So, when do we secede?

[leVieux]

>

It is because the enemies of our Constitutional freedoms are adamant, aggressive, and arrogant. They will not change and we will not be subjugated !

Would you rather we just kill them all ?

Please tell us what a viable other option would be.

leVieux
.

 

[Armybrat]

Most people who favor secession today believe that it could be accomplished peacefully. Texas Nationalist Movement being the major proponent of secession, you could educate yourself on reasons and means, if you desired. tnm.me


I just wondered if that might be an influence on your negative views of secession, in addition to your military service/heritage...

You were born in Georgia, did your forebears serve the Confederacy or the Union?

I was born at Fort Benning during the War. My branch of the family is from Missouri - ancestors fought for the Union.
The other family branch was from South Carolina & Georgia. I assume they fought for the Confederacy since they ran a small plantation with slaves.
They also fought in the American Revolution (one was at Kings Mountain).

My Dad was Regular Army (Lt. Col.). He fought the Japanese and Germans in WWII.
I did not have the privilege of serving in the military.

I have lived in Texas since 1959, before that in Louisiana, California, Missouri, Kansas, Taiwan, Puerto Rico, Mexico (and at Fort Sam & Fort Hood in the 1940s).
Texas is my home and I wouldn’t even consider living anywhere else even if they paid me.
My wife’s family came over from Germany in the 1870s to settle in Texas.

 

[cycleguy2300]

So y’all are willing to fire on the American flag and shoot US military personnel to secede.
Got it.

If a foreign power attempted to interfere with the Republic of Texas I would be an honor to bear arms against them in defense of my home.

Надіслано з дому вашої мами за допомогою Tapatalk

 

[Armybrat]

Mexico isn’t going to declare war & invade with it’s pitiful army.

 

[Tnhawk]

Mexico isn’t going to declare war & invade with it’s pitiful army.

We presently have an invasion without the army

 

[Armybrat]

We presently have an invasion without the army

Yes I know.
Cycleguy apparently was talking about a ”foreign power”, not a mob of illegals.

 

[cycleguy2300]

Yes I know.
Cycleguy apparently was talking about a ”foreign power”, not a mob of illegals.

I have no problems with a border jumper being met with deadly force. Just make sure they know the rules of the game are being changed then make them stop.

Надіслано з дому вашої мами за допомогою Tapatalk

 

[Armybrat]

Shoot someone who is not a threat to you?
Turn them back yeah, but kill some guy who wants to get paid for roofing your house in August?

If you want to shoot someone, aim for the coyote who is the cartel trafficker.

 

[cycleguy2300]

Shoot someone who is not a threat to you?
Turn them back yeah, but kill some guy who wants to get paid for roofing your house in August?

If you want to shoot someone, aim for the coyote who is the cartel trafficker.

Anyone who enters my country illegally is a threat to my security and peace.

It is attitudes which fail to recognize the extent of the threat that make me wish Texas would leave the Union and be allowed to protect our border as we see fit.

Надіслано з дому вашої мами за допомогою Tapatalk

 

[V-Tach]

Cross illegally into Mexico as an American gringo.............

Let us know how that works out............

 

[gll]

Shoot someone who is not a threat to you?
Turn them back yeah, but kill some guy who wants to get paid for roofing your house in August?

If you want to shoot someone, aim for the coyote who is the cartel trafficker.

Crossing the border unarmed is a tactic that allows the invasion to continue, because we are expected to be too moral to oppose it with the force required to stop it.

Similar to looting...

Shoot to kill is really the only way to stop it!

The only real alternative is open borders and free shopping...

As I've said before, most any crime is worthy of the death penalty during it's commission...

Further, once the expectation is established, violations will decrease.

 

[gll]

Nationalism: The Hill I Will Die On -Daniel Miller

Nationalism: The Hill I Will Die On | Texian Partisan

At a recent speaking engagement, I stood in the hotel lobby before I spoke and was advised that “some people in the room don’t like the word nationalist, so

texianpartisan.com

 

[leVieux]

>’
It WAS achieved “peacefully” until Lincoln INVADED South Carolina !

>

I had opportunity to fly my own plane ofer Charleston Harbor a couple times in recent years.

Seeing how deep inside our CSA Fort Sumter is really impressed me as to how out-of-line Lincoln’s INVASION really was.

leVieux
.

 

[ronbwolf]

Today sounds good!

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

 

[gll]

Today sounds good!

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

Couldn't be too soon for me...

 

[WT_Foxtrot]

Posted the below a while back in another thread, so a bit dated. Had to look back at it, but still stand by it.
*************************************************************************************************************************

Been watching and reading about the secession movement for over a decade, not necessarily supporting it and wishing it to be true, but just keeping up with it, reading about it, and knowing that it's there. In my mind, it is a last resort.

