U.S. TerritoriesPuerto Rico, Guam, U.S. Virgin Islands, etc.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The article states that the Chamarro people are only 40% of Guam's population...the article implied that it was this group that was having thoughts on independence. What about the rest of the population?
Anyway, I do not think that it would be wise for Guam to be granted independence; for both of us. The US needs Guam now that the Philippines closed our bases and the ones in Okinawa are being threatened for closure too. We need Guam to help secure our geo-political strength in the western Pacific. It would also be unwise for Guam to be granted independence because tourism has been down ever since the Japanese economy went into recession. Hence, the economic benefits of the US military presence is even more important to Guam.
As if. Guam survives off the military and other federal government investment. They would be up a creek without a paddle otherwise, worse than anywhere else under the US flag.
As if. Guam survives off the military and other federal government investment. They would be up a creek without a paddle otherwise, worse than anywhere else under the US flag.
Every couple of years the "independence" factions in US commonwealth and territorial holdings come up with the latest brilliant plans to release themselves from the restrictive colonial oppression which stifles them and prohibits them from being their own keepers. Flaming with rhetoric they inundate the local press with their hyperbole, hold rallies, rise placards, have a few speakers with resonant voices but not too many brain cells to stir the pot. And then they disappear again. It's one of those cyclical things.
None of them could possibly survive without the assistance of the US Federal government programs. The only reason these groups form in the first place is because they're headed by those who resent the oversight of the Feds and the Federal scrutiny which often uncovers basic graft and corruption in the dispensation of US funds.
They'd like all that scrutiny to just go away so they can continue to shove money into their back pockets. Not one of the territories or PR with its commonwealth status could be self-supporting and most rational residents of these places are fully aware of that which is why these movements pop up with much fanfare and fizzle out like a leaking party balloon.
Every so often the independence crowd rears their ugly heads in one of the world's remaining dependent territories. Here's the reality:
1) Most of the remaining dependent territories are not economically viable as independent nations and thus need to rely on the ruling nation for economic aid. This is especially true of US territories, and the smaller British overseas territories such as Montserrat and the Turks & Caicos.
2) If they become independent they would lose US, British, French, Dutch, or Danish citizenship - and acess to EU countries visa free (this is not applicable to US territories obviously).
3) If they become independent there is no obstacle to corrupt politicians abusing the treasury and committing other illegal acts. The ruling power has the ultimate responsibility to ensure good governance, law & order, defense, and to uphold human rights.
4) They are already self governing to a large degree. It's not like Obama wakes up every morning with a list of demands to be met by Guam. Yes, we (the US Congress) can overturn any legislation passed by Guam but when was the last time this happened? When was the last time the Governor of Bermuda overturned legislation passed by the Bermuda Parliament?
As we can see, there is very little to gain from independence other that the symbolic freedom from "colonialism" ... but that still dosent put money in wallets and keep crooked politicians in line. They would lose alot more than they would gain. Usually, most of these "independence movements" are started by politicians who are upset that the ruling power is investigating them for some sort of offense related to corruption, fraud, etc - see Michael Missick and the nonexistent Turks & Caicos independence movement.
Besides, nobody really wants indepdence ... it's more of an ego thing for the politicans to be able to say "I was the one who gained independence and liberated the people in ______ from the evil British/American/Dutch/French/Danish colonial occupiers". Take Bermuda for instance, poll after poll shows that 70-75% of the population is opposed to gaining independence from the UK but yet the ruling Progressive Labor Party is OBSESSED with gaining independence and is always pulling all sorts of tricks to try and force the public to favor independence. Their stunts usually involve things like race baiting, insulting people's intelligence, making absurd demands of the British governor (and then claiming he is arrogant, racist, etc), and the like.
I don't think Associated State status should be an option. I know the UN "mandates" it but eff them - it would just allow them to keep all the benefits while giving us nothing in return. A post colonial relationship should be based on equal standing and status between both partners (in this case the US and Guam).
