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.

 

NEWS: Secession Talk Goes Mainstream

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 10 2004 @ 09:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Odd
Does the Left really think it could win a war? They don't even have guns!



I honestly believe that all of this talk of secession is not only stupid, not to mention treasonous,

[edit on 11/10/2004 by Odd]


I wouldn't say treasonous exactly. According to the Constitution, no state can be forced into the Union, and no state can be forced to stay. It's up to that state whether or not to secede. If they want to, fine, I wish them the best of luck.




posted on Nov, 10 2004 @ 09:31 PM
link   
Actually, that's not true. Unless I've been grossly misled. Any state that tries to secede could be forced (militarily) to remain within the union with one exception...Texas. Texas, by what I have been taught, is the only state in the union with a secession clause in its state constitution.



posted on Nov, 10 2004 @ 09:36 PM
link   



posted on Nov, 10 2004 @ 09:39 PM
link   
Thanks Amethyst!




posted on Nov, 10 2004 @ 10:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amethyst
I wouldn't say treasonous exactly. According to the Constitution, no state can be forced into the Union, and no state can be forced to stay. It's up to that state whether or not to secede. If they want to, fine, I wish them the best of luck.


If that is true the Yankees owe us a BIG "I'm Sorry"

Seems the civil war settled that question once and for all no matter what the Constitution says



posted on Nov, 10 2004 @ 10:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amuk

Originally posted by Amethyst
I wouldn't say treasonous exactly. According to the Constitution, no state can be forced into the Union, and no state can be forced to stay. It's up to that state whether or not to secede. If they want to, fine, I wish them the best of luck.


If that is true the Yankees owe us a BIG "I'm Sorry"

Seems the civil war settled that question once and for all no matter what the Constitution says

Reparations for Amuk: Here's a big ole' I'm sorry from up in Gettsyburg!!

(Ya know I'm joking right?)(Seriously, quit lookin at me like that, I said I was joking)



posted on Nov, 10 2004 @ 10:42 PM
link   
My entire long post was lost again when the homepage changed...oh well..

Like some members have said, the division in the U.S. is not really a new one, and whoever says we are now more divided than ever, doesn't know the history of the U.S.

Even at the time of our founding fathers they did not really agree with each other's point of view, they argued, and in some cases even fought in duels because of their different points of view, there were some wars fought because of these points of view, perhaps if you were paying attention in history class you will know which battles they were...

Althou these days the protests have taken another direction, that of socialism under the desguise of liberalism, there has always been a group of dissenters in the States, no matter which candidate was elected for president. One thing is for certain, despite what these dissenters claim, the U.S. is not a dictatorship and it is not in need for any seccession/civil war. You would really have to be naive and selfish to want the people of the U.S. to be in another civil war....because a "small" group don't want the president that was chosen.

If you want to know what a dictatorship is, i can arrange something with some members of my family so you can live with them, and you can truly live under a dictatorship, perhaps then some of you will see what you are taking for granted....



[edit on 10-11-2004 by Muaddib]



posted on Nov, 10 2004 @ 10:51 PM
link   
What you call taking for granted some might call defending it fiercely. You say the 'small majority' that didn't want Bush as president, but I think you severely underestimate the sheer numbers of pissed off americans that have been lied to for the last four years. And as far as the actual numbers go, who knows, you're letting diebold do your counting for you. You may think that dissention in this matter is limited to the tin foil hats and radical left, but that would be a generalization which is hardly supported by statistical data. Consider the possibility that we have raised a warning cry, our electoral process has been compromised, and there are more of us than you think.



posted on Nov, 10 2004 @ 11:20 PM
link   
Twichy, i can say there are more Republicans and people who voted for Bush than you think also....you have your "theory" of how things went. You have 100,000-200,000 people protesting against Bush in some cities and yet you still don't want to see that whether you like it or not, there are 159 million Christians in the U.S.

Whether you want to accept it or not, the U.S. is a Christian country, and even though I am not Christian, i know that most of these people including many fervent Catholics, would vote for Bush. You have your point of view which you believe your chosen candidate represents, and most of these Christians and Catholics also have their own points of view, and which candidate best represents them, most of them chose Bush.

Oh and btw...there has almost always been a pissed off number of Americans who didn't agree much with the results of most elections. But please do tell me, if i am wrong, when in the history of the U.S. there was not a group of "pissed off Americans" because things didn't go the way they wanted...



[edit on 10-11-2004 by Muaddib]



posted on Nov, 11 2004 @ 12:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Valhall
Actually, that's not true. Unless I've been grossly misled. Any state that tries to secede could be forced (militarily) to remain within the union with one exception...Texas. Texas, by what I have been taught, is the only state in the union with a secession clause in its state constitution.



I have it on good authority that if Texas would leave, the rest would stay.


Might I sweeten the deal with Alaska?

I call dibs on that Oil for Food program.



posted on Nov, 11 2004 @ 02:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amuk

Originally posted by Amethyst
I wouldn't say treasonous exactly. According to the Constitution, no state can be forced into the Union, and no state can be forced to stay. It's up to that state whether or not to secede. If they want to, fine, I wish them the best of luck.


If that is true the Yankees owe us a BIG "I'm Sorry"

Seems the civil war settled that question once and for all no matter what the Constitution says


I'm from a Northern state myself (Michigan). I'm considering joining the Daughters of Union Vets (my mother is a member), since I had a gg grandfather and a ggg grandfather who fought in the Union Army--the ggg grandfather was a Cherokee.

From what I've read, the South seceded when Lincoln got elected, because of his anti-slavery position. I think if Douglas (pro-slavery) had been elected, they would have stayed.

I am curious as to the circumstances of the southern states reuniting with the Union. I have heard SO many things about the Civil War and some of the info contradicts itself.







 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join