# I joined, and pledged support to Yes California today. **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [November 11, 2016, 4:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467 "2016-11-11T04:44:31Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 43
**Author:** ![Morgenstern](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Morgenstern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Morgenstern)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2017, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/841 "2017-01-24T19:20:18Z")
> [@DinoR](#): > > Having been absent for a bit after my last post in the thread 3 weeks ago I was catching up and surprised by one of the doozies in the shifting position - NATO membership. > > Morgenstern, aside from the odd assertion that you would automatically be a NATO member you are now claiming you want to be? Seriously?!? At the start of the thread you sounded like you wanted a Costa Rica like model (although with less shadow military forces than they’ve actually maintained for good chunks of the time since they cut their military). Now when it’s convenient to your case you want to be part of the world’s largest military alliance with a commitment to respond to Article 5 requests from member states. > > Is that your position now? You want to be part of the world’s largest military alliance effectively saying you are the enemies of anyone who attacks the US? You want to build and sustain a military capable of deploying to and assisting in a European ground war like potentially helping Estonia fight off Russia? Isn’t that directly counter to some of the benefits of leaving that you touted at the start of the thread? No, actually the extent of the military is something that will be voted on. I would prefer something along the lines of the Coast Guard. Something that has a purpose other than practicing for war. Forget the need to project our power beyond the horizon with aircraft carriers and expensive jets. But that’s my opinion. ---
**Author:** ![Morgenstern](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Morgenstern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Morgenstern)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2017, 7:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/842 "2017-01-24T19:21:20Z")
> [@Tamerlane](#): > > And this of course is why all of these pages and pages of arguments are a moot point. The above will never happen. Remember this. Trump will never be elected. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2017, 7:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/843 "2017-01-24T19:27:23Z")
> [@Morgenstern](#): > > Remember this. Trump will never be elected. Well your comments in this thread have been as nonresponsive and fact deprived as Trump, so maybe you’ve got a chance. ---
**Author:** ![Pantastic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3bc359/32.png) [@Pantastic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pantastic)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2017, 7:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/844 "2017-01-24T19:31:07Z")
> [@DinoR](#): > > Morgenstern, aside from the odd assertion that you would automatically be a NATO member you are now claiming you want to be? Seriously?!? At the start of the thread you sounded like you wanted a Costa Rica like model (although with less shadow military forces than they’ve actually maintained for good chunks of the time since they cut their military). Now when it’s convenient to your case you want to be part of the world’s largest military alliance with a commitment to respond to Article 5 requests from member states. I didn’t catch that, but it’s a very good point. Earlier he was arguing that California wouldn’t need to spend money on wasteful military ventures, now he’s wanting to build and maintain a two-ocean Navy (CA would need Pacific since that’s where the coast is, NATO would require Atlantic), ground forces to deploy to a European war, and the force projection capability to maintain them there. Also, he earlier said that he expected Russia to support the Calexit movement, but I doubt that Russia is going to rush to support a country that wants to immediately join an anti-Russian alliance. This whole concept gets more an more incoherent as more pages get added. CA isn’t going to need a military because they’re peaceful traders, but they’re going to join NATO which requires being prepared to send ground forces against Russia. CA is leaving because they don’t like paying so much US tax, but they’re also going to keep US citizenship even though US citizens owe income tax regardless of what country they’re in. The secession from the US will be completely peaceful and will not involve seizing Federal property, but also somehow the 46% of California that the Federal government owns will not be an issue. If I felt more energetic I’d quote mine a bunch of these and pair them off. ---
**Author:** ![Morgenstern](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Morgenstern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Morgenstern)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2017, 7:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/845 "2017-01-24T19:32:23Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > Well your comments in this thread have been as nonresponsive and fact deprived as Trump, so maybe you’ve got a chance. Be happy then. Look at it this way. When the vote time comes, one of two things will have happened. A. Trump has soooo pissed off California, that it easily passes. B. Trump has quit, been impeached, or died. It’s win or win for CA here. ---
**Author:** ![Morgenstern](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Morgenstern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Morgenstern)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2017, 7:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/846 "2017-01-24T19:34:49Z")
> [@Pantastic](#): > > I didn’t catch that, but it’s a very good point. Earlier he was arguing that California wouldn’t need to spend money on wasteful military ventures, now he’s wanting to build and maintain a two-ocean Navy (CA would need Pacific since that’s where the coast is, NATO would require Atlantic), ground forces to deploy to a European war, and the force projection capability to maintain them there. Also, he earlier said that he