If Arizona were to secede from the United States ..

[Unilisia]

there are rules that the united states must play by, and if that shit didn't fly or work in Iraq, it wouldn't work in Arizona

A well armed local populace always holds the homefield advantage, Arizona patriots will see to it, that it is a long and bloody occupation.

Arizona also has a much smaller population than Iraq, and I'm sure a lot of the more intelligent population will flee the second the state of Arizona announces plans to secede.

Combined with the fact that the people of Arizona haven't been fighting for their lives for the past few decades, and won't suddenly gain the necessary skills to do so now.

[Potarius]

Arizona also has a much smaller population than Iraq, and I'm sure a lot of the more intelligent population will flee the second the state of Arizona announces plans to secede.

Combined with the fact that the people of Arizona haven't been fighting for their lives for the past few decades, and won't suddenly gain the necessary skills to do so now.

Having a rifle in your house doesn't automatically give you great marksmanship skills. This isn't the 1800s, and this sure as hell isn't the civil war.

Those confederate soldiers, more often than not, had been hunting and using guns their entire lives, which is why they managed to do so well against Union soldiers. Going to a gun range is not the same as shooting actual targets that, you know, move at differing speeds. For the people who have guns that do go to the gun range, anyway.

[GeneralHaNor]

Then the United States uses giant Fuel-Air bombs to blow up Phoenix. >:1

First, as horrible as I believe the united states to be, they haven't accepted "Total War" as a viable or moral doctrine since the March on Atlanta. Sure they firebombed Dresden in WWII (and Nuked two japanesse cities), but for the most part, civilians aren't legitimate targets. otherwise must of Iraq or Afghanistan would have experienced "America's Terrible Wrath" ™. They don't

We don't firebomb civilians because insurgents hide among them, we just don't, not on foreign soil, and certainly not on "our" soil.

[Celis]

Then the United States uses giant Fuel-Air bombs to blow up Phoenix. >:1

First, as horrible as I believe the united states to be, they haven't accepted "Total War" as a viable or moral doctrine since the March on Atlanta. Sure they firebombed Dresden in WWII (and Nuked two japanesse cities), but for the most part, civilians aren't legitimate targets. otherwise must of Iraq or Afghanistan would have experienced "America's Terrible Wrath" ™. They don't

We don't firebomb civilians because insurgents hide among them, we just don't, not on foreign soil, and certainly not on "our" soil.

If Arizona seceded from the United States they would be considered enemies of the state. Civilians would have the chance to vacate Arizona or go to designated safe zones, otherwise I think it would be a full on war. Are you going to address what the people above me said? They have made excellent points.

[Unilisia]

Combined with the fact that the people of Arizona haven't been fighting for their lives for the past few decades, and won't suddenly gain the necessary skills to do so now.

Having a rifle in your house doesn't automatically give you great marksmanship skills. This isn't the 1800s, and this sure as hell isn't the civil war.

Those confederate soldiers, more often than not, had been hunting and using guns their entire lives, which is why they managed to do so well against Union soldiers. Going to a gun range is not the same as shooting actual targets that, you know, move at differing speeds. For the people who have guns that do go to the gun range, anyway.

You seem to misunderstand me by a long-shot. Iraq has been in a war with Iran, with NATO, and against the United States and its allies. For quite awhile, it's people haven't known true peace, unlike Arizonan's, who haven't been in a war since before they were even part of the United States.

[Potarius]

Having a rifle in your house doesn't automatically give you great marksmanship skills. This isn't the 1800s, and this sure as hell isn't the civil war.

Those confederate soldiers, more often than not, had been hunting and using guns their entire lives, which is why they managed to do so well against Union soldiers. Going to a gun range is not the same as shooting actual targets that, you know, move at differing speeds. For the people who have guns that do go to the gun range, anyway.

You seem to misunderstand me by a long-shot. Iraq has been in a war with Iran, with NATO, and against the United States and its allies. For quite awhile, it's people haven't known true peace, unlike Arizonan's, who haven't been in a war since before they were even part of the United States.

No no, I understand you perfectly. I was just furthering the point you made. I was talking about people in Arizona, not Iraq.

[Yknots]

Arizona is increasingly becoming highly sustainable in terms of security, and it's legislative government fails to recognize most of the clauses of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. I predict that Arizona will threaten secession within 20 years, if not, 15.

NSG, what do you think would result if Arizona were to secede from the United States of America?

They'd last about as long as it would take the Armed Forces to occupy the capital and arrest the leaders of the secession movement. Maybe a day?

If even that

[Potarius]

They'd last about as long as it would take the Armed Forces to occupy the capital and arrest the leaders of the secession movement. Maybe a day?

