If Texas had a referendum, and 51% decided to secede, who in the rest of the US would be the ones to stop them?
Who are the main states that Texas would have to deal with? What armaments and tactics would they have to face?
>>30516530
the entire US would be against them. a state cant be allowed to leave of their own accord. not without a really good reason. "because we'd be better off by ourselves" isnt good enough.
>>30516530
They'd be fucked short of foreign intervention and support.
>You will never get to put down a Texan or Californian insurrection and establish freedom in their land again
>>30516530
The states with big military bases if the American Gub'ment were the ones trying to stop secession (which they would). I suppose if it was only civilian resistance, the biggest threats would be the other Bible Belt states.
Also we'd get embargoed by the US and probably a lot of other 1st world countries.
>>30516530
States can't secede from the union, for any reason, ever.
If any one single state could, it would be Arizona
>>30516530
Peeps all over the country would join the fight for Texas. But a lot of Texans would move out of the state if it did try.
>>30516530
Should we factor in Texas getting a hold of its nuclear weapons?
>>30516581
Especially considering the Federal assets in state, including armor and air military equipment reserves plus strategic oil assets. How many M1s, other armor and rotary wing assets at Ft. Hood alone?
That's the other problem with this plan. Unless Texas wants to bomb the fuck out of Ft. Hood and every other US mil installation in Texas, they'd have to deal with, at the very least, a huge proportion of military units breaking out of their bases and rolling/fighting cross country to rejoin the US. Just all around never going to happen.
How about all the support Texas gets from FEMA? That's just an example of how much support they receive from the federal government. If they succeed, that's all out the window. Now that little micro economy they have just got a big burden put on it.
Also the whole Mexican border thing would rest on their hands. CBP is federal too.
Texas would have an ally in Russia, they've said they would support a Texas secession, so weapons and possibly training as well as fighters could be in great supply.
Texas has lots of oil and tons of land for expansion and development.
>>30516655
Seriously this. As much as I love the great state of Texas, this state is so dependent on Washington dollars. No more border patrol, no more federal dollars for oil, no more education dollars, no more military, no more agriculture/livestock dollars, you better believe companies like dell, bank of America, Chase and all the other big copies will jump ship.
Texas is a lot like that kid who went to UT. Yeah he's got a 2017 Silverado, nice apartment, fresh haircut, and all the Lone Star in his fridge. But once daddy stops paying his rent and phone bill, he's as poor and broke as anyone else
>>30516669
Russia can barely project power in their own back yard. Expecting Russia to project power to Texas is about as vodka-pickled delusional as it gets.
>>30516669
>tfw probably won't ever fight to secure Texas' freedom with a full-retard AK blessed by an Orthodox priest, sent from Putin with love
>tfw once all the liberal Austin faggots and families of illegals gtfo of dodge, we probably won't become an Orthodox state
>tfw Novorossiyan veterans probably won't come help us
>tfw we probably won't conquer Mexican border land in order to create a buffer area, and fill it entirely with barbed wire and alligators
>tfw the word probably in all of these means that there is at least a miniscule chance of these things happening
it makes my heart jump for joy, family.
>>30516530
A full third of Texas's budget is federal money. Texas's GDP is dependent on businesses it courted by offering such low taxes. Without federal money you'll have to raise those taxes. You'd also lose hundreds of billions currently provided by the Gulf Coast and I-35 corridor. Lastly, Texas's top export client is Mexico, as is California's, who you'd then be forced to compete with from a much weaker position.
The idea that Texas's massive GDP could support them as an independent nation is silly. The independent energy grid is huge, but sitting back on oil and gas wouldn't be enough to maintain it.
>>30516770
>implying if we did manage to secede, we wouldn't get business back by allowing all companies who build manufacturing plants in Texas to stay for 5 years at nearly no tax cost
>>30516772
>Implying Russia wouldn't take any chance it could get to weaken the United States
>>30516655
>implying we need bloated bureaucracy bux from Big Brother Fed, and can't remake these same institutions and make them leaner, more efficient, and all around better, once we kick all the welfare-americans out by denying them their welfare-bux
>>30516867
>>30516770
>>30516655
Texas sends more money to the federal government than it gets.
>>30516669
They are gunna ship aid through Cali or Mexico, without getting fucked by the US military? They can barely attack their former satellites.
>>30516817
>Tfw you'll never have a 10/10 siberian qt sucking you as part of Texas/Russia war effort
>>30516871
>>Implying Russia wouldn't take any chance it could get to weaken the United States
They'd be doing the US a favor. After we wrapped up in Texas with the speed and rage of the fucking gods, we'd take the biggest fucking shit ever, light it on fire and send it to Putin with a fucking cruise missile.
The country would never be more united than facing internal interference like that from fucking Russia.
>>30516647
Well, Texas does have at least one nuclear power plant
>>30516530
Oklahoma, by damning up their rivers and watching DFW die of thirst.
It will never win by referendum
>Niggers, spics and other social degenerates are not going to vote away their welfare. Boomers are not going to vote away their social security.
>The Feds will use massive voter fraud
>Most of the people advocating Texas nationalism are LARPing. They're sure as hell not going to shoot at invading US troops.
Here's why it's not desirable
>Texas is already a majority Hispanic state. Short of ethnic cleansing you'll be voting to make yourself a satellite state of Mexico.
>>30516924
>Texas sends more money to the federal government than it gets.
Hasn't been true since 2012.
http://www.dallasnews.com/news/politics/headlines/20120805-texas-can-no-longer-complain-that-it-gives-more-than-it-gets-from-federal-government.ece
Texas's GDP fluctuates wildly thanks to oil and gas prices and why you've dropped in the GDP rankings since the subprime oil/natural gas bust. Its why Perry has such a boner about courting businesses from California.
https://www.texastribune.org/2013/02/04/gov-perry-californians-move-texas/
>>30516621
>States can't secede from the union, for any reason, ever.
Oh? Can you explain why, without resorting to meme arrows, reaction images, or muh slavery?
Bonus points if you can justify your explanation on moral grounds, given that OP's example was a majority of Texans voting to leave. See if you can do this without basing your argument on what's good for the REST of the country (but not necessarily Texas), without resorting to "might makes right", and without confusing whether it's a dumb fucking idea (it is) with whether it's right to force a people to remain against their will.
>>30517011
My god. Can you imagine the border wars over water rights if Texas succeeded? It'd be fucking epic.
>>30517037
So ethnic cleansing / mass deportations when?
>>30516867
>great lakes megaregion emerging
>people fleeing that area in droves
your map
i believe it has a flaw
>>30517039
*Perry had
>>30516530
Considering we have already had a war on the subject, STATES AREN'T ALLOWED TO SECEDE FROM THE UNION UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES.
>>30517037
>>Niggers, spics and other social degenerates are not going to vote away their welfare.
the democratic party created a social class so utterly dependent upon government entitlement programs that the can only vote democrat because the cold uncaring republicans will cut the funding
lbj worst president ever. how's your great society working out, asshole
>>30516770
This is retarded.
Texas makes 1.3 trillion and has no debt. It has its own power grid. It does this without even having a state tax. If 20% of everyone's income in Texas stopped going to the US and went to Texas instead that number would only get bigger, and the state would easily handle ALL of its own affairs.
>>30517039
So that's not true anymore because of bloated government spending and mass immigration?
All the more reason to leave.
>>30516867
You're thinking conventionally. We could get that money back by offering an extremely low "introductory" tax to business who move to the new Texas, and offering even lower taxes to businesses who stay through the ordeal. Also, we have the Gulf in which to conduct trade business, and many caribbean islands to act as intermediaries. Even if there is a naval blockade, we could smuggle through Mexico, in an ironically reversed fashion. If we made weed legal, some would fight just for that. And we could become a haven for alternative energy solutions, what with the insane amount of sun and wind in the state,
Also, this isn't the 1860s. War fatigue would set in on the Americans much, much faster than it did earlier, especially if we adopt similar tactics to the enemies we're fighting now. All we'd need to do is hold on, and many would just give up. Also, many other states might join our cause. This situation only goes through if Hillary wins, and if she does, many other southern states would join in, along with many of the other uncucked people from along the country. Considering half the nation's army is from the South, it'd be pretty hard for them to bomb their home, so many would defect to the Texan cause. This would be pretty bad, considering almost 50% of the nation's military comes from the South.
