Future of the United States of America

[The Serbian Empire]

How is that going to destroy America? I don't believe there are hordes waiting to invade us.

It will reduce americas ability to fulfill their role as the worlds police.

The nukes do that for us... not many countries with more nuclear weapons you see.

[America in the image of levi]

Nuclear war... With North Korea

[Farnhamia]

And that's endeared us to so many people, hasn't it?

It's a shame that Teddy Roosevelt made a mess of our own foreign policy.

That and two world wars and Korea ... it's a vicious circle.

[Arglorand]

Nuclear war... With North Korea

That's a bloody short nuclear war right there.

[Meinkraft]

Nuclear war... With North Korea

That's a bloody short nuclear war right there.

Sig thread now.

[Olivaero]

Not Oakland but how about DC? or anywhere Officials of the central government are residing? Large population centres... etc. Anywhere that will get them noticed and their point across really. And staying in Texas will not do that.

Oakland? They'd really catch hell if they started bombing mailboxes there. Homie don't like the cracker-man much now, he's gonna hate his ass a lot more when Grams gets a face full of shrapnel.

Also, I think you're misunderstanding something. The US would lock down the border with Texas pretty quickly. Crossings wouldn't happen as often as they did during The Troubles, *anyone* showing a Texas State ID would be suspect, arrested, or deported. This is a wartime process, and a wartime footing. We wouldn't be playing with the kid gloves on this.

How big is the Texas border again? my understanding is it was *very* big. The UK didn't play with "kids gloves" with the IRA either, they still got a Bomb into Maggie Thatchers hotel, and lets not forget the US has very little experience in fighting domestic terrorists, these draconian measures are just likely to give them more support both in Texas and without.

[The Emerald Dawn]

Nuclear war... With North Korea

That's a bloody short nuclear war right there.

One sided, really. North Korea launches, the rocket fails, nukes itself, China sighs and closes its eyes, South Korea walks in with full Rad Gear on and saves who they can.

[The Emerald Dawn]

Oakland? They'd really catch hell if they started bombing mailboxes there. Homie don't like the cracker-man much now, he's gonna hate his ass a lot more when Grams gets a face full of shrapnel.

Also, I think you're misunderstanding something. The US would lock down the border with Texas pretty quickly. Crossings wouldn't happen as often as they did during The Troubles, *anyone* showing a Texas State ID would be suspect, arrested, or deported. This is a wartime process, and a wartime footing. We wouldn't be playing with the kid gloves on this.

How big is the Texas border again? my understanding is it was *very* big. The UK didn't play with "kids gloves" with the IRA either, they still got a Bomb into Maggie Thatchers hotel, and lets not forget the US has very little experience in fighting domestic terrorists, these draconian measures are just likely to give them more support both in Texas and without.

Not really, considering our PR machine. See, the US has more "friends" than Texas does, because a LOT of people don't like their attitude, or their condescension.

Also, I would not compare the US military with the UK military in terms of containment. Even during the Cold War era, the US had at least three times the military the UK did. Locking the border down with Mexico is always part of war planning for a home engagement, Texas' border < Mexico's border.

[Samuraikoku]

That and two world wars and Korea ... it's a vicious circle.

For one of them, you didn't really have a choice.

[Yue-Laou]

It will reduce americas ability to fulfill their role as the worlds police.

And that's endeared us to so many people, hasn't it?

I know it's a tough burden but the world needs america, no one else can replace the US. If you think the world doesn't need to be policed you're sadly mistaken.

[The Serbian Empire]

That and two world wars and Korea ... it's a vicious circle.

For one of them, you didn't really have a choice.

As in they were sinking American merchant ships which were neutral.

[Arglorand]

And that's endeared us to so many people, hasn't it?

I know it's a tough burden but the world needs america, no one else can replace the US. If you think the world doesn't need to be policed you're sadly mistaken.

Thanks, I'll let myself and the rest of the world know we can't be entrusted to run our own lives.

[The Emerald Dawn]

I know it's a tough burden but the world needs america, no one else can replace the US. If you think the world doesn't need to be policed you're sadly mistaken.

Thanks, I'll let myself and the rest of the world know we can't be entrusted to run our own lives.

Have you SEEN the World Cup lately? Seriously, we couldn't fuck it up more if we tried.

[Samuraikoku]

As in they were sinking American merchant ships which were neutral.

I actually had the other one in mind, but I thought of the possibility.

It's not like America would do nothing after Pearl Harbor.

[Olivaero]

How big is the Texas border again? my understanding is it was *very* big. The UK didn't play with "kids gloves" with the IRA either, they still got a Bomb into Maggie Thatchers hotel, and lets not forget the US has very little experience in fighting domestic terrorists, these draconian measures are just likely to give them more support both in Texas and without.

