can be debated, but it is a fact that we would not be better off.

And Brexit has worked out so poorly for the Brits that within the next few years they are going to be forced to come groveling to the US and accept our existing terms for an economic alliance that will be far worse for them than the deal they had with the EU. At present the only reason it hasn't happened yet is their pride. But it's been an unmitigated economic disaster for them.

---

There was a big piece in the Journal about Brexit the other day. You thought inflation was bad here, wooooo boy.

---

As if hundreds and hundreds of problems created by a bloated federal government that was originally purposed to ensure fair trade among states and protection of its people from the very type of invasion we've seen for three years aren't infinitely worse than a temporary economic downturn.

And please explain why a peaceful exit of ANY state or territory from the union is a fantasy?

---

Because the United States would not allow it. It's fairly simple. The idea that the U.S. would let one of its bellcows (or any state) just walk away with a smile and pat on the back isn't realistic. The U.S. is going to fight tooth and nail to keep itself united. I realize we're arguing over which near-zero chance is more likely, but I have a harder time imagining a world where the U.S. allows Texas to up and leave than I do a world where it fights to prevent the Union's dissolution.

---

So, if Texas PEACEFULLY petitioned to leave the union, do you honestly think that the FedGov would FORCIBLY prevent it from happening by using the military?

I think that's very far-fetched...one huge difference now is in the make up of the military. At the time of the Civil War, most Union units that fought against the South were comprised of people from Union states. And the converse was true for the South.

Today, the US military is a hodge podge of people from all over the US. You likely couldn't field any units that wouldn't have Texans in them...or units that had numerous soldiers that AGREED with Texas.

And would the US military actually start firing on and killing other Americans to force them to stay? Could the brass get the rank and file to actually do that?

---

Good question. I believe that if Texas peacefully petitioned for secession to the federal government, the U.S. would laugh and move on to more serious matters.

To add an edit, as a former servicemember who served in combat zones, the Oath is to America, not to Texas. You might have some Texans who jump ship, but nowhere close to enough to make a difference.

---

So, would those soldiers fire at and willingly kill AMERICANS in order to force Texas to stay in the union? Would the Congress be able to even get enough votes authorize the military to perform that act? Since it would require an act of Congress to override the Posse Comitatus Act.

Would YOU, as a service member have fired upon people in Texas to enforce this?

---

I think the question, in our extremely unlikely scenario, works the other way around. Would Texans willingly kill to separate. The U.S. would economically seize assets long before they fire a shot in order to choke the state off and maintain it's logistical supply. Military bases, the oil fields, banking, medical, military contractors, etc. The private entities running those businesses would probably ask for federal help before even that happened (a scenario like this would have to play out over years). Would Texans kill Americans to get those assets back?

But, to answer you question, I would do what is necessary to preserve the Union. But, again, only, what, 56% of Texans voted R last presidential cycle? Would anywhere close to a majority of that 56% support a secession? Highly unlikely, especially with what it would mean for jobs and the state economy. As another poster mentioned, a group of true believers could terrorize people pretty hardcore.

---

So, the federal government would effectively nationalize private businesses? And this is Texas - very little of our land belongs to the FedGov - so all those oil fields are on private land...

Texans might kill to get the assets back - but, that would be because the FedGov actually STOLE those assets...a little different proposition from Texas just asking to walk away.

And, interesting that you didn't rule out killing other Americans to force them to stay American.

---

If it came to a war to preserve the Union, yes, at least until the rebellion is subdued. There would, at least for a time, be an attempt to keep the economy moving while the rebellion physically played out (think Muslim-Christian trade during The Crusades), ala allow companies to continue as is with federal protection. I have a hard time believing Texas would be able to mount an effective long-term resistance to completely sever economic and logistical movement, but once war starts, predicting what happens is impossible.

One thing needs to be made very clear. History has shown time and time again that when these things start, people think the results will be quick. But more often it drags out and spirals, and the cost is brutal to all involved. But to say, "Lets prevent bloodshed by letting the nation dissolve" is not a realistic option.

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Reality Check said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

Reality Check said:

---

TexasAggiesWin said:

---

Civil War, Secession all sounds great and well until **** hits the fan. That is the entire purpose of a movie like this, to explore exactly how brutal it would be.

---

Or we could all peacefully decide that Texas is better off being governed by Texans and have a Brexit type departure.

---

The long term viability of an independent Texas can be debated, but it is a fact that we would not be better off.

And Brexit has worked out so poorly for the Brits that within the next few years they are going to be forced to come groveling to the US and accept our existing terms for an economic alliance that will be far worse for them than the deal they had with the EU. At present the only reason it hasn't happened yet is their pride. But it's been an unmitigated economic disaster for them.

---

There was a big piece in the Journal about Brexit the other day. You thought inflation was bad here, wooooo boy.

---

As if hundreds and hundreds of problems created by a bloated federal government that was originally purposed to ensure fair trade among states and protection of its people from the very type of invasion we've seen for three years aren't infinitely worse than a temporary economic downturn.

And please explain why a peaceful exit of ANY state or territory from the union is a fantasy?

---

Because the United States would not allow it. It's fairly simple. The idea that the U.S. would let one of its bellcows (or any state) just walk away with a smile and pat on the back isn't realistic. The U.S. is going to fight tooth and nail to keep itself united. I realize we're arguing over which near-zero chance is more likely, but I have a harder time imagining a world where the U.S. allows Texas to up and leave than I do a world where it fights to prevent the Union's dissolution.

---

So, if Texas PEACEFULLY petitioned to leave the union, do you honestly think that the FedGov would FORCIBLY prevent it from happening by using the military?

I think that's very far-fetched...one huge difference now is in the make up of the military. At the time of the Civil War, most Union units that fought against the South were comprised of people from Union states. And the converse was true for the South.

Today, the US military is a hodge podge of people from all over the US. You likely couldn't field any units that wouldn't have Texans in them...or units that had numerous soldiers that AGREED with Texas.

And would the US military actually start firing on and killing other Americans to force them to stay? Could the brass get the rank and file to actually do that?

---

Good question. I believe that if Texas peacefully petitioned for secession to the federal government, the U.S. would laugh and move on to more serious matters.

To add an edit, as a former servicemember who served in combat zones, the Oath is to America, not to Texas. You might have some Texans who jump ship, but nowhere close to enough to make a difference.

---

So, would those soldiers fire at and willingly kill AMERICANS in order to force Texas to stay in the union? Would the Congress be able to even get enough votes authorize the military to perform that act? Since it would require an act of Congress to override the Posse Comitatus Act.

Would YOU, as a service member have fired upon people in Texas to enforce this?

---

I think the question, in our extremely unlikely scenario, works the other way around. Would Texans willingly kill to separate. The U.S. would economically seize assets long before they fire a shot in order to choke the state off and maintain it's logistical supply. Military bases, the oil fields, banking, medical, military contractors, etc. The private entities running those businesses would probably ask for federal help before even that happened (a scenario like this would have to play out over years). Would Texans kill Americans to get those assets back?

