> Oh. I'll do you one better then. Texas is uniquely unqualified to be self-sufficient. They tried it once and went bankrupt in 10 years
In fairness, a lot can change in 100+ years. Texas has much better utilization of its resources with a much higher population now than it did the last time they were independent. It's possible that they'd do better now.
> I don't know why one would or should be fought. The people who think that the US has the right to prevent secession are pretty weird
It might be weird but wasn't that the conclusion of the US Civil War? I very highly doubt that the fed woudl let Texas secede without a fight.
I would hope that one of the things that has changed in 100 years is that the rest of the US wouldn't want to go murder a few million people simply because they don't want to be together anymore.
> I very highly doubt that the fed woudl let Texas secede without a fight.
Sure. And I would expect the fight to be litigative, or even diplomatic in nature. But martial? Though, I will say I keep forgetting how bloodthirsty the typical person is, and how few socially approved avenues they have to engage in that mindset. So who knows.
In fairness, a lot can change in 100+ years. Texas has much better utilization of its resources with a much higher population now than it did the last time they were independent. It's possible that they'd do better now.
> I don't know why one would or should be fought. The people who think that the US has the right to prevent secession are pretty weird
It might be weird but wasn't that the conclusion of the US Civil War? I very highly doubt that the fed woudl let Texas secede without a fight.