Do Mexicans have a right to declare independence in the Southwest?

[poiuytrewq0987]

I think they do since America's official stance on an issue like this one was confirmed with their support of Kosova.

http://www.aztlandestroyer.com/site/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/map-conquest-of-aztlan.jpg

<table id="ncode_imageresizer_warning_2" class="ncode_imageresizer_warning" width="450"><tbody><tr><td class="td1" width="20">http://www.theapricity.com/forum/images/statusicon/wol_error.gif</td><td class="td2">This image has been resized. Click this bar to view the full image. The original image is sized 485x388.</td></tr></tbody></table>http://www.earthwidemoth.com/mt/img/aztlan.jpg

[Joe McCarthy]

The US has never supported an unlimited right of secession or national self-determination - even in Wilson's time, so citing Kosovo as precedent is flawed and incomplete.

[poiuytrewq0987]

The US has never supported an unlimited right of secession or national self-determination - even in Wilson's time, so citing Kosovo as precedent is flawed and incomplete.

Regardless, the actions of America during the Kosovo crisis set a precedent, one that could be used by Mexicans.

[Joe McCarthy]

Regardless, the actions of America during the Kosovo crisis set a precedent, one that could be used by Mexicans.

That's true, and in that sense it is dangerous. It is similar to war crimes trials which set precedents for China or others to try us later if and when they're strong enough.

[Grumpy Cat]

http://gripewhine.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/can-of-worms.jpg

[Joe McCarthy]

The real precedent setter and can of worms would have been Quebec successfully seceding. Mexicans have been called our Quebec in this context.

[Grumpy Cat]

Mexicans have been called our Quebec in this context.

Speaks volumes about what Anglos think of us. :rolleyes:

[Black Sun Dimension]

They got their ass kicked, so no. But they already have a strong presence in the south-west; plus that region is better off under U.S management than in mexican hands.

[Joe McCarthy]

Speaks volumes about what Anglos think of us. :rolleyes:

Not this Anglo, though I agree it's insulting, even if not deliberately so.

[Grumpy Cat]

Not this Anglo, though I agree it's insulting, even if not deliberately so.

Well I was talking about the idiots who go "Mexican hunting". I know they don't like my kind that much, I have gotten foul treatment from one of them myself.

Sorry, I'm on the Mexicans' side on this issue.

[R4ge]

Of course they have the "right" to, but if they did then they would all be killed. Any group of people around the world who are at least close to being a majority in the place they are living has the "right" to try to take over, the real question is whether or not they can, and the Mexicans can't take over in the Southwest by force, nor would they want to. Just ask any Mexican whether they would rather be a citizen of the United States or Mexico.

And why question America's support or motives? America only does what pleases it's own interests. They supported Kosovo's independence to look good and build a better relationship with Muslims and at the same time expose Russia+undermine their credibility for being unable to support Serbia.

[Joe McCarthy]

They got their ass kicked, so no. But they already have a strong presence in the south-west; plus that region is better off under U.S management than in mexican hands.

They're not going to secede. We might get some ETA-style terrorism, but any serious attempt to secede would give us an excuse to destroy them, and they know this. What is likelier is that Mexico will become more affluent and the US and Mexico will become part of a sort of bloc.

[Stars Down To Earth]

The thing is, Kosovo seceded from Serbia. Not only was it an international pariah, after the Balkan Wars and the Bosnia massacres, but also a small country who stood no chance against a NATO attack. It wasn't hard for the Albanians to get the support of America, the World Police.

If the Mexicans tried to same thing, they would have the support of...who?

[Joe McCarthy]

If the Mexicans tried to same thing, they would have the support of...who? Direct intervention is a non-starter. Russia or China arming and supporting a rebellion is possible.

[Stars Down To Earth]

Direct intervention is a non-starter. Russia or China arming and sopporting a rebellion is possible.
Maybe, but highly doubtful. China is a major trading partner of the US and holds much of their debt - they're comfortable with the status quo. Russia under an anti-western government might secretly support a rebellion, but they'd need to be incredibly sneaky about it.

[R4ge]

Direct intervention is a non-starter. Russia or China arming and sopporting a rebellion is possible.

China wouldn't dare. Without America as a trade partner, the game would be quickly over for them. Russia is a different story as they wouldn't have much to lose but their military is in shambles currently and they don't really have any motive to support them. America, Russia and China need each other.

[Raikaswinþs]

Well, they can claim it if they have the balls to fight for it. The US claimed the land once, and conquered it. If mexis can conquer it back they will sincerely win my admiration, but I highly doubt so.

I however think that in the next 100 years there will be more than 3 nations in North America. And more than 4

[Joe McCarthy]

Sorry, I'm on the Mexicans' side on this issue.

I don't suppose the fact that Mexico's most noted holiday celebrates a victory over France would change your mind? Any Anglo-French ethnic rivalry in the New World is relegated to Canada. Anglo-Americans are indifferent to French-Canadians, just as they're indifferent to most foreigners.