But, to answer you question, I would do what is necessary to preserve the Union. But, again, only, what, 56% of Texans voted R last presidential cycle? Would anywhere close to a majority of that 56% support a secession? Highly unlikely, especially with what it would mean for jobs and the state economy. As another poster mentioned, a group of true believers could terrorize people pretty hardcore.

---

So, the federal government would effectively nationalize private businesses? And this is Texas - very little of our land belongs to the FedGov - so all those oil fields are on private land...

Texans might kill to get the assets back - but, that would be because the FedGov actually STOLE those assets...a little different proposition from Texas just asking to walk away.

And, interesting that you didn't rule out killing other Americans to force them to stay American.

---

If it came to a war to preserve the Union, yes, at least until the rebellion is subdued. There would, at least for a time, be an attempt to keep the economy moving while the rebellion physically played out, ala allow companies to continue as is with federal protection. I have a hard time believing Texas would be able to mount an effective long-term resistance to completely sever economic and logistical movement, but once war starts, predicting what happens is impossible.

One thing needs to be made very clear. History has shown time and time again that when these things start, people think the results will be quick. But more often it drags out and spirals, and the cost is brutal to all involved. But to say, "Lets prevent bloodshed by letting the nation dissolve" is not a realistic option.

---

BTW...I edited to add the following apparently as you were responding:

Quote:

---

BTW, all of the actions that you described the US FedGov doing would be unconstitutional. So...you're advocating for the FedGov to violate the Constitution and possibly kill Americans who live in Texas in order to enforce those unconstitutional acts? And you might be willing to be one of those doing that killing?

---

So...it sounds like you have no problem violating the Constitution....

Ag with kids said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Reality Check said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

Reality Check said:

---

TexasAggiesWin said:

---

Civil War, Secession all sounds great and well until **** hits the fan. That is the entire purpose of a movie like this, to explore exactly how brutal it would be.

---

Or we could all peacefully decide that Texas is better off being governed by Texans and have a Brexit type departure.

---

The long term viability of an independent Texas can be debated, but it is a fact that we would not be better off.

And Brexit has worked out so poorly for the Brits that within the next few years they are going to be forced to come groveling to the US and accept our existing terms for an economic alliance that will be far worse for them than the deal they had with the EU. At present the only reason it hasn't happened yet is their pride. But it's been an unmitigated economic disaster for them.

---

There was a big piece in the Journal about Brexit the other day. You thought inflation was bad here, wooooo boy.

---

As if hundreds and hundreds of problems created by a bloated federal government that was originally purposed to ensure fair trade among states and protection of its people from the very type of invasion we've seen for three years aren't infinitely worse than a temporary economic downturn.

And please explain why a peaceful exit of ANY state or territory from the union is a fantasy?

---

Because the United States would not allow it. It's fairly simple. The idea that the U.S. would let one of its bellcows (or any state) just walk away with a smile and pat on the back isn't realistic. The U.S. is going to fight tooth and nail to keep itself united. I realize we're arguing over which near-zero chance is more likely, but I have a harder time imagining a world where the U.S. allows Texas to up and leave than I do a world where it fights to prevent the Union's dissolution.

---

So, if Texas PEACEFULLY petitioned to leave the union, do you honestly think that the FedGov would FORCIBLY prevent it from happening by using the military?

I think that's very far-fetched...one huge difference now is in the make up of the military. At the time of the Civil War, most Union units that fought against the South were comprised of people from Union states. And the converse was true for the South.

Today, the US military is a hodge podge of people from all over the US. You likely couldn't field any units that wouldn't have Texans in them...or units that had numerous soldiers that AGREED with Texas.

And would the US military actually start firing on and killing other Americans to force them to stay? Could the brass get the rank and file to actually do that?

---

Good question. I believe that if Texas peacefully petitioned for secession to the federal government, the U.S. would laugh and move on to more serious matters.

To add an edit, as a former servicemember who served in combat zones, the Oath is to America, not to Texas. You might have some Texans who jump ship, but nowhere close to enough to make a difference.

---

So, would those soldiers fire at and willingly kill AMERICANS in order to force Texas to stay in the union? Would the Congress be able to even get enough votes authorize the military to perform that act? Since it would require an act of Congress to override the Posse Comitatus Act.

Would YOU, as a service member have fired upon people in Texas to enforce this?

---

I think the question, in our extremely unlikely scenario, works the other way around. Would Texans willingly kill to separate. The U.S. would economically seize assets long before they fire a shot in order to choke the state off and maintain it's logistical supply. Military bases, the oil fields, banking, medical, military contractors, etc. The private entities running those businesses would probably ask for federal help before even that happened (a scenario like this would have to play out over years). Would Texans kill Americans to get those assets back?

But, to answer you question, I would do what is necessary to preserve the Union. But, again, only, what, 56% of Texans voted R last presidential cycle? Would anywhere close to a majority of that 56% support a secession? Highly unlikely, especially with what it would mean for jobs and the state economy. As another poster mentioned, a group of true believers could terrorize people pretty hardcore.

---

Wanted to separate these two responses so they didn't get conflated in one post...

You do realize that when the colonists fought the British for independence, the split between support for the colonists and support for the crown was probably around those numbers...possibly even less support for WAR to gain independence.

---

Yep, and I'll do you one better: the Bolsheviks had even less support in Czarist Russia when they overthrew the Czars. A small group can cause calamity if they know how and when to strike. Never underestimate the length true believers will go. I mean, look what Timothy McVeigh-one guy-did in the name of fighting against federal overreach. Imagine just ten people willing to go to those lengths. You could paralyze an entire nation.

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Reality Check said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

Reality Check said:

---

TexasAggiesWin said:

---

Civil War, Secession all sounds great and well until **** hits the fan. That is the entire purpose of a movie like this, to explore exactly how brutal it would be.

---

Or we could all peacefully decide that Texas is better off being governed by Texans and have a Brexit type departure.

---

The long term viability of an independent Texas can be debated, but it is a fact that we would not be better off.

And Brexit has worked out so poorly for the Brits that within the next few years they are going to be forced to come groveling to the US and accept our existing terms for an economic alliance that will be far worse for them than the deal they had with the EU. At present the only reason it hasn't happened yet is their pride. But it's been an unmitigated economic disaster for them.

---

There was a big piece in the Journal about Brexit the other day. You thought inflation was bad here, wooooo boy.

---

As if hundreds and hundreds of problems created by a bloated federal government that was originally purposed to ensure fair trade among states and protection of its people from the very type of invasion we've seen for three years aren't infinitely worse than a temporary economic downturn.

And please explain why a peaceful exit of ANY state or territory from the union is a fantasy?

---

Because the United States would not allow it. It's fairly simple. The idea that the U.S. would let one of its bellcows (or any state) just walk away with a smile and pat on the back isn't realistic. The U.S. is going to fight tooth and nail to keep itself united. I realize we're arguing over which near-zero chance is more likely, but I have a harder time imagining a world where the U.S. allows Texas to up and leave than I do a world where it fights to prevent the Union's dissolution.

---

So, if Texas PEACEFULLY petitioned to leave the union, do you honestly think that the FedGov would FORCIBLY prevent it from happening by using the military?

