• Texas secessionists inspired by Brexit: ‘If Trump fails #Texit seems to be our best remedy’
    88 replies, posted
[QUOTE=l337k1ll4;50588548]This is not how Jeopardy is played.[/QUOTE] Damned be the rules.
[QUOTE=axelord157;50588515]What is the Civil War for 500?[/QUOTE] I didn't know it was still the 19th Century; You know the era where slavery was acceptable in several countries and genocide and mass murder were par for the course. Notice how Sudan, the USSR, East Timor and Yugoslavia all happened in the past 30 years? This is the era where any government that uses force against a popular movement immediately delegitimatizes itself politically both domestically and internationally.
I'm okay with this if they take Ted Cruz with them.
[QUOTE=Broseph_;50588756]I didn't know it was still the 19th Century; You know the era where slavery was acceptable in several countries and genocide and mass murder were par for the course. Notice how Sudan, the USSR, East Timor and Yugoslavia all happened in the past 30 years? This is the era where any government that uses force against a popular movement immediately delegitimatizes itself politically both domestically and internationally.[/QUOTE] What those places have in common is that they were all unstable, extreme proverty, collapsing hellscapes before major, large-scale violence broke out. Mass bloodshed and brother slaying brother was inevitable under those conditions.
[QUOTE=Broseph_;50588398]What I don't get is why the anti-secession people are so quick to jump to violence and armed conflict; Like really, these are usually the same people who are anti-war, but a second a state wants to secede from America? They pretty much act like the Serbs did in the 90s. Like seriously, look at Sudan, the USSR, Yugoslavia, East Timor; Using force to stop secession doesn't fucking work and just makes things even worst.[/QUOTE] You're right, why don't you just suceed and we'll just sit here and do nothing while you get a huge boost from all the stuff you've taken, and then the union falls apart when other states realize they can just do that.
[QUOTE=Broseph_;50588756]I didn't know it was still the 19th Century; You know the era where slavery was acceptable in several countries and genocide and mass murder were par for the course. Notice how Sudan, the USSR, East Timor and Yugoslavia all happened in the past 30 years? This is the era where any government that uses force against a popular movement immediately delegitimatizes itself politically both domestically and internationally.[/QUOTE] Yeah, those cases have nothing to do with this. Texans speak the language as the rest of the United States, hold the same values, and their people overwhelmingly want to remain part of the union. I thought you were arguing against secession?
Didn't broseph argue for like 10 pages about the merits of texas seceding previously?
Niche Twitter Hashtag Makes People Think A Thing Is Happening
[QUOTE=OvB;50585895]It's far from the reddest if you look at facts and not bullshit.[/QUOTE] They hold a solid amount of Republican electoral votes, ergo they are reddest where it counts
[QUOTE=axelord157;50589055]What those places have in common is that they were all unstable, extreme proverty, collapsing hellscapes before major, large-scale violence broke out. Mass bloodshed and brother slaying brother was inevitable under those conditions.[/QUOTE] Yugoslavia wasn't in extreme poverty, or collapsing, in 1990 it was projected to be the first Slavic and Socialist state to join the European Union (Which would've meant Yugoslavia would've joined the EU before Sweden and Finland!) before the Federal Government went full retard over Slovenia wanting to secede and started bombing it; Which, Up until that point, nobody wanted to recognize since it everyone preferred Yugoslavia to continue as a single political entity; Yet it was through the Ten-Day War Yugoslavia delegitimatized itself politically. [editline]25th June 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Kyle902;50589695]Didn't broseph argue for like 10 pages about the merits of texas seceding previously?[/QUOTE] Yeah, but it pretty much dissolved into people claiming that in the hypothetical a majority of Texans voted to secede, the people who voted to stay would take up arms and launch terrorist attacks against Texas; Then I was denounced as a violent extremist when I said they should be shot since apparently terrorism is a-okay as long as you agree with it's goals (Texas remaining a State) even if that means suppressing democracy, and they hoped Texas would be left in ruins to teach it a lesson for daring to vote to leave. Pretty much a even more batshit insane version of the Remain camp's scaremongering over Brexit and Scotland's referendum. Also some pretty Russian-style Ukrainian bullshit.
[QUOTE=Broseph_;50588398]What I don't get is why the anti-secession people are so quick to jump to violence and armed conflict; Like really, these are usually the same people who are anti-war, but a second a state wants to secede from America? [B]They pretty much act like the Serbs did in the 90s.[/B][/QUOTE] You are the Texan stink, you are the Texan smell! Remove Texan from the premises! Fall of Alamo, best day of life!