If Hillary wins, I'm sure we have many rich patriotic folks that would make the war go our way by strategically lining Madame President's pockets.
If Trump wins, we'd have no reason to secede.
>>30517082
This isn't the 1800's that shit doesn't fly anymore. Especially since the US has been crying about "muh right to self-determination" for decades along with the other cucks in the UN.
>>30517039
>Implying the reason that hasn't been true is because of that fucking asshat Obama
Why do you think we want to secede?
>>30516649
yep, can't let a brand new nation get all our military assets
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pantex_Plant
>>30517045
It already happened. The next time won't be bloodless.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_River_Bridge_War
>>30517041
After the Civil War(1868 or so) a lawsuit over war bonds issued by the CSA went before the SCOTUS and they ruled that no state, not even Texas, has the right to secede from the union. The SCOTUS has a bad habit of making rulings because they're politically expedient instead of right(see the time they ruled the jap internment camps were legal) but that's another discussion.
Unlike pre-Civil War when no such case existed, there is legal precedence saying that no, you, Commifornia, and Jew York are stuck together.
>>30516946
it hurts
all the more reason to secede
>>30517144
>Abbot orders the Texas Ranger's tactical units to capture pantex
>Texas is within hours a nuclear power
Now what faggots?
>>30517049
Might as well change the name to New Bosnia and be done with it.
>>30517041
Not the guy you're replying to, but you're asking to come back with a logical argument to an extremely illogical situation. Illogical situations breed illogical solutions.
Also, "might makes right" is the entire point of the damn discussion. Is Texas strong enough? Short answer? No. Long answer? Not without so many things that have a 0.001% chance of happening happen in the perfect order, at the perfect time, with the perfect public opinion, as well as support from Mex/Cali other bordering states to not completely wreck their fucking shit first chance they get, just via cutting off land routes, supplies, water, etc.
Honestly, if any of you think that Mexico wouldn't at least attempt to get Texas back after it pissed off big brother and after it was weakened and full of turmoil, y'all niggas cray.
>>30516993
look up Pantex
>>30516530
Ok lets say Texas secedes how long until they decide its a bad idea
> new country with no foreign allies surrounded by the enemy and mexico
> US gubment places heavy embargoes because "fuck you lets starve em out"
> immigration laws apply to texas
I give it a year at best
>>30516770
> no more edu money
All of our schools are funded at state level or are privite schools
>border patrol
If Texas was allowed to set it's own border policy the border patrol office would be flooded with volunteers
>big business jumps ships
That's why they are jumping shit from all of those other smaller countries with lower tax rates than the US....oh wait they aren't.
Sorry your state sucks New York or California dweller.
>>30517182
If you think the US Gov wouldn't know that that shit was a threat and send actual troops to protect it at the first hint that Texas would even THINK about trying something funny like that, (especially if it was perfect scenario and Putin and Co WERE helping) you'd be wrong.
>>30517182
DOE security team enacts failsafe measures at the plant. Reactor goes into mechanically locked safe shutdown and turbines and other infrastructure is destroyed. Only the cooling systems are left untouched.
Enjoy, dickweeds.
>>30517037
>>30517086
>>30517049
>tfw deporting all the undesirables, actual deportation, rounding up every democrat voter and sending them out on a train where the tracks end a mile out into the gulf (or something less extreme maybe, depends on circumstances, the second anyone accuses you of genocide you're done for. Maybe we'll dump them in New Mexico, lol.)
>call for all uncucked people from Europe to fight for a new home
FUCK DAMN I'M CREAMY IN THE JEANS JUST THINKING ABOUT
>>30517229
>That's why they are jumping shit from all of those other smaller countries with lower tax rates than the US....oh wait they aren't.
Those places aren't exactly under the threat of being completely surrounded and cut off by hostile states on all sides.
>>30517256
>US loses a significant nuclear advantage as China and Russia look on hungrily
FREE TEXAS OR TOTAL NUCLEAR ANNIHILATION, LOSERS, YOUR CHOICE
>>30517218
>Texas leads the nation in cattle, cotton, hay, sheep, goats and mohair production.
Texas leads the nation in number of farms and ranches, with 248,800 farms and ranches covering 130.2 million acres.
>starve texas out
>Agricultural exports to foreign countries totaled $6.5 billion in 2012.
Texas ranks # 6 overall in value of agricultural exports.
Texas' national rank for selected commodity exports:
1 - Cotton & cottonseed, $1.6 billion
1 - Beef, $855 million
1 - Hides & skins, $431 million
2 - Seeds for planting, $244 million
4 - Tree nuts, $66 million
4 - Rice, $119 million
6 - Broilers, $323 million
6 - Milk and milk products, $248 million
9 - Wheat, $286 million
10 - Feeds & fodders, $172 million
10 - Grain products, $171 million
11 - Fresh fruits, $54 million
13 - Corn, $157 million
13 - Sugar, $27 million
15 - Fresh vegetables, $39 million
>not the other way around
>>30516597
Russian would support them, they are on record on the matter.
>>30517229
>big business jumps ships
Bud, the first thing that would happen in case of a Texit would be trade tariffs across the board on any and all goods headed to the rest of the US, our biggest trading market.
All those corporations that moved their HQ from Cali to Texas, like Toyota? Guess where their biggest market in North America is? The other 49 states.
They'd be gone before the ink dried on the paperwork, along with a sizable number of jobs.
>>30517293
>Russian would support them, they are on record on the matter.
They have zero capability to support them. Fuck off, Vatnik.
>>30517095
>bloated government spending and mass immigration?
>>30517122
>because of that fucking asshat Obama
No, it's for your benefit. Federal money allows Texas to attract businesses by offering tax breaks and incentives. Texas wants to diversify its economy so you're less tethered to oil/gas. Its why California just made news for becoming the worlds 6th largest economy but Texas has fallen in the ranks from 2012.
How you guys know so little about your own state economy is beyond me.
>>30517182
About 12 hours later every special operator on active duty converges and takes it back.
Or it eats a nuke and we move assembly to one of the other sites around the country. You are aware that Pantex is only assembly/disassembly and storage, right?
So now you have a radiological disaster on your hands, and FEMA support stops at the border.
Texas' exports are too valueable to be tariffed or embargoed, the US would not actively do any of these things because the US is gonna be lead by a bunch of cucks.
>>30516581
I don't live in Texas but I would fight for Texas.
How the fuck would the US stop Texas from utilizing the Port of Texas anyway? Gonna take one hell of a naval blockade.
>>30517284
They may not be starved out, but how's their water situation? How much are they importing from other States? Oh, wait:
https://stateimpact.npr.org/texas/2011/11/15/five-things-you-didnt-know-about-water-in-texas/
Have fun keeping all those animals and crops alive at the same levels as before without support for such basic shit as water. You guys might be able to cut us out of several million barrels of oil, which will hurt, yeah. You'd be able to produce enough of your own electricity with all those wind farms to keep the necessities alive, but don't expect nearly the same level of lights and fridges turned on as before.
Doesn't matter really, no water = no war. Mexico doesn't have the water either, so where you guys gonna go? Your desalination plants are far, far from producing what you would need to survive on your own.
>>30517351
>Your desalination plants are far, far from producing what you would need to survive on your own.
...and not even talking about what kind of water resources you're going to be using and transporting to try to protect Texas' border. Dem troops gotta drink, too.
