Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    12 May '13 17:31
    Because they needed protection from Mexico.
  2. 12 May '13 17:36
    Originally posted by AThousandYoung
    Because they needed protection from Mexico.
    A plausible reason. The same might apply to Massachusetts and South Carolina (actually all of the original 13), except it was protection from the European powers not Mexico.
  3. 12 May '13 18:18
    Texas don't need protection from NO ONE!
    One good Texas Ranger can handle anything mexico can throw their way.
  4. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    12 May '13 18:44 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by KilgoreTrout15
    Texas don't need protection from NO ONE!
    One good Texas Ranger can handle anything mexico can throw their way.
    Except mobile field artillery.

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mier_Expedition
  5. Standard member caissad4
    Child of the Novelty
    13 May '13 07:52
    Originally posted by AThousandYoung
    Because they needed protection from Mexico.
    Having a familial history from the early days of the Republic of Texas, I can only agree.
  6. 13 May '13 10:29
    Originally posted by KilgoreTrout15
    Texas don't need protection from NO ONE!
    One good Texas Ranger can handle anything mexico can throw their way.
    Are you another one of those private vigilante gun nuts
    who patrol the border without any mandate or authority?

    The only good Mex is a dead Mex. Is that the kind of person you are?

    Another dumb redneck with a rifle who thinks that America is the
    centre of the universe and that you are God's appointee on earth
    here to stand as judge and jury over those who happen to be from
    a different nation?
  7. 13 May '13 12:29
    Originally posted by johnnylongwoody
    Are you another one of those private vigilante gun nuts
    who patrol the border without any mandate or authority?

    The only good Mex is a dead Mex. Is that the kind of person you are?

    Another dumb redneck with a rifle who thinks that America is the
    centre of the universe and that you are God's appointee on earth
    here to stand as judge and jury over those who happen to be from
    a different nation?
    As an American, a US citizen, I totally agree with this statement. My fellow citizens, beware. We are a powerful yet young country. If we continue down the current path of mayhem and murder to protect our interests, we will eventually fall. We have the means, but lack the will, to provide much of the world with ways to produce their own food and water. Freedom and economic success cannot thrive when people are starving and sick.

    The issue of guns goes far beyond the US borders. The US is the prime source, internationally, for black market weapons.

    Global warming will soon cause a significant rise in sea levels and droughts, both of which will cause political unrest and wars. It's going to get very ugly.
  8. 13 May '13 14:23
    Originally posted by KilgoreTrout15
    Texas don't need protection from NO ONE!
    One good Texas Ranger can handle anything mexico can throw their way.
    Did they have roundhouse kicks in 1845?
  9. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    13 May '13 19:32
    "They know what they did in Texas..."

    Ranting Chicano activist

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RM9uH4XgOmI
  10. 13 May '13 22:15 / 3 edits
    Originally posted by AThousandYoung
    Because they needed protection from Mexico.
    Contrary to what secessionists might say today, Texans (anglos and hispanics) wanted Texas to be part of the US from day one that Texas won independence from Mexico.

    By the way, during those few years (1836-1845) when Texas was a Republic (an independent country) and the US would not accept Texas into the US (and with Mexico actually invading and occupying San Antonio a couple of times), Great Britain ultimately started offering protection to Texas (against Mexico).

    Great Britain did not want to occupy Texas but they liked Texas being an independent country in the hope this would stifle US westward expansion (to the Pacific). As for the US, they did not like the idea of Texas being a Great Britain satellite.

    Interestingly, when the US did grant statehood to Texas, this was a catalyst for the Mexican-American War, and in which the US won from Mexico: California, Utah and Nevada as well as parts of New Mexico, Arizona, Wyoming and Colorado -- facilitating US westward expansion.
  11. 15 May '13 03:36
    Originally posted by AThousandYoung
    Because they needed protection from Mexico.
    My understanding -- and it's quite possible that in only this one very limited instance, I may be wrong -- is that by the time Texas joined the USA, most of the people in power were anglo or aligned themselves mentally and culturally with the USA. Texanos had no interest in joining the USA when most of the people in power were Mexican or aligned themselves mentally and culturally with the USA. It was the change in power and the change in population, I believe, that lead to the change in nationality.
  12. 17 May '13 07:28 / 1 edit
    Texans were both hispanic and anglo.
  13. 17 May '13 07:32 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by Sahuaro
    My understanding -- and it's quite possible that in only this one very limited instance, I may be wrong -- is that by the time Texas joined the USA, most of the people in power were anglo or aligned themselves mentally and culturally with the USA. Texanos had no interest in joining the USA when most of the people in power were Mexican or aligned themselves ...[text shortened]... hange in power and the change in population, I believe, that lead to the change in nationality.
    Your comment is not accurate. Initially, both hispanic Texans and anglo Texans were ok with being part of Mexico, and had a lot of autonomy without much interference from Mexico.

    At independence, Texans were both hispanic and anglo. A lot of hispanic Texans at independence. Their generations are still here today.

    At independence, the hispanic Texans wanted Texas to be a state in the US just as much as did the anglo Texans. Even with discrimination or racism they may face. Better than being part of Mexico.

    Interestingly, some hispanic Texans had alot of wealth and power. And some were heroes and leaders. Towns named after them.

    Moreover, the culture was very hispanic influenced. Also, many anglos embraced it. A mix. Friendships and mixing of marriages and families, etc. Anglo and hispanic. Still see that today
  14. 17 May '13 19:21
    Originally posted by moon1969 to Sahauro
    Your comment is not accurate. Initially, both hispanic Texans and anglo Texans were ok with being part of Mexico, and had a lot of autonomy without much interference from Mexico.

    At independence, Texans were both hispanic and anglo. A lot of hispanic Texans at independence. Their generations are still here today.

    At independence, the ...[text shortened]... riendships and mixing of marriages and families, etc. Anglo and hispanic. Still see that today
    You (Moon1969) seem to downplay (post-independence) Texas's history
    of racism against people of Mexican heritage. Juan Seguin (who was at
    the Alamo--he left before it fell) fought for the independence of Texas
    from Mexico. On account of his Mexican heritage, however, Juan Seguin
    was treated with deep suspicion and hatred (including death threats) by
    many white (Anglo) Texans. So Juan Seