• Son_of_dad@lemmy.world
    52·
    10 months ago

    As a Canadian this reminds me of Quebec. They’re always going on about seceding, but they’re land locked, and without the rest of the country they’d be financially and socially FUCKED.

    Reminder that Texas’s yearly operating budget is roughly 51 billion, and they receive 62 billion in federal aid, so without the rest of the country, Texas can’t even run the state

      • jaxxed@lemmy.world
        15·
        10 months ago

        Not only is it not landlocked, it separates all of the Atlantic Maritime provinces from the rest of Canada, and governs part of the Great Lake waterways.

        • Bob@feddit.nl
          2·
          10 months ago

          Just looking at the map now, it stretches all the way up the side of that bleeding great sea poking a hole in Canada to the Hudson Strait.

      • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
        6·
        10 months ago

        Texas is on the Gulf of Mexico… Also, I double checked and you used a proper ellipsis so we can be friends.

        • droans@lemmy.world
          1·
          10 months ago

          If Texas actually tries to secede, it’s likely we’ll see a West Virginia situation where the eastern part of Texas remains with the US because of Dallas, Houston, Austin, and San Antonio.

      • Peppycito@sh.itjust.works
        3·
        10 months ago

        Nevermind the St. Lawrence and the fact that Montreal is a huge shipping port, there’s also that wee bit of water called Hudson Bay. I don’t think that fellow understands what ‘land locked’ means.

    • dlhextall@sh.itjust.works
      16·
      10 months ago

      but they’re land locked

      Yeah, except for the main East maritime entryway and port lol. Classic good ol’ Quebec bashing.

        • JamesStallion@sh.itjust.works
          6·
          10 months ago

          Quebec is the sea route to the Great lakes and the interior of North America. The absolutely enormous benefits of this are precisely why Quebec was conquered in the first place.

    • hglman@lemmy.mlEnglish
      6·
      10 months ago

      That’s not how that math works out, you are not including taxes collected. The balance is still negative but there’s a smaller gap.

    • funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works
      2·
      10 months ago

      just you wait until an enterprising film lecturer creates a film that no one can stop watching until they starve to death and it falls into the hands of voluntary amputee Quebecois separatists who use it to execute minor government attachés!

    • Peppycito@sh.itjust.works
      1·
      10 months ago

      And what percentage of the national debt will they take with them when they leave? Same with Alberta. That’s where it all falls apart.

  • Ech@lemm.eeEnglish
    49·
    10 months ago

    Dude at the end looking at his two e’s like he put them in the wrong order. Just priceless.

  • Empricorn@feddit.nlEnglish
    46·
    10 months ago

    Republicans: “We’d win a 2nd civil war, we have all the guns!”

    Bitch, do you think your civilian small-arms could stand against the full military might of the federal government!? Not even saying it’s a good thing…

    • NoIWontPickaName@kbin.social
      26·
      10 months ago

      Historically yes, an uprising of civilians has a great chance at asymmetrical warfare on their own turf.

      You can’t destroy your own infrastructure like you can someone else’s.

      Will they win? Almost certainly not.

      Can they force some concessions? Probably

          • RealFknNito@lemmy.worldEnglish
            9·
            10 months ago

            They’d pull punches but lets not kid ourselves, Texas is not going to last very long against checks notes the entire United States military

              • RealFknNito@lemmy.worldEnglish
                6·
                10 months ago

                The Taliban didn’t have their home base on American soil. They were a significant distance overseas which created a lot of logistical barriers.

                It’s the difference between walking next door to kill your neighbor and catching a flight to kill him while he’s on vacation.

                • Encode1307@lemm.eeEnglish
                  1·
                  10 months ago

                  If you think Texans can’t mount an insurgency that would turn extraordinarily bloody for both sides, you’re crazy. A significant part of the military would switch sides too, and we’d have a full blown civil war on our hands.

      • Cethin@lemmy.zipEnglish
        6·
        10 months ago

        They wouldn’t stand a chance. They’re power grid is so brittle. The US military would destroy it probably within minutes of an actual war being started. The people who can’t stand the heat or the cold (depending on the time of year) would turn on them so quickly.

        Just like the south in the civil war, they don’t have the infrastructure for the logistics needed to fight a war.

        • hglman@lemmy.mlEnglish
          1·
          10 months ago

          You know unless the struggle is within the us military or the military wont get involved

      • BakedGoods@sh.itjust.works
        3·
        10 months ago

        These aren’t the Taliban. These are a bunch of obese losers with handguns. They have nothing once McDonalds pull out.