>>30517284
I'd love to see how you guys would handle transportation. Do you allow BNSF, KCS and Union Pacific railroads to continue running trains into your state, or do you annex their private property and call on your internal-only railroad companies to handle your shit for you?
>>30517293
So they'd be fucked, then?
>>30517041
Because Texas is part of America, and America belongs to all Americans. As such, parts of the country can't decide to leave without approval from the rest of the country. Otherwise, what's the moral justification for not letting you form a sovereign state on your property?
>>30517351
>>30517366
>The state’s Water Development Board told the Chronicle that “about 160,000 acre-feet of water were used for mining in 2008, the latest figures available. That includes oil and gas production and came after drilling began on the Barnett shale in North Texas, but before work ramped up in south Texas’ Eagle Ford shale. Another 482,100 acre-feet a year was used for cooling at power plants” in 2009
The water hole gets deeper and deeper Texas...
You guys with your faggoty boots and gay hats don't stand a chance. You'd have better chance re-joining Mexico than trying to do it on your own.
>texas
>seceding
With all the immigration, you guys are basically guaranteed to be a solid blue state in the next 10-20 years. You missed your window of opportunity.
>>30517168
>The SCOTUS has a bad habit of making rulings because they're politically expedient instead of right(see the time they ruled the jap internment camps were legal) but that's another discussion.
No, that's exactly this discussion. Besides what you hinted at, "you can't secede because secession is illegal!" isn't a very compelling argument. Seceding from Britain was illegal, too, but that didn't stop the founders of secession-is-illegal-land from drafting the Declaration of Independence.
>>30517206
There's nothing illogical about supposing what might happen if, one day, more Texans want to secede than currently want to secede.
What IS illogical is the number of people gloating that Texas couldn't leave even if they wanted to. Those folks deserve to be stuck with California's gun control, which follows all the same but-it's-illegal and you-need-everyone-else's-permission logic, but they'll happily secede across state lines as soon as they move out of their parents' basement.
>>30517382
Your house is part of Detroit, and Detroit belongs to all Detroitans. As such, no one can leave the city without approval from the rest of the city. Otherwise, what's the moral justification for not letting you move, or incorporate your own township somewhere else?
>>30516530
For Americans who dont understand how full Australia is
>>30516871
>implying you didn't already talk about voting a referendum, and then begging for big fed's big cock to save you from the flooding
>>30517351
>How the fuck would the US stop Texas from utilizing the Port of Texas anyway? Gonna take one hell of a naval blockade.
Hi. Are you aware of the USN and USCG, two of the largest and best trained organizations of their type on the planet?
No, I didn't think so.
Also, it isn't like the Caribbean isn't full of fucking choke points.
>>30517351
>naval blockade
Don't forget Putin would be on Tx's side
>kek
>>30516530
I'm tired of this secede crap. It's only there to sell fucking bumper stickers
>>30516621
it's in their state constitution that they have the ability to dumbass
>>30516647
>>30516993
There may or may not be 20 intercontinental reasons to not fuck with Texas
>>30517438
If the help is there, why not use it?
But only if the help is worth everything it's costing us.
If a progressive faggot wins this election, it might not be worth it.
Why are you so against Texas, anyways? Wouldn't you cream your jeans at the chance to serve for Rhodesia and make a difference?
If Hillary's coming to shove Sweden taxes down your throat, and take your guns while she's at it, and force you to live with Mexican and Syrian refugee families in your house, why wouldn't you want to fight to make a difference?
>>30517455
>Don't forget Putin would be on Tx's side
Don't forget the USN built almost 1.5 times Putin's entire commissioned naval tonnage just since 1998, and most of Putin's ships and subs were commissioned before 1994.
Red rover, red rover, send them the fuck on over. We could use some more artificial reefs in the gulf.
>>30517430
No, the argument boils down to there being no legal right to secede, so the only way you're going to get it is by force of arms and the help of someone else as powerful as the nation you're trying to secede from.
>>30517481
Though I am a pro-Texas-revolution guy, that simply isn't true, it's a myth. What is in the state constitution is the ability to break up into up to 5 different states should we want to.
>>30517482
>Only 20
I get the feeling the Dakotas would smoke your ass.
>>30517434
So...your continent is about the size of Alaska.
>>30517517
>Nuclear exchange within the US
>while Russia and China look on hungrily
Suurrreee
>>30517539
>Suurrreee
I'm in MN, I lose nothing significant to me.
How many other states would side with texit?
>>30517583
Montana is MT, dumbass.
>>30517547
>MN
>>30517583
>Montana
..... Go back to civics glass, bruh.
>>30516530
Just an FYI, if that pic was to scale then Australia would be twice as large
>>30516530
>Nuclear Reactors
>Texas: 2
>Australia: 0
>implying Texas wouldn't go Slim Pickens on the other 47 states
>>30516530
I would gladly kick them out the fucking door.
Fuck texas and fuck texans.
>>30516530
They'd have to face the entire country, including ALL of the tanks. ALL of them.
Because they're in fucking texas.
Also, nobody likes texas.
>>30517182
>police
>vs doe security teams that recruit form SOF vets
>in the confines of a fucking power plant
Good. Fucking. Luck.
>>30517524
Alaska is about 1/4 the size of Australia.
>>30517524
>>30517726
http://thetruesize.com/#?borders=1~!MTY3NzA4MjQ.MTIyMTYyMjc*MTEzNDE1MTU(MzA2MTU5Mjk~!CONTIGUOUS_US*MTAwMjQwNzU.MjUwMjM1MTc(MTc1)MA~!IN*NTI2NDA1MQ.Nzg2MzQyMQ)MQ~!CN*OTkyMTY5Nw.NzMxNDcwNQ(MjI1)Mg~!AU*MTE3NzExNTY.MjA5NTM5MjA)Mw
>>30517661
Australia does have the OPAL 20MW nuclear reactor for research purposes.
>>30516530
I would move to Texas on the condition that we kick the Mexicans out and offer free 1 way tickets to LA/NYC for all the residents of Austin
>>30517293
Russian support to American rebels would only actually be effective if the fight wasn't just a roflstomp of any one side. If Texas made an exit solo it would be that
>>30517662
>Fuck texas and fuck texans.
The only negative thing I can say is that whatever Texans leave their state and venture to mine are fucking morons who drive like shit. They literally drive the speed of a walking cow., it's goddamn annoying.
>>30517726
>>30517744
So... Is Australia the second least populated continent per mile? I mean, it makes sense since every single example of wildlife there is either poisonous, venomous or constantly under the influence of the extreme urge to assrape all encountered humans. It's just surprising for some reason.
>>30517788
Very much so.
>>30517767
Legal bean here.
Illegals suck ass.
>>30517326
>They have zero capability to support them. Fuck off, Vatnik.
le Russia cannot force project meme
>>30517860
It's not a meme if its true.
Russia could not get a reasonable force to texas and keep it supplied unless the US actively helped them.
>>30516530
I am going to be honest here.
The Republicans from the other states will be more pissed off than anyone else. Most Democrats I talk to would love for Texas to leave. The government will be theirs for the taking without Texas giving a huge boost to the right the game is up.....
>>30517512
>Break up into 5 states
>fuck approval from Congress
>form new state governments/
>draft 5 new state constitutions
>insert secession clause into each new state constitution
>all 5 states secede
>reform Lone Star Republic
>???
>PROFIT
>>30517860
>le Russia cannot force project meme
Name a single way Russia could get so much as a cargo ship or flight into Texas through contested waters and airspace.
>inb4 Mexico
They'd be allied with US interests in this fight.
>Implying Texas isnt a overated shithole meme state
>Implying Texas isnt full of spics and other leeches
>Implying they could support themselves as a nation
ftfy
>>30517872
Wouldn't Ivan just go through Mexico?>>30517881
I feel like that's the actual plan.
>>30517923
>Wouldn't Ivan just go through Mexico?
