It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The United States should divide

page: 8
18
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 27 2017 @ 05:01 PM
link   
a reply to: queenofswords

Right so he is up against the system, a system we all know is corrupt and utterly undemocratic, if that is correct then you do need him right now even though his presidency may not be perfect, he may not be the best guy for the job but he may be the ONLY guy for the job, I wish we had someone like that (though I am a bit more left in my belief's) to drain the British Swamp because if make's yours look positively clean.




posted on Aug, 27 2017 @ 05:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: Teikiatsu

originally posted by: Abysha

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: 1337Kph

I agree with you.

I would be much happier if the Pacific states and Atlantic NE were their own countries and would leave us 'fly over' folks alone.



THIS is where people like you and I find common ground.

I've always rooted for Texas when they start their hourly petition to secede. It's not just because I don't like Texas; it's because they'd be paving the way towards decentralizing an extremely binary nation.



It doesn't need to be so extreme. We just need to fall back to the intended federalism and let each state operate as its own 'sub-country' within the union and let the People decide what works and what doesn't.

That would mean reigning in the federal government, something that some people don't want to see happen.


Actually, you're kinda describing the general idea of the EU. Which was closer to what I think we were originally supposed to be.

- Shared currency
- Shared core rights
- National defense

Boom, done.
edit on 27-8-2017 by Abysha because: Goddamn phone...



posted on Aug, 27 2017 @ 05:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Abysha

Except that the EU project was taken over by Troika and they are little better than a bunch of gangster's.

The other problem with the EU is that unlike the US bordered by only a few country's, really only two, Canada to the north with it's shared value's and Mexico to the south and a few small island nation's the US does not have the problem's the EU does, yes they have a serious migration problem caused by grinding poverty in south america but the EU has far more porous borders, a larger over all population than the US even before the mass migration that is causing our problem's and we have the Middle East, Russian Federation and just across a small stretch of water north Africa, these other nation's mostly do not share our value's (Russia is the closes to us though and not really a problem despite the wind bag's and entrenched hatred of them among many EU citizen's), this also lead's to massive culture clashes and there is one other glaring and unbridgeable difference.
Unlike the US which for all it's varied people's origin's has a single varied culture the EU is made of multiple different national identity's and culture's as well as language barriers and differing tradition's and law's.

So there are a lot more difference than that between these two block's.



posted on Aug, 27 2017 @ 05:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Abysha

originally posted by: Teikiatsu

originally posted by: Abysha

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: 1337Kph

I agree with you.

I would be much happier if the Pacific states and Atlantic NE were their own countries and would leave us 'fly over' folks alone.



THIS is where people like you and I find common ground.

I've always rooted for Texas when they start their hourly petition to secede. It's not just because I don't like Texas; it's because they'd be paving the way towards decentralizing an extremely binary nation.



It doesn't need to be so extreme. We just need to fall back to the intended federalism and let each state operate as its own 'sub-country' within the union and let the People decide what works and what doesn't.

That would mean reigning in the federal government, something that some people don't want to see happen.


Actually, you're kinda describing the general idea of the EU. Which was closer to what I think we were originally supposed to be.

- Shared currency
- Shared core rights
- National defense

Boom, done.


That may have been what was promised with the EU, but the reality is much different. The EU is now a bureaucratic oligarchy of non-elected bean counters overruling the laws and traditions of nations with hundreds of years of enmity against each other.

Hence Brexit.

The EU will tear itself apart within 10 years. Great Britain was just the start.



posted on Aug, 27 2017 @ 05:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Abysha

You really do not want his honest opinion on the EU. He deals with it's regulatory authorities professionally on a day to day basis.

You got his *nice* opinion.



posted on Aug, 27 2017 @ 05:43 PM
link   
a reply to: eriktheawful

People make the biggest deal out of federal issues, but honestly most federal issues don't matter. They affect very few people. Local issues are what have the biggest impact on your daily life, and they get the least attention.



posted on Aug, 27 2017 @ 05:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Abysha

You really do not want his honest opinion on the EU. He deals with it's regulatory authorities professionally on a day to day basis.