I think that's very far-fetched...one huge difference now is in the make up of the military. At the time of the Civil War, most Union units that fought against the South were comprised of people from Union states. And the converse was true for the South.

Today, the US military is a hodge podge of people from all over the US. You likely couldn't field any units that wouldn't have Texans in them...or units that had numerous soldiers that AGREED with Texas.

And would the US military actually start firing on and killing other Americans to force them to stay? Could the brass get the rank and file to actually do that?

---

Good question. I believe that if Texas peacefully petitioned for secession to the federal government, the U.S. would laugh and move on to more serious matters.

To add an edit, as a former servicemember who served in combat zones, the Oath is to America, not to Texas. You might have some Texans who jump ship, but nowhere close to enough to make a difference.

---

So, would those soldiers fire at and willingly kill AMERICANS in order to force Texas to stay in the union? Would the Congress be able to even get enough votes authorize the military to perform that act? Since it would require an act of Congress to override the Posse Comitatus Act.

Would YOU, as a service member have fired upon people in Texas to enforce this?

---

I think the question, in our extremely unlikely scenario, works the other way around. Would Texans willingly kill to separate. The U.S. would economically seize assets long before they fire a shot in order to choke the state off and maintain it's logistical supply. Military bases, the oil fields, banking, medical, military contractors, etc. The private entities running those businesses would probably ask for federal help before even that happened (a scenario like this would have to play out over years). Would Texans kill Americans to get those assets back?

But, to answer you question, I would do what is necessary to preserve the Union. But, again, only, what, 56% of Texans voted R last presidential cycle? Would anywhere close to a majority of that 56% support a secession? Highly unlikely, especially with what it would mean for jobs and the state economy. As another poster mentioned, a group of true believers could terrorize people pretty hardcore.

---

Wanted to separate these two responses so they didn't get conflated in one post...

You do realize that when the colonists fought the British for independence, the split between support for the colonists and support for the crown was probably around those numbers...possibly even less support for WAR to gain independence.

---

Yep, and I'll do you one better: the Bolsheviks had even less support in Czarist Russia when they overthrew the Czars. A small group can cause calamity if they know how and when to strike. Never underestimate the length true believers will go. I mean, look what Timothy McVeigh-one guy-did in the name of fighting against federal overreach. Imagine just ten people willing to go to those lengths. You could paralyze an entire nation.

---

Thats why ANTIFA is such a threat

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

Quote:

---

Even more so than the leftest fantasy to transform American into a communist hell hole?

---

The United States cannot be transformed into a "communist hell hole". The things that would need to occur preceding such a transformation would be both so fundamental and so violent that the US would have already ceased to exist, and their very nature would have brought about mass emigration and secession anyway.

So either we go on bickering as we currently do while remaining, by leaps and bounds, the most prosperous and luxurious society in human history or it all falls apart and you get what you want anyway. Theres no role in there for seceding while the getting is still good.

---

Bawahahahah. Reread your first paragraph

You dont think this is exactly what the Biden and Obama admins were doing. They only reason things are not violent is because the right is still somewhat comfortable but those comforts and rights are disappearing by the day.

Are you paying attention? Our society is very different from what it was as recently as 2010. The US is in the process of undergoing exactly what you describe. I guess you dont keep up with news details. The US is a mess and the left put it there and is stepping on the gas with Excessive debt at 135% of GPP, unfettered, record, levels of illegal immigration. Excesses by the Executive branch. XO's are release in bushels with hardly a word from congress

Pay attention to what the hell is going on.

ttu_85 said:

---

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

Quote:

---

Even more so than the leftest fantasy to transform American into a communist hell hole?

---

The United States cannot be transformed into a "communist hell hole". The things that would need to occur preceding such a transformation would be both so fundamental and so violent that the US would have already ceased to exist, and their very nature would have brought about mass emigration and secession anyway.

So either we go on bickering as we currently do while remaining, by leaps and bounds, the most prosperous and luxurious society in human history or it all falls apart and you get what you want anyway. Theres no role in there for seceding while the getting is still good.

---

Bawahahahah. Reread your first paragraph

You dont think this is exactly what the Biden and Obama admins were doing. They only reason things are not violent is because the right is still somewhat comfortable but those comforts and rights are disappearing by the day.

Are you paying attention? Our society is very different from what it was as recently as 2010. The US is in the process of undergoing exactly what you describe. I guess you dont keep up with news details. The US is a mess and the left put it there and is stepping on the gas with Excessive debt at 135% of GPP, unfettered, record, levels of illegal immigration. Excesses by the Executive branch. XO's are release in bushels with hardly a word from congress

Pay attention to what the hell is going on.

---

Nobody is going to go to war over debt or immigration, especially while their 401k coffers are brimming with Benjamins.

ttu_85 said:

---

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

Quote:

---

Even more so than the leftest fantasy to transform American into a communist hell hole?

---

The United States cannot be transformed into a "communist hell hole". The things that would need to occur preceding such a transformation would be both so fundamental and so violent that the US would have already ceased to exist, and their very nature would have brought about mass emigration and secession anyway.

So either we go on bickering as we currently do while remaining, by leaps and bounds, the most prosperous and luxurious society in human history or it all falls apart and you get what you want anyway. Theres no role in there for seceding while the getting is still good.

---

Bawahahahah. Reread your first paragraph

You dont think this is exactly what the Biden and Obama admins were doing. They only reason things are not violent is because the right is still somewhat comfortable but those comforts and rights are disappearing by the day.

Are you paying attention? Our society is very different from what it was as recently as 2010. The US is in the process of undergoing exactly what you describe. I guess you dont keep up with news details. The US is a mess and the left put it there and is stepping on the gas with Excessive debt at 135% of GPP, unfettered, record, levels of illegal immigration. Excesses by the Executive branch. XO's are release in bushels with hardly a word from congress

Pay attention to what the hell is going on.

---

None of this represents any sort of fundamental change in our style of governance. And, again, the American Democratic Party remains by far the most conservative mainstream liberal party in the entire western world.

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Reality Check said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

Reality Check said:

---

TexasAggiesWin said:

---

Civil War, Secession all sounds great and well until **** hits the fan. That is the entire purpose of a movie like this, to explore exactly how brutal it would be.

---

Or we could all peacefully decide that Texas is better off being governed by Texans and have a Brexit type departure.

---

The long term viability of an independent Texas can be debated, but it is a fact that we would not be better off.

And Brexit has worked out so poorly for the Brits that within the next few years they are going to be forced to come groveling to the US and accept our existing terms for an economic alliance that will be far worse for them than the deal they had with the EU. At present the only reason it hasn't happened yet is their pride. But it's been an unmitigated economic disaster for them.

---

There was a big piece in the Journal about Brexit the other day. You thought inflation was bad here, wooooo boy.

---

As if hundreds and hundreds of problems created by a bloated federal government that was originally purposed to ensure fair trade among states and protection of its people from the very type of invasion we've seen for three years aren't infinitely worse than a temporary economic downturn.

And please explain why a peaceful exit of ANY state or territory from the union is a fantasy?

