David, I find your writing style to be bothersome to trudge thru.
I see. (I gratefully APPROVE
of your writing "trudge thru
it makes my humble efforts feel worthwhile.)
Your annoying fluctuation between accurate spelling and that God-awful quasi faux phonetic crap
you INSIST on using makes trying to determine your meaning more trouble than it's worth.
I 've taken a liberal
vu of when to apply it; don t wanna over-do it.
I've read your stuff from time to time when I have the stomach to switch from enjoyment to cryptography.
These views you have expressed regarding the Civil War have annoyed me beyond annoyed.
First of all the Federal Government is not a club.
Do u have any historical information showing that the States were warned
that thay 'd be trapped FOREVER
, if thay joined up?? Does it say that in the text?
Did the Federalists make a public announcement to that effect??
I have repeatedly pointed out that New York, (1 of the 2 most important States)
explicitly reserved the right to secede to effect its "HAPPINESS"
in its Instrument of Ratification,
and this ratification, bearing that reservation of rights, was accepted
and without rejection
by the Federalists.
That contemporary fact of 1788 shows that it was then deemed
appropriate and reasonable for a State to withdraw from the Union,
hopefully more PEACEFULLY
than it had just seceded from the English Empire.
Using that rationale, why couldn't Cities or Counties secede.
I don t know of a reason against it.
What will they use for currency,
or silver coin, per the Constitution.
will they need passports to travel from West Virginia to Ohio.
No. That has not proven to be necessary
with joint sovereignty.
Will these new entities establish their own Military?
Thay already did.
That 's a joke, right??
What country will they be? They would have to denounce their American citizenship
to become citizens of Tennessee.
No; experience has disproven that.
The bottom line regarding the Civil War was the South claimed
The United States of America was interfering in States Rights.
Thay felt abused in Congress; outvoted by Northern interests.
The South did not believe that continued participation
was ideally in keeping with its best interests.
They didn't want to be told they didn't have the right to own human beings.
Do u believe that the Southerners
considered Africans to be fully human
Do u think that, in the Southern vu of the 18OO
s, owning an African
was the same as owning a Frenchman or a Bulgarian?? (or the Northern
vu, for that matter)
U think thay saw no
significant racial difference ?
Even in New York, slavery for blacks
legally continued until 1827.
That 's only some 34 years before the South seceded.
This is probably the weakest argument you ever attempted to make.
Well, I guess SOME argument must be the weakest,
unless thay r all of equal strength.
The territories who sought Statehood, joined the Union after the 13 original Colonies fought
for our nations independence. the sought Statehood to strengthen their own independence.
Were thay more
thay joined up ?
How many Texans, Floridians, or Californians signed the Declaration of Independence?
Once the British were defeated, they must have decided they would rather be US citizens instead of Spanish/Mexican subjects.
Bottom line, do you really think a fractured map of the US could possibly have been successful during WWI or WWII.
I really think that it coud possibly
have succeeded in both wars; yes.
In the First
World War, we only tipped
American forces were only in combat for a few months b4 the Armistice.
If I remember accurately, it was about 5 months.
The English and German armies were badly exhausted
those are just two examples of why the union should never be divided.
It's not a club or fraternity, or even a corporation designed to make a profit.
I believe that a fair minded, impartial judge woud hold that the States
retained the right and the power to secede; see 1Oth Amendment.
Nowhere in the Constitution of 1787 is the federal government
granted authority to hold in any State against its will.
the Constitution HAD declared
that, then the NY Instrument
of Ratification woud not have declared the right of the State to secede
Perhaps, it woud simply not have joined up. (It was a close vote.)
U have alleged, without proving, that the joining up of the States
was distinct in principle from joining a club. Please offer evidence
that thay had chosen to do something DISTINCT in principle
from joining a club.
was it said that it was a permanent trap.
I agree that in the future, splitting up woud be a bad thing.