If even that

That would be pretty goddamn funny, and very satisfying to see people like that go down so quickly.

[Unilisia]

They'd last about as long as it would take the Armed Forces to occupy the capital and arrest the leaders of the secession movement. Maybe a day?

If even that

What's funny is that American military forces are within Arizona anyway, and thus could simply move against the secessionist government in a couple of hours, at most.

[GeneralHaNor]

First, as horrible as I believe the united states to be, they haven't accepted "Total War" as a viable or moral doctrine since the March on Atlanta. Sure they firebombed Dresden in WWII (and Nuked two japanesse cities), but for the most part, civilians aren't legitimate targets. otherwise must of Iraq or Afghanistan would have experienced "America's Terrible Wrath" ™. They don't

We don't firebomb civilians because insurgents hide among them, we just don't, not on foreign soil, and certainly not on "our" soil.

If Arizona seceded from the United States they would be considered enemies of the state. Civilians would have the chance to vacate Arizona or go to designated safe zones, otherwise I think it would be a full on war. Are you going to address what the people above me said? They have made excellent points.

There points are good, so good I don't need to address, I can let them stand as is. Your point however is completely wrong. If the United States is trying to reunify Arizona with the Union, sure they'll declare the insurgents enemies of the state, but under no circumstance has the United States in modern history ever declared "total war" on a civilian population, or even civilian militants, because if it did that, we would have won the Vietnam war.

Your point is a non-point, they will not "destroy phoenix" because that would create such bad press regarding the war, that you would have protests in Washington by the start of the next day, The UN breathing down your neck, and every foreign oil power grandstanding and threatening sanctions for your human rights violation, while the international war crimes tribunal issues an arrest warrant for the president of the united states.

[Galla-]

I think the will of the majority should be over the will of the minority. If there are more people who want something and less people that want something else it's obvious who should get what they want in a DEMOCRACY!

Tyranny of the majority eh?

I guess you support Mugabe then?

[Unilisia]

I think the will of the majority should be over the will of the minority. If there are more people who want something and less people that want something else it's obvious who should get what they want in a DEMOCRACY!

Tyranny of the majority eh?

I guess you support Mugabe then?

Mugabe is not in the majority, as his populace far outnumbers his tyranny.

[Alien Space Bats]

Other states (Particularly Texas) would demand the same.

Texas is the only state that could possibly secede legally.

No, Texas cannot secede legally. That is a myth.

[The Atlantean Menace]

Texas is the only state that could possibly secede legally.

No, Texas cannot secede legally. That is a myth.

Of course, the very claim that secession is illegal is absurd.

"We're leaving your country!"
"Oh, sorry, looks like our country's laws say that's against the law. Guess we're going to have to screw you."

[Feral Land]

Let em go as long as it's understood that they can't come back!

[Farnhamia]

No, Texas cannot secede legally. That is a myth.

Of course, the very claim that secession is illegal is absurd.

"We're leaving your country!"
"Oh, sorry, looks like our country's laws say that's against the law. Guess we're going to have to screw you."

Texas v. White, the case in which SCOTUS said it is illegal, does appear to leave room for a state petitioning Congress to leave the Union (I haven't looked this up). So, running to your room and slamming the door is bad. Asking if you can move out of the house is okay, maybe.

[Alien Space Bats]

The 14th Amendment would not apply in Arizona after it seceded.

The United States military disagrees. You mess with our citizens and we tend to get REALLY pissed off.

And yes, until or unless each and every one of them individually and freely renounces his or her American citizenship without duress, they're OUR citizens.

[Alien Space Bats]

A well armed local populace always holds the homefield advantage, Arizona patriots will see to it, that it is a long and bloody occupation.

There would be enough collaborators outraged American patriots who wanted Arizona to remain part of the Union to nullify that home field advantage nicely, not to mention the likelihood that any secessionist movement would be thoroughly infiltrated by the FBI well before it ever go up enough steam to try and make a break.

Remember, we only suck at human intelligence outside our own territory.

[Alien Space Bats]

No, Texas cannot secede legally. That is a myth.

Of course, the very claim that secession is illegal is absurd.

"We're leaving your country!"
"Oh, sorry, looks like our country's laws say that's against the law. Guess we're going to have to screw you."

Criminal: "The law no longer applies to me!"

Policeman: "I don't THINK so..."

You do realize that obeying the law is not optional, right?

[The Atlantean Menace]

Of course, the very claim that secession is illegal is absurd.

"We're leaving your country!"
"Oh, sorry, looks like our country's laws say that's against the law. Guess we're going to have to screw you."

Criminal: "The law no longer applies to me!"