---

Because the United States would not allow it. It's fairly simple. The idea that the U.S. would let one of its bellcows (or any state) just walk away with a smile and pat on the back isn't realistic. The U.S. is going to fight tooth and nail to keep itself united. I realize we're arguing over which near-zero chance is more likely, but I have a harder time imagining a world where the U.S. allows Texas to up and leave than I do a world where it fights to prevent the Union's dissolution.

---

So, if Texas PEACEFULLY petitioned to leave the union, do you honestly think that the FedGov would FORCIBLY prevent it from happening by using the military?

I think that's very far-fetched...one huge difference now is in the make up of the military. At the time of the Civil War, most Union units that fought against the South were comprised of people from Union states. And the converse was true for the South.

Today, the US military is a hodge podge of people from all over the US. You likely couldn't field any units that wouldn't have Texans in them...or units that had numerous soldiers that AGREED with Texas.

And would the US military actually start firing on and killing other Americans to force them to stay? Could the brass get the rank and file to actually do that?

---

Good question. I believe that if Texas peacefully petitioned for secession to the federal government, the U.S. would laugh and move on to more serious matters.

To add an edit, as a former servicemember who served in combat zones, the Oath is to America, not to Texas. You might have some Texans who jump ship, but nowhere close to enough to make a difference.

---

So, would those soldiers fire at and willingly kill AMERICANS in order to force Texas to stay in the union? Would the Congress be able to even get enough votes authorize the military to perform that act? Since it would require an act of Congress to override the Posse Comitatus Act.

Would YOU, as a service member have fired upon people in Texas to enforce this?

---

I think the question, in our extremely unlikely scenario, works the other way around. Would Texans willingly kill to separate. The U.S. would economically seize assets long before they fire a shot in order to choke the state off and maintain it's logistical supply. Military bases, the oil fields, banking, medical, military contractors, etc. The private entities running those businesses would probably ask for federal help before even that happened (a scenario like this would have to play out over years). Would Texans kill Americans to get those assets back?

But, to answer you question, I would do what is necessary to preserve the Union. But, again, only, what, 56% of Texans voted R last presidential cycle? Would anywhere close to a majority of that 56% support a secession? Highly unlikely, especially with what it would mean for jobs and the state economy. As another poster mentioned, a group of true believers could terrorize people pretty hardcore.

---

Bruh, this union sucks. I wouldn't even call it a union. Nothing could unite us at this point. 9/11 did for a brief moment, but those were much different times.

BassCowboy33 said:

---

ttu_85 said:

---

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

Quote:

---

Even more so than the leftest fantasy to transform American into a communist hell hole?

---

The United States cannot be transformed into a "communist hell hole". The things that would need to occur preceding such a transformation would be both so fundamental and so violent that the US would have already ceased to exist, and their very nature would have brought about mass emigration and secession anyway.

So either we go on bickering as we currently do while remaining, by leaps and bounds, the most prosperous and luxurious society in human history or it all falls apart and you get what you want anyway. Theres no role in there for seceding while the getting is still good.

---

Bawahahahah. Reread your first paragraph

You dont think this is exactly what the Biden and Obama admins were doing. They only reason things are not violent is because the right is still somewhat comfortable but those comforts and rights are disappearing by the day.

Are you paying attention? Our society is very different from what it was as recently as 2010. The US is in the process of undergoing exactly what you describe. I guess you dont keep up with news details. The US is a mess and the left put it there and is stepping on the gas with Excessive debt at 135% of GPP, unfettered, record, levels of illegal immigration. Excesses by the Executive branch. XO's are release in bushels with hardly a word from congress

Pay attention to what the hell is going on.

---

Nobody is going to go to war over debt or immigration, especially while their 401k coffers are brimming with Benjamins.

---

Agreed. The only war or widespread social unrest will only come when times are truly hard for everyone. Increasing debt and immigration are merely two, of a host of factors, that may push us there.

samurai_science said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Reality Check said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

Reality Check said:

---

TexasAggiesWin said:

---

Civil War, Secession all sounds great and well until **** hits the fan. That is the entire purpose of a movie like this, to explore exactly how brutal it would be.

---

Or we could all peacefully decide that Texas is better off being governed by Texans and have a Brexit type departure.

---

The long term viability of an independent Texas can be debated, but it is a fact that we would not be better off.

And Brexit has worked out so poorly for the Brits that within the next few years they are going to be forced to come groveling to the US and accept our existing terms for an economic alliance that will be far worse for them than the deal they had with the EU. At present the only reason it hasn't happened yet is their pride. But it's been an unmitigated economic disaster for them.

---

There was a big piece in the Journal about Brexit the other day. You thought inflation was bad here, wooooo boy.

---

As if hundreds and hundreds of problems created by a bloated federal government that was originally purposed to ensure fair trade among states and protection of its people from the very type of invasion we've seen for three years aren't infinitely worse than a temporary economic downturn.

And please explain why a peaceful exit of ANY state or territory from the union is a fantasy?

---

Because the United States would not allow it. It's fairly simple. The idea that the U.S. would let one of its bellcows (or any state) just walk away with a smile and pat on the back isn't realistic. The U.S. is going to fight tooth and nail to keep itself united. I realize we're arguing over which near-zero chance is more likely, but I have a harder time imagining a world where the U.S. allows Texas to up and leave than I do a world where it fights to prevent the Union's dissolution.

---

So, if Texas PEACEFULLY petitioned to leave the union, do you honestly think that the FedGov would FORCIBLY prevent it from happening by using the military?

I think that's very far-fetched...one huge difference now is in the make up of the military. At the time of the Civil War, most Union units that fought against the South were comprised of people from Union states. And the converse was true for the South.

Today, the US military is a hodge podge of people from all over the US. You likely couldn't field any units that wouldn't have Texans in them...or units that had numerous soldiers that AGREED with Texas.

And would the US military actually start firing on and killing other Americans to force them to stay? Could the brass get the rank and file to actually do that?

---

Good question. I believe that if Texas peacefully petitioned for secession to the federal government, the U.S. would laugh and move on to more serious matters.

To add an edit, as a former servicemember who served in combat zones, the Oath is to America, not to Texas. You might have some Texans who jump ship, but nowhere close to enough to make a difference.

---

So, would those soldiers fire at and willingly kill AMERICANS in order to force Texas to stay in the union? Would the Congress be able to even get enough votes authorize the military to perform that act? Since it would require an act of Congress to override the Posse Comitatus Act.

Would YOU, as a service member have fired upon people in Texas to enforce this?

---

I think the question, in our extremely unlikely scenario, works the other way around. Would Texans willingly kill to separate. The U.S. would economically seize assets long before they fire a shot in order to choke the state off and maintain it's logistical supply. Military bases, the oil fields, banking, medical, military contractors, etc. The private entities running those businesses would probably ask for federal help before even that happened (a scenario like this would have to play out over years). Would Texans kill Americans to get those assets back?

But, to answer you question, I would do what is necessary to preserve the Union. But, again, only, what, 56% of Texans voted R last presidential cycle? Would anywhere close to a majority of that 56% support a secession? Highly unlikely, especially with what it would mean for jobs and the state economy. As another poster mentioned, a group of true believers could terrorize people pretty hardcore.