You got his *nice* opinion.


Hah! I get it, anyway. I was speaking in generalities of what it was supposed to be like and how that vision would be a good working model for a stage sovereignty type of system here.

In other words, the spirit of the whole thing, not the present application of it.



posted on Aug, 27 2017 @ 05:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: tribal
a reply to: Aazadan

ok, find me a MSM article where they put Trump ahead of Clinton and for how long.


Trump never wound up ahead of Clinton, the vast majority of polls nailed the number of votes each would get, and averaged together it was damn near perfect. The states where there wasn't a clear cut percentage had Clinton having x% chance to win, averaging all of those together and taking into account that Trump had to win every single one, left Trump with somewhere between a 3% and a 10% chance of victory.

That doesn't mean that Trump couldn't win, only that Trump winning was unlikely. The thing about probability though is that the common event doesn't always win, sometimes you get the rare one. That's what happened in the election.

The polls did a very good job of predicting the results.

I take it you were one of those people who only read the headline of "Clinton x% to win, Trump y% to win" without understanding what those numbers actually meant?



posted on Aug, 27 2017 @ 06:04 PM
link   
I have talked about this before, and there are several problems, though I would like to see some separation in principle. The biggest problem is that if you split up the country you will and up with the extremists in control still and people in the middle having no choice- ever. Not only that, but you would have to relocate a ton of people which would be too expensive and difficult.Then you would have the new countries arguing over resources, trade, etc.

The only way this could work would be on a small scale. For example, let some place like Kentucky secede and the small number of liberals there could move to another southern state like Georgia or Florida that is more diverse politically. Even at a single state level it would be a massive undertaking.



posted on Aug, 27 2017 @ 07:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: 1337Kph
Note; I'm not even from the US.

I can no longer see how the US will be able to remain a functioning country, let alone a super-power, when there is such a huge gap between beliefs of both political sides.
Sayings like "It's just political, nothing separates between us" have lost their meaning. People are not feeling belonging to a single country anymore. People are denouncing the flag, the anthem, and the very core of the United States.

There was never such a clash of beliefs in the history of the US since the civil war.







"Pluralism is the source of our strength". - A mistake. At this time this is pretty much your only weakness as a society.


Absolutely not! I will not surrender my country to the fanaticals of either side. I love my country...all of it. I am a centrist and believe that most of America is like minded at least on this issue. The msm, foreign enemies and the elite are propagating this war for their benefit. Russia and China will eat our lunch if we split. We have been through much worse and we can rise ABOVE this if we listen to common sense. You said that you weren't American so suffice to say that you would benefit if we split so I say GO F**k yourself. It won't happen.



posted on Aug, 27 2017 @ 07:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Abysha

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Abysha

You really do not want his honest opinion on the EU. He deals with it's regulatory authorities professionally on a day to day basis.

You got his *nice* opinion.


Hah! I get it, anyway. I was speaking in generalities of what it was supposed to be like and how that vision would be a good working model for a stage sovereignty type of system here.

In other words, the spirit of the whole thing, not the present application of it.


The biggest problem is that the EU was an attempt to mimic the economic power of the USA, not create some new governmental entity. Then they got bogged down in the weeds with regulations.

The USA was formed from colonies that were roughly 100 years old and had some basic cultural similarities to bind them together. The nations of Europe were each older than the USA with their own cultures, languages, histories, art, currency, etc.

I'm not saying it was a bad thought but the end goal was money and influence, not freedom and liberty.
edit on 27-8-2017 by Teikiatsu because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 27 2017 @ 08:20 PM
link   
Dude, most people don't even vote. Clearly people aren't upset to the point that we need to DIVIDE the country.

F'ing absurd.