If Mexico allowed it, the US would simply occupy the south bank of the Rio Grande until the conflict was over. Over land from New Mexico and landing from sea. They'd be forced to support US interests. Not to mention the fact that the USN and USAF would be interdicting and identifying all incoming flights and ships on both shores of Mexico to prevent China or Russia from sticking their dick in.
>>30517923
With what robust transport fleet, anon?
They don't have the capacity.
>>30517881
>HUUUR WE HAS SECESSION CLAUSE
It doesn't work that way. The union does not have any mechanism for leaving. If you want to legally secede, you need a constitutional amendment.
>>30517897
>They'd be allied with US interests in this fight.
Genuinely wondering. Because why?
>>30517872
>>30517897
>They'd be allied with US interests in this fight.
And? Implying Russia wouldn't violate Mexican airspace out the ass to put a pro-Russian republic on the borders of the US. And the US would not do shit about it. We're not talking goat herders here. We're talking Putin. NATO and the EU would keep their noses out. They wouldn't want to invite more aggression in Eastern Europe by supporting America in keeping Texas.
Russia would fuck up all the major Mexican force centers near the US border, including cartel strongholds, with airstrikes and
>>30517952
And yet South Carolina and Mississippi seceded without a hitch and had peace for months until the shit show at Ft. Sumter. The Union doesn't have a "mechanism" for leaving the Union because Constitution is silent on the matter. The 10th Amendment comes into play here, as well as the Declaration of Independence, both of which were invoked by the Southern states when they seceded in the 1860s.
>>30517955
>Because why?
Overwhelming force disparity if nothing else. The USN Atlantic and Pacific fleet commands could level most of Mexico's C4SIR, political leadership and civil infrastructure in 72 hours all by themselves with no help from the Army, Marines or USAF.
It wouldn't come even close to that, though. Texas is a drop in the bucket as far as trade compared to the entire US.
>>30517897
>Russia fucks Mexico up the ass, sends cargo through there
>After the war is over, Russian Texas takes alot of Mexico's land, giving all Mexican resources to Russia
>Lonestar Empire is formed
>>30517982
>And? Implying Russia wouldn't violate Mexican airspace out the ass to put a pro-Russian republic on the borders of the US.
How would they get there? Seriously. Think it through. Two carriers on the Pacific side and one in the Caribbean completely closes Mexican airspace to any possible Russian access.
>>30516649
Ours now friendo.
>>30516530
Honestly, if the secession movement in Texas grew that powerful, other states probably would be trying to do the same exact thing and the movement would probably have significantly more supporters than it does now and outside of Texas.
So depending on if any other states also vote to secede, you might see secessionist states joining together to resist any forced reunification by the feds.
Also since Texas is one of the largest contributor of military personnel in the US, you have that to contend with.
I think that if Texas attempted to go it alone that they would put up a hell of a fight, but its a doomed effort without other supporting states.
>>30517982
>And? Implying Russia wouldn't violate Mexican airspace out the ass to put a pro-Russian republic on the borders of the US
>Russia would fuck up all the major Mexican force centers near the US border, including cartel strongholds, with airstrikes and
>>30517985
>>Russia fucks Mexico up the ass, sends cargo through there
It is hilarious to me how poor /k/ is at geography to think Russia could squeeze a fart into Mexico in this scenario, much less any kind of actual force.
>>30518012
>Ours now friendo.
Most of those servicemen and women on those bases? You do realize they're not native born Texans, right? You do realize they're not going to commit treason just because Texans are morons, right?
>>30517984
>The USN Atlantic and Pacific fleet commands could level most of Mexico's C4SIR, political leadership and civil infrastructure in 72 hours all by themselves with no help from the Army, Marines or USAF.
You seem to think that this makes Mexico want to remain America's bitch. I can assure you they do not.
>>30517998
I'm not strategist so I have no concrete idea. But to propose that Mexico is infallible to invasion because 'Murica is just laughable. We couldn't stop the Russians from getting to Cuba, we couldn't stop Russian influence in Latin America. You're also assuming that a Obama or Hillary administration would greenlight action against Russian forces. I'm not sure they would. This is a group of people who let Ukraine get raped on a world stage and did literally nothing to stop it.
>>30517982
HOW. IS. RUSSIA. GETTING. THERE.
You cannot supply major forces by airlift.
Russia doesn't have the shipping capacity to do it, and doesn't have the naval power to escort the ships even if they find them.
>MUH PUTINS
If the Russians actively supply a fucking breakaway state, they will get engaged. Russia is, by far, the weaker of the two powers, with far less capacity to cause harm to the US. It also has far less soft power, is far more vulnerable to economic harm, an dis bordered by a state totally reliant on US trade.
Putin knows all of this.
The white house knows all of this.
Russians trying to mount any serious operation would die, and very little would come of it.
>>30518025
Texas on its own would get trampled. You're talking militia, cops, and guard VS the us military.
Not all the militia will be at all competent. Cops? Actually routinely come from other states, they move around more than teachers do.
Guard? Same deal, you sign up in the place with best benefits, not necessarily where you live.
>>30518062
You.
Are.
Retarded.
>>30517878
Democrats SAY that to be smarmy
Anyone who knows what they're talking about (including Dems) knows how critical Texas is the this country, and this is coming from a New England Yankee. Texas has a fuckhuge share of American resources in every respect (natural, oil, military, population, etc.)
And anything that pisses off Texas so bad they leave would definitely also be pissing off most Republicans, all save the most RINO of them.
People dismissing Texan independence as no big deal are clearly retarded. It would mean the end of America as a world power and therefore the gov't wouldn't let it go without a fight - unless led by Canada-level pushovers witch is not entirely far-fetched desu
>>30518062
>You seem to think that this makes Mexico want to remain America's bitch. I can assure you they do not.
Hilarious. Tell me, what possible strategic, economic or political benefit could Mexico realize in siding with a succeeding Texas? Don't worry, I'll wait.
>I'm not strategist
No shit, sherlock. Even a cursory look at geography and available assets for the US and Russia will tell you how ridiculous your idea is. They cannot project power to Mexico. Period.
>But to propose that Mexico is infallible to invasion because 'Murica is just laughable.
Not just 'cause 'Murrica. Because 10 supercarriers, 62 Destroyers, 22 Cruisers, 9 LHA/LHDs, the rest of the USN/gator navy, the USMC aviation wing, and finally the USAF which by itself (without the USN and USMC) is the largest, best equipped air force in the world (numbers of fighters and quality of fighters). NOTHING IS GETTING INTO MEXICO that we don't see first in this scenario.
>We couldn't stop the Russians from getting to Cuba
Read a book. We blockaded the island, dumbass. Also the Soviet Navy of 1963 was proportionally much, much stronger compared to the USN than they are now.
>You're also assuming that a Obama or Hillary administration would greenlight action against Russian forces.
That's a ridiculous argument assuming they're actually sending troops and supplies to fucking Texas.
>This is a group of people who let Ukraine get raped on a world stage and did literally nothing to stop it.
The US intervening directly against Russia in Ukraine/Crimea would be about 10 times easier than Russia trying to do the same in Texas. LOOK AT THE AVAILABLE ASSETS. Jesus Christ. Just read a fucking book.
>>30518093
You must be the kinda guy who thinks America won WW2 by themselves and that the US also didn't retreat from Vietnam.
America isn't infallible and they would not risk a damn carrier group to save Mexican druglords from Russians landing troops there.
Once againe
>UKRAINE
>US did nothing
>>30518157
>AVAILABLE ASSETS
Jets and tanks don't mean shit without the political force necessary to use them. And America in the Obama administration just doesn't have show any reason for me to believe they'd engage with Russian troops directly.
>>30518158
>>30518177
This has to be some half-drunk Vatnik teenager. I can't believe any Burger would actually be this stupid. Even a Texan.