expected Russia to support the Calexit movement, but I doubt that Russia is going to rush to support a country that wants to immediately join an anti-Russian alliance. > > This whole concept gets more an more incoherent as more pages get added. CA isn’t going to need a military because they’re peaceful traders, but they’re going to join NATO which requires being prepared to send ground forces against Russia. CA is leaving because they don’t like paying so much US tax, but they’re also going to keep US citizenship even though US citizens owe income tax regardless of what country they’re in. The secession from the US will be completely peaceful and will not involve seizing Federal property, but also somehow the 46% of California that the Federal government owns will not be an issue. If I felt more energetic I’d quote mine a bunch of these and pair them off. Read my post three above yours - had you done that first you wouldn’t have made such a mistake here. ---
**Author:** ![Pantastic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3bc359/32.png) [@Pantastic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pantastic)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2017, 7:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/847 "2017-01-24T19:35:00Z")
> [@Morgenstern](#): > > No, actually the extent of the military is something that will be voted on. > I would prefer something along the lines of the Coast Guard. Something that has a purpose other than practicing for war. Forget the need to project our power beyond the horizon with aircraft carriers and expensive jets. But that’s my opinion. So you’re going to have a military that doesn’t practice for war, doesn’t use aircraft carriers or expensive jets, and doesn’t need to project power, but are also going to join an alliance that requires you to fight in the Atlantic Ocean and project ground and air power into Europe, both of which require not just going ‘beyond the horizon’ but crossing North America, then the Atlantic ocean? ---
**Author:** ![Pantastic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3bc359/32.png) [@Pantastic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pantastic)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2017, 7:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/848 "2017-01-24T19:36:37Z")
> [@Morgenstern](#): > > Read my post three above yours - had you done that first you wouldn’t have made such a mistake here. I don’t bother to refresh the thread every few minutes, and I responded to that post too. You still want both to be a part of an alliance that requires you to project force into Europe, and want to avoid the expense of force projection. ---
**Author:** ![Morgenstern](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Morgenstern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Morgenstern)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2017, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/849 "2017-01-24T19:40:46Z")
> [@chappachula](#): > > Trump will only be in office for 4 years. A breakup of the USA will be long term. Very, very long term. > > If you think international support will be automatic, because the whole world hates Trump–you are wrong. There are more important, long-term issues.By the time the new Nation of California gets itself organized enough to apply for a building permit in Paris or Moscow to construct an embassy,Trump will be long gone. > > Other countries don’t really care that much about Trump (his economics, his disdain for global warming, etc are not so different than the rest of the Republican Congress, so no other President will be much better for the Europeans-- if the Congress remains Republican, they won’t approve treaties.) And the internal issues with Trump, which worry so many Americans, are absolutely and totally irrelevant to foreign countries.(abortion, Supreme court, gun control, Mexican immigration, Muslim registry, etc) > > So other countries will not join you in your panic to cut off from Trump. They will take a long-term approach, and realize that supporting 30 million Californians this year is not worth pissing off 300 million Americans for decades. They may nod their heads a bit towards you, but then they will sit on their hands quietly, and do _nothing_ to actively support the new nation of California, because the backlash from New York and Washington won’t be worth it to them. And we disagree. Cascadia Independence, Hawaii and Nevada are all working on the same thing. I would honestly expect that any success with the California will create other independence requests. The damage Trump will do in 4 years (points at SCOTUS justice nominations as an example) is beyond repair for at least a generation. ---
**Author:** ![DinoR](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dinor/32/2821_2.png) [@DinoR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DinoR)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2017, 7:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/850 "2017-01-24T19:45:34Z")
> [@Morgenstern](#): > > No, actually the extent of the military is something that will be voted on. > I would prefer something along the lines of the Coast Guard. Something that has a purpose other than practicing for war. Forget the need to project our power beyond the horizon with aircraft carriers and expensive jets. But that’s my opinion. Just being clear, it looks like you are saying one of the following two things: - your personal preference is that California not join NATO. - you are hoping NATO will let you free ride by committing to CA’s defense without CA accepting it’s treaty obligations as a member Is there something else because your post doesn’t really answer how CA would meet Article 5 commitments in your preferences? ---
**Author:** ![Morgenstern](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Morgenstern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Morgenstern)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2017, 7:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/851 "2017-01-24T19:48:00Z")
> [@Pantastic](#): > > I don’t bother to refresh the thread every few minutes, and I responded to that post too. You still want both to be a part of an alliance that requires you to project force into Europe, and want to avoid the expense of force projection. See, this is where you go off the track again. I never said I wanted to be a member of NATO, I said CA would be when it spawned. At least, until we declined membership. CA is not in any danger of being attacked by a foreign power. CA is in danger of lone terrorist attacks and shooting events etc. You don’t need submarines to protect against that, and B-52s are just an overstatement when dealing with school shooters. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2017, 7:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/852 "2017-01-24T19:48:23Z")
