SR2020 STORYLINE CORRECT SO FAR?!?

[SoB]

The UN will send you a strongly worded letter

[Ruges]

@ Light,

You would not think so. However if the democratic government failed to act on the situation. Would the republican side take such actions as to split to go do it themselfs. IE Iran gets its nukes says its going in to solve Iraqs issues and will use nukes against anyone wishing to stop it. So to prevent nuclear war the UN prohibits the US from getting involved. Of which the democrates agree war is not in the US's best interest. Of which the Republicans are screaming they cannot let Iran get away with this.

Although I dont see every state sudenly becoming there own nation. well maybe. But it would start out with say Texas droping off to persue its military ambitions. bringing several states with it. Then california droping off for economic reasons, And then from there the rest of the nations just fracture apart.

Oh sure its pretty far fetched, and all thats really going to happen is the status quo.

[Col_Travis]

Light&Ruges, what in the heII are you talking about? Sunnis, Shia's Chritians and Jews surrendering to an Islamic Theocracracy?

[Lightbringer]

Light&Ruges, what in the heII are you talking about? Sunnis, Shia's Chritians and Jews surrendering to an Islamic Theocracracy?

Ummm No. He's talking about cowardly Dems and conservatives breaking the Union because of it.

@Ruges. If you think that Republicans/Conservatives are willing to destroy the United States because the Democrats are spineless cowards, you are mistaken. Sure we would raise holy hell, but Iraq is a foreign country, and the "establishment" types would be drooling at using chaos and bloodshed in Iraq to electorally "hang" the Dems. Why destroy the country to stop the Dems from committing election suicide? There is only one excuse for breaking the Union. The Abrogation of the Constitution by the Federal government. There is no Iraqi Amendment in the United States Constitution.

-Light

[Col_Travis]

Light&Ruges, what in the heII are you talking about? Sunnis, Shia's Chritians and Jews surrendering to an Islamic Theocracracy?

Ummm No. He's talking about cowardly Dems and conservatives breaking the Union because of it.

@Ruges. If you think that Republicans/Conservatives are willing to destroy the United States because the Democrats are spineless cowards, you are mistaken. Sure we would raise holy hell, but Iraq is a foreign country, and the "establishment" types would be drooling at using chaos and bloodshed in Iraq to electorally "hang" the Dems. Why destroy the country to stop the Dems from committing election suicide? There is only one excuse for breaking the Union. The Abrogation of the Constitution by the Federal government. There is no Iraqi Amendment in the United States Constitution.

-Light

So Ruges, no more SSBN Obamin? The US Consitution has already been abrogated! Check your history Light, the one and all intrusive Incumbent Party! Thers only One Party in the US, and if both of you would take the time to check, you'll see that there both at the bottom of the of the Wheel In the Sky (Facism & Communism have both come full circle!!!)

[Lightbringer]

So Ruges, no more SSBN Obamin? The US Consitution has already been abrogated! Check your history Light, the one and all intrusive Incumbent Party! Thers only One Party in the US, and if both of you would take the time to check, you'll see that there both at the bottom of the of the Wheel In the Sky (Facism & Communism have both come full circle!!!)

...and your point is? Should we welcome blatant tyranny because we have already let some sneaky tyranny into the system? Should we simply shrug and then smash the system instead of working to fix it? What is your point?

-Light

[Col_Travis]

In the movie "Brewsers Million's" he advocated voting None of the Above, I advocating voting the all all and put non-partisans in office.

[Lightbringer]

In the movie "Brewsers Million's" he advocated voting None of the Above, I advocating voting the all all and put non-partisans in office.

It's a nice sentiment, but not a very functional one.

1. Even during a "Wave" year like this one, even if every single Tea Party person voted for some mythical "Tea Party" candidates, you aren't going to elect very many of them. In fact, third party candidates usually manage to ensure the election of the candidate with the ideas furthest from those they espouse. Example: The Tea Party would be splitting votes with the Republicans (a vast majority anyway) and huge numbers of Democrats would be elected, even in conservative districts. (40%-30%-30% type of result)

2. Primaries: Since the institution of Primary elections, it has been much easier to "Hi-Jack" a party than to create a new one. In fact, that is what is going on this year with the tea Party/Republicans. The key ingredient is public awareness and involvement. If you have enough voter enthusiasm to create a 20% "third party", you have the voting strength to just about 100% steer one of the existing parties. You just can't take your hands off the wheel. That is really what you are upset about, the American people, because of apathy and greed, allowing their political parties to run rampant and without direction.

We already have a car in the race. We can either spend a pit stop to fix our existing car to run the way we want, or we can try to build a brand new car 1/2 with parts taken from our old car, while our opponent goes back on the track and starts lapping us.

-Light

[Kreiger815]

The US breaking into 50 separate countries will never happen in the remotely foreseeable future...Texas wouldn't even do it. We kinda had this document that governed us called the Articles of Confederation that failed miserably by making the states basically individual countries...and then in the 1860's we had this tiny conflict that kinda made us realize that the whole "Secession" thing is a bad idea.....

[Col_Travis]

The US breaking into 50 separate countries will never happen in the remotely foreseeable future...Texas wouldn't even do it. We kinda had this document that governed us called the Articles of Confederation that failed miserably by making the states basically individual countries...and then in the 1860's we had this tiny conflict that kinda made us realize that the whole "Secession" thing is a bad idea.....

The Articles of Confederation were in effect from 1781 to 1790, I don't see how the could have had any bearing on the causes of the US Civil War? It was the issue of States Rights in the X Amendment to the US Constitution that was the basis for the start of the US Civil War!

[SoB]

In any case in to day's amrica the south would win in any civle war. I all so don't see all 50 stats breaking away but you only need 10 key states to break free to ruin the USA.