Posted on 04/08/2006 10:23:27 AM PDT by Travis McGee
Our Southwest is going to resemble the Balkans on steroids.
exactly. we better wake up. I pray to God Bush doesn't listen to the wishy washy wimps on this issue. mass deportations are in order around May. I pray our laws are enforced for once
Amen sister! I wanted to encapsulate the history, and it would have been too long if I had included Texas' unique origin.
That's right. It's a Trojan Horse immivasion.
A lot of bloodshed. The American future in the SW is surrender, or civil war.
But that is in the cities. Most of the counties of the Southwest outside of the big cities have a very deep "cowboy culture." These Americans are not sissies, and will not go quietly.
We will be in for a Bosnia type civil war, with the invaders controlling the cities, and the Americans controlling the land in between. It might become problematic in the cities, if, for example, their pipelines and powerlines are continually cut off.
I love that Hawaiian factoid!
They are entitled. Possession by right of conquest is recognized by the Law of Nations.
Spain abandoned the territories at issue, in some cases under the application of force by Mexico. Mexico, therefore, occupied some of the territory abandoned by Spain but claimed it all. However, Mexico was unable to maintain control over all it had claimed. Hence, some of the territory at issue was seized and held by Mexico by right of conquest, and some remained beyond Mexico's effective control. This latter, then, became unclaimed territory despite Mexico's assertion otherwise (a claim that connot be enforced has no standing).
When we (the US) won the war with Mexico, we settled the boundry dispute Texas had with Mexico, we claimed the territory abandonded by Spain, and took the balance of the disputed territories from Mexico by right of conquest (Texas, an independent nation for ten years, applied for admittance into the US and was accepted).
We hold these territories by right of conquest. Aztlan can claim these territories by right of conquest. At some point, one of three things will happen.
So not only did we beat them in a war, we paid them for the land in cash.
Case closed.
L
bttt
And part of the "deal" concluded with the treaty was that the victorious American forces would leave Mexico City and the rest of the territory we had taken during the war. That's a pretty good deal for them, we could have just kept it as a subjugated colony.
(Hisotrical fact: Mexico in 1846 had a much larger professional military than the USA. We whipped their a$$es back to their capital with hastily formed and trained volunteers and amateurs. Something they may wish to think about, should push come to shove again.)
The federal govt is at present on the path to surrender in the SW, but it may not happen very smoothly. There are millions of hardcore gringo cowboys in the SW who will not meekly pack up and leave. It will be a bloodbath, it will be Bosnia X 100.
Bookmarked
"You should write a book about this. :-p "
LOL! Yeah, I second the motion!
It's only about about 9 years for California and that's being charitable with regard to all but three, principal settlements.
1821 - Mexico declares independence from Spain. Spanish garrisons in California decommissioned (no money for troops in the boondocks) and rule relegated to Catholic Church through a string of missions.
1836 - Mexico City begins to secularize missions and begins to establish rule of civil law through the presence of Mexican troops and on-site governors. Secularization completed by 1839.
1842- Last Mexican governor dispatched to California. Home rule revolt, not involving non-Hispanic, white Europeans, or illegal, US immigrants, starts upon arrival and governor forced to flee in 1845. At that time California had about 100K natives, 9K Mexicans and 2K illegal immigrants from the US.
1845 - US begins to explore Alta California with both troops and warships.
1846 - Bear Flag revolt and war between Mexico and US.
1847 - Cahuenga Capitulation in January 1847
The Estados Unidos Mexicanos essentially had little or no control over California. the Catholic Church yes. The United Mexican States, no.
After some reasearch, my surmise is that Arizona and New Mexico were no different. There are simply fewer, independent, historical accounts to burst the Mexican myth of benign, close stewardship in those two states. Texas, of course, is another matter.
They are organizing on a massive scale. If they don't get what they want, it will probably turn violent, especially given the intentions of the leadership of this movement.
Here's what they are up to in my neck of the woods.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1611553/posts
Not good my friends. Not good at all.
Thank you!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.