>>30518177
>without the political force necessary to use them
Nigger, what exactly do you think the response would be to an existential threat to the United States of America? We almost pushed the big red fucking button over a few nukes in Cuba! What the fuck do you think we'd do about a rogue, Russian-backed Texas? NOT use our military? Get the fuck outta here.
>>30518158
>ukraine
Ukraine has no value to America.
Texas and mexico do.
You are retarded.
>risk a carrier group
Russia would lose the entirety of their navy, and likely all of their shipyards and even PORTS if they engaged inopen war with the USN.
And, again, they know this. They knew this when the fucking wall was still up.
They literally designed the soviet navy around their MASSIVE disparity in strength with the USN, and that has only gotten worse.
>>30518190
We have a lot of russiaboos.
>>30518190
>non-Texan American
So America has superior forces in the area. Correct. Show me that a Obama or Hllary administration would have the balls to use them. Show me that resolve. Because without someone calling those carriers and telling them to engage or setting up some anticipatory retaliation line, they wouldn't do shit.
Look over US foreign policy in the past 8 years. Show me some reason, ANY REASON to believe that Washington under Obama or Hillary would pull the trigger and start WW3 by engaging Russians over a little state secession movement.
I'm legit asking here. Give me proof that the US would have the political willpower to use their military assets in this scenario. Show me.
>>30518224
>existential threat to the United States of America
>ISIS still exists
>Ukraine gone
>Russia blatantly performing military exercises on NATO borders
Yeah no I don't think the US would do shit. Not if Texas had already secured Federal assets in the state.
>>30518249
>start WW3 by engaging Russians over a little state secession movement.
You do realize that killing Russians supporting a Texas succession would not even open up a wider conflict with Russia, much less the world, right? Right?
Why are you commenting on this ridiculous what if scenario if you're this laughable ignorant of geopolitics?
Go back to listening to your daddy rant at the breakfast table and sucking Rush Limbaugh's dick. If you ever actually read a fucking book, come talk.
>>30518249
>>existential threat to the United States of America
>>ISIS still exists
>>Ukraine gone
>>Russia blatantly performing military exercises on NATO borders
Which one of those is an existential threat to the USA? Do you even know what the word "existential" means?
>>30517382
No it doesn't. If that were true I'd get to vote for elections in San Francisco, because it belongs to me.
Every time this shit comes up the children talk tough about getting violent so no one can leave. Why couldn't they leave and be a peaceful trade partner? "Oh no, even if all the people in a state vote to leave it doesn't matter because it really belongs to all Americans!" Great, then quit claiming that the government derives it's authority from the will of the people. They're slaves you won't allow to escape.
>>30518249
>I'm legit asking here. Give me proof that the US would have the political willpower to use their military assets in this scenario. Show me.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/world/asia/drone-strikes-reveal-uncomfortable-truth-us-is-often-unsure-about-who-will-die.html
http://www.commondreams.org/news/2015/02/02/almost-2500-now-killed-covert-us-drone-strikes-obama-inauguration-six-years-ago
https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/2015/01/07/us-drone-war-2014-in-numbers/
If the US gives zero fucks about turning a terrorist in an allied country into gumbo without so much as a by your leave, you can bet your ass they'd do the same to Russian personnel effectively invading the USA.
>>30517329
Because you are wrong famalamadingdong.
>>30518249
You.
Are.
Retarded.
>ISIS
>Existential threat
You have no idea what the term means, do you?
Isis is an irritant. Not an existential threat.
>ukraine gone
Nope. It's still.... right where it always was.
It's also useless to the united states, and always will be. Hence never having been an allied nation.
The us and Russia both felt Ukraine was too retarded to be a nuclear power, and tricked them into giving them up.
End of actual US concerns, beyond customary dickwaving at russia.
>Russia blatantly performing military exercises on NATO borders
And? The reverse is also true. We pull stunts with even less plausible deniability than the Russians do.
You think we sent those strykers parading around eastern europe and then had them sit in a former soviet satellite for no reason?
>HUUUR SHOW ME D WILLZ!
We fucking launched a unilateral raid into a fucking nuclear power, assassinated several people, and then told the world.
On live tv.
Give up, vatnik.
>>30517455
>Don't forget Putin would be on Tx's side
So Texas would definitely be fucked, then?
>>30518331
t. Obama voter
>>30518308
>drone killing goat herders
Full on warfare against a 1st world nation is a little different anon.
>>30518289
>Not knowing the long game
Sure is 1938 in here.
>>30518158
>America isn't infallible and they would not risk a damn carrier group to save Mexican druglords from Russians landing troops there.
When you sober up you should take a look at the Monroe Doctrine.
>>30516581
A very good point. The British should have fought harder to retain the colonies, they need the British empire!
https://youtu.be/UMCOiiketIk?t=535
>>30517430
>Seceding from Britain was illegal, too, but that didn't stop the founders of secession-is-illegal-land from drafting the Declaration of Independence.
Drafting the Declaration isn't what accomplished the secession. Nothing stops you from claiming national sovereignty and diplomatic immunity right now. Send an email to your government to let them know. Then start breaking the law. See how far drafting a declaration of independence actually gets you.
>>30518359
>russia
>1st world
You don't know what that term means.
>russia
>long game
Yeah, losing the soviet union, and having their economy crashed-twice-by giggling americans is all part of the plan.
As is to total obsolescence of their aerospace AND electronics industries.
In the 21st century.
When these are completely vital to a serious military.
As is the total lack of strong allies.
As is fucking BELARUS of all places turning on them
Oh, and losing their status as indias arms supplier.
If russia had a plan, it went tits up a long time ago.
>>30516581
Texas can annon.
That was one of the requirements they put in place when they joined the union. That they could up and leave.
>>30518362
>popular referendum in favor of secession
>federal assets in Texas seized
>Mexico =/= US
Tell me more abut the Monroe Doctrine in reference to the large amounts of Russian spies caught in the US in the last few years.
>>30518431
...You literally don't know what it is, do you?
>>30518414
>That was one of the requirements they put in place when they joined the union. That they could up and leave.
No. It literally wasn't. Read your own state constitution, you illiterate steerfucker.
All you can do is split into 5 separate states.
>>30518455
No, he doesn't. Just like he doesn't understand what an existential threat is.
We're literally arguing with a half-drunk teenager with a 5th grade understanding of military strategy and geopolitics. I think that makes us the assholes here. Retard is as retard does, after all.
>>30518093
Yeah man the USN is going to get into a shooting match with the Russians just like they did during Korea and Vietnam oh what's that they fucking didn't? Shut the fuck up
>>30518487
When you're right, you're right.
>>30518455
>"A principle of US policy, originated by President James Monroe in 1823, that any intervention by external powers in the politics of the Americas is a potentially hostile act against the US."
Now tell me how the US responded to this intervention by external powers. Joe Biden fucking laughed about it on the Jay Leno Show. They caught even more spies back in 2015. Tell me how the fucking Monroe doctrine dealt with espionage in the continental US.
You can't just quote foreign policy doctrines and ideas without citing how the actual policies are carried out.
>>30518492
>Korea
Oh, the US only killed a few hundred Soviet pilots. Totally not a shooting war at any level.
>Vietnam
We totally didn't smoke some Soviet SAM operators and pilots in Vietnam, either.
>>30518506
>espionage
>being even in the same zip code as foreign troops on US soil
nigga went full retard. watch out.
>>30518487
Still waiting for that proof of political willpower to use force against Russian troops. An administration that couldn't even rescue a US Ambassador from a couple mudslimes with slim to no training is gonna pull the trigger and attack Russian troops, over Texas (or more realistically, Mexico)?
I'm still waiting to see the proof of political willpower here.
>>30518331
>We fucking launched a unilateral raid into a fucking nuclear power, assassinated several people, and then told the world.
>On live tv.