    • electric_nan@lemmy.ml
      7·
      10 months ago

      It wouldn’t happen like that. We would have an insurgency and lots of terrorist attacks. You would have towns and areas that are under insurgent control, with reprisal killings at night. Shit like that. I can’t tell you to take it seriously, but you ought to at least consider how it would actually look if it happened.

      • Empricorn@feddit.nlEnglish
        7·
        10 months ago
        1. It’s not going to happen
        2. If it did, they would lose

        That doesn’t mean I don’t take it seriously. We already have electrical substations getting shot by “Y’all-Qaeda”…

        • electric_nan@lemmy.ml
          5·
          10 months ago

          Well even if they lose, I’m sure that won’t be much comfort to the good people they kill along the way. I just don’t think we should be glib at the thought of open civil conflict. Looking at it this way convinced me that I don’t want to be without the means to defend myself and my loved ones in the event our “cold” civil war suddenly becomes “hot”.

      • kromem@lemmy.worldEnglish
        1·
        10 months ago

        It really depends on what would be happening in the military and intelligence services.

        I don’t think people really understand just how much a civil conflict would be a war of information as opposed to a war of arms.

        If things got bad enough domestically that laws like the Patriot Act were expanded and agencies that haven’t been supposed to operate domestically suddenly could, and those agencies were still 100% under government control, you’d have vans (or simply drones) taking out domestic terrorists in the middle of the night right before the day they were supposed to organize to kill and terrorize their neighbors.

        The US could become an almost unthinkable police state under the control of a government like China’s or if we had a Stalin-esque administration.

        This is the part that Y’all Queda don’t fully grasp. They aren’t hiding out in caves in Afghanistan or air gapped in Pakistan. The only thing keeping them safe from the monsters under their bed that they largely don’t realize are there is the very government they think would be such a bright idea to try to overthrow. And if that government saw them as enough of an existential threat to unleash the monsters on them, well, they’d have quickly succeeded in overthrowing the US government in a sense, but wouldn’t be around to see it.

        • electric_nan@lemmy.ml
          1·
          10 months ago

          “The government” isn’t a monolith. It is made up of human beings with differing political opinions. US military assets are spread all around the country. US intelligence agencies are full of people that would prefer the far right to the far left. I think you are also overestimating the power of intelligence agencies.

      • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
        23·
        10 months ago

        On their own turf the USA has all the maps of everything including of what’s underground, they already have records of who are the potential insurrectionists, where they live, what they drive, who their families are and they also have the support of a huge part of the population.

        Oh and good luck to the guys who own machine guns and hunting rifles when facing drones flying high enough that you can’t see them with your naked eye.

        It would have nothing to do with Afghanistan.

      • Deceptichum@kbin.social
        18·
        10 months ago

        The guys half way across the world from the US army, where the only thing at stake was a country they’d bombed to shit previously?

        • wagesj45@kbin.social
          3·
          10 months ago

          Which is exactly why the US isn’t going to carpet bomb their own territory. One, ruling over a rubble-laden wasteland isn’t very appealing. Destroying your own infrastructure isn’t good for GDP. Two, soldiers are going to have a lot harder time bombing their own homeland, regardless of how well trained they are.

              • Cethin@lemmy.zipEnglish
                2·
                10 months ago

                Reconstruction was mostly social, not infrastructure. It was reconstructing social order in place of what was removed (plantation farming a slave labor), not buildings/roads/railways really.

                • xantoxis@lemmy.world
                  3·
                  10 months ago

                  Well that became the narrative when it became clear that we weren’t going to rebuild all the buildings we burned down.

              • wagesj45@kbin.social
                1·
                10 months ago

                And things have changed quite a bit since the civil war. We have a very interconnected country and world. Airplanes exist now. Nuclear submarines and cruise missiles. The destructive power of our weapons has increased ten fold. And we have instant access to 24/7 new media. I don’t think we have the appetite for such a thing in this day and age. Not to mention how any number of hostile nations would be foaming at the mouth looking forward to us having our guard down.

            • wagesj45@kbin.social
              1·
              10 months ago

              So then the citizenry and army would be fighting on equal footing then and the “we have all the guns here in Texas” argument goes back to making sense. Either the US uses their overwhelming military power or not, you can’t choose both.