Not really, considering our PR machine. See, the US has more "friends" than Texas does, because a LOT of people don't like their attitude, or their condescension.

Also, I would not compare the US military with the UK military in terms of containment. Even during the Cold War era, the US had at least three times the military the UK did. Locking the border down with Mexico is always part of war planning for a home engagement, Texas' border < Mexico's border.

How much of that military will be sympathetic to Texas's plight eh? Secession is often touted in America among one particular wing of the political spectrum which is why I'm unsure how the US's great PR skills will be able to convince the rest of the country that Texas is in the wrong. I mean look at the opinions of the Iraq/Afghan wars and they are overseas against a bunch of Muslims. Also How many friends do you think the US has when it comes to independence movements? I mean sure you can count on the establishment in most countries tactic support but international opinion will be if possible even more unfriendly to the US than it is now, especially after the US's very vocal support for independence movements else where....

[The Serbian Empire]

As in they were sinking American merchant ships which were neutral.

I actually had the other one in mind, but I thought of the possibility.

It's not like America would do nothing after Pearl Harbor.

Without the first one, there is no second World War.

[Arglorand]

Not really, considering our PR machine. See, the US has more "friends" than Texas does, because a LOT of people don't like their attitude, or their condescension.

Also, I would not compare the US military with the UK military in terms of containment. Even during the Cold War era, the US had at least three times the military the UK did. Locking the border down with Mexico is always part of war planning for a home engagement, Texas' border < Mexico's border.

How much of that military will be sympathetic to Texas's plight eh? Secession is often touted in America among one particular wing of the political spectrum which is why I'm unsure how the US's great PR skills will be able to convince the rest of the country that Texas is in the wrong. I mean look at the opinions of the Iraq/Afghan wars and they are overseas against a bunch of Muslims. Also How many friends do you think the US has when it comes to independence movements? I mean sure you can count on the establishment in most countries tactic support but international opinion will be if possible even more unfriendly to the US than it is now, especially after the US's very vocal support for independence movements else where....

I don't support independence movements when they are not established by clear democratic mandate of the people, and this hypothetical scenario clearly outlines a group of violent revolutionaries. Probably not at all representative of Texans, either.

[The Emerald Dawn]

Not really, considering our PR machine. See, the US has more "friends" than Texas does, because a LOT of people don't like their attitude, or their condescension.

Also, I would not compare the US military with the UK military in terms of containment. Even during the Cold War era, the US had at least three times the military the UK did. Locking the border down with Mexico is always part of war planning for a home engagement, Texas' border < Mexico's border.

How much of that military will be sympathetic to Texas's plight eh? Secession is often touted in America among one particular wing of the political spectrum which is why I'm unsure how the US's great PR skills will be able to convince the rest of the country that Texas is in the wrong. I mean look at the opinions of the Iraq/Afghan wars and they are overseas against a bunch of Muslims. Also How many friends do you think the US has when it comes to independence movements? I mean sure you can count on the establishment in most countries tactic support but international opinion will be if possible even more unfriendly to the US than it is now, especially after the US's very vocal support for independence movements else where....

Not very much of it. I've served in the US Military, and while there are people from Texas in the military, most of us tend to find reasons to be particularly un-gentle with the football during games with them.

Also, a large portion of the secessionist movement lacks a serious understanding of asymmetrical warfare. The US has spent the last decade learning it.

Europe, portions of Latin America, Canada, China, Russia, SE Asia, and Africa are all going to ignore the gun-happy Right Wing Derptopia that is Texas and focus on assisting the US, because a stable US is a good thing for the global economy.

[Arglorand]

Right Wing Derptopia

Must be a new nation category, like, fast.

[Betrothed to a Beetroot]

Texas' border < Mexico's border.

Not by much. Discount the sea border of Texas because the Navy could handle that easily. But don't discount the Texas/Mexico border if you mean to blockade Texas. That would be like pretending there is no Cambodia when fighting in Vietnam, or pretending there is no Pakistan when fighting in Afghanistan. Mexico might let the US enforce the border Mexico/Texas for a price, but don't pretend they'd do it themselves for nothing.

Er, I should probably avoid such military strategy talk because it isn't my forte. My point is that the land borders of Texas are actually longer than the Mexico/US land border.

My source? Looking at a map.

[The Emerald Dawn]

Texas' border < Mexico's border.

Not by much. Discount the sea border of Texas because the Navy could handle that easily. But don't discount the Texas/Mexico border if you mean to blockade Texas. That would be like pretending there is no Cambodia when fighting in Vietnam, or pretending there is no Pakistan when fighting in Afghanistan. Mexico might let the US enforce the border Mexico/Texas for a price, but don't pretend they'd do it themselves for nothing.