Whoa, whoa whoa, what fucking part of history did I miss out on? Whatchu talkin bout Willis?
>>30518539
>Whoa, whoa whoa, what fucking part of history did I miss out on? Whatchu talkin bout Willis?
The Osama Bin Laden raid, you fucking moron.
>>30518527
>not answering the original question
Your lack of proof is showing.
>>30518539
He's talking about the Osama bin Laden raid. Apparently Pakistan is a "nuclear power". Funny, I thought their program was falling apart at the seams.
>>30517037
>you'll be voting to make yourself a satellite state of Mexico
>implying most of it isn't already
>>30518529
Can we all stop pretending that Russia would actually help Texas and it wasn't just Putin sabre rattling on a NK-tier level?
>>30518529
>Still waiting for that proof of political willpower to use force against Russian troops. An administration that couldn't even rescue a US Ambassador from a couple mudslimes with slim to no training is gonna pull the trigger and attack Russian troops, over Texas (or more realistically, Mexico)?
I'm beyond reason at this point. How can anyone be stupid enough to think the US would not kill Russian troops when THEY'RE ON US SOIL. Just. No words.
>>30518552
>Apparently Pakistan is a "nuclear power". Funny, I thought their program was falling apart at the seams.
>Pakistan is not a nuclear power
http://time.com/4082776/pakistan-report-nuclear-weapons-fifth-largest-2025/
It's on track to double their number of warheads in the next decade. "Falling apart". Jesus Christ.
>>30518546
>>30518552
I thought he was talking about Russia.
>As of early 2013, Pakistan was estimated to have had a stockpile of around 100–120 warheads,[1] and in November 2014 it was projected that by 2020 Pakistan would have enough fissile material for 200 warheads.[63]
Well shit.
>>30518560
>>30518570
Just one piece of evidence would do boys. You can get butthurt and call me a vatnik all you want. I just want to see one piece of evidence.
>>30518506
> is a potentially hostile act against the US
Now go figure out what this actually means, child.
Protip:It means the us may or may not tolerate any given action, and may or may not respond, EVEN IF the US is not directly targeted.
Espionage is commonplace. It Never results in war.
Actively attacking a neighboring state is an entirely different fucking thing.
This is especially true when you're the undisputed king of the seas, complete with a military, political, and economic strategy that rely on staying that way, have no land borders that are under even the slightest threat, and the attacking power is not friendly to you.
Add in a fucking secession movement, and it will lead to shooting.
>>30518552
It is, by literally every single definition.
And is in a position to easily start ww3, which is why both pakistan and the indians are courted in international relations.
>>30518539
...did you miss the part where obama shit on pakistans face on live tv?
Pakistan was actively hiding bin laden.
We flew in helicopters at night, under the radar, killed people just down the road from a military academy, and didn't tell them until we were done.
And then told them not to touch the crashed helicopter.
Which we left on their soil. After launching a completely illegal military action in their country.
In a country where this sort of thing could cause anything from riots to a coup, to full on civil war, complete with nukes. Pakistan is not stable, and its relations with the US are a MAJOR point of contention.
>>30516530
>who in the rest of the US would be the ones to stop them?
The Federal Government.
From day one we had a system of "Dual Sovereignty" as relating to the states. A U.S. State is not like a country and hardly has any rights at limiting immigration or commerce from other states and has literally no right to unilaterally secede.
Now by technicallity, once Texas does unconstitutionally seceede from the union it would be its own independent republic.
While it is true that Texas does pay more in federal taxes than it receives in direct benefit, most of its economy is based on either International Trade deals via the US Federal government or through interstate commerce with the other states.
The US Governemnt could now put a total embargo of all trade on the state. Amid the need for every other country to now make new trade deals with Texas as an independent republic, the US could be a bit persuasive to "convince" other nations from not doing any business deals with Independent Texas.
Not to mention the fact that your state doesn't even have it's own independent currency. You're not allowed to have one. And most of the businesses in your state are incorporated elsewhere, particularly Delaware.
Not a single bullet would need to be fired. The only bomb dropped would be your economy. It would be a divorce with a "fuck my shit up" alimony in the best case scenario.
Texas will only ever be independent when the Federal Government wants to.
>>30517041
Well one? We have direct supremem court precedent that is still considered good law that no state has the Unilateral Right to secession from the Union.
Two? Even assuming the Texas Constitution says they can, this is a question of the U.S. Constitution.
Three? Even assuming it was at least constitutional, it's a simple question of what the Federal Governemnt would want. See above.
Good luck Texas!
This Ohioan is sitting this one out.
Unless its Trump. Then im gonna volunteer to liberate the fuck outta california!
>>30518514
>A handful of crews
>All out naval war
Yeah ok, totally the same thing
>>30518621
>>All out naval war
Sinking the handful of ships Russia could actually get to the vicinity of Texas would not be all out naval war. All out naval war would be sinking Russia's entire fucking navy and then glassing their ports and drawing dicks on any portions of buildings that survived.
>>30518618
The US economy would get fucked without Texas. Oil prices would sky rocket without Texas crude. Food in the US would go up. Texas isn't a small part of the economy.
>>30518646
Texas' economy without the US would be ten times worse off. Especially with the USN blockading every port and every bridge over the Rio Grande rubble.
>>30518606
I remember, what I didn't remember was that the Pakis are packing nukes.
I don't know why you idiots are even arguing this. If shots were actually fired, every single Texas secessionist leader would get droned/JDAMed within 72 hours. We've gotten very, very good at reaching out and touching people who are hard to find. Some fat, dumbass Texas politicians? It'd be a fucking cakewalk.
>>30518659
It's literally the only reason anybody knows they exist at all.
It's also the only thing keeping the Indians from actively trying to wipe them out.
>>30518659
>what I didn't remember was that the Pakis are packing nukes.
You forgot one of the most important geopolitical events of the last 25 years?
Just stop posting.
>>30518646
>pretending we need you more than you need us
Cmon. It's been established, yeah, your 3,000 barrels a day are going to deliver us a hit, sure, but we import the same amount from Non-OPEC countries, and even more from OPEC countries. It wouldn't be long before one of them stepped up production to feed our deficit.
Meanwhile you guys are still working on your water problem. You don't have the water to continue your current rate of production without the rest of the US helping you out. All of your agriculture levels will drop to shit not seen since the 50s. That's just bad for everyone, but it's worse for you guys.
>>30518681
>>30518676
Yeah yeah, I'm retarded, but I wasn't even thinking about Pakis, I was thinking about the Ruskies. I posted a comment without thinking for a half a second first, I deserve the flaming I'm getting right now.
We are not Balkanizing the United States.
Because if that's what you want to do, you must as a necessary precursor cleanse most or all of the People You Don't Like out of your little sphere or niche or what have you. And they will do the same to yours. And then you wind up with a multi-pronged clusterfuck that makes Syria look straightforward.
This is not a solution. We need to reboot our Republic. Not destroy it to save it. The answer is no.
>>30518699
The answer is to let the liberals and conservatives have their own hamlets
>>30518671
Yeah man that's why we haven't been in Afghanistan for 15 years
>>30518699
Ahhh fuck.
ABANDON THREAD.
>>30518711
Don't feed the autistic kid.
>>30518655
Who could handle the pressure more? Would all those democrats in new York and California work to stop them or actively support them? Texas leaving the US guarantees a Democrat in the white house forever.
>>30518736
>Texas leaving the US guarantees a Democrat in the white house forever.
Recent economy-wise, that ain't such a bad thing. Strictly in economic terms. Bill Clinton and Obama VS G. W. Bush? Not even close.
>>30518721
>Yeah man that's why we haven't been in Afghanistan for 15 years
If you'd been paying attention, you'd know the Taliban leadership was in north-west Pakistan for most of that time. You know, where we DIDN'T have boots on the ground? Where we weren't constantly calling in airstrikes?
>>30518751
Clinton created the housing crash
>>30518721
Finding a fat fuck Texan senator is going to so much easier, as he's not living in the goddamn mountains and in mud huts and shit, moving around every goddamn day. He wants LUXURIES. Which will get you killed. Afghani's have been perfecting hiding in their fucking caves and in the mountains for centuries. A Texan senator? Probably too arrogant to do much more than sleep at his buddies house. Who is also another high level Texan official, also on the hit list. Two birds with one stone (rocket)
>>30518699
Fuck off back to your containment thread.
>>30518761
>Clinton created the housing crash
Actually, the dismantling of Glass-Steagall began with Reagan, and continued through H.W. Bush and then Clinton.
Look it up.
>>30518760
Mexico, Russia, Cuba, Venezuela
>Da US Armee is UNDEADABLE
>Texas one of the most americany McAmerican states wants out
>somehow drums up an alliance with China, North Korea and Russia
>Texas seize nuclear facility in order to acquire nuclear force
>Pentagons panics
>World community baffled by the news
> Communist backed Conservative redneck US state nuked by United Liberal States of America.
>Weird War One ends in tragedy and crowns China World n1 superpower
"Mirroring the 20th century, the 21st century was defined by its own Two Weird Wars."
Where should Weird War two happen?
The belligenrents?
>>30516637
>a lot of transplant cali and new york faggots would leave the state.
Fixed that for you, faggot. I hope we secede. Fuck the US. I'm a Texan first and begrudgingly a US citizen second.
>>30518781
>>a lot of transplant cali and new york faggots would leave the state.
So... everyone with better than an 8th grade education?
>>30518711
I'll settle for repealing Reynolds vs Sims and eliminating the stranglehold that one or two big faggoty urban centers hold over the rest of their states. That would go a long way towards clearing the air right there.
>>30518768
You've got the wrong guy. I ain't from /pol/.
>>30518795
Fuck off. You talk like a fag and your shits all retarded.
>>30518795
Well guys, it was a fun thread, but now we know that it's over.
>>30518766
>killing everyone I don't like is the goal
Right. It totally doesn't help reinforce resistance against invaders or anything...
>>30518872
>killing enemy leaders to lower morale and put a dent in the enemies ability to make strategic, logistical, or political decisions is the goal
You fucking idiot.
>>30518912
>Texas senators
>being leaders
Now hold on there, that's making a huge assumption.
And besides, do you know how big Texas is? Last time I checked, it's pretty fucking big.
>>30518937
I was going on this guy's statement, that we have become "very good at reaching out". This entire thread has been nothing but a bunch of assumptions made off of nothing. The scenarios described in this thread (are complete works of fiction and falsehood etc) have been so bizarre that I'm surprised THIS is what you're having a hard time believing.
>>30518671
>>30518951
Sorry, just figured that out.
This whole thread is just baseless assumption of an event that will most likely never happen and if it did it will never turn out the way anyone expects.
Huh. That's a little like life, I guess.
>>30519023
Yeah it was a fun thread, but ridiculous the entire time. Too many variables to even begin to consider how Texas would even go about seceding, let alone why they would. We jumped right past that to "HOW DO WE KILL TEXAS AS FAST AS POSSIBLE?"
>>30518793
Funny, I have a 2 year degree and I bet I have a better grasp on any concept than some faggot from Jew York or Commiefornia. You know Lincoln had a year of schooling under his belt, right? A lot of retarded faggotrs are overeducated.
>>30519023
>most likely never happen
It won't happen, ever.
Texas divisionism is a mainly historical movement that advocates the division of the U.S. state of Texas into as many as five states, as statutorily permitted by a provision included in the resolution admitting the former Republic of Texas into the Union in 1845.[1]
Texas divisionists argue that the division of their state could be desirable because, as the second-largest and second most-populous state in the U.S., Texas is too large to be governed efficiently as one political unit, or that in several states Texans would gain more power at the federal level, particularly in the U.S. Senate to which each state elects two Senators and by extension in the Electoral College in which each state gets two electoral votes for their Senators in addition to an electoral vote for each Representative. However, division may be wastefully duplicative, requiring a new state government.
Texas' division was frequently proposed in the early decades of Texan statehood, particularly in the decades immediately prior to and following the American Civil War in which Texas seceded from the Union and joined the Confederacy.
It was never about "Texas can do better on our own!" That's just what edgy, rebel-without-a-cause people think. It's become Texas's own meme, if you will.
>>30516581
>a state cant be allowed to leave of their own accord.
Would you mind reading the Declaration of Independence?
>>30516530
No USA military intervention required. Just look at Ukraine.
>paint Texas seperatists as racists, corrupt
>paint non seperatists as oppressed, yearning for freedom to stay in USA
>sanction all powerful Texan elites. Have them turn on the seperatists
>fund and arm the anti seperatists
>ignore all crimes by anti seperatists, fabricate crimes by separatists
>send in snipers, mercenaries for secret missions of openly stay and be potrayed as anti seperatists freedom fighters
>>30516871
If Russia even hinted at aiding Texas, all the fifth columns in Russia and neighbouring countries would released and Russia would be fighting wars inside and out.
>>30519077
Would you mind learning a little bit about Texas history? They gave up the "right" (ability) to
"secede" (break into several states up to five due to the belief Texas was too large to be governed by so few, plus dem electoral votes) and they knew it, when they rejoined the US as a state after all their bullshit. That was part of their agreement.
The only thing hanging this up is that the US Supreme Court ruled that Texas never legally left the US, so their agreement upon rejoining is void.
>>30519077
Its not in the Declaration you dumb fuck.
Texas v. White, United States Supreme Court, (1869)
In 1869, the Supreme Court ruled that secession of Texas from the United States was illegal. The court wrote, "The Constitution, in all its provisions, looks to an indestructible Union, composed of indestructible States." The court did allow some possibility of the divisibility "through revolution, or through consent of the States."[14][15]
The only way they ever could have left (legally speaking) was with Congress approval, which is never gonna happen.
>>30517376
They still own it. Give the big corporations a better deal tax wise, etc. Hope they fight for you (lobbying wise) in the US to keep their new profits. If not, annex.
>>30519077
> the United States District Court for the District of Columbia ruled, on April 30, 1998: "Despite plaintiffs' argument ..... [i]n 1845, Texas became the 28th state of the United States of America. The Republic of Texas no longer exists."[19]
Huh, so they totally can't do it anymore, because it was for the Republic of Texas, which doesn't exist.
There's been more than one ruling on this, too.
IT AINT NEVER GONNA HAPPEN, NEVER EVER NEVERRRRRRRRRRR
YOU WITH US FOREVER TEXAS, GIVE US YOUR OIL AND GET USED TO IT
>>30516581
>the entire US
Most citizens in the west would be sympathetic for Texas actually
>>30516530
>Who are the main states that Texas would have to deal with? What armaments and tactics would they have to face?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h3ywuv8lJMs
>>30516647
What weapons? The B-1s don't carry them anymore. Heck, the only strategic targets in the state are two communications nodes in Dallas.
>>30516817
>Texas
>Orthodox state
The Sprinklers and Dunkers would like to have a word with you.
>>30516993
Two. There's one on the coast.
>>30519267
>Greater Appalacia
>At least 70% of it isn't even with sight of the mountain range
God I hate this map
>>30516770
> No more money for education
I don't think that's a deterrent since they slash that funding as much as possible since evolution is a hoax to them
>>30519433
>on the coast
That's always bugged me.
>lets out a nuclear reactor in Texas
>okay where?
>I know by the coast in hurricane alley!
>>30517455
Russia would NOT involve itself in this. It's a recipe for disaster that'd get all of NATO a foot up it's collective ass.
>>30516530
Ok so what about Washington state too?
I'm a real big proponent of Cascadia so long as
Seattle and Portland are never considered as choices for the capital.
I suggest you guys to read Flashback by Dan Simmons...
