why not break up the US into 10 smaller countries?

[theDoctorisIn]

The premise is ludicrous, but for the sake of argument, let's follow it through - red state and blue state America split into two countries.

Let's talk trade balance. What do red states produce that blue states need? Where is most of the wealth to begin with?

Blue states have computers, ipods, cars, and a good chunk* of the food - not to mention essentially all of the international markets.

What do you guys have?

*edited.

 

[Wyatt earp]

The premise is ludicrous, but for the sake of argument, let's follow it through - red state and blue state America split into two countries.

Let's talk trade balance. What do red states produce that blue states need? Where is most of the wealth to begin with?

Blue states have computers, ipods, cars, and most of the food - not to mention essentially all of the international markets.

What do you guys have?

food

 

[theDoctorisIn]

The premise is ludicrous, but for the sake of argument, let's follow it through - red state and blue state America split into two countries.

Let's talk trade balance. What do red states produce that blue states need? Where is most of the wealth to begin with?

Blue states have computers, ipods, cars, and most of the food - not to mention essentially all of the international markets.

What do you guys have?

food

We've got food too. 75% of the produce in this country comes from California.

 

[Wyatt earp]

The premise is ludicrous, but for the sake of argument, let's follow it through - red state and blue state America split into two countries.

Let's talk trade balance. What do red states produce that blue states need? Where is most of the wealth to begin with?

Blue states have computers, ipods, cars, and most of the food - not to mention essentially all of the international markets.

What do you guys have?

food

We've got food too. 75% of the produce in this country comes from California.

I don't even know why you put that post up, the 1st one, the year is not 1960, surely you jest and don't know all the products the South makes? Take south Carolina my state, biggest tire manufacture in the US, Oklahoma is 2nd, we export BMW, Volvo is moving here, we have Boeing, refrigidair, Chinese company's moving here all the time, the drill manufacture greenfield for example, we manufacture electric busses and a host of others.

 

[JQPublic1]

each one would STILL have far more power (given a few nukes) than 95% of the rest of the world's countries. What is it that you don't like about the idea, hmm? maybe the split up would mean that you can't sit around on your arse, living off of other people? Maybe you could not feel "tough" while "your" troops go oppress other countries in your name? What makes you afraid of this outcome, hmm? Nobody attacks Belgium, Spain, Portugal, Switzerland, dozens of other rich, small countries, even tho they AInT got nukes. A VERy few nukes suffice to guarantee that Isreal will never be attacked by any large group of people, in any organized fashion, and Isreal doesn't have nuke missiles, nor missile subs. The 8-10 smaller frags of the US could have a nuke missile sub EACH, and have a treaty to defend each other, too. there's nothing to be afraid of, except your own personal weakness and incompetence.

What is it about "United We Stand, divided We Fall" don't you understand?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

The premise is ludicrous, but for the sake of argument, let's follow it through - red state and blue state America split into two countries.

Let's talk trade balance. What do red states produce that blue states need? Where is most of the wealth to begin with?

Blue states have computers, ipods, cars, and most of the food - not to mention essentially all of the international markets.

What do you guys have?

food

We've got food too. 75% of the produce in this country comes from California.

I don't even know why you put that post up, the 1st one, the year is not 1960, surely you jest and don't know all the products the South makes? Take south Carolina my state, biggest tire manufacture in the US, Oklahoma is 2nd, we export BMW, Volvo is moving here, we have Boeing, refrigidair, Chinese company's moving here all the time, the drill manufacture greenfield for example, we manufacture electric busses and a host of others.

Factories there don't mean the companies are there.

Boeing is headquartered in Chicago.
BMW is headquartered in Munich.
Volvo is headquartered in Sweden.
Frigidaire is a subsidiary of Electrolux, which is a Swedish company as well.

Same thing goes for all those "Chinese companies".

 

[Wyatt earp]

The Chinese company I mentioned moved their head quarters here...
Also like I said we export, Texas is the biggest exporter.

I was looking for a list of products made in the red states earlier and found this link from 2004 , to address your head quarters....

Red State Brands to Boycott

 

[NYcarbineer]

States rights conservatives hate the Constitution, that's why they want out from under it.

Nope, just the opposite, conservatives want the federal govt to follow the constitution.

It does. Roe v Wade was decided in accordance with the Constitution.

Yes, the SC ruled on that. Now, let me ask you, is if ok if a majority of americans disagree with that ruling? or are we all now mandated to believe what the government dictates that we must believe?

second question: why do you want innocent unborn human beings killed? Do you realize the most abortions occur in the minority community? so are you a racist like Margaret Sanger (founder of planned parenthood)?

Margaret Sanger was anti-abortion, like you.

Yes it's okay if a majority of Americans disagree with an SC ruling. That's a check against tyranny of the majority.

are you crazy? Sanger founded PP in order to reduce the black birth rate. Look up her quotes. She was a rampant abortionist who wanted to stop blacks from reproducing.

"tyranny of the majority" what a crock of shit. Minority rights would not exist if not for majority vote. Minority rights were created by the majority.

