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.
More realistically, after devolution gets underway (which, again, is perfectly legal now) Pacifica could petition for observer status in the UN. China and Russia would no doubt applaud such a move.
If Cali ever decided to go it alone they would surely be delighted to link up with WA and OR, and guess what we have more water than we need or could use.
We would be happy to share some with them, so nope CA would be absolutely fine.
Or they could simply switch up farms to less water intensive crops and send water to the cities instead.
sorry to rain on your idea...
I'm sure that the farmers in Oregon's Willamette Valley will willingly give up their water rights for California. NOT!
Before anyone pushes for secession, because they don't like what the country is doing to their little corner of it, maybe they should look for another country that would suit their needs better. Then get back to us about their luck in finding a better place to live. We might want to join them.
Actually if Colorado is actually a sovereign state and chose to exercise that status they could of course cut off the water.
Let's say they tried. The dams are not Colorado property in the first place -- they are federal property. Would the governor of CO attempt to seize federal property? A federal court would then intervene, and US marshals would keep it open. Then Colorado might attempt to send in their state troopers or the governor might attempt to mobilize the national guard, which might agree or might mutiny. Let's say the agree. Then the federal government would send in the US Army. Or perhaps the Federal Government might just let Mexico invade Colorado to open the spigots. Colorado would have no chance against the Mexican Army.
All of the above, including Colorado cutting off the water in the first place, is a hypothetical so remote as to be silly.
Let's say they tried. The dams are not Colorado property in the first place -- they are federal property. Would the governor of CO attempt to seize federal property? A federal court would then intervene, and US marshals would keep it open. Then Colorado might attempt to send in their state troopers or the governor might attempt to mobilize the national guard, which might agree or might mutiny. Let's say the agree. Then the federal government would send in the US Army. Or perhaps the Federal Government might just let Mexico invade Colorado to open the spigots. Colorado would have no chance against the Mexican Army.
All of the above, including Colorado cutting off the water in the first place, is a hypothetical so remote as to be silly.
You quoted that text out of context. And your assertion is actually that Colorado would not be sovereign in any practical sense. Which was implied in the context of the original post. And as well the practical. What would CO do with all that water? Lake Powell for a couple of years and then they have to let it go.
A state is only sovereign to the degree it can defend itself. See Crimea.
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.
