Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

ExpensiveSwordfish65 t1_j9s9yvv wrote

Reply to comment by RagingHeretic in [OC] National Divorce by the Numbers (Politics, Demographics, GDP) by tabthough

My concern here is Russia and China manipulating those smaller states/unions and slowly taking over the former states of America one by one. But you're dam right about finding them. I'm also in a liberal net positive state and not interested in funding them.

2

DeepJob3439 t1_j9seckw wrote

I personally think each state should go it’s own way, but hold a defensive aid pact. Should any one of them get attacked, the other states must come to their aid. After that’s, states can form their own unions at their leisure. This will deter states trying to forcefully gobble other states or China and Russia interfering.

0

ExpensiveSwordfish65 t1_j9skzxn wrote

I think this would work until a state started to get gobbled up and enough states don't want to render aid :/

3

RagingHeretic t1_j9sadab wrote

Russia and China can't even negotiate their own wars of expansion against neighbors. There's no chance they will manage to do it here. "New America" will become a Russian ally on the North American continent...but they have no industry, no education, no public services...just guns. Pacifica, New Canada, and New England all either join Canada proper or join NATO.

−7

ExpensiveSwordfish65 t1_j9scj5w wrote

I hadn't considered them joining NATO. Seems unlikely to me though :/

4

RagingHeretic t1_j9scv9f wrote

Joining Canada would instantly give us NATO membership. No approval Turkey and Hungary necessary.

4

ExpensiveSwordfish65 t1_j9sdq8h wrote

I'm sorry I thought you meant the seditious states joining NATO. I would have thought america would retain membership since were the bulk of its resources to begin with, no?

But we keep the name America, not new america, or anything else. The seditionists can find a new name.

4