>U.S.A. in ruins
>Israel destroyed
>Texas independent
>War with Mexico
>Muslims pretty much conquered Europe
>>30516581
Oklahoma might secede. I have family near 2 parts of the red river so that would suck cock. Seeing my homeland turned into a warzone.. This isn't Europe or Africa dammit.
>>30517397
You clearly haven't been to Texas this year.
The entire Brazos watershed is flooded, and the Colorado watershed isn't much better.
El Nino is love, El Nino is life.
>>30518466
But it can still leave
>>30517256
>DOE security team enacts failsafe measures at the plant. Reactor goes into mechanically locked safe shutdown and turbines and other infrastructure is destroyed. Only the cooling systems are left untouched.
M16's to the head along with family member in Texas get those reactors turned on.
Do you even insurrection bro?
>>30517331
The US wasn't willing to drop nukes on North Korea or North Vietnam. They'll never drop nukes in a civil war no matter the cost.
>>30517661
Power reactors don't make good bomb material. Bomb-making reactors have considerably different designs.
That's how we know Iran and NK aren't just trying to make peaceful electricity--the reactor designs they use are visibly (from orbit) *not* the kind used to make power.
>>30519395
Read the fucking thread. Pantex is nukes.
>>30519447
It's made of similar people and culture, it has nothing to do with any mountain range.
>>30518689
Where do you think the water comes from? Other than the Red and Rio Grande, all of the major Texas rivers start in or near Texas, and their primary watersheds are within state borders.
It's not like the states whose water originates as snow in the Rockies.
>>30519607
we can still dirty bomb it up
>>30519611
Read the wiki entry. Pantex is nuke assembly/disassembly.
It doesn't make bomb fuel, and fuel from disassembled weapons is shipped out of state to be turned into MOX and burned in a power plant. The only working nukes there would be any that are waiting to be (or have just been) disassembled.
>>30518618
We already have a different currency. there is a mint plant in Texas that uses silver and gold. the people get paid in precious metals.
>>30519801
But anon, cake factories don't need ingredients shipped to them in order to make cakes.
>>30517086
If I was a lazy degenerate I'd be blaming someone else too.
For everyone naysaying about how much Texas needs the feds, you seem to forget that Texas and Texans pay MORE in taxes than Texas recieves in benefits from said feds. Some other states don't, but Texas is not economically dependent on the federal government. Furthermore, a Texans make up ~1/3 of US military personnel. So, if Texas decided to leave, the primary weapons against it would be economic harassment, sanctions, and blasting from the media. It would be easier to talk Texas back into the Union than to go into a military conflict.
>>30517336
Your death would be funny
>>30520204
Faggot
>>30516530
As long as Texas nukes Florida before leaving it should be fine.
>>30517329
While I can't argue with some of the shenanigans Perry and Abbot have done with federal tax money, that GDP didn't go negative. It's growth slowed from 6% to 4.5%, but it's still net growth.
According to wikipedia, we went from 15th largest economy in 2012 to 12th in 2014. And our damn net migration from other states continues to rise, pushing my damn housing taxes higher every year.
First of all who gives a shit. Texans are just a bunch of wannabe Montanans. They're just Hollywood cowboys.
>>30520128
>texas secedes
>USA embargoes them, but doesn't even bother with a seaside blockade
>texas yearly agricultural output could barely feed the state for one week
>cattle, no cattle feed
>food has to be purchased from south america or shipped from SE asia
>staple packaged food disappears overnight, replaced by shipments of bread containing shredded drywall because lol china
>chinese bread is $55 a loaf
>muh texan oil can't support the state's usage. No access to canadian, alaskan, or US oil so assraped by OPEC
>gas prices make yuropoor petrol look like a screaming deal
>week 3 rolls around
>cities in full venezuelan tier food riot mode
>cattle ded/10
>state economy hemorrhaging money to keep society from collapsing
texas secession is a massively bad idea for so many reasons. Logistically texas simply can't support it's population, let alone support them at a first world western standard.
>>30520396
>>30516581
I'd actually be in favor of Texas leaving in the chance it causes a domino effect that leads to the collapse of the US.
The government and politics in this country are so fucked right now.
>>30520403
What you are forgetting is that they have oil and guns. They can sustain themselves drinking the oil until they decide to finally put a gun to their own heads.
>>30517269
>implying all the surrounding states would be hostile
>>30519586
No, it cannot. There is NO Federal Process for a state to leave the union. There is also NOTHING in the State constitution that allows Texas to leave.
The only thing Texas can do, without Congressional approval, is divide itself into 5 separate states if it wanted.
That's it. Nothing else.
>>30517326
The problem is you, like many others assume it will be military support, not political support. Who says Russia won't be throwing their weight, along with anyone else they can convince, around in the UN to give Texas support?
>>30520204
Say that to Davey Crockett
>>30516581
>a state cant be allowed to leave of their own accord.
except... they are. so you're, what, advocating a repeat of the war crimes lincoln committed?
>>30518606
>And then told them not to touch the crashed helicopter.
yeah they sold it to china
>>30519267
I absolutely hate how people split the south of Louisiana off from the rest of the Deep South. It's sparsely populated just like a lot of Mississippi and they do NOT consider themselves French. They're rednecks. Just because they speak with a vague French accent and have good food doesn't make them some vastly different culture than the rest of the South.
>>30519410
Orthodox is (slightly) better than Catholic so they'd be okay with it. I know I would. (Baptist here)
>>30518699
>We need to reboot our Republic. Not destroy it to save it.
As much as I hate to agree with a tripfag, he's right. Even Gov. Abbott says that secession would be good for Texas, but making the rest of the country more like Texas would be good for the Union as a whole. And he's right.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wgvuAGnqkC8
>>30520128
>Texans make up ~1/3 of US military personnel
Not even close to true. Texas currently has about 175,000 active military personnel in state. The US military is 1.3 million active members currently. That's less than 1/7th, or 13.5%.
If you're claiming 1/3 of the military comes from Texas, that's also dubious. Texas doesn't even have the largest number of reserve military residents - that's California. Texas only accounts for 6.8% of total reserve military.
Per capita, Georgia, Maine, Idaho, Arizona, Alabama, both Carolinas and Virginia all enlist more than Texas. Texas is on a tier with New Hampshire, Washington state and Nevada. Pic related.
Where do you Texans come up with your crazy numbers and notions?
>>30520492
>Who says Russia won't be throwing their weight, along with anyone else they can convince, around in the UN to give Texas support?
Who says that would do a single iota of good for Texas? The UN is neutered when it comes to matters involving security council members.
>>30519267
>this fucking meme map again
I want to kill myself whenever someone spews this shitty map
>>30516530
Fuck off we are full.
>>30516530
Last time someone tried to secede, it didn't exactly go well...
>>30519516
Where else are they gonna put it bro? Salt water is best for these kinds of things.
>>30517041
I once read the entire Constitution to see if there really was a "legal right to secede" and there very much is not. There are, however, several clauses that specifically limit state's ability to operate as "independent nations," for instance the outright ban on two states entering into any agreement or treaty between themselves only without involving or working through the federal government.
The Constitution takes great pains to make it explicit that the United States is a federation, not a confederation. There is a difference. Once you join, you have no legal, independent right to decide to leave.
The states that rebelled in the Civil War were asserting a moral, not a legal right. Just as the Founding Fathers rebelled against England by saying that English law was no longer just or fair or sufficient, and thus it no longer had legitimate authority, so to were the rebels rejecting the entire legal apparatus of the Union. They weren't working within it, by definition they were rejecting it.
To this day dumb fuck rednecks try to claim there was a "legal right" to secede because they conflate that with the moral authority to do so.
>>30517351
>How the fuck would the US stop Texas from utilizing the Port of Texas anyway?
Uh, a single sortie from Florida with a few B-52s with Quickstrike mines?
