The USA promotes democracy for the world, for example if a state or the native american indian population requested independance by majority vote democratically what would Bush and Rumsfeld do. Thier predecessors commited genocide against the native indian people of america, should the past actions of presidents be tried in after their term of office, absentia or retrospectivly for crimes against humanity or does (as usual) the winner writes the history.
2006-10-06 03:59:41 · 8 answers · asked by ian d 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
Native Indians have quite a lot of independence.
Secession from the Union is against the constitution. i.e., against the law.
I'm sure your country's history is not perfect.
2006-10-06 04:05:23 · answer #1 · answered by Munster 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This did happen about 140 years ago didn't it? And then the remaining States in the Union fought a war against the seceding States until they agreed to rejoin the Union. I don't think it's possible to leave that club ionce you've joined.
You can't try dead people. I suppose you could (as with that Pope whose body they dug up) but there seems little point.
Bad things were done in the past and the important thing now is to learn the lessons of history and to try our best not to repeat them. There's no point criminalising individuals who only did what was accepted by their society hundreds of years ago.
2006-10-06 11:08:33 · answer #2 · answered by SteveT 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
American Civil War II
2006-10-08 21:02:21 · answer #3 · answered by Chariotmender 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This question has already been answered. They people who tried to leave, following a vote whose result they did not agree with, where called Confederates. The dispute was eventually settled during a vigorous debate called the civil war. This has sort of put a damper on futer attempts to leave the union.
Alex
2006-10-06 11:09:34 · answer #4 · answered by Alice S 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No one really has the answer for this question.
However, Texas is the only state where succession would be "legal". it is actually written into their constitution. Any other state would be an illegal secession, and the US would probably fight to get it back like in the Civil war. Except, I am sure", most of the fighting would be in courts.
Unless California succeeded. I think we can let them go.
2006-10-06 11:06:29 · answer #5 · answered by ihatehippies 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't think that anyone can answer that question. I do know though that California wanted to split into two states like South Ca and North Ca, similar to the Dakota's and that was squashed so I don;t think there would be much success in states or groups that wanted to split form the US.
2006-10-06 11:13:32 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
1 - 49 states would die laughing.
2 - Bush & Rumsfeld? They'd say "Only two more years to go!"
Stop crying about the past and try (really - TRY) to do something productive in the present so that we have a better future. You will feel so much better, I promise!
2006-10-06 11:04:05 · answer #7 · answered by Walter Ridgeley 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
well if california voted to become independent they would be the 9th richest country in the world. in this day and age, if a state wanted indepenedence, they would probably get it. unless bush made up some law saying they couldnt.
2006-10-06 11:10:09 · answer #8 · answered by jimi 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