Jump to content


Photo
* * - - - 3 votes

killing peaceful secessionists


  • Please log in to reply
77 replies to this topic

#61 rodeo

rodeo

    Keelah se'lai

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,383 posts

Posted 14 November 2012 - 12:30 PM

Doesn't matter if its 60-40 or even 70-30 in favor of separation. If you want a peaceful separation then there will have to be provisions made for making those who want no part of it whole. If you want it to be peaceful then that means buying them out. Otherwise people will defend their homes and farms and businesses by force if necessary and when the separatists respond in kind you can bet Uncle Sam will be there with his F-22s.

The only way this hypothetical would stand a snowballs chance in hell of being both peaceful and successful would be to buy people out.

And which state could afford to buy out half of its population without Federal aid? None states is the answer.

#62 Jase

Jase

    Kuechold Fantasies

  • Administrators
  • 16,518 posts
  • LocationMatthews, NC

Posted 14 November 2012 - 12:30 PM

It was pretty peaceful until Lincoln sent the blockades.

#63 thatlookseasy

thatlookseasy

    Death to pennies

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,931 posts

Posted 14 November 2012 - 12:31 PM

The problem I have with this whole idea is you are never realistically going to get the kind of massive agreement for secession. As a populace we are very divided right now, but its a division by political philosophy not by states. Even in strongly conservative states about 40% of voters picked Obama.

If there was as strong a consensus as you are talking about (~80% for secession) they would almost assuredly be able to vote in whichever guy they wanted for President (unless other states had a strong consensus the other way). The conditions you are talking about would require some sort of hyper-polarization of the american electorate, and unless their is some big issue of contention that drives people apart exclusively due to their geography (like slavery) I dont see any way that happens

#64 Inimicus

Inimicus

    Life is better in a kayak

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,000 posts

Posted 14 November 2012 - 12:32 PM

Nance, maybe you can answer this. Is there a standard number of soldiers in a company?

In 1970 three companies of the Ohio Nat Guard were deployed at Kent State. Of them 77 soldiers claimed to have fired their weapons on the protesters.


While not a perfectly analogous situation it might prove as a jumping off point for the question of how many servicemen would fire on unarmed US citizens.

#65 rodeo

rodeo

    Keelah se'lai

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,383 posts

Posted 14 November 2012 - 12:35 PM

The problem I have with this whole idea is you are never realistically going to get the kind of massive agreement for secession. As a populace we are very divided right now, but its a division by political philosophy not by states. Even in strongly conservative states about 40% of voters picked Obama.

If there was as strong a consensus as you are talking about (~80% for secession) they would almost assuredly be able to vote in whichever guy they wanted for President (unless other states had a strong consensus the other way). The conditions you are talking about would require some sort of hyper-polarization of the american electorate, and unless their is some big issue of contention that drives people apart exclusively due to their geography (like slavery) I dont see any way that happens


Yeah it gets harder to draw the borders along political lines when you look closer.

Posted Image

#66 thatlookseasy

thatlookseasy

    Death to pennies

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,931 posts

Posted 14 November 2012 - 12:36 PM

don't take my word for it. feel free to google/wiki it yourself


The South's secession during the civil war peaceful until it actually came time to do things.

Thats like saying my farts dont stink when I'm sitting on the couch- oh they stink, you just wont smell it until I stand up

#67 twylyght

twylyght

    The picture of how I care

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,328 posts

Posted 14 November 2012 - 12:41 PM

The problem I have with this whole idea is you are never realistically going to get the kind of massive agreement for secession. As a populace we are very divided right now, but its a division by political philosophy not by states. Even in strongly conservative states about 40% of voters picked Obama.

If there was as strong a consensus as you are talking about (~80% for secession) they would almost assuredly be able to vote in whichever guy they wanted for President (unless other states had a strong consensus the other way). The conditions you are talking about would require some sort of hyper-polarization of the american electorate, and unless their is some big issue of contention that drives people apart exclusively due to their geography (like slavery) I dont see any way that happens


some posters have gone to great pains to note the geographical differences in the electoral results. however, it is not my premise that this is a democrat/republican split driving a secessionist movement. there are marked differences between democrats/republicans in ny/california when compared to those in texas/georgia. the cultural bindings between regions would likely be more binding than party affiliation as things become more strained in the coming decades.

#68 twylyght

twylyght

    The picture of how I care

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,328 posts

Posted 14 November 2012 - 12:43 PM

The South's secession during the civil war peaceful until it actually came time to do things.

Thats like saying my farts dont stink when I'm sitting on the couch- oh they stink, you just wont smell it until I stand up


do things.... like.... trade with france?

#69 mmmbeans

mmmbeans

    FBI SURVEILLANCE VAN

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,000 posts

Posted 14 November 2012 - 12:44 PM

It was implied by some posters that there would be a number of willing military personnel that would be willing to do so... This thread was an effort to guage just how many military present here would actually obey, or be willing to obey such orders...


i think it's less probable that an order would be given for such a thing... i find it more probable that it could happen on its own... hell, it happened at kent state... i don't think nixon gave that order...


edit: inimicus beat me to it.

#70 PhillyB

PhillyB

    hug it chug it football

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,694 posts
  • LocationGreensboro

Posted 14 November 2012 - 12:56 PM

the problem with trying to compare this to 1861 is that the way people primarily identify has changed. due in large part to technological advancements in transportation and communication, people who once primarily identified as Virginian or Carolinian now identify primarily as American. "Fighting to preserve the state of North Carolina" is almost as ludicrous as imagining everyone in Guilford County unanimously determining to take up arms to fight Forsyth County cause fug them Winstonites.

An unbelievable level of propaganda would have to be disseminated for a significant period of time to convince GI Joe to go out there and shoot separatists in the head.

And, as others have brought up, one of the primary problems is that there is no foundational institution or significantly different paradigm/way of life/binding ideology that a vast majority of the citizens of these supposed secessionist states identify with that would make separating a unanimous decision, and that poses huge problems for the would-be rebels because of insurgency with federal loyalists.

Oh and Texas, of its population of 26 million people, has only managed to herd 250,000 into its Texas Nationalist movement. If the case example for secession talks can't motivate more than 1% of individuals in an already heavily conservative state that's the most likely to jump on board, how on earth is 51% gonna happen, much less the vast majority of a state's population?

It's a fuging stupid notion. It always has been. Someone will bump this thread in a couple years and we'll all have a good laugh.

#71 Panthro

Panthro

    Bunned

  • Moderators
  • 23,210 posts

Posted 14 November 2012 - 01:06 PM

If there was as strong a consensus as you are talking about (~80% for secession) they would almost assuredly be able to vote in whichever guy they wanted for President (unless other states had a strong consensus the other way). The conditions you are talking about would require some sort of hyper-polarization of the american electorate, and unless their is some big issue of contention that drives people apart exclusively due to their geography (like slavery) I dont see any way that happens

Black president

#72 NanceUSMC

NanceUSMC

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,148 posts

Posted 14 November 2012 - 01:40 PM

Nance, maybe you can answer this. Is there a standard number of soldiers in a company?


It will vary wildly, and be in the 100-200 range most of the time... But there is no set number, no... =)

#73 NanceUSMC

NanceUSMC

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,148 posts

Posted 14 November 2012 - 01:50 PM

i think it's less probable that an order would be given for such a thing... i find it more probable that it could happen on its own... hell, it happened at kent state... i don't think nixon gave that order...


edit: inimicus beat me to it.


Agreed, once you infuse tension and emotion into the situation, all bets are off and things like KSU happen...

#74 Proudiddy

Proudiddy

    The Thread Killer (Since 2004)

  • Moderators
  • 14,632 posts

Posted 14 November 2012 - 02:37 PM

I saw the topic of using military force against fellow Americans discussed briefly in the other thread, and it seems not many are aware of Oath Keepers, or I may have not saw it in the few posts I looked over.

So, there's that if you weren't already aware of it. I support Oath Keepers, but I don't support idiots claiming they want to secede from the union... Regardless, this will not reach the level that force of any kind needs to be used... It will blow over without any major problems.

Like I said, it's really an empty gesture.

#75 Proudiddy

Proudiddy

    The Thread Killer (Since 2004)

  • Moderators
  • 14,632 posts

Posted 14 November 2012 - 02:39 PM

Nance, maybe you can answer this. Is there a standard number of soldiers in a company?

In 1970 three companies of the Ohio Nat Guard were deployed at Kent State. Of them 77 soldiers claimed to have fired their weapons on the protesters.


While not a perfectly analogous situation it might prove as a jumping off point for the question of how many servicemen would fire on unarmed US citizens.

Only ones I would worry about were the borderline retarded ones that went into service because they had no other options.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com - IP Content Design by Joshua Tree / TitansReport.