Saying that, I never understand when arguments are made that there's no way it could happen or how bad it would turn out for Texas. Without going into deep specifics, nations with far fewer resources and innovation than Texas do just fine. Our economy now would be among the top ten on the planet and potentially greater without the encumbrances of Washington as it relates to energy, taxes, regulations, etc. Then there's the legitimate assumption that we wouldn't be the Lone Ranger (to incorporate two Texas'isms) in such a move either.

Who knows what it would look like? Would it be easy? No. Are there legitimate concerns and issues that would result and need to be addressed? Absolutely.

During the Trump years, this was more of an afterthought for me and went to the back burner. But now there's a senile puppet in place being directed by a gaggle of Marxists, leftist control of both houses of congress, never seen before assault on free speech and free thought including proposed criminalization of such that doesn't fit the narrative of those in power, talk of deprogramming and reeducation camps not just from left-wing Hollywood nutjobs, but from elected officials and members of major media outlets, massive election fraud that was never investigated, packing the SC, not to mention the coming assault on the 2nd Amendment which is just now getting started. I could go on and on because shit is seriously going off the rails and the threats are real for free people. As bad as Obama was, that wasn't shit compared to what's happening now.

When does enough become enough? Would those who wave it away as some looney pipedream continue to do so as things get worse and worse and therefore end up in line to pledge their allegiance to an ideology and denounce everything they love and stand for while turning in their "weapons of war" for pennies on the dollar.......OR would they finally decide they'd had enough and elect to go down a path that, while uncomfortable, would restore their freedoms and way of life that they were promised by the very government taking it away?

I know where I stand. And I think that day is coming where that decision will have to be made.

 

[popsgarland]

I Googled "can Texas secede from the union" and about 1,000,000,000,000 websites came up. Since I value my time, I only checked out a few of them. The main consensus is that for any State to secede from the union, it has to go before the Supreme Court and they have to approve it before any state can secede from the union.

 

[leVieux]

I Googled "can Texas secede from the union" and about 1,000,000,000,000 websites came up. Since I value my time, I only checked out a few of them. The main consensus is that for any State to secede from the union, it has to go before the Supreme Court and they have to approve it before any state can secede from the union.

> Is that in our Constitution? Sounds to me like someone’s “opinion”.

The fact that Lincoln got away with what he did does not make it either constitutional or “LEGAL” !

leVieux
.

 

[cycleguy2300]

> Is that in our Constitution? Sounds to me like someone’s “opinion”.

The fact that Lincoln got away with what he did does not make it either constitutional or “LEGAL” !

leVieux
.

Booth didn't cry Sic Semper Tyrannis for nothing...

If it wasn't for freeing SOME* of the slaves and the propaganda around that and "saving the Union" Lincoln would be viewed in a very bad light by most if they knew some of the rights and freedoms he violated because the ends justified the means to him and his type.

*slavery was legal in some northern states (Delaware? Rhode Island?) until well after the American Civil War was over (Dec 1865 iirc)

Надіслано з дому вашої мами за допомогою Tapatalk

 

[jrbfishn]

This is true. There were quite a few times, and not just against the Southern States but Northern citizens as well, that Lincoln violated and/or just blatanly ignored the Constitution. The fact that Congress was doing so with the blessings of the Courts is one of the biggest reasonsons the South seceded in the first place.

Booth didn't cry Sic Semper Tyrannis for nothing...

If it wasn't for freeing SOME* of the slaves and the propaganda around that and "saving the Union" Lincoln would be viewed in a very bad light by most if they knew some of the rights and freedoms he violated because the ends justified the means to him and his type.

*slavery was legal in some northern states (Delaware? Rhode Island?) until well after the American Civil War was over (Dec 1865 iirc)

Надіслано з дому вашої мами за допомогою Tapatalk

Up until the War of Northern Agression, the allegiance of most citizens was first to their State. Then the United States. Most Armies were designated by a number and the State from which the originated during the Civil War and before. Gen. Lee was Commander in Chief of the Southern Armies, but actually only led the Army of Virginia IIRC.

History and Government question; can anyone here point out the Constituional Clause that says States may not leave the Union once they have joined?
The Constitution is a contract between the Federal Union and the people( the States). If the Federal Union does not abide by that contract, why would the States NOT have the right to desolve it's contractual obligation and secede from the Union?
What other recourse does it have? After all, if the State,the people, don't abide by wht the Federal Union says is the Law of the Land, they have shown several times in our history that they are more than willing to use force to get their way.


Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk