tnmarktx
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2010
- Messages
- 6,107
- Likes
- 4,722
I didn’t state my point well. I’m saying that the fact that these countries are on the map (and btw many have a higher standard of living than the USA) proves that existence is possible. Virtually every nation in Europe during WW2 was bombed and/or invaded including the USA, China, Japan, Germany, France, Britain, the USSR…..Luxembourg didnt fair any better against the germans than anyone else at that time. They were actually annexed into germany for a bit.
Monaco was actually invaded by the Italians and forced out by the germans. They were a banking center for the germans.
Malta was a british naval base constantly attacked.
Cyprus was bombed.
Finland fought the winter war against the russians in like 37 or 38. Whooped ol Stalins bois. Russians found out who general Winter really worked for.
Why not mention Belgium, Netherlands, norway, Greece, Yugoslavia or any of its subsidiaries. Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia, the divisions of Romania, Czechsolvakia, or Austria.
Ww2 is only a tale of the large nations fighting because the small ones had already been swept aside.
All democracies fail at some point, we are in the downward spiral now and only have 75-100 years left. We will either Balkanize (not likely) or end up under 1 party authoritarian rule. Either way we are done as a unified nation, accept it and prepare your grandchildren.
And the small states had to pick a side quickly or else. Switzerland survived neutrality because of its terrain . Sweden survived neutrality because it was of limited strategic importance except for its iron ore which all went to Germany anyway once Narvik Norway was occupied and shipments to other states stopped.Luxembourg didnt fair any better against the germans than anyone else at that time. They were actually annexed into germany for a bit.
Monaco was actually invaded by the Italians and forced out by the germans. They were a banking center for the germans.
Malta was a british naval base constantly attacked.
Cyprus was bombed.
Finland fought the winter war against the russians in like 37 or 38. Whooped ol Stalins bois. Russians found out who general Winter really worked for.
Why not mention Belgium, Netherlands, norway, Greece, Yugoslavia or any of its subsidiaries. Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia, the divisions of Romania, Czechsolvakia, or Austria.
Ww2 is only a tale of the large nations fighting because the small ones had already been swept aside.
I don't agree with you on much, but you are spot on with this. This notion of states splitting up in a North v. South v. West dynamic is outdated and would not be sustainable. You'd have active revolts in urban areas across the South, as well as the vast majority of counties in California, both for different reasons. If the US ever falls apart, it will make Balkanization look like a Sunday school trip to the zoo.If America ever fractures, it will be along urban/rural lines, not along state boundaries. Even in large „blue“ states like California, the vast majority of the land area outside on the major urban centers is inhabitanted by normal sane people. If those states ever seceded, most of their counties would in turn try to secede from the new blue overlords. What you would eventually end up with is basically independent city states on the coasts with the core of America remaining intact. But it would be a disaster for us all. The city states would sit on our major harbors and ports and have the ability to control commerce. The red lands would control food production and energy supply. The resulting economic „cold war“ would be terrible beyond imagination. The only winners would be the Chi-coms and the Russians because we would be finished as a power. So we have to learn to work together as a country. There is no viable plan B IMO
If asked nicely, I would consider being a sovereign overlord.All democracies fail at some point, we are in the downward spiral now and only have 75-100 years left. We will either Balkanize (not likely) or end up under 1 party authoritarian rule. Either way we are done as a unified nation, accept it and prepare your grandchildren.
Political parties are not interested in "efficiency". They're interested in maintaining control. As long as people focus on voting Democrat or Republican, we're screwed. Both sides maintain their status through division. If the citizenry united, those ass clowns would be out of business.I'm not. I agree our government is inefficient. But the solution is to vote for more efficient government, not dump the model.
That would be TERRIBLE from a recruiting standpointIn the June 8, 1861 referendum, East Tennessee held firm against separation, while West Tennessee returned an equally heavy majority in favor. The deciding vote came in Middle Tennessee, which went from 51 percent against secession in February to 88 percent in favor in June.
Can it happen again, with East Tennessee isolated from the rest of the state?
Until there is some actual risk for those in power it wont get better. And it probably needs to be more than getting voted out.I dont disagree. I'd say term limits would help, but I think term limits defeat the will of the people and legislators with experience can get more accomplished just because they learn and develop a base of knowledge about the things (specifically their committee assignments) while they are there. On the other hand, I'm tired of people like McConnell and Pelosi, who only aspire to maintain themselves and their party,
They exist only by the acceptance of the big guys. Typically once a big guy pays attention it's over. They have higher standards because they get to focus on the issues that matter (to them).I didn’t state my point well. I’m saying that the fact that these countries are on the map (and btw many have a higher standard of living than the USA) proves that existence is possible. Virtually every nation in Europe during WW2 was bombed and/or invaded including the USA, China, Japan, Germany, France, Britain, the USSR…..
They exist because of ….reasons. They have higher standards because of …..reasons. I just point out that they exist and seem to be living well.They exist only by the acceptance of the big guys. Typically once a big guy pays attention it's over. They have higher standards because they get to focus on the issues that matter (to them).
We have control over ourselves but the issue isn't government pushing us to the fringes. It's government playing to and coddling the fringes.I think we'd all be happier if we focused less on politics and more on ourselves and our families. Allowing politicians to push us to the fringe is the issue, not your neighbor down the street who is in favor of legalized weed.
At what point is government to large to ever be "efficient" and one needs to start over?
The right has been every bit as responsible for government expansion and overreach, especially in the past two decades.Wasn't Trump trying to do audits of the needs for certain departments and reduce government?
Didn't Obama expand government? We have ling heard it was a philosophy of progressism - big government. It also assures government power is extended and makes it easier to flood agencies with deep state operatives that are all over the place. I think it's why the Trump administration had so many leaks.
It's like when UT was trying to reduce the womens AD department and people within were trying to sabotage the effort. I guess no one wants to lose their job after something has been expanded.