Therefore I propose the referendum have the following 2 options:
1) Statehood.
2) Full independence (and loss of US citizenship, all economic aid, etc).
None of this silly halfway stuff like "Associated State", "Commonwealth", "Enhanced self rule while still remaining a territory" nonsense.
WINS2006 are you suggesting that we get nothing in return from Guam? Who else wants that many US military bases on their soil? I think Guam, because of that, is fine the way it is. Maybe we should allow Guam to become a commonwealth as long as we can keep our bases. However, independence in not in both of our best interests and statehood is not practical either.
WINS2006 are you suggesting that we get nothing in return from Guam? Who else wants that many US military bases on their soil? I think Guam, because of that, is fine the way it is. Maybe we should allow Guam to become a commonwealth as long as we can keep our bases. However, independence in not in both of our best interests and statehood is not practical either.
What I ment was that Associated State status was not benefical to the United States.
I would settle for giving them enhanced self rule under Commonwealth status like Puerto Rico and the Northern Mariana Islands. I also agree on statehood not being practical due to it's small size and population.
What I really want is to find a way to directly incorporate the 5 US territories into the United States proper complete with full, voting representation in the House and the Senate, the right to vote in presidential elections, etc while still allowing them to remain as territories.
Therefore I propose the referendum have the following 2 options:
1) Statehood.
2) Full independence (and loss of US citizenship, all economic aid, etc).
You did not mention commonwealth status in your proposed referendum. That's all I am saying.
Anyway, yes, I agree that commonwealth status that guarentees our military bases is the best. However, I do not know the constitutionality of voting representatives in Congress for the 5 territories. Even DC is unqualified for voting reps in Congress short of an admendement to the consitituion. Ditto for presidential elections. If they want their autonomy and do not to fully assimilate into the US, why should they get voting and elections rights like the states? You can't have it all, especially when so many people in the territories do not see themselves as "American."
Every so often the independence crowd rears their ugly heads in one of the world's remaining dependent territories. Here's the reality:
1) Most of the remaining dependent territories are not economically viable as independent nations and thus need to rely on the ruling nation for economic aid. This is especially true of US territories, and the smaller British overseas territories such as Montserrat and the Turks & Caicos.
2) If they become independent they would lose US, British, French, Dutch, or Danish citizenship - and acess to EU countries visa free (this is not applicable to US territories obviously).
3) If they become independent there is no obstacle to corrupt politicians abusing the treasury and committing other illegal acts. The ruling power has the ultimate responsibility to ensure good governance, law & order, defense, and to uphold human rights.
4) They are already self governing to a large degree. It's not like Obama wakes up every morning with a list of demands to be met by Guam. Yes, we (the US Congress) can overturn any legislation passed by Guam but when was the last time this happened? When was the last time the Governor of Bermuda overturned legislation passed by the Bermuda Parliament?
As we can see, there is very little to gain from independence other that the symbolic freedom from "colonialism" ... but that still dosent put money in wallets and keep crooked politicians in line. They would lose alot more than they would gain. Usually, most of these "independence movements" are started by politicians who are upset that the ruling power is investigating them for some sort of offense related to corruption, fraud, etc - see Michael Missick and the nonexistent Turks & Caicos independence movement.
Besides, nobody really wants indepdence ... it's more of an ego thing for the politicans to be able to say "I was the one who gained independence and liberated the people in ______ from the evil British/American/Dutch/French/Danish colonial occupiers". Take Bermuda for instance, poll after poll shows that 70-75% of the population is opposed to gaining independence from the UK but yet the ruling Progressive Labor Party is OBSESSED with gaining independence and is always pulling all sorts of tricks to try and force the public to favor independence. Their stunts usually involve things like race baiting, insulting people's intelligence, making absurd demands of the British governor (and then claiming he is arrogant, racist, etc), and the like.
Colonialism is a very serious issue and it sounds like you think it is some kind of joke.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