> [@Morgenstern](#): > > Be happy then. Look at it this way. > > When the vote time comes, one of two things will have happened. > > A. Trump has soooo pissed off California, that it easily passes. > > B. Trump has quit, been impeached, or died. > > It’s win or win for CA here. Yes, there are only two branches ahead in the river of time. Thanks for reminding me. Think I’m done wasting my time on this incoherent discussion. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2017, 7:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/853 "2017-01-24T19:53:39Z")
> [@Morgenstern](#): > > See, this is where you go off the track again. I never said I wanted to be a member of NATO, I said CA would be when it spawned. I wonder if NATO shares your interpretation. At least according [to this article](http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-scotland-independence-eu-idUKKBN0H31FK20140908), it does not. ---
**Author:** ![Morgenstern](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Morgenstern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Morgenstern)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2017, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/854 "2017-01-24T19:54:39Z")
> [@DinoR](#): > > Just being clear, it looks like you are saying one of the following two things: > > - your personal preference is that California not join NATO. > - you are hoping NATO will let you free ride by committing to CA’s defense without CA accepting it’s treaty obligations as a member > > Is there something else because your post doesn’t really answer how CA would meet Article 5 commitments in your preferences? My vote would be NO to NATO. No to capital military assets, (beyond jeeps, etc) and No to a standing army. Not necessary. A service similar to the Coast Guard would be all that was needed. Again, CA does not need defending. It won’t be invaded. There are 38 million people and probably 50 million guns in CA. The friggen world knows about the 2ND and Americans. There will never be an invasion. ---
**Author:** ![Morgenstern](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Morgenstern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Morgenstern)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2017, 8:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/855 "2017-01-24T20:00:24Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > I wonder if NATO shares your interpretation. > > At least according [to this article](http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-scotland-independence-eu-idUKKBN0H31FK20140908), it does not. Again, not being in NATO would be awesome. I hope you’re right about that. I also hope CA doesn’t inherit the enemies of the US, maybe not being in NATO would prevent that. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2017, 8:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/856 "2017-01-24T20:06:48Z")
> [@Morgenstern](#): > > Again, not being in NATO would be awesome. I hope you’re right about that. I also hope CA doesn’t inherit the enemies of the US, maybe not being in NATO would prevent that. No need to hope. That’s the reality of the situation: If CA achieved independence, they would not be part of NATO. No need to send representatives to meetings or anything, you’d be out. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2017, 8:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/857 "2017-01-24T20:07:49Z")
> [@Morgenstern](#): > > Again, not being in NATO would be awesome. I hope you’re right about that. I also hope CA doesn’t inherit the enemies of the US, maybe not being in NATO would prevent that. But the lawyers at the California National party told you it was a fact California would be part of NATO. If you hope they’re wrong about that, they would also likely be wrong about California automatically being part of all those trade agreements. ---
**Author:** ![Morgenstern](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Morgenstern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Morgenstern)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2017, 8:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/858 "2017-01-24T20:12:35Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > No need to hope. That’s the reality of the situation: If CA achieved independence, they would not be part of NATO. No need to send representatives to meetings or anything, you’d be out. That’s good news. Now, back to negotiating the harbor fees for storing and servicing your Navy’s ships. ---
**Author:** ![Morgenstern](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Morgenstern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Morgenstern)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2017, 8:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/859 "2017-01-24T20:15:11Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > But the lawyers at the California National party told you it was a fact California would be part of NATO. If you hope they’re wrong about that, they would also likely be wrong about California automatically being part of all those trade agreements. No one said lawyers dude, and no one said they told me. Please read more carefully. I thought you flounce-quit this thread a few posts up. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2017, 8:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/860 "2017-01-24T20:21:26Z")
> [@Morgenstern](#): > > No one said lawyers dude, and no one said they told me. Please read more carefully. I thought you flounce-quit this thread a few posts up. I just said I’m done with the discussion. Just mocking you now. Also, you did say lawyers: > [@Morgenstern](#): > > Here, go argue with their lawyer. > [https://californianational.party/en/](https://californianational.party/en/) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467.md?page=42) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467.md?page=44)