                • wagesj45@kbin.social
                  1·
                  10 months ago

                  I’m saying that if you rely on having F-16 fighter jets and drones dropping bombs, you’re arguing for wholesale destruction. If you don’t rely on fighter jets and bombing raids, that means you’re fighting a ground war against insurgents that are more or less equally armed, assuming they have weapons like AR-15s.

                  My point is that cruise missiles don’t solve every problem; namely armed local insurgencies. What kind of third use-of-force scenario are you imagining?

      • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
        6·
        10 months ago

        The Taliban had the advantage of logistics. Which we all know is important in war according to Sun Tzu.

        It will be a whole lot different when they can fight on their own home turf, which they have been fortifying since whenever they arrived.

      • Empricorn@feddit.nlEnglish
        46·
        10 months ago

        Jan 6 insurgents got pretty close to overthrowing the government. Imagine if they were armed.

        Lol. I understand its symbolism, but let’s be real: they overwhelmed a building and barely clashed with poorly-staffed local police. In no reality were they in any way “close to overthrowing the government”.

        Taliban tied up the US for 20 years in Afghanistan, look who is in charge now.

        There’s a pretty big difference between wanting to conquer/occupy a region and helping a local population police it. Plus, once government and social support for US presence in Afghanistan dropped, someone was going to control it.

        Your Federal Army isn’t going to do as well as you think it is.

        It’s not “my” federal military, and I’m not supporting them. But anyone who thinks they can win a war against the US military on US soil is out of their mind.

          • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
            2·
            10 months ago

            I highly doubt much of the US military would defect, they generally love the country more than any particular political ideology. So you’d have a likely highly motivated military with more than half of the public on their side.

            Then again, if this was a coup situation, I’m guessing it would be a bit more difficult, since some of the military would be on the side of the challenger. But that wasn’t what happened on Jan 6, Trump wasn’t calling on the military to keep him in office, he merely refused to call in reinforcements to deal with the insurrectionists.

            I’m not saying it couldn’t happen here, I just think it would be incredibly difficult barring some kind of popular movement. And secession/insurrection isn’t popular.

      • Scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.techEnglish
        4·
        10 months ago

        Same argument was made about Jan 6, but when they called in the national guard they showed right the fuck up. Military aren’t to be fucked with, they know the chain of command. They know if they step out of line in that way their entire military career (and most likely civilian career and livelihood) is over. It would take several people high up disobeying commands, knowing they’ll probably get court martialed, and everyone underneath them for that to happen.

        Stop fear mongering. Military knows who is in charge and where their paychecks come from. I’m more worried about who controls the military because that super loyal knife cuts both ways.

  • Blackmist@feddit.ukEnglish
    34·
    10 months ago

    Love how they get a random black guy/gal involved, like they wouldn’t be decorating the nearest tree if these fuckers got their way.

  • eek2121@lemmy.world
    27·
    10 months ago

    It is funny to see the calls like this and also the calls for civil war. The number of texans capable of shooting down an F35 with the puny small arms they bought is zero. Shoot, replace F35 with any plane built in the past 50 years.

    That is why there will never be a civil war.

    Before you start mumbling something about republicans flying F35s, keep in mind you actually have to have an ounce of intelligence to fly one. If they had any intelligence they would not be republican.

    • JPAKx4@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      12·
      10 months ago

      Texan here. We don’t want a civil war, it’s just far right nutjobs. We would do fine as our own country, but things would be worse quality of life wise.

    • wildn0x@lemmy.worldEnglish
      5·
      10 months ago

      Does Texas become open season or would war have to be declared? Mainly I don’t want to join/get drafted but I’m down to fuck around.

      • Liz@midwest.socialEnglish
        10·
        10 months ago

        You need a fuck-ton of infrastructure to keep fighter jets flying. The service time to fight time ratio is ~18:1. Nothing but an established state has the organization and the logistics supply to keep one in the air.

          • CurlyMoustache@lemmy.worldEnglish
            2·
            10 months ago

            You still would need the help of the entire government to keep the jets flying and armed. No fuel delivery? Cut out of satelite usage? No GPS? You’re fucked and then put in jail and/or to death, because the US have death penalty

    • Heikki@lemm.ee
      4·
      10 months ago

      Ive been to the state fair. TX with never rise again with that amount of deep fried butter

  • niktemadur@lemmy.world
    17·
    10 months ago

    “We’ll make mariguana even more illegal! With harsher punishment! And we’ll make legal guns even BIGGER ‘n’ faster! Don’t tread on me YEEHAW!”