[QUOTE=153x;50585269]You won't be missed[/QUOTE] You're kidding right? Texas is an economic powerhouse. If they left the United States they most certainly would be missed. IIRC Texas is 2nd highest in terms of GSP in the United States, and #1 for export dollars made at a little over $260BN Their GDP is ranked 12th in the world. Ahead of Australia and South Korea. It would DEFINITELY hurt the USA
They're just doing it because of the name.
[QUOTE=Snoberry Tea;50596245]You're kidding right? Texas is an economic powerhouse. If they left the United States they most certainly would be missed. IIRC Texas is 2nd highest in terms of GSP in the United States, and #1 for export dollars made at a little over $260BN Their GDP is ranked 12th in the world. Ahead of Australia and South Korea. It would DEFINITELY hurt the USA[/QUOTE] Economic powerhouse dependant on oil pipelines. If a border suddenly was stuck between the two then Texas's refineries would mostly run dry.
[QUOTE=Sableye;50598463]Economic powerhouse dependant on oil pipelines. If a border suddenly was stuck between the two then Texas's refineries would mostly run dry.[/QUOTE] I think people forget that within the US each state is technically working under a 100% free trade agreement across any and all industries and if a state left, it would not be able to do business with its neighbors as freely as it once did (and has developed infrastructure to do).
[QUOTE=Sableye;50598463]Economic powerhouse dependant on oil pipelines. If a border suddenly was stuck between the two then Texas's refineries would mostly run dry.[/QUOTE] Hey, Sable, 95% of Texas' oil refineries are within 500 yards of navigational waters, and less than 20 miles from International waters [IMG]http://www.willisms.com/archives/usrefineries.gif[/IMG] So what fucking border are you going to impose? [editline]26th June 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;50598477]I think people forget that within the US each state is technically working under a 100% free trade agreement across any and all industries and if a state left, it would not be able to do business with its neighbors as freely as it once did (and has developed infrastructure to do).[/QUOTE] Texas has very little cross border infrastructure, there's literally nothing between our largest city and Louisiana other than the Interstate, and between Dallas-Fort Worth and Oklahoma there's not even a Interstate, meanwhile everything else in the state of economic value is over 250 miles away from any other state; Like a majority of Texas' traffic to Louisiana is purely for their Casinos.
[QUOTE=Broseph_;50598482]Hey, Sable, 95% of Texas' oil refineries are within 500 yards of navigational waters, and less than 20 miles from International waters [IMG]http://www.willisms.com/archives/usrefineries.gif[/IMG] So what fucking border are you going to impose?[/QUOTE] You realize that Texas's biggest trade partner for oil would have to be the US, which would end up having to deal with export regulations like every other foreign oil partner? And that Texas has ZERO ties to any other country in the world to make its own trade deal with (which to send overseas would be immensely more costly than to simply pump it into the US?) [editline]26th June 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Broseph_;50598482] Texas has very little cross border infrastructure, the literally nothing between our largest city and Louisiana other than the Interstate, and between Dallas-Fort Worth and Oklahoma there's not even a Interstate, meanwhile everything else in the state of economic value is over 250 miles away from any other state.[/QUOTE] Infrastructure doesn't mean physical connections. It means laws, regulations, relationships, etc. that transcend mere roads.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;50598494]You realize that Texas's biggest trade partner for oil would have to be the US, which would end up having to deal with export regulations like every other foreign oil partner? And that Texas has ZERO ties to any other country in the world to make its own trade deal with (which to send overseas would be immensely more costly than to simply pump it into the US?)[/QUOTE] [thumb]http://www.econnewsletter.com/media/DIR_90801/994188854e9720eeffff8040ffffe906.jpg[/thumb] Also the first export of Crude Oil from the United States since the 1973 Oil Crisis was from Texas going to Switzerland. [url]http://www.wsj.com/articles/first-tanker-of-u-s-crude-oil-for-export-launches-from-texas-1451601536[/url]
[QUOTE=Broseph_;50598519][thumb]http://www.econnewsletter.com/media/DIR_90801/994188854e9720eeffff8040ffffe906.jpg[/thumb] Also the first export of Crude Oil from the United States since the 1960s was from Texas going to Switzerland. [url]http://www.wsj.com/articles/first-tanker-of-u-s-crude-oil-for-export-launches-from-texas-1451601536[/url][/QUOTE] Here's your problem: Those are [B]American exports[/B] originating from Texas. Texas did not set up those trade deals. Texas did not send an ambassador and sign a treaty. Texas does not use solely Texas shipping and trucking to get its resources to those places. All of these would have to be built from scratch if Texas would go independent, which not only would be difficult but would destroy their economy in the short term with lasting effects.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;50598494]You realize that Texas's biggest trade partner for oil would have to be the US, which would end up having to deal with export regulations like every other foreign oil partner? And that Texas has ZERO ties to any other country in the world to make its own trade deal with (which to send overseas would be immensely more costly than to simply pump it into the US?) [editline]26th June 2016[/editline] Infrastructure doesn't mean physical connections. It means laws, regulations, relationships, etc. that transcend mere roads.[/QUOTE] I don't know about relationships, but if Mexico has no problem trading with America, why would Texas have an issue?
