Posted on 05/24/2025 4:44:06 AM PDT by MtnClimber
Not Canada, not Greenland, not Gaza. It’s one that almost no one has thought of.
If you believe President Trump, America is in an expansionist mood. Locations from Greenland to Gaza have been mentioned as potential new territories for American acquisition and stewardship. Is this merely talk, or can any of these areas be acquired or persuaded to change allegiance to become the 51st state?
The two most obvious candidates are the District of Columbia and the Territory of Puerto Rico. The problem with the District becoming the 51st state is that it was established by the U. S. Constitution. Thus, an amendment to the Constitution would be required to change its status.
SNIP
In the absence of a popular revolt, this would require military action. One obstacle is thought to be President Kennedy’s 1962 pledge not to invade Cuba in exchange for the removal of Soviet missiles from the island. However, he later recanted, using the Rio Pact as an excuse. So the agreement never became a signed treaty. The agreement was also made with the Soviet Union, a nation that no longer exists.
In response to Cuba’s economic plight, its president, Miguel Diaz-Canel, said, “We will make more Revolution and more Socialism.”
Perfect. Load up on that revolution, Miguel. I can see a flag with fifty-one stars waving on the horizon.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
As for DC, everything except the central district should just be returned to Maryland.
“”Maybe even downsize a little, say, throw out California.””
And don’t forget the New England states - that cuts it down even more...so many choices!
Agreed!
MY best friend is a Cuban, whose father got him out of Cuba when he was 2. His father was imprisoned & tortured for 15 years. He had quite the stories to tell about the Bay of Pigs fiasco, and the Castro regime.
We still need Greenland.
Greenland Signs Lucrative Minerals Deal with Europe in Blow to Trump
Onteresting timing, eh?
Very interesting...
One of the issues with the CIA/JFK situation on the Bay of Pigs that I have not seen discussed at all...
One of the CIA’s jobs is to assess the personalities of foreign leaders.
Presumably they should have the skills to assess the personalities of domestic leaders as well—including of course JFK.
If they were good at their jobs they should have been able to predict he would say “no” in the Bay of Pigs scenario.
Bottom line: The CIA made an incredible blunder in that assessment.
Remember—at this moment Greenland is owned by Denmark.
The status quo is the status quo—until it is not.
Canada was never really considered as the 51st state.
Albereta, now that’s different. But the count would not really change. Minnesota would be traded for Alberta
Their people must be tired of socialist policies, high taxes, and freedom robbing restrictions.
Oh, you underestimate their determination to remain deluded. They will never change.
It took decades for leftist Californians to get that way—so it probably would take decades for them to change.
Of course the “change” may be that the aging hippies die off and a new generation with totally new perspectives is born and become adults.
It is like the old joke about how science advances—when the old science professors die.
“Their people (California’s) must be tired of socialist policies, high taxes, and freedom robbing restrictions.”
Yes, you are so correct. That’s why they are fleeing to other states where they vote for socialist policies, high taxes and freedom robbing restrictions. No sarcasm intended, it’s the truth, that’s what red states turn blue. Texas is next.
We don’t need a 51st state. We have too many that are socialist/communist already. So no, Puerto Rico can keep it’s current status, DC was never intended to be a state, and Canada can keep Alberta.
What about the State of Jefferson; the secession of several northern California counties from the rest of the state?
It can’t. But the whole idea of a federal district is now obsolete. As strange as this might seem given the modern balance of power between the states and the federal government, one thing that the Founders feared was that if the federal government were located in a large, powerful state (which would have been likely since those states were the most influential), that state might have been able to intimidate and corrupt the new, weaker federal government. A state such as Virginia or New York would have had more of a financial base and a larger armed force than the federal government at the time, so this fear was not unreasonable. The Founders therefore gave the Feds a geographical territory over which it was sovereign and the ability to raise troops to defend it.
Obviously the power balance has now shifted, and the Founders never really envisioned that the capital would become a major city with more than a half million permanent residents. Those residents should be represented in Congress. The best solution IMO would be to retrocede DC back to Maryland. All the citizens of DC would then be represented. All government facilities could remain federal property within Maryland (much like some of the agencies that are already located in Maryland in the DC suburbs).
Cuba? HELL NO. They don’t speak English. They’re a backward 3rd world country at this point. That would be just adding 10 million more snouts to feed at the public trough and they’d likely be Democrat voters anyway. Forget it.
Better still trade the Acela Corridor/New England to Canada for everything west of Ontario. We’ll carve out Vancouver and let them keep that.
Add Eastern Oregon and Eastern Washington to California north of Oakland to form the state of Jefferson.
How about Haiti?, Yemen?, Ukraine? /s
Haiti has a big BBQ industry.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.