posted on Nov, 19 2012 @ 09:22 AM
reply to post by Jason88
Dead wrong on New York, but California and Texas are big contenders. I think you are vastly underestimating the mountainous and difficult terrain and
hardy people of certain areas.
Of course there are too many factors to be considered, such as where the war would be fought. Texas and California could cuccessfuly mount a major
offensive on the rest of the country, but they might not have the best defensive strongholds. I believe Missouri and Arkansas, and some of the
Appalachian states might have the very best defensive strongholds, and probably could not be conquered. There is a lot of rich history there of
living off the lands hillbilly style and hanging G-men that try to interfere.
Florida would be easy to defend, because it is mostly coast line, so any land offensive would get bottlenecked. Of course, it would depend on which
way the military units leaned. A major naval offensive could crush Florida with ease, but if the Navy and Air Force stayed loyal to Florida, it would
be a great platform to launch offensives against the entire East and Gulf Coasts!
I'm not familiar with the Great Lakes region, but there is high population density, unique weather, and unique waterways, I would expect the Great
Lakes states to be pretty formidable in their own defense.
The rural states like Montana, the Dakotas, Minnesota, Utah, New Mexico, Arizona, Kansas have good survivalist types, but their population is just too
sparse and the open land too vast to defend. They would be overrun easily. They might mount a continued guerrilla nuisance, but they would not
retain control of their state for very long.
edit on 19-11-2012 by darkhorserider because: (no reason given)