---

Fighting the fed gov who is trying to remove our constitutional rights is not terrorism, but nice try.

---

After seeing Civil War, I wanted to circle back and mention how on point we were on this sub-discussion about the gray that defines terrorism, loyalty, and being "American." All play a role in this film, and not in the way I expected.

Ag with kids said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Reality Check said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

Reality Check said:

---

TexasAggiesWin said:

---

Civil War, Secession all sounds great and well until **** hits the fan. That is the entire purpose of a movie like this, to explore exactly how brutal it would be.

---

Or we could all peacefully decide that Texas is better off being governed by Texans and have a Brexit type departure.

---

The long term viability of an independent Texas can be debated, but it is a fact that we would not be better off.

And Brexit has worked out so poorly for the Brits that within the next few years they are going to be forced to come groveling to the US and accept our existing terms for an economic alliance that will be far worse for them than the deal they had with the EU. At present the only reason it hasn't happened yet is their pride. But it's been an unmitigated economic disaster for them.

---

There was a big piece in the Journal about Brexit the other day. You thought inflation was bad here, wooooo boy.

---

As if hundreds and hundreds of problems created by a bloated federal government that was originally purposed to ensure fair trade among states and protection of its people from the very type of invasion we've seen for three years aren't infinitely worse than a temporary economic downturn.

And please explain why a peaceful exit of ANY state or territory from the union is a fantasy?

---

Because the United States would not allow it. It's fairly simple. The idea that the U.S. would let one of its bellcows (or any state) just walk away with a smile and pat on the back isn't realistic. The U.S. is going to fight tooth and nail to keep itself united. I realize we're arguing over which near-zero chance is more likely, but I have a harder time imagining a world where the U.S. allows Texas to up and leave than I do a world where it fights to prevent the Union's dissolution.

---

So, if Texas PEACEFULLY petitioned to leave the union, do you honestly think that the FedGov would FORCIBLY prevent it from happening by using the military?

I think that's very far-fetched...one huge difference now is in the make up of the military. At the time of the Civil War, most Union units that fought against the South were comprised of people from Union states. And the converse was true for the South.

Today, the US military is a hodge podge of people from all over the US. You likely couldn't field any units that wouldn't have Texans in them...or units that had numerous soldiers that AGREED with Texas.

And would the US military actually start firing on and killing other Americans to force them to stay? Could the brass get the rank and file to actually do that?

---

I see your point here and it's a good one- but you claim that "most" units in the Civil War from either North or South.

why wouldn't you say "all" units of the North were Northern men and "all" units of the Confederate military were southern men?

are you differentiating with border states such as Tennessee/Kentucky/Maryland?

or the miniscule amount of southern units fighting as part of the Federal Army from areas of the deep south liberated in 1862?

LMCane said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Reality Check said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

Reality Check said:

---

TexasAggiesWin said:

---

Civil War, Secession all sounds great and well until **** hits the fan. That is the entire purpose of a movie like this, to explore exactly how brutal it would be.

---

Or we could all peacefully decide that Texas is better off being governed by Texans and have a Brexit type departure.

---

The long term viability of an independent Texas can be debated, but it is a fact that we would not be better off.

And Brexit has worked out so poorly for the Brits that within the next few years they are going to be forced to come groveling to the US and accept our existing terms for an economic alliance that will be far worse for them than the deal they had with the EU. At present the only reason it hasn't happened yet is their pride. But it's been an unmitigated economic disaster for them.

---

There was a big piece in the Journal about Brexit the other day. You thought inflation was bad here, wooooo boy.

---

As if hundreds and hundreds of problems created by a bloated federal government that was originally purposed to ensure fair trade among states and protection of its people from the very type of invasion we've seen for three years aren't infinitely worse than a temporary economic downturn.

And please explain why a peaceful exit of ANY state or territory from the union is a fantasy?

---

Because the United States would not allow it. It's fairly simple. The idea that the U.S. would let one of its bellcows (or any state) just walk away with a smile and pat on the back isn't realistic. The U.S. is going to fight tooth and nail to keep itself united. I realize we're arguing over which near-zero chance is more likely, but I have a harder time imagining a world where the U.S. allows Texas to up and leave than I do a world where it fights to prevent the Union's dissolution.

---

So, if Texas PEACEFULLY petitioned to leave the union, do you honestly think that the FedGov would FORCIBLY prevent it from happening by using the military?

I think that's very far-fetched...one huge difference now is in the make up of the military. At the time of the Civil War, most Union units that fought against the South were comprised of people from Union states. And the converse was true for the South.

Today, the US military is a hodge podge of people from all over the US. You likely couldn't field any units that wouldn't have Texans in them...or units that had numerous soldiers that AGREED with Texas.

And would the US military actually start firing on and killing other Americans to force them to stay? Could the brass get the rank and file to actually do that?

---

I see your point here and it's a good one- but you claim that "most" units in the Civil War from either North or South.

why wouldn't you say "all" units of the North were Northern men and "all" units of the Confederate military were southern men?

are you differentiating with border states such as Tennessee/Kentucky/Maryland?

or the miniscule amount of southern units fighting as part of the Federal Army from areas of the deep south liberated in 1862?

---

I was mainly staying away from the world "all" because in a debate like this, that one word can cause a 2 page derail.

Absolutes are a bad thing to use in a debate since just ONE outlier makes the statement incorrect.

Ag with kids said:

---

LMCane said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Reality Check said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

Reality Check said:

---

TexasAggiesWin said:

---

Civil War, Secession all sounds great and well until **** hits the fan. That is the entire purpose of a movie like this, to explore exactly how brutal it would be.

---

Or we could all peacefully decide that Texas is better off being governed by Texans and have a Brexit type departure.

---

The long term viability of an independent Texas can be debated, but it is a fact that we would not be better off.

And Brexit has worked out so poorly for the Brits that within the next few years they are going to be forced to come groveling to the US and accept our existing terms for an economic alliance that will be far worse for them than the deal they had with the EU. At present the only reason it hasn't happened yet is their pride. But it's been an unmitigated economic disaster for them.

---

There was a big piece in the Journal about Brexit the other day. You thought inflation was bad here, wooooo boy.

---

As if hundreds and hundreds of problems created by a bloated federal government that was originally purposed to ensure fair trade among states and protection of its people from the very type of invasion we've seen for three years aren't infinitely worse than a temporary economic downturn.

And please explain why a peaceful exit of ANY state or territory from the union is a fantasy?

---

Because the United States would not allow it. It's fairly simple. The idea that the U.S. would let one of its bellcows (or any state) just walk away with a smile and pat on the back isn't realistic. The U.S. is going to fight tooth and nail to keep itself united. I realize we're arguing over which near-zero chance is more likely, but I have a harder time imagining a world where the U.S. allows Texas to up and leave than I do a world where it fights to prevent the Union's dissolution.

---

So, if Texas PEACEFULLY petitioned to leave the union, do you honestly think that the FedGov would FORCIBLY prevent it from happening by using the military?