[Grumpy Cat]

I don't suppose the fact that Mexico's most noted holiday celebrates a victory over France would change your mind?

No, not really. I don't identify with France, I am Acadian.


Any Anglo-French ethnic rivalry in the New World is relegated to Canada. Anglo-Americans are indifferent to French-Canadians, just as they're indifferent to most foreigners.

This has not been my experience. Yes, many Americans are nice, or indifferent, but I have been greeted with hostility too. Ironically, usually people from "blue states" like New York and California, but usually the right-wing minority in said states.

[Smaland]

The Texians were Anglo settlers who came to Texas when it was still a part of Mexico, at the invitation of the Mexican government. They were invited because Texas was thinly populated with non-Indians at the time, and Mexico wanted to strengthen its hold on the area.

At one time, they even supported Santa Ana in the 1832 Mexican presidential election.

But Santa Ana turned out to be an oppressor, instead of the person the Texians thought him to be. The situation came to a head in the Texas Revolution, which Mexico lost. Afterward, Texas became an independent country in 1836, and later it was legally annexed by the United States in 1845.

In response, Mexico started and lost the war of 1846-48. In the resulting Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, Mexico formally gave up all claims to what is now the American Southwest, except for the land sold to the U.S. in the Gadsden Purchase of 1853; the U.S. Southwest was completed with that transaction.

Not only this, but the United States even paid $20M for the land ceded in the 1848 treaty. $20M in 1848 dollars might be quite a large amount of money today.

In summary, the U.S. Southwest belongs to America by right. If Mexico finally does complete its "Reconquista", it will have done nothing more than steal our land.

[poiuytrewq0987]

They're not going to secede. We might get some ETA-style terrorism, but any serious attempt to secede would give us an excuse to destroy them, and they know this. What is likelier is that Mexico will become more affluent and the US and Mexico will become part of a sort of bloc.

Well, in that case if the Americans are going to trample on the Mexicans then the NATO should bomb America.

[BeerBaron]

Well, in that case if the Americans are going to trample on the Mexicans then the NATO should bomb America.

Well for all practical purposes the US in itself is NATO. NATO is almost totally dependent on American weapons/ships/ and airpower, they can't even mount a respectable bombing campaign in Libya without the US. NATO is totally dependent on the US military and I don't think they are gonna bomb themselves.

[Great Dane]

No. Besides if they did secede who would pay for all of their welfare benefits?

[poiuytrewq0987]

No. Besides if they did secede who would pay for all of their welfare benefits?

Via indemnities.

[Raskolnikov]

To add Mexican-Americans back to Mexico would defeat the whole point of their emigration, both from their perspective, and the perspective of Mexicans wanting to get rid of their lowest class.


I don't suppose the fact that Mexico's most noted holiday celebrates a victory over France would change your mind?
Most noted by Budweiser, and not for the historical event.

[Great Dane]

Well, in that case if the Americans are going to trample on the Mexicans then the NATO should bomb America.

We are NATO. The French and British can barely conduct operations against Libya, do you think they would really bomb the United States on behave of Mexicans?

[Dario Argento]

It's like everything. The right of force. If they can defeat the USA forces and stablish and independent state that land would be theirs by right of force. I don't think this would happen soon, but sometimes history takes weird turns.

[Debaser11]

Considering you really don't understand where "rights" come from, I'd say the answer is "no."

[Duke Nukem]

If anything, the USA should take about 20 miles inland from the border, along the entire length of it as a sort of 'no man zone' much like the de-militarized zone between North and South Vietnam during the war.

[Turkophagos]

Yankees will have to fight again to keep these lands. Mexican-Americans are content with their usa passports today, but as the history of all former empires have proven, wealth and power don't last forever. When America stops being a superpower and/or Mexico stops being a third world country, it's not difficult to assume who's side the Latinos will choose...

[Poop]

It should be a semi autonomous latino zone.

[Austin]

People who think Mexicans are ever going to take anything or ever were should really go to any south-side of any major U.S. city sometime. That will be the last time you think such.

The people are barely five feet tall for gods sake and cannot even grasp the concept of right-of-way in traffic. They spend more on their cheap cars tires and hubcaps than they do their children.

[Dario Argento]

People who think Mexicans are ever going to take anything or ever were should really go to any south-side of any major U.S. city sometime. That will be the last time you think such.

The people are barely five feet tall for gods sake and cannot even grasp the concept of right-of-way in traffic. They spend more on their cheap cars tires and hubcaps than they do their children.

I don't believe you. Not even Bolivians are that short. Not even Cambodians for that matter.

[Debaser11]

Mexicans are short. But they can take over too because whites have grown into pathetic people.

[Joe McCarthy]

Mexicans in the US assimilate enough yet immerse themselves enough in a domestic Mexican population that secession would be unlikely and unnecessary. It would also be to their detriment financially. The richer, whiter cash cow states can be drained with union. They can't with secession. What is likelier is we secede from them.

[Debaser11]

Well, if whites had common sense. But they don't these days.