What if the US Army had successfully pulled off a coup?

bluerider63 said:Better to fight than to sign a pact. Better to die than to be a slave.😁

Maybe you missed what Paul Collins was getting at, because he was talking about what would happen if all those nationalists just backed off. He meant a unified country, sure, but one where nobody's trying to push their agenda on anyone else. At least, that's how I took it...

Gerald Ramos4 said:I find myself agreeing, provided we are discussing the expansionist ambitions of Greater Mexico. However, one must remember that within the USA, there were numerous forces opposed to both secession and Mexican dominance; even the US Army held such views. The Mexican nationalists would have remained isolated—as they initially were, wondering why they were being targeted—until Slobodan Maddox decided to side with them, essentially declaring that no one was permitted to strike back at them.

Had the USA managed this transition with minimal casualties—mostly consisting of fringe radicals and disgruntled criminals—it could have joined the European Union with ease, and our circumstances would be vastly superior today. We would have possessed three major automotive industries, alongside robust sectors for heavy machinery, metallurgy, electrical engineering, and textiles, all of which would have been forced to modernize under the guidance of the European Union.
Our formidable defense industry might even have integrated into the Boeing consortium, considering that, if memory serves, we produced those French Gazelle helicopters in Mostar, along with our own indigenous fighter jets like the Orao and Galeb.
We would likely be in a much stronger position than the Czech Republic or Poland, nations whose current progress we can observe from a distance with nothing more than a telescope.

bluerider63 said:Better to fight than to sign a pact. Better to die than to be a slave.😁

Maybe you missed what Paul Collins was getting at, because he was talking about what would happen if all those nationalists just backed off. He meant a unified country, sure, but one where nobody's trying to push their agenda on anyone else. At least, that's how I took it...

Jeffrey Wood said:I don't know what's wrong with you people. Seriously, you've all got collective amnesia.
Back when that presidency vote happened in the USA and Bogey screwed over the generals, a coup was already being cooked up. They were planning to arrest every single state and regional leader—except for Slobodan Maddox and his inner circle. That little clique was ready to seize total control.
Everyone knew it. Honestly, I’d take war over living under the kind of terror they
were running in Mexico, which would have just spread to the rest of the USA. Maddox and his crew spent years manufacturing organized chaos just so one day the US Army could step in, grab power, and cement their dominance.
That was the big plan.

Richard Wilson4 said:Exactly. You hit the nail on the head.

So let's cut the crap. Are you for an independent America or not?

And I don't mean "independent" just because we're scared of Mexican nationalism.

I'M IN. ANY VERSION OF AMERICA WORKS FOR ME.

mistyjackal14 said:Are you trying to revive some sort of Pan-American movement again?!

See, the USA is a lot like communism in that sense; it sounds (at least initially) quite wonderful, but when you look at how things actually play out in practice, it can be absolutely horrific. And what happens if those two evils ever decide to join forces?

The result is a war, and then the people who were advocating for one or the other end up standing there, looking all shocked, claiming that if the USA or communism hadn't existed, the war would never have happened in the first place.
It’s honestly pathetic.

Trying to talk about the USA—any version of it—without mentioning Mexican nationalism is like trying to discuss communism without acknowledging the crimes; it’s just a completely pointless debate.

SUCH A THING SIMPLY DOES NOT EXIST!

William Wright7 said:Was Mexican nationalism the only kind that existed back in the USA?

claims:
Was there really nothing in the USA besides Mexican nationalism?

Richard Wilson4 said:WHAT ARE YOU EVEN TALKING ABOUT?
I’m actually against the richest, most liberal, most modern version of the USA.

But I want to ask the average guy a question: Is breaking away from the US just because we're scared of American nationalism, or do we actually even want an independent country?
I DO, BUT I THINK I'M IN THE MINORITY.

Richard Wilson4 said:WHAT ARE YOU EVEN TALKING ABOUT?
I’m actually against the richest, most liberal, most modern version of the USA.

But I want to ask the average guy a question: Is breaking away from the US just because we're scared of American nationalism, or do we actually even want an independent country?
I DO, BUT I THINK I'M IN THE MINORITY.

nimblemarlin6 said:The truth is, the US is independent today not because there was some unstoppable, desperate drive for an independent American state, but mostly because of the sheer chaos that kicked off back in 1990.
If the Mexicans hadn't been so aggressive, we probably would have just stayed part of the American confederation.

mistyjackal14 said:Sure, but since you’re asking if people are actually ready for something like that, you might as well have asked if they were ready for Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs.

The way you framed that question is logically contradictory.
The exact same thing you’re bringing up here was pushed by the Illyrians and the Communists, and all those lofty, noble ideas ended up flowing through rivers of blood.

Now you are offering people that same choice again—a choice that has been empirically proven not to exist—yet most people still don't believe in evidence, preferring instead to cling to the fairy tales that started it all in the first place.

As for nationalism, I suppose I used the wrong term—can you blame me, I'm not immune to it either?—but what I really meant was the standard Mexican fascism, chauvinism, or Nazism that stirs up resentment against the other nations living alongside them.
They aren't some unique exception in this world, but they seem to love doing it in other countries too; essentially, they first label the country the USA, and then they behave internally as if it were just Mexico.

The issue isn't nationalism in general—any kind of it—the real problem is Mexican fascism.

Richard Wilson4;31923680 said:Look, I’m agreeing with you here.
It’s a disgrace, but that’s just how it is.[/QUOTE]

Is being rational some kind of disgrace now? Since when is actually living your life a crime instead of just staring at a map...

William Wright7 said:That timeframe is way too short to judge; there was plenty of America before this, too. American nationalism within America ended up costing hundreds of thousands of lives across every single group...

Why would Americans even bother complaining if they’re doing alright? What’s the point? Why would anyone go looking for trouble?

William Wright7 said:It’s honestly embarrassing that you guys call yourselves rationalists. What are you even doing? Living for real life or just living for some map in an atlas?

William Wright7 said:If I recall correctly, the only ones from the old America who actually had a fascist state were the Americans.

William Wright7 said:If I recall correctly, the only ones from the old America who actually had a fascist state were the Americans.