I think that's very far-fetched...one huge difference now is in the make up of the military. At the time of the Civil War, most Union units that fought against the South were comprised of people from Union states. And the converse was true for the South.

Today, the US military is a hodge podge of people from all over the US. You likely couldn't field any units that wouldn't have Texans in them...or units that had numerous soldiers that AGREED with Texas.

And would the US military actually start firing on and killing other Americans to force them to stay? Could the brass get the rank and file to actually do that?

---

I see your point here and it's a good one- but you claim that "most" units in the Civil War from either North or South.

why wouldn't you say "all" units of the North were Northern men and "all" units of the Confederate military were southern men?

are you differentiating with border states such as Tennessee/Kentucky/Maryland?

or the miniscule amount of southern units fighting as part of the Federal Army from areas of the deep south liberated in 1862?

---

I was mainly staying away from the world "all" because in a debate like this, that one word can cause a 2 page derail.

Absolutes are a bad thing to use in a debate since just ONE outlier makes the statement incorrect.

---

In the real world, stuff like that just gets understood in context or glossed over. On message boards, there's always that one guy who veers the topic off course for three pages and starts hurling insults over word choice.

Ag with kids said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Reality Check said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

Reality Check said:

---

TexasAggiesWin said:

---

Civil War, Secession all sounds great and well until **** hits the fan. That is the entire purpose of a movie like this, to explore exactly how brutal it would be.

---

Or we could all peacefully decide that Texas is better off being governed by Texans and have a Brexit type departure.

---

The long term viability of an independent Texas can be debated, but it is a fact that we would not be better off.

And Brexit has worked out so poorly for the Brits that within the next few years they are going to be forced to come groveling to the US and accept our existing terms for an economic alliance that will be far worse for them than the deal they had with the EU. At present the only reason it hasn't happened yet is their pride. But it's been an unmitigated economic disaster for them.

---

There was a big piece in the Journal about Brexit the other day. You thought inflation was bad here, wooooo boy.

---

As if hundreds and hundreds of problems created by a bloated federal government that was originally purposed to ensure fair trade among states and protection of its people from the very type of invasion we've seen for three years aren't infinitely worse than a temporary economic downturn.

And please explain why a peaceful exit of ANY state or territory from the union is a fantasy?

---

Because the United States would not allow it. It's fairly simple. The idea that the U.S. would let one of its bellcows (or any state) just walk away with a smile and pat on the back isn't realistic. The U.S. is going to fight tooth and nail to keep itself united. I realize we're arguing over which near-zero chance is more likely, but I have a harder time imagining a world where the U.S. allows Texas to up and leave than I do a world where it fights to prevent the Union's dissolution.

---

So, if Texas PEACEFULLY petitioned to leave the union, do you honestly think that the FedGov would FORCIBLY prevent it from happening by using the military?

I think that's very far-fetched...one huge difference now is in the make up of the military. At the time of the Civil War, most Union units that fought against the South were comprised of people from Union states. And the converse was true for the South.

Today, the US military is a hodge podge of people from all over the US. You likely couldn't field any units that wouldn't have Texans in them...or units that had numerous soldiers that AGREED with Texas.

And would the US military actually start firing on and killing other Americans to force them to stay? Could the brass get the rank and file to actually do that?

---

Good question. I believe that if Texas peacefully petitioned for secession to the federal government, the U.S. would laugh and move on to more serious matters.

To add an edit, as a former servicemember who served in combat zones, the Oath is to America, not to Texas. You might have some Texans who jump ship, but nowhere close to enough to make a difference.

---

So, would those soldiers fire at and willingly kill AMERICANS in order to force Texas to stay in the union? Would the Congress be able to even get enough votes authorize the military to perform that act? Since it would require an act of Congress to override the Posse Comitatus Act.

Would YOU, as a service member have fired upon people in Texas to enforce this?

---

I think the question, in our extremely unlikely scenario, works the other way around. Would Texans willingly kill to separate. The U.S. would economically seize assets long before they fire a shot in order to choke the state off and maintain it's logistical supply. Military bases, the oil fields, banking, medical, military contractors, etc. The private entities running those businesses would probably ask for federal help before even that happened (a scenario like this would have to play out over years). Would Texans kill Americans to get those assets back?

But, to answer you question, I would do what is necessary to preserve the Union. But, again, only, what, 56% of Texans voted R last presidential cycle? Would anywhere close to a majority of that 56% support a secession? Highly unlikely, especially with what it would mean for jobs and the state economy. As another poster mentioned, a group of true believers could terrorize people pretty hardcore.

---

Wanted to separate these two responses so they didn't get conflated in one post...

You do realize that when the colonists fought the British for independence, the split between support for the colonists and support for the crown was probably around those numbers...possibly even less support for WAR to gain independence.

---

in the Revolutionary War only about 40% of the population supported independence, 40% supported the Crown, and 20% went whichever side they thought was winning.

Battle of Kings Mountain in 1780 was American against American.

LMCane said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Reality Check said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

Reality Check said:

---

TexasAggiesWin said:

---

Civil War, Secession all sounds great and well until **** hits the fan. That is the entire purpose of a movie like this, to explore exactly how brutal it would be.

---

Or we could all peacefully decide that Texas is better off being governed by Texans and have a Brexit type departure.

---

The long term viability of an independent Texas can be debated, but it is a fact that we would not be better off.

And Brexit has worked out so poorly for the Brits that within the next few years they are going to be forced to come groveling to the US and accept our existing terms for an economic alliance that will be far worse for them than the deal they had with the EU. At present the only reason it hasn't happened yet is their pride. But it's been an unmitigated economic disaster for them.

---

There was a big piece in the Journal about Brexit the other day. You thought inflation was bad here, wooooo boy.

---

As if hundreds and hundreds of problems created by a bloated federal government that was originally purposed to ensure fair trade among states and protection of its people from the very type of invasion we've seen for three years aren't infinitely worse than a temporary economic downturn.

And please explain why a peaceful exit of ANY state or territory from the union is a fantasy?

---

Because the United States would not allow it. It's fairly simple. The idea that the U.S. would let one of its bellcows (or any state) just walk away with a smile and pat on the back isn't realistic. The U.S. is going to fight tooth and nail to keep itself united. I realize we're arguing over which near-zero chance is more likely, but I have a harder time imagining a world where the U.S. allows Texas to up and leave than I do a world where it fights to prevent the Union's dissolution.

---

So, if Texas PEACEFULLY petitioned to leave the union, do you honestly think that the FedGov would FORCIBLY prevent it from happening by using the military?

I think that's very far-fetched...one huge difference now is in the make up of the military. At the time of the Civil War, most Union units that fought against the South were comprised of people from Union states. And the converse was true for the South.

Today, the US military is a hodge podge of people from all over the US. You likely couldn't field any units that wouldn't have Texans in them...or units that had numerous soldiers that AGREED with Texas.

And would the US military actually start firing on and killing other Americans to force them to stay? Could the brass get the rank and file to actually do that?

---

Good question. I believe that if Texas peacefully petitioned for secession to the federal government, the U.S. would laugh and move on to more serious matters.

