|
| 23 Dec 2011 02:51 PM |
(IN MY PERSONAL OPINION):
Mexico should get Texas, the Indian Territory of western-Oklahoma, NewMexico, Arizona, California & Nevada.
Canada should get Alaska, the Dakota Territory & the Oregon Country.
(Yes, there would be a big culture shock & protests, but the natives got used to the Europeans, so the Americans can get used to the Mexicans)
what would you think of this, if it was put in place? |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 23 Dec 2011 02:53 PM |
That would be cool.
Mexico FTW!
But instead Mexico should get also Louisana, Missisipi, Alabama, Georgia and Florida and Canada should get the rest of the US.
Sounds like a plan. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Avogadro
|
  |
| Joined: 14 Nov 2010 |
| Total Posts: 4011 |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
| 23 Dec 2011 03:28 PM |
| why would I want to be part of canada and also why do u want the usa gone? |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Person299
|
  |
| Joined: 28 Feb 2008 |
| Total Posts: 7952 |
|
|
| 23 Dec 2011 03:30 PM |
| And what, in your personal opinion, gives Mexico and Canada any right to those territories...? |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 23 Dec 2011 03:35 PM |
@classy.
I don't want the US gone. I just want Canada & Mexico bigger & better at the expensive of one nation.
that nation by default must be the US.
@person.
mainly so Canada an be greater, Mexico can be once again whole, and so Latin Americans can go up through the Atlantic & Gulf of Mex to take the rest of the Eastern US land & become the new natives.
Really it's because of my love.. well, obsession with the geography, culture & politics of the Old West & the New World. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
logmanjr
|
  |
| Joined: 13 May 2008 |
| Total Posts: 10075 |
|
|
| 23 Dec 2011 03:43 PM |
Mexico has no ability to govern itself let only new territories with successionist groups.
Canada's welfare state would have trouble when it doubles its population. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
TheAztec
|
  |
| Joined: 12 Jul 2010 |
| Total Posts: 2011 |
|
|
| 23 Dec 2011 03:51 PM |
@logmanjr
Despite the rampant corruption going on, Mexico DOES have the ability to govern itself. The government is not efficient, this "democratic" system does not work as it should (but hey, don't the Americans complain about that in their own country too?) but Mexico is still far from being in a state of complete and absolute anarchy. In fact, it still is considered as a venue for international events (recently it hosted the Pan American Games, and last year the city of Chihuahua hosted the IAAF's World Race Walking Cup)
The violence mainly occurs in the northern border states, as two major cartels operate there and most of the illegal dr*g trafficking to the United States has to pass through those states.
Other parts of the interior of the country suffer from violence as well but other than that there's states like Yucatan (where Canadian and American tourists love to spend their vacations) that are relatively peaceful. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Iqualit
|
  |
| Joined: 07 Jul 2010 |
| Total Posts: 756 |
|
|
| 23 Dec 2011 03:55 PM |
As my dad says stay near the tourist areas.
Thread gets a 4/10 |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
logmanjr
|
  |
| Joined: 13 May 2008 |
| Total Posts: 10075 |
|
|
| 23 Dec 2011 04:08 PM |
| Govern was the wrong word but keep peace would be apprioate. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
TheAztec
|
  |
| Joined: 12 Jul 2010 |
| Total Posts: 2011 |
|
|
| 23 Dec 2011 04:54 PM |
By that logic, currently the following countries can't "keep peace":
Greece (riots) England (riots during summer 2011) United States (police forces evicting occupy protesters) Russia (major protesting suppressed by police officers) Syria (near civil war and oppressive authorities) Egypt (major oppression and police/military brutality)
|
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Iqualit
|
  |
| Joined: 07 Jul 2010 |
| Total Posts: 756 |
|
|
| 23 Dec 2011 04:57 PM |
| >Implying the Occupy Movement is still a legitimate movement. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Boeing717
|
  |
 |
| Joined: 08 Jun 2008 |
| Total Posts: 70007 |
|
|
| 23 Dec 2011 05:22 PM |
| I don't believe Canada has had historic control of current us states, and Mexico might have, but they got beaten in war for us to get them. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 23 Dec 2011 05:39 PM |
But why does Mexico and Canada deserve land that the US won?
That is plain retarded.
Its ironic, you are the type that wouldn't say anything about the UK, who should give North Ireland back to the Irish, or Taiwan back to Chinese, the people who own Taiwan.