Some people spend too much time in internet la la land.



posted on Aug, 27 2017 @ 08:30 PM
link   
What we need to do is realize we have a system created from the past to take care of. This infighting between parties is contrived and controlled, its very obvious fake people who love money, power, influence are making it impossible for anyone honest who seeks a position in politics to get there.
Corporations and banks and wall street. All evil and selfish. The people...distracted by cable and cell phone bills, how many jobs they work while the rich pretend to be moral or religious making us slaves to their b.s.. War is coming soon in some regions. If peoples minds were not so distorted, we would probably not be so selfishly ignorantly following stupid people.



posted on Aug, 27 2017 @ 09:14 PM
link   
a reply to: 1337Kph

New guy here. My opinion is we should get back to respecting the constitution and the 10th amendment. Basically what ever is not considered a right covered under the constitution should be left up to each state to decide. Our federal government was designed to unify the sovereign states (countries) together with federal powers listed under the constitution. Things such as national defense and treaties with other countries are the responsibility of the federal government. Commerce between states is another role for the feds.

Over time and with the help of the supreme court the federal government has taken over many issues that should be up to the individual states. This has meant way more money being sent to DC and less staying within the states. If we get back to functioning the way we were intended each state can decide many of the issues that separate us. Liberal people can have all their liberal ideals in such a state and conservatives can also have their happy place. We would be United by a military and all else that falls on the feds, but most things would be up to the states.

Doing this would mean DC gets less of people's money but the individual states may get more than they currently do. States would be competing against each other. People would be able to vote with their feet. Over time states with the best model would win more people and business. But more importantly people could live in a state that best fit their ideas.



posted on Aug, 27 2017 @ 09:17 PM
link   


I can no longer see how the US will be able to remain a functioning country, let alone a super-power, when there is such a huge gap between beliefs of both political sides.


Got a left wing lesbian friend at work who thinks "Don't these pro Trump/anti Trump people have jobs to go to?"

There's a whole hell of a lot more political and racial harmony than there is chaos.

The people you see and hear about on TV and over the internet are VERY loud, but small groups of people, both right wing and left wing, who just wanna fight in the streets.

That's what we're seeing now.

Everyone is paranoid over nazis even though there are a total of 50k of them nation wide. Everyone is worried about the KKK, but there's only about 6k if them nation wide. Everyone is worried about the commies, but they are such a small minority of political zealots and all they have left is to throw tantrums on the streets.

We are not as effed up as you think we are, even with our problems.



posted on Aug, 27 2017 @ 10:21 PM
link   
a reply to: 1337Kph

Cause we are not gonna lose half our nation just to prove a point. Sure, we could divide, but the Lefty half would be a 3rd world nation within a decade or two, and they'd just be begging us to come save their asses. We would end up having to reconquer it all over again.

Id rather have a civil war. Or just give Cali to the leftys and downgrade CA from state status so they can run their little utopia experiment (again!) and see how wrong they are about Everything (again!). But not half the country. And if the CA utopia experiment works, then I'm sure everyone will be jumping at the chance to join them.

The biggest problem they will face is giving up their free wheeling lifestyle which is only made possible with the tax money from hard working people...

How will they feed, clothe, shelter and give free medical to every needy person on the planet as if money grows on trees without the hard working, practical, logical side of the nation footing the bill for everything...



posted on Aug, 27 2017 @ 10:26 PM
link   
Serious you guys, lets just give them california and be done with it. They can be a territory, like Peurto Rico or the US Virgin Isles. They can enact all the policies they want with no resistance, and see well that works. The biggest issue besides moving people, will be the border security. We don't want those loonies infecting our society at will.



posted on Aug, 27 2017 @ 10:40 PM
link   
I say let Mighty Texas Secede... Yee-Haw!!!



posted on Aug, 28 2017 @ 12:29 AM
link   
a reply to: 3n19m470

We'd be VULNERABLE to attack ,from ...anyone who wanted a foot hold on our territory,no doubt starting with Mexico.



posted on Aug, 28 2017 @ 06:44 AM
link   
a reply to: 1337Kph

Oh so how do we do this? Since we're not broken into political regions? One block red one block blue?
The middle one country the two coasts another with the one between?
We've survived the damn cola wars well survive bipartisan politicians too.



new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join