Support or oppose military response to American secession?

if the state legislature passes sececcion and there is a state referendum, they should be allowed to leave the union.

but they will owe the USA for their share of the national debt and all Federal property is to be returned.

 

I will admit its very complicated to negotiate. the practicalities are daunting.

 

As far as Kalifornia goes, I think the federal government should hold them at arms length. No more Federal money that pays for it's Marxist programs. I'm sure they get some for roads and schools but not welfare.

 

"We work together or hang separately".... I think on the world front we need to work out our differences so we don't turn into a third rate Europe. Most of us see nations that would love to impose their will on a divided U.S.

 

I would join a military intervention to prevent secession however I would not oppose redistricting state lines. I would say when counties don't want to experiment with nanny state socialist programs they should be permitted to join an adjacent state.

 

What if the state also votes to ignore this debt?

 

That would very likely prevent all current movements for secession.

 

The federal government which purposely invaded the Southern States hellbent on it's instruction to force them BACK INTO the Union. Why would you have opposed the invasion and war?

 

Because offensive violence is always wrong. Also because the conflict could have been resolved by peaceful means, both before and after it came to secession. The North spent $5B defeating the South, to free $3B worth of slaves. It would've been cheaper to just buy their freedom. But clearly it wasn't about that, it was about enforcing the authority of centralized federal government and killing or brutalizing those who would dare reject it.

 

Do you think the Feds could have purchased the slaves for 3 B dollars? I really doubt it. I think the Southern Aristocrats would have told them to go to hell and continued to hold others in slavery which was often brutal, though not always. It tore families part. There was never going to be an easy ending to the slavery issue.

 

There is no right of secession.

 

Most of the unskilled labor that slaves performed was already more efficiently performed by machines even in 1860. Slavery was already becoming inefficient and therefore unprosperous. I'm sure there would have been a few who refused to sell simply because they liked having slaves, but most people would have taken the money way out if the price was good enough. The few holdouts who liked having slaves more than they liked getting richer could have been dealt with later without a civil war.

 

There is credence to what you say. It is interesting. All I know we are interesting flawed creatures who can learn from our mistakes. Many of us are groomed to fight at the drop of the hat. Others are skilled in the art of deception. They play on eachother. Lord help us!
I don't know if money can ever buy us out of the flawed position we are in. Consider, we have to confiscate money from those who do what is upright to correct the flaws of others and they will not always consent!

 

He had a no nonsense approach to do what others knew needed to be done!