Well don't mind me about the history of this country. I know alot more then I claim to here on this thread.

It is actually sad part of history and I just hope in the end regardless if a state wants to become independent or not that we as a people regardless if we have different opinions on certain issues can still coexist in peace.

In the meantime I will visit a native reservation to listen to more stories of the people that once lived here in peace and enjoyed the very nature of what this land offered to everyone.

Good luck with Texas and if you know more about the Wild West then don't hesitate to email me on it.

if i find more sites...i'll let you know

but think about it....i think every country has things in their past they aren't proud of.

Right! That's not what I asked though.
Texas was divided after annexation into the Union.
The citizens asked to be annexed several times. They were refused admittance once by a vote in the Senate 35-16.
When annexation was approved in 1845, it was barely approved, 27 to 25!
What area did it encompass?

fanta...i graduated 20 yrs ago....

Here, you can have both.

you are a brave man willing

brb fanta

this doesn't make it right. We should learn from the mistakes history has done. It is too bad that we just repeat them instead.

If you look into the history of how natives where treated when the Europeans came over after they had helped them survive the winter seasons, I can only shake my head at the greed of power, religious intolerance, and stupidity that was done to establish a country.

The smallpox, being forced to become christians, and to be subjected as second class citizens in a country they lived on first is nothing to be proud of.

The natives in North America had very little dispute amongst their tribes until the European came. Their spiritual practice and peaceful coexistence with nature is a symbol and idealogy we should study and follow. I say this with a sincere heart for it is in the end a much more peaceful way to cherish and appreciate our planet, our neighbors, and our lifestyles.

Yet only few, and I say very few Americans, will agree with this, and continue to do what they always do. Criticize, speculate, and judge each others opinions leading to uneccessary confrontations.

So yes in the end if there is only one wish I could grant if such an act would happen concerning independence as a individual state (rather it happens or not) that it is done peacefully without the loss of lives.

Good luck on your debates

smiles...you are 100% correct

Texas was divided!

Major parts of N Mexico and Colorado. Smaller parts of Oklahoma, Kansas and Wyoming were The Republic of Texas when annexed.

The Native Indians of N America never lived in Peace.
The largest united group was The Cherokee Nation and they maintained their Nation through violent war!
That, and their general complacency is why the Europeans were so easily able to conquer their land!

psst fanta...i'm not arguing with you dork lol. i CAN see your points

No!!! Tell me it aint soooo! We were part of Texas!??

Well, I guess if we were to go to secession...I would have to buy me a gun or two or three. Cuz..I aint goin without a fight. That is why there was a civil war folks. Dividing and conquering. Bloodshed bloodshed all around. You think Repubs and Demos are bad...just you wait til states divide and come to blows.

Kat
ps, would there be a wall to keep new citizens out?

i got my nerf gun (that drivin gave me) let's lock and load

I can handle a gun quite well. Was very good til I got my felony...no more...unless I go to one of those gun shows. Then I can buy one just like all those crimmies do.lol No wait time...nothing but a drivers license.

Kat

Did you know that my family helped settle the 3rd oldest town in Texas?
Or,
that we have a whole county named after us?

brb!

YOU HAVE TOLD ME BEFORE lol. yes i knew that....which is why ya love texas lol

Kat...i have many friends and family that own guns...but for some reason....they are always busy when it comes to teaching me lol

yes some tribes were more war like then others, but there were many tribes who did live in peace and didn't go to divide and conquer.

The lived in peace with other tribes. They may have had small confrontations, but nothing compared to the Apache, Cherokee, or even the Sioux.

In the end you can defend the right of how America was established, but my view on it, is that the natives where here first and they helped the pilgrims survive the winters by teaching them how to harvest crop successfully, as of other things to live.

What did they get in return?

What makes it sad is they didn't have to do this. They could have been violent and just fought the Europeans off. Afterall, at the time they were much more then the few European settlements.

but what did they actually do?

Their spiritual practices where peaceful. It was in their nature to coexist and respect their environment taking only what is needed. They wanted to show this to the Europeans who eventually in time became less dependent on the natives and eventually eradicated their existence.

So yes there were some tribes that were more warlike, but many that weren't.

Yep!
You and Dragoness would have a say,
if Texas could legally secede.
Which they cant!

It presents to the whole family of man the question whether a constitutional republic or democracy -- a Government of the people, by the same people -- can or cannot maintain its territorial integrity against its own domestic foes. It presents the question whether discontented individuals, too few in numbers to control administration, according to organic law, in any case, can always, upon the pretenses made in this case, or on any other pretenses, or arbitrarily without any pretense, break up their Government and thus practically put an end to free government upon the earth. It forces us to ask: "Is there, in all republics, this inherent and fatal weakness?" "Must a government, of necessity, be too strong for the liberties of its own people, or too weak to maintain its own existence?
Abraham Lincoln, Special Session Message, 1861.

When a group seeks to secede, it is claiming a right to a particular piece of land, and one must necessarily inquire into why it is entitled to that particular piece of land, as opposed to some other piece of land - or no land at all.
Lea Brilmayer (1991) Secession and self-determination: a territorial interpretation. Yale Journal of International Law 16, 177-202, p.201.

A state who secedes is liable to form and expel or transfer a population not wanted. Cleansing if you will. Could happen. They would be under their own law..rules....

Kat