To add an edit, as a former servicemember who served in combat zones, the Oath is to America, not to Texas. You might have some Texans who jump ship, but nowhere close to enough to make a difference.

---

So, would those soldiers fire at and willingly kill AMERICANS in order to force Texas to stay in the union? Would the Congress be able to even get enough votes authorize the military to perform that act? Since it would require an act of Congress to override the Posse Comitatus Act.

Would YOU, as a service member have fired upon people in Texas to enforce this?

---

I think the question, in our extremely unlikely scenario, works the other way around. Would Texans willingly kill to separate. The U.S. would economically seize assets long before they fire a shot in order to choke the state off and maintain it's logistical supply. Military bases, the oil fields, banking, medical, military contractors, etc. The private entities running those businesses would probably ask for federal help before even that happened (a scenario like this would have to play out over years). Would Texans kill Americans to get those assets back?

But, to answer you question, I would do what is necessary to preserve the Union. But, again, only, what, 56% of Texans voted R last presidential cycle? Would anywhere close to a majority of that 56% support a secession? Highly unlikely, especially with what it would mean for jobs and the state economy. As another poster mentioned, a group of true believers could terrorize people pretty hardcore.

---

Wanted to separate these two responses so they didn't get conflated in one post...

You do realize that when the colonists fought the British for independence, the split between support for the colonists and support for the crown was probably around those numbers...possibly even less support for WAR to gain independence.

---

in the Revolutionary War only about 40% of the population supported independence, 40% supported the Crown, and 20% went whichever side they thought was winning.

Battle of Kings Mountain in 1780 was American against American.

---

Heck, the way Lincoln saw it, the whole Civil War was American against American. Also, in the battle of Castle Itter in WWII, the Americans and Germans fought together against the SS. There's some really wild history when you go down the war rabbit hole. The North Vietnamese-American friendships that developed from the combatants of the battle of la Drang Valley decades after are really interesting.

It takes me back to Anthony Swofford's quote, "Every war is different. Every war is the same." That was something that was really hard for me to understand as the typical gung-ho teen going into the military. I might've thought I understood it at the time, but there's no substitute for experience. As I've gotten wiser and realized that I know less the more I learn, it's to the point now where my thought process doesn't even resemble who I was then.

BassCowboy33 said:

---

I do find it humorous that some people are going into a fictional Civil War film, like, "Texas and California would never team up."

Bro, it's a movie. Just enjoy it.

---

True - but comedy isn't funny unless it's based in truth.

The same with films. A film must have an undercurrent of "truth" in the message or it falls flat. Everything has meaning - or resonates with a common fear or want. Sure a movie can be enjoyed on a surface level, but there's generally a deeper meaning with good films that resonates.

"A gun over the mantle in scene two must be fired in scene three"

I think you'll find more than an undercurrent in this film. It seems a lot of people assumed this was going to be some film about the good America bravely fighting off insurrectionist states (I was one fo them based on what little we knew from the trailers). I turned out to be quite wrong.

BassCowboy33 said:

---

ttu_85 said:

---

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

Quote:

---

Even more so than the leftest fantasy to transform American into a communist hell hole?

---

The United States cannot be transformed into a "communist hell hole". The things that would need to occur preceding such a transformation would be both so fundamental and so violent that the US would have already ceased to exist, and their very nature would have brought about mass emigration and secession anyway.

So either we go on bickering as we currently do while remaining, by leaps and bounds, the most prosperous and luxurious society in human history or it all falls apart and you get what you want anyway. Theres no role in there for seceding while the getting is still good.

---

Bawahahahah. Reread your first paragraph

You dont think this is exactly what the Biden and Obama admins were doing. They only reason things are not violent is because the right is still somewhat comfortable but those comforts and rights are disappearing by the day.

Are you paying attention? Our society is very different from what it was as recently as 2010. The US is in the process of undergoing exactly what you describe. I guess you dont keep up with news details. The US is a mess and the left put it there and is stepping on the gas with Excessive debt at 135% of GPP, unfettered, record, levels of illegal immigration. Excesses by the Executive branch. XO's are release in bushels with hardly a word from congress

Pay attention to what the hell is going on.

---

Nobody is going to go to war over debt or immigration, especially while their 401k coffers are brimming with Benjamins.

---

high debt levels and massive immigration from different cultures are not snap-shot issues or factors. They are long to intermediate term events that can fundamentally change an economy or culture. Are they themselves a country breaking event ? Who knows. I do know our nation is changing rapidly and lots of people are not happy with the direction. These two factors as well as others are accelerating those changes. As is the excesses of the executive branch on the political front.

Debt is a killer for all those Benjamin you snugly mention. Inflation, currency destruction, and eco uncertainty have a real and historically proven effect on internal and international politics that might be enough to trip our coffers you are so confident in. I'm worried and I dont have a dime of debt and I have put back plenty. I also know what debt can do to 401K's composed of stocks and MF's

I mention specific examples of factors and you responded with a non specific simplistic rebuttal. Disappointing

ttu_85 said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

ttu_85 said:

---

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

Quote:

---

Even more so than the leftest fantasy to transform American into a communist hell hole?

---

The United States cannot be transformed into a "communist hell hole". The things that would need to occur preceding such a transformation would be both so fundamental and so violent that the US would have already ceased to exist, and their very nature would have brought about mass emigration and secession anyway.

So either we go on bickering as we currently do while remaining, by leaps and bounds, the most prosperous and luxurious society in human history or it all falls apart and you get what you want anyway. Theres no role in there for seceding while the getting is still good.

---

Bawahahahah. Reread your first paragraph

You dont think this is exactly what the Biden and Obama admins were doing. They only reason things are not violent is because the right is still somewhat comfortable but those comforts and rights are disappearing by the day.

Are you paying attention? Our society is very different from what it was as recently as 2010. The US is in the process of undergoing exactly what you describe. I guess you dont keep up with news details. The US is a mess and the left put it there and is stepping on the gas with Excessive debt at 135% of GPP, unfettered, record, levels of illegal immigration. Excesses by the Executive branch. XO's are release in bushels with hardly a word from congress

Pay attention to what the hell is going on.

---

Nobody is going to go to war over debt or immigration, especially while their 401k coffers are brimming with Benjamins.

---

high debt levels and massive immigration from different cultures are not snap-shot issues or factors. They are long to intermediate term events that can fundamentally change an economy or culture. Are they themselves a country breaking event ? Who knows. I do know our nation is changing rapidly and lots of people are not happy with the direction. These two factors as well as others are accelerating those changes. As is the excesses of the executive branch on the political front.

Debt is a killer for all those Benjamin you snugly mention. Inflation, currency destruction, and eco uncertainty have a real and historically proven effect on internal and international politics that might be enough to trip our coffers you are so confident in. I'm worried and I dont have a dime of debt and I have put back plenty. I also know what debt can do to 401K's composed of stocks and MF's

I mention specific examples of factors and you responded with a non specific simplistic rebuttal. Disappointing

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

ttu_85 said:

---

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

Quote:

---

Even more so than the leftest fantasy to transform American into a communist hell hole?