Policeman: "I don't THINK so..."

You do realize that obeying the law is not optional, right?

The difference is that a large group of people residing in one geographic area is choosing to no longer be part of a country, and that country is claiming that they cannot do that.

It's called a "land war," not "law enforcement."

[Goober Kingdom]

id probly move.

[GeneralHaNor]

The 14th Amendment would not apply in Arizona after it seceded.

The United States military disagrees. You mess with our citizens and we tend to get REALLY pissed off.

And yes, until or unless each and every one of them individually and freely renounces his or her American citizenship without duress, they're OUR citizens.

Tell me, if you are living or working in Canada, are you no longer an American citizen
Same conditions apply

If you are arrested in Canada, do we send a special ops to "liberate" you?
Same conditions apply.

[GeneralHaNor]

Of course, the very claim that secession is illegal is absurd.

"We're leaving your country!"
"Oh, sorry, looks like our country's laws say that's against the law. Guess we're going to have to screw you."

Criminal: "The law no longer applies to me!"

Policeman: "I don't THINK so..."

You do realize that obeying the law is not optional, right?

Obeying the law certainly is optional, I choose whether or not to obey laws all the time. Enforcement is also optional, the United states could in fact let this go.

Soverign Nation of Arizona; "We have left your country, your laws no longer apply to us"
United States of America; "We are prepared to use force to make you compliant with our law"

How is that not a war of conquest?

[Alien Space Bats]

Criminal: "The law no longer applies to me!"

Policeman: "I don't THINK so..."

You do realize that obeying the law is not optional, right?

The difference is that a large group of people residing in one geographic area is choosing to no longer be part of a country, and that country is claiming that they cannot do that.

It's called a "land war," not "law enforcement."

Criminal action on a large scale by an organized political group is still criminal action.

Puts a whole new spin on the phrase "police action", doesn't it?

---

In the end, though, it does not matter:

• If Arizona secedes without prior approval by the rest of the United States, the United States will not recognize that secession as a legal act. Arizona can say whatever they want about the matter, but that's just how it goes.
  
  
• The 35-45% of Arizona's population that doesn't support secession (mostly Democrats) will demand Federal protection from their neighbors, insisting that, whatever the State Legislature and/or a majority of electors within the State may have done, they never gave up their U.S. citizenship. And - in the eyes of the United States government - they will in fact be correct on all counts.
  
  
• On the basis of its need to defend the civil rights of those Arizona residents who refused to relinquish their citizenship, the United States government will move to protect them.

You can turn the legalities on your head all you want, proclaiming that U.S. States somehow have, by way of an unwritten "right" to secede based on some half-assed theory of implicit State sovereignty, the "right" to break away from the United States without resistance and the "right" to kidnap over two million U.S. citizens and declare that they are now no longer entitled to the rights and protections they once had, but are rather - like it or not - citizens of Arizona. You can claim that, but it isn't going change a god-damned thing in Washington. The rebellion will still be put down, and that's that.

If you don't like that fact, go complain to the U.N. I dare you.

[Alien Space Bats]

Obeying the law certainly is optional, I choose whether or not to obey laws all the time. Enforcement is also optional, the United states could in fact let this go.

Soverign Nation of Arizona; "We have left your country, your laws no longer apply to us"
United States of America; "We are prepared to use force to make you compliant with our law"

How is that not a war of conquest?

Arizona Secessionists: "We are declaring that all this land is ours, and that all the people who live here are no longer U.S. citizens, but rather citizens of Arizona."

Arizona Loyalists: "Like Hell!!!!" <to Washington> "HELP!!!!!!"

United States of America: "Let's see... No legal right to secede under the Consititution? Check. No legal right to strip Americans of their citizenship? Check. O.K., that's not kosher. You're under arrest."

Arizona Secessionists: "You have no legal authority here!"

United States of America: "Wrong answer. The right answer is, 'O.K., I'm laying down on the ground with my hands behind me head. Please don't shoot me.'"

Arizona Secessionists: "To arms!"

United States of America: "Let's see, that's Treason and Sedition. Check, and check." <proceeds to stomp all over Arizona Secessionist movement>

---

That's not a war of conquest, because Arizona never "belonged" to the secessionists. It's called "putting down an armed rebellion".

<pause>

You know, I have to ask: How can ultra-conservatives be such a Flaming Critical Mass of Fail? They're laissez-faire devotees who don't understand capitalism, Rand devotees who never really read Rand, strict Constitutionalists who don't understand the Constitution, most of them profess to be Christians while not understanding Christianity, and they're universally ignorant of history and incapable of using logic.

How can you be that lame without spending a lifetime working at it?