U.S. News

[SpiritWebb]

For those in the U.S.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/1 ... 16620.html

Basically stating that states (21 so far) are wanting to separate from the United States.

(Not wanting to start a political argument, but am curious) What do you think about this?

[OoZI]

They're mad about Obama's re-election.

[Jackolantern]

Interesting, but of course it can't go anywhere. The US Civil War didn't go so well for the seceeders, and the military is now much more lopsided between the actual US military and local militias than it was then. Any secession forces wouldn't even have any kind of air force.

[Shihonoryu]

I doubt this is very well planned...who will lead them? what will they be about?

[Jackolantern]

I doubt this is very well planned...who will lead them? what will they be about?

I think they understood it wasn't actually going to happen. 35,000 signatures isn't a significant number at all out of 25 million citizens. I think it was just a statement.

[hallsofvallhalla]

A succession does not mean war. Nor did the succession during the Civil war truly cause the war. It would be a political battle as no one would now fight in any kind of Civil War. Things are far different now. The US would simply become two or 3 separate countries much like Europe. I do not mean it to sound simple but is it out of the question? Absolutely not and I think we will see it or the beginning in our life time. I actually hope so. It could do the US good.

[Jackolantern]

The cause of the Civil War was indeed complex and can't be boiled down to a single sentence, or even a handful of sentences, but secession was definitely part of it. The Supreme Court ruled (I believe after the Civil War) that a state or states can only secede with a majority vote of all other states and with the blessing of the federal government. Typically an unfriendly secession movement is a deceleration of war, and it is taken as such all around the world. I believe there is still a conflict along the southern Russian border right now with a small area that claims it was transferring from a territory into its own country, and Russia sent in the military. It has been going on for so many years now I can't quite remember the names.

There is also the issue of giving back all federal property. In the 19th century that may have been possible, but I don't even see how it could be done today. Just the federal land in Texas would cost the state billions of dollars to buy.

Just to be clear, I am not taking any political side on this. I am just commenting on the historical right to secede (which was left in the 19th century that a state or region does not have the right to unilaterally secede), and the mechanics of actually doing so in today's environment. I simply believe the people who started these petitions knew it was not going to happen, but simply wanted to send the harshest message they could. And it got a lot of national and international attention as well.

[Callan S.]

There is also the issue of giving back all federal property. In the 19th century that may have been possible, but I don't even see how it could be done today. Just the federal land in Texas would cost the state billions of dollars to buy.

Why on earth do you have to buy back land?

What alot of lip service to something which is as cynical as making someone pay to be able to vote (oh, can't pay? No vote for you, but that's totally fair. Can't pay to secede? No capacity to secede for you (or we'll send in our army). That's totally fair)

What alot of BS lip service to the notion, then plonking an impossible to meet requirement on top that may as well be honest and say "Actually no, you can't secede, or we'll shoot you"! Because there's nothing else there but that raw threat (and enough mumbo jumbo text to keep the stupid demographic flummoxed enough to shut up and accept it)

[Jackolantern]

I am not saying that it is right or not, but that is the way it is. Federal property is federal property, not state property. And yes, it is kind of messed-up that land is basically by default federal, but...well...I don't know what to tell you. That is just the way it is. The US was not created with a secession plan. Once you are in, you are in. The country looks at secession as you taking land from them, just like you were a foreign power invading their land. Basically every country in the world looks at it that way. I am not saying that it is right or wrong, but that is just the way that countries work.

The issues of secession run very deep. Beyond federal property, which is owned by all US tax payers, there is also the issue of federal tax dollar usage in states. Some states use far more federal tax money than they send back to the federal government, so that means that tax payers all over the country helped develop that state. States are basically hopelessly intertwined with the federal government, and secession would be terribly messy.

[hallsofvallhalla]

So was the election