TexasCHLforum.com

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/laplaza ... onque.html
Ready for a cold Lone Star, anybody?

It shows when people drink too much they can't think right.

Nice.

Good thing I drink French Vodka.

I'd say they're welcome to have the territory back under exactly the same terms that we acquired it: First, they have to beat us in a war. Then, they have to pay us for it. Finally, they have to guarantee property rights of U.S. citizens in the acquired territory.

Oh, and of course the independent and sovereign Republic of Texas would be free to launch its own counterattack and seek its own terms of treaty. I'd say that by D+7, we'd own the entire Gulf coast and all of the Yucatán Peninsula. Oil rights would be exploited soon afterwards.

Should I point out that their claim of "centuries of rightful ownership" of the ceded territory, was actually less than 30 years? Until 1821, the land was part of the Spanish Empire.

KBCraig wrote:Oh, and of course the independent and sovereign Republic of Texas would be free to launch its own counterattack and seek its own terms of treaty. I'd say that by D+7, we'd own the entire Gulf coast and all of the Yucatán Peninsula. Oil rights would be exploited soon afterwards.

D+7? You can probably drive to the Yucatan in less than that. There would be an economic boom lasting generations that would lift millions out of poverty. Of course, it would be ruled the crime of the century by the UN, not unlike virtually everything done by the US and Israel today.

It would be interesting to see a comparison of each state in the U.S. versus other countries as it relates to size of their "armed forces" and number of weapons. I suspect that many states (especially Texas) would have more weapons (private and government) and people in "military" organizations (National Guard, Law Enforcement) than most other countries in the world. When you throw in the independent mindset and aversion to authority inherent in the majority of US citizens, it becomes very clear how we booted the Brits out and later bled so profusely in the War Between the States.

I'm not easily offended, but that really got me mad.

Lodge2004 wrote:When you throw in the independent mindset and aversion to authority inherent in the majority of US citizens, it becomes very clear how we booted the Brits out and later bled so profusely in the War Between the States.

Speaking broadly, 21st century Americans weaned on televison and public education are far different from the 18th century Americans who threw off the British yoke (with French assistance) and wrote the Declaration of Independence, Bill of Rights, Common Sense, Anti-Federalist papers, etc.

Also, by my reckoning it was the War of Northern Aggression---not the War Between the States or the "Civil War".

yerasimos wrote:

Lodge2004 wrote:When you throw in the independent mindset and aversion to authority inherent in the majority of US citizens, it becomes very clear how we booted the Brits out and later bled so profusely in the War Between the States.

Speaking broadly, 21st century Americans weaned on televison and public education are far different from the 18th century Americans who threw off the British yoke (with French assistance) and wrote the Declaration of Independence, Bill of Rights, Common Sense, Anti-Federalist papers, etc.

Some of us 21st century Americans are trying to raise a generation not weaned on TV & public ed., whose bookshelves are actually stocked with those four titles, among others. It wouldn't be completely out of place to think that Texas has a sizable contingent of those folks, perhaps even more than any other state (being The Former Republic).

JT,
been a Texan @ heart his whole life, but only by address for about 18 months
"I wasn't born in Texas but I got here as fast as I could."

lawrnk wrote:I'm not easily offended, but that really got me mad.

An "Absolut World" must be one that you are so numbed that you don't care about the sovereignty and borders of your nation. No Absolut for me!

Goodbye Diane Feinstein!

Goodbye Barbara Boxer!

I'll drink to that!

tarkus wrote:Goodbye Diane Feinstein!

Goodbye Barbara Boxer!

I'll drink to that!

The map showed that Texas would be going with Cali..... and you know Mexicos stance on firearms

Interesting thread, interesting responses. A little overblown though - it's just an advertisement. Since capitalism is responsible for the relative prosperity of our nation, I would think most here would see it as nothing more than that. It makes logical sense to appeal to the emotions of the masses when trying to convince them to do something(such as buy their product). Companies all around the world do it, and often use the US as the butt of their jokes - recently we're an easy target! In any event, it's not like anything different is done here. They didn't run it here anyhow, which is the main point. If they ran it here for the immigrants, I'd get very very upset.

It's a wash anyhow, Mexico wouldn't get past Austin before we pushed them back down to Guatemala, even if they committed their entire Military and we just committed Ft Hood and we, the citizens

Modern-day Mexico tends to forget that Texas was almost completely unsettled, until Americans settlers came in the 1820's and 1830's.

http://www.tshaonline.org/handbook/onli ... /npm1.html

I never understood why Mexico wants the land back, they can't manage the land and abundant resources they have now.

Well, I think the map was almost perfect. The only problem I saw with it was that the name of the country in green was wrong. Instead of Mexico, it should have been labeled "Republic of Texas". With the elections coming up, we might get upset and decide to do something positive. We could fix the problems in Mexico and California at the same time as protecting our fair state from more Northern aggression.

.....and that, folks, is why I drink whiskey!!