Er, I should probably avoid such military strategy talk because it isn't my forte. My point is that the land borders of Texas are actually longer than the Mexico/US land border.

My source? Looking at a map.

Why would we need to stop Texans from crossing into Mexico? If they want to bother the Mexicans, I'm sure Los Zetas would be happy to slice up some gringos.

[Olivaero]

How much of that military will be sympathetic to Texas's plight eh? Secession is often touted in America among one particular wing of the political spectrum which is why I'm unsure how the US's great PR skills will be able to convince the rest of the country that Texas is in the wrong. I mean look at the opinions of the Iraq/Afghan wars and they are overseas against a bunch of Muslims. Also How many friends do you think the US has when it comes to independence movements? I mean sure you can count on the establishment in most countries tactic support but international opinion will be if possible even more unfriendly to the US than it is now, especially after the US's very vocal support for independence movements else where....

Not very much of it. I've served in the US Military, and while there are people from Texas in the military, most of us tend to find reasons to be particularly un-gentle with the football during games with them.

Also, a large portion of the secessionist movement lacks a serious understanding of asymmetrical warfare. The US has spent the last decade learning it.

Europe, portions of Latin America, Canada, China, Russia, SE Asia, and Africa are all going to ignore the gun-happy Right Wing Derptopia that is Texas and focus on assisting the US, because a stable US is a good thing for the global economy.

Learning but not improving I think. I mean the British have had at least 150 years of combating various independent movements but they still didn't deal too well with one so close to home (NI) And I doubt the political leanings of the Texan movement will really matter Self determination is the thing most people look for in independence movements and if the US is remiss about giving the people of Texas a referndum international opinion will turn against them.

[The Emerald Dawn]

Not very much of it. I've served in the US Military, and while there are people from Texas in the military, most of us tend to find reasons to be particularly un-gentle with the football during games with them.

Also, a large portion of the secessionist movement lacks a serious understanding of asymmetrical warfare. The US has spent the last decade learning it.

Europe, portions of Latin America, Canada, China, Russia, SE Asia, and Africa are all going to ignore the gun-happy Right Wing Derptopia that is Texas and focus on assisting the US, because a stable US is a good thing for the global economy.

Learning but not improving I think. I mean the British have had at least 150 years of combating various independent movements but they still didn't deal too well with one so close to home (NI) And I doubt the political leanings of the Texan movement will really matter Self determination is the thing most people look for in independence movements and if the US is remiss about giving the people of Texas a referndum international opinion will turn against them.

The IC isn't going to back a violent secessionist state with an established member of the IC as one of the belligerents. It is, quite literally, not in their best interest. Because that means that if, say, Guang Dong decides that "Fuck China" is a good idea, other countries can just pile in and eat a large chunk of China. At *best* you are looking at inaction on their part. At worst, if your Texas, you're looking at no trade partners and a maritime force that is constantly harassed by "pirates".

[Rico the Explorer]

I predict another war in Korea soon for the US.

May God protect North Korea's citizens.

http://rt.com/news/north-korea-cuts-hotline-070/

[Betrothed to a Beetroot]

Not by much. Discount the sea border of Texas because the Navy could handle that easily. But don't discount the Texas/Mexico border if you mean to blockade Texas. That would be like pretending there is no Cambodia when fighting in Vietnam, or pretending there is no Pakistan when fighting in Afghanistan. Mexico might let the US enforce the border Mexico/Texas for a price, but don't pretend they'd do it themselves for nothing.

Er, I should probably avoid such military strategy talk because it isn't my forte. My point is that the land borders of Texas are actually longer than the Mexico/US land border.

My source? Looking at a map.

Why would we need to stop Texans from crossing into Mexico? If they want to bother the Mexicans, I'm sure Los Zetas would be happy to slice up some gringos.

Los Zetas are mainly active in the south I thought. But anyway, they'll do whatever pays best. Expecting a poorer neighbouring country to help enforce a blockade, when the prices the blockaded country will pay to beat that blockade are inflated way above standard commodity prices, absolutely does not work. It didn't work for Cambodia, or I must add for Iraq when the international coalition tried to impose an oil export embargo on them. It hasn't worked well on the Afghanistan/Pakistan border.

I'll give you the sea border (not all states have one) but really don't see how you can so easily dismiss the land border with Mexico. You'd still have to enforce the Arizona/Mexico border like it was a border with Texas because they'd get a Ho Chi Min Trail thing happening there.

And after all, from my quantative and object source* I can still say that Texas's border with other US states is not much shorter than the US/Mexico border if it's shorter at all.

*looking at a map