The judicial branch was established by the same majority that ratified the Constitution. If the majority wants to remove the power of the judiciary to settle rights issues in favor of a right that doesn't have popular support,

then the majority can do so.

You're actually arguing a point I've often made, but you're perverting it.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Alaska would be the state most likely to secede. Then possibly a combination of Texas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and a few more southern and central states.

And they make the attempt at their own risk.

Secession is patently illegal. Unconstitutional.

 

[chikenwing]

To what end?

Tyranny of the majority. Conservatives are in the minority at the national level. If they could create smaller countries, enclaves of conservatism so to speak,

they could become the majority in those new states and thus impose their will.

It's really what states' rights come down to.

So when the Federal government is imposing leftism on us all, your concern is that OMG, conservative states may still have conservatives and we need to stop that? What part of you won, quit already don't you get?

These clowns show themselves for what they are daily,intolerant self absorbed bigots .

 

[NYcarbineer]

To what end?

Tyranny of the majority. Conservatives are in the minority at the national level. If they could create smaller countries, enclaves of conservatism so to speak,

they could become the majority in those new states and thus impose their will.

It's really what states' rights come down to.

U.S. Liberals at Record 24 but Still Trail Conservatives

look, you almost learned something today

Is that why President McCain is a two termer?

 

[Carla_Danger]

To what end?

Tyranny of the majority. Conservatives are in the minority at the national level. If they could create smaller countries, enclaves of conservatism so to speak,

they could become the majority in those new states and thus impose their will.

It's really what states' rights come down to.

and the "conservative" states would be successful, safe, and fiscally sound. While the "liberal states would all look like Detroit or Baltimore.

Lets do it.

Successful like Mississippi? lol

 

[Redfish]

Alaska would be the state most likely to secede. Then possibly a combination of Texas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and a few more southern and central states.

And they make the attempt at their own risk.

what specifically do you see as the risk? Would the US govt send the army to kill the secessionists?

 

[Redfish]

To what end?

Tyranny of the majority. Conservatives are in the minority at the national level. If they could create smaller countries, enclaves of conservatism so to speak,

they could become the majority in those new states and thus impose their will.

It's really what states' rights come down to.

and the "conservative" states would be successful, safe, and fiscally sound. While the "liberal states would all look like Detroit or Baltimore.

Lets do it.

Successful like Mississippi? lol

Have you ever been to Mississippi? It is quite successful. New York city has more in poverty than MS.

 

[Redfish]

Stop the fed payments and stop the fed taxes, we will be just fine.

So what you advocate is anti-Americanism. Got it.

Not at all. I advocate following the constitution and if the federal govt violates the constitution then the states have the right to secede.

Now, do I think that will ever happen, NO

You said stop fed taxes. But the Federal government has a constitutional right to collect taxes. And so what you are advocating is a threat to the constitutional powers of the United States.

the fed govt also has a constitutional duty to follow the constitution. If the fed govt commits treason do the citizens still have a duty to support it?

Who convicts the 'fed govt' of treason?

The people.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Alaska would be the state most likely to secede. Then possibly a combination of Texas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and a few more southern and central states.

And they make the attempt at their own risk.

Secession is patently illegal. Unconstitutional.

I never could understand why the left thinks like that. If a few states wanted to do it, had the military power to do it. Nothing to stop it.


Country's have been broken up all through history.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Alaska would be the state most likely to secede. Then possibly a combination of Texas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and a few more southern and central states.

And they make the attempt at their own risk.

Secession is patently illegal. Unconstitutional.

I never could understand why the left thinks like that. If a few states wanted to do it, had the military power to do it. Nothing to stop it.


Country's have been broken up all through history.

Their action would be neither legal nor constitutional. That's all I said. I am right.

 

[Redfish]

The premise is ludicrous, but for the sake of argument, let's follow it through - red state and blue state America split into two countries.

Let's talk trade balance. What do red states produce that blue states need? Where is most of the wealth to begin with?

Blue states have computers, ipods, cars, and a good chunk* of the food - not to mention essentially all of the international markets.

What do you guys have?

*edited.

Food, oil, gas, car factories, refineries, ports, raliroads, cotton, cattle, chickens, corn, beans, banks. You know, just the basics of life.

 

[Redfish]

Alaska would be the state most likely to secede. Then possibly a combination of Texas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and a few more southern and central states.

And they make the attempt at their own risk.

Secession is patently illegal. Unconstitutional.

So was the declaration of independence, whats your point?

 

[Redfish]

Alaska would be the state most likely to secede. Then possibly a combination of Texas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and a few more southern and central states.

And they make the attempt at their own risk.

Secession is patently illegal. Unconstitutional.

I never could understand why the left thinks like that. If a few states wanted to do it, had the military power to do it. Nothing to stop it.


Country's have been broken up all through history.

Their action would be neither legal nor constitutional. That's all I said. I am right.

So what, when part of a country secedes, it ignores the rules of the old country. Do you know anything about american history?