You are just saying the US should give up the land it won in fair war, the land that young men died for, just because you don't like the US. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
TheAztec
|
  |
| Joined: 12 Jul 2010 |
| Total Posts: 2011 |
|
|
| 23 Dec 2011 06:07 PM |
>Implying the Occupy Movement is still a legitimate movement.
Iqualit...
> Implying I said anything about OWS being legitimate or not > Completely missing the point > lrn2use the "implying" argument
@EWM
Land is not "deserved". It's simply owned by a State. It's an entirely political term particularly if you use it today.
"Taiwan back to Chinese, the people who own Taiwan." Texas was an independent republic for 9 years, and the Texans fought battles against Mexicans, entirely on their own. So, why not let Texas be independent? If you are wondering, yes, there's people who want Texas to be independent. But should you just give it to them because they want to?
"You are just saying the US should give up the land it won in fair war, the land that young men died for, just because you don't like the US. " Didn't many young Mexicans die in the Mexican-American war? It wasn't a "fair war" strictly speaking. At the time, Mexico was going through a civil war, and the generals leading the Mexican Army were incompetent and made the wrong decisions, costing them humiliating defeats.
|
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 23 Dec 2011 07:24 PM |
| no i think it should stay how it is |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 23 Dec 2011 09:46 PM |
@log Canada will do fine with a greater area. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
logmanjr
|
  |
| Joined: 13 May 2008 |
| Total Posts: 10075 |
|
|
| 23 Dec 2011 09:50 PM |
| Americans are instilled with patriotism so successionist movements would cause other rebellions such as Quebec and the Inuit. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
BRC98
|
  |
| Joined: 06 Oct 2010 |
| Total Posts: 590 |
|
|
| 23 Dec 2011 09:53 PM |
| Mexico already historically owned most of the Western USA, which the US took via imperalism..but yes! |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
isherloxi
|
  |
| Joined: 12 Sep 2010 |
| Total Posts: 2284 |
|
|
| 23 Dec 2011 10:15 PM |
Mexico lost it's state to bad for them.
canada doesn't deserve any states unless it can fight for it.
And besides what would that help those 2 nations anyway?
what next give cuba florida
Japan hawaii?
Russia back the land we bought alaska?
And it isn't as easy to adapt
Mexicans won't be treated so kindly
canadaians wouldn't either
Mexico narco situation would become worse.access to more weapons,etc.and land was won fairly from mexico theres no fairness in war |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Iqualit
|
  |
| Joined: 07 Jul 2010 |
| Total Posts: 756 |
|
|
| 24 Dec 2011 03:32 PM |
>Implying the Occupy Movement is still a legitimate movement.
Iqualit...
> Implying I said anything about OWS being legitimate or not > Completely missing the point > lrn2use the "implying" argument
_________
Missed obvious troll and it is me Jericho15
@EWM
Land is not "deserved". It's simply owned by a State. It's an entirely political term particularly if you use it today.
"Taiwan back to Chinese, the people who own Taiwan." Texas was an independent republic for 9 years, and the Texans fought battles against Mexicans, entirely on their own. So, why not let Texas be independent? If you are wondering, yes, there's people who want Texas to be independent. But should you just give it to them because they want to?
_______
Texas actually wanted to be a state. We didn't make them.
"You are just saying the US should give up the land it won in fair war, the land that young men died for, just because you don't like the US. " Didn't many young Mexicans die in the Mexican-American war? It wasn't a "fair war" strictly speaking. At the time, Mexico was going through a civil war, and the generals leading the Mexican Army were incompetent and made the wrong decisions, costing them humiliating defeats.
_______________ >Implying war is fair in general
Also desptie whatever civil war, Mexico had the sympathies of Europe and was considered the regional power in the area not the US at the time. Had immense more wealth and a larger standing military than the US to.
|
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Boeing717
|
  |
 |
| Joined: 08 Jun 2008 |
| Total Posts: 70007 |
|
|
| 24 Dec 2011 07:51 PM |
technically we bought the west from mexico
if they didnt want to give it to us they shouldnt have sold it |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
pepper0
|
  |
| Joined: 01 Sep 2007 |
| Total Posts: 12032 |
|
|
| 24 Dec 2011 07:58 PM |
| Texas would NEVER want to be back with Mexico. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 25 Dec 2011 04:43 AM |
And what, in your personal opinion, gives Mexico and Canada any right to those territories...?
---
Because Canada has free heathcare and Mexico is going to be the superpower of the 22nd century. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|