[prof.h.mandingo]

You misunderstood. I have no problem with another fight. I simply alluded to the fact that according to Texas v. White (1869). Texas cannot legally leave the Union. That's what I meant by war having consequences. I think you are trying to be funny with the diplomacy idea. You can't argue with a liberal. They are not equipped for logical expression. In fact a real liberal is mentally ill.

[JRandomFreeper]

I wasn't trying to be funny. Most of my historical reading comes from that era, and tempers got very hot at the slightest perceived insult, in 1860.

Not so much, today. CW1 was as much about honor(face) and money as it was about anything else.

Preserve face and honor and money and warfare can be avoided.

Warfare is, after all, just a form of diplomacy.

Diplomacy is agreement. They agree to let us go. They get certain things. They don't get hundreds of thousands dead (like last time).

Carrot and stick. Arguing is for fools.

/johnny

[JRandomFreeper]

Texas cannot legally leave the Union.

I don't know where you have been hiding, but lots of what has happened here in Texas (and other places) tonight hasn't been legal, and it's been going on for years, and will.

Some folks aren't going to give a rat's pointy little tail about legal. The rule of law loses it's teeth when the lawgiver breaks the law.

/johnny