Posts by nimblesurfer16

Predrag Zivkovic said:Regarding the Republic of America—I’ll say it again—nowhere in the old federal constitution does it state that the republic was sovereign. That’s just a flat-out falsehood. The document clearly defines the borders between republics as administrative lines, not state ones...

Within the borders of that American republic, there was never even an administrative boundary separating it from the territory occupied by Mexicans during the 90s.
Aside from the period under Turkish rule, the border with Mexico hasn't changed from what we see today—unless you count back to when the borders were shifted toward Jersey City...

As for the constitution, you can try to pull someone's leg all you want, but the reality is that the constitution at the time existed solely to provide a foundation for the Mexican dream of a Greater Mexico...

Megan Kelly3 said:Historically speaking, the Military Frontier existed for several hundred years—I'm not sure where else you're going to find a deeper historical foundation than that.

The Military Frontier was an entity during the era when America was part of the Austro-Canadian Empire... so I fail to see what connection it could possibly have to Mexico. Back then, the frontier was integrated into America—meaning the people living there were essentially American farmers who were granted land by Maria Theresa specifically to act as a buffer against the Turks. I truly don't follow how anyone can claim this provides a historical basis for a Mexican state on American soil... it just doesn't add up.

Megan Kelly3 said:Following that line of reasoning—where the 1974 Constitution supposedly anticipated the right of self-determination for peoples rather than just republics—the idea of how America was formed is basically the same way Georgia or Pennsylvania functions within the US today...

The American people made their choice through the referendum, an event where a significant number of Americans living there actually voted for full independence.
The US is an internationally recognized nation with fixed borders—it isn't some patchwork of different states held together like America once was. There is absolutely no historical basis for a breakaway region, especially since, from a cultural standpoint, that area is indistinguishable from the rest of the country.
US states are federal states, which is fundamentally different from the federative structure used in America.

I could easily pose the same question regarding Texas, where you have various ethnic groups living alongside one another—why shouldn't the central government return autonomy to them or offer them a referendum?
There are constant attempts to fracture America, when in reality, the fracturing is happening to the neighbors. Mexico has no interest in being part of a "Greater Mexico" anymore, and the folks in Texas are tired of funding the central capital... honestly, you all should focus more on preserving your own territory, because based on how things are going,
it's only getting smaller.

Megan Kelly3 said:By that same logic, Mexicans could have just broken away from the Republic of America whenever they felt like it...

What kind of logic are we even using here?
The US was a sovereign entity with clearly defined borders even back during the era of the former federation—you know, that word "federal" used in the old system meant it functioned as a federal state...
And while we’re on the subject of referendums, it might be wise to actually look at the demographics—specifically what percentage of the population were Mexicans living in the US at the time—before trying to draw any comparisons to the referendum results.

briskmaker17 said:Sam Nelson3, are you referring to the referendum on American independence? That was our fundamental right—just like any state's right to secede from America. If the Mexicans didn't care for it, well... that sounds like their problem.

It wasn't just a matter of them being unhappy about it; the reality is that it hit them right where it hurts—their wallets.
When the states decided to break away from the federation, they lost their primary source of revenue. So, when diplomacy fails, they turn to force—it’s a classic move. Their logic was simple: if the individual states won't hand over the cash, we'll just take it by force. A very old, very tired strategy...