---

The United States cannot be transformed into a "communist hell hole". The things that would need to occur preceding such a transformation would be both so fundamental and so violent that the US would have already ceased to exist, and their very nature would have brought about mass emigration and secession anyway.

So either we go on bickering as we currently do while remaining, by leaps and bounds, the most prosperous and luxurious society in human history or it all falls apart and you get what you want anyway. Theres no role in there for seceding while the getting is still good.

---

Bawahahahah. Reread your first paragraph

You dont think this is exactly what the Biden and Obama admins were doing. They only reason things are not violent is because the right is still somewhat comfortable but those comforts and rights are disappearing by the day.

Are you paying attention? Our society is very different from what it was as recently as 2010. The US is in the process of undergoing exactly what you describe. I guess you dont keep up with news details. The US is a mess and the left put it there and is stepping on the gas with Excessive debt at 135% of GPP, unfettered, record, levels of illegal immigration. Excesses by the Executive branch. XO's are release in bushels with hardly a word from congress

Pay attention to what the hell is going on.

---

Nobody is going to go to war over debt or immigration, especially while their 401k coffers are brimming with Benjamins.

---

what happens when the 401K coffers are empty?

LMCane said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

ttu_85 said:

---

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

Quote:

---

Even more so than the leftest fantasy to transform American into a communist hell hole?

---

The United States cannot be transformed into a "communist hell hole". The things that would need to occur preceding such a transformation would be both so fundamental and so violent that the US would have already ceased to exist, and their very nature would have brought about mass emigration and secession anyway.

So either we go on bickering as we currently do while remaining, by leaps and bounds, the most prosperous and luxurious society in human history or it all falls apart and you get what you want anyway. Theres no role in there for seceding while the getting is still good.

---

Bawahahahah. Reread your first paragraph

You dont think this is exactly what the Biden and Obama admins were doing. They only reason things are not violent is because the right is still somewhat comfortable but those comforts and rights are disappearing by the day.

Are you paying attention? Our society is very different from what it was as recently as 2010. The US is in the process of undergoing exactly what you describe. I guess you dont keep up with news details. The US is a mess and the left put it there and is stepping on the gas with Excessive debt at 135% of GPP, unfettered, record, levels of illegal immigration. Excesses by the Executive branch. XO's are release in bushels with hardly a word from congress

Pay attention to what the hell is going on.

---

Nobody is going to go to war over debt or immigration, especially while their 401k coffers are brimming with Benjamins.

---

what happens when the 401K coffers are empty?

---

We all get part-time jobs at Home Depot.

DarkBrandon01 said:

---

There won't be a civil war. Very few people want to throw their lives away for stupid nonsense.

---

Oh enough people want to throw their lives away because:
women don't want to be treated like livestock or property
minorities believe they have rights embodied in the Constitution
people want to come here and do work that native born citizens do not
the sexual identity of some people is confusing to others
people wish to practice faiths other than the Evangelical one


Seems therapy to wrestle with these issues would be easier and less messy than civil insurrection.

Ag with kids said:

---

And would the US military actually start firing on and killing other Americans to force them to stay? Could the brass get the rank and file to actually do that?

---

Soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines firing weapons? The much bigger concern for today's Pentagon leaders is ensuring they had completed their 90 hours of DEI training and properly listed their pronouns on their email signatures.

So the plot makes absolutely no sense at all…until you realize what you're seeing is not the original plot and what you're seeing is a rewrite of the script to make it more palatable to a wider audience


It makes sense when you realize the original script was a lib fan fic where a California led Western Forces (Liberals) fighting against Loyalist (Conservatives) and their 3 term dictator Trump stand in (the ending being the liberal journalist dream porn)

FlyRod said:

---

DarkBrandon01 said:

---

There won't be a civil war. Very few people want to throw their lives away for stupid nonsense.

---

Oh enough people want to throw their lives away because:
women don't want to be treated like livestock or property
minorities believe they have rights embodied in the Constitution
people want to come here and do work that native born citizens do not
the sexual identity of some people is confusing to others
people wish to practice faiths other than the Evangelical one


Seems therapy to wrestle with these issues would be easier and less messy than civil insurrection.

---

You can't give one single example of any policy being pushed that creates and of that woe-is-me victimhood crap you're trying to push because it's all BS from Reddit and another Jones

BassCowboy33 said:

---

I think you'll find more than an undercurrent in this film. It seems a lot of people assumed this was going to be some film about the good America bravely fighting off insurrectionist states (I was one fo them based on what little we knew from the trailers). I turned out to be quite wrong.

---

not to give out a spoiler, but in the media now they discuss this is almost more a movie about "war correspondents" than it is about an American civil war.

the fighting is the ground for the discussion about humanity- not about slavery and a second Fort Sumter.

it's interesting that there were books about an American Civil War dating back to 1836!!

Threw on my ghillie suit and face paint and went to see this by myself last night. I was actually shocked that this movie somehow managed to not get political (as far as I could tell)...also didn't sense any race-baiting or other fruity liberal BS...and I will gladly eat crow on that. Thought it was pretty good, and was definitely entertaining....I just think I may want to view it again once it is streaming because I am still trying to understand the true meaning or purpose of the film. I feel like it's kind of making some type of apolitical statement about human nature and maybe even journalism, but trying to pin it down.

LMCane said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

I think you'll find more than an undercurrent in this film. It seems a lot of people assumed this was going to be some film about the good America bravely fighting off insurrectionist states (I was one fo them based on what little we knew from the trailers). I turned out to be quite wrong.

---

not to give out a spoiler, but in the media now they discuss this is almost more a movie about "war correspondents" than it is about an American civil war.

the fighting is the ground for the discussion about humanity- not about slavery and a second Fort Sumter.

it's interesting that there were books about an American Civil War dating back to 1836!!

---

Oh, yeah, Jackson had to march the Army south toward South Carolina to prevent them from going rogue long before Fort Sumter.

Plemons got his wife a job, nice.

FlyRod said:

---

DarkBrandon01 said:

---

There won't be a civil war. Very few people want to throw their lives away for stupid nonsense.

---

Oh enough people want to throw their lives away because:
women don't want to be treated like livestock or property
minorities believe they have rights embodied in the Constitution
people want to come here and do work that native born citizens do not
the sexual identity of some people is confusing to others
people wish to practice faiths other than the Evangelical one


Seems therapy to wrestle with these issues would be easier and less messy than civil insurrection.

---

Dafuq is this? LOLOLOL

Antoninus said:

---

ttu_85 said:

---

Mike Hancho said:

---

The people who think this movie should be banned are the same ones who actively call for secession from the union

---

Whose calling for banning this movie ?

---

Yeah, I would like an answer to that question as well.

I've not seen ANYONE making that call.

The trailer is VERY careful not to reveal the REASON for the secessions, and I suspect that the film will do the same. The story does not seem to be about the reason for the conflict, but instead about the survival of some people caught-up in it.

---

It's the opposite of what happens on the board.

The reason is paramount (libs evil, or whatever has set someone off), and the what happens next is like a snap of the fingers - either bloodless or with libs being starved in the cities bemoaning their foolishness.