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;50598525]Here's your problem: Those are [B]American exports[/B] originating from Texas. Texas did not set up those trade deals. Texas did not send an ambassador and sign a treaty. Texas does not use solely Texas shipping and trucking to get its resources to those places. All of these would have to be built from scratch if Texas would go independent, which not only would be difficult but would destroy their economy in the short term with lasting effects.[/QUOTE] Okay, and? Texas has something everyone wants, that is Oil Refineries; It shouldn't have a problem negotiating trade deals and treaties; and like I pointed out, the first drop of American crude exported in over 40 years came from Texas and the Europeans bought that shit right up. Also you realize there's a shitload of trade barriers due to American laws, like the Chicken Tax, and this stupidity that cars produced first world countries like Japan and Germany are illegal in the United States unless extensively modified to meet US specifications, and this 40 year oil embargo.
Best case scenario for everyone would be a harmonious breakup and keeping Texas an oil import/export middleman. The US simply would not have the ability to import or export the same volumes without Texas. It would be best for the US and it's international trade partners to transfer those contracts to Texas because good luck having a liberal government expand oil terminals elsewhere to meet the capacity of Texas. The US would hurt itself trying to meet needs without Texas. This is also why the US would never allow Texas to leave harmoniously. Source: I see the bottleneck of tankers outside the port of Houston everyday. [editline]26th June 2016[/editline] And it's not just oil, but all other petroleum product under the Sun.
[QUOTE=Broseph_;50598482]between Dallas-Fort Worth and Oklahoma there's not even a Interstate[/QUOTE] Uh, what? I-35? I drive on it like 4 times a year cross country. It's one of Texas' biggest interstates. How can you forget that? Yes, Texas could probably survive if it went independent. It's still even more of a blatantly retarded idea than Brexit was.
[QUOTE=.Isak.;50598651]Uh, what? I-35? I drive on it like 4 times a year cross country. It's one of Texas' biggest interstates. How can you forget that? Yes, Texas could probably survive if it went independent. It's still even more of a blatantly retarded idea than Brexit was.[/QUOTE] Oh I forgot about 35, I just remember that 45 turns into a US Highway after Dallas.
Bioshock Infinite
[QUOTE=orgornot;50585452]Walls work. Just ask Israel, Hungary or East Berlin. [url]https://i.sli.mg/PENmG4.png[/url][/QUOTE] Because as we all know, there's nothing wrong with Israel or Cold War-era Berlin.
[QUOTE=OvB;50598588]Best case scenario for everyone would be a harmonious breakup and keeping Texas an oil import/export middleman. The US simply would not have the ability to import or export the same volumes without Texas. It would be best for the US and it's international trade partners to transfer those contracts to Texas because good luck having a liberal government expand oil terminals elsewhere to meet the capacity of Texas. The US would hurt itself trying to meet needs without Texas. This is also why the US would never allow Texas to leave harmoniously. Source: I see the bottleneck of tankers outside the port of Houston everyday. [editline]26th June 2016[/editline] And it's not just oil, but all other petroleum product under the Sun.[/QUOTE] Part of the "bottleneck" is the shittons of tankers off the coast just sitting because oil prices are so low. The oil just has nowhere to be stored so it's oceanbound for who knows long, which sounds like a [I]fantastic [/I]idea.
If I recalled, the last time an American State tried to leave the United States, it started a bloody civil war. Plus, the USA is too proud to let a single state of it's land become an independant nation.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.