Secession wouldn't avoid a catastrophe, it would cause one. And in fact would be one.
-
-
Why do you think that? (honest q; history of broken up large countries is mixed rather than disastrous...).
3 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
The US did OK after seceding from the British Empire IIRC.
3 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Yeah because it was a big contiguous landmass seceding from an island that was an ocean away.
3 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Ukraine/Kazakhistan/Uzbekistan, etc... 1918: Austria, Hungary, Roumania, Yugo.. Czech, Slovakia
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
All irrelevant to the current situation!
4 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Noahpinion @PsychRabble and
...which of course you already know full well, having participated in this stupid discussion for many minutes on end now. You're too smart to do the "cycle back to old refuted arguments" thing for any purpose other than trolling. ;-)
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Noahpinion @PsychRabble and
They're not trolling. They just don't want to accept your points because it kills their fantasy of a secession in America.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @amatueradult @Noahpinion and
I don't necessarily _want_ a secession. I just don't think we need to catastrophize about it. Borders change. Countries redefine themselves. People and civilizations go on.
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @primalpoly @amatueradult and
Which do you think will happen first, the US changes its borders in a significant way, or the US ceases to exist? I'd say the first is much more likely, even though people focus on the second more. (and of course, both are very unlikely to happen in any specific time frame)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Both would happen right around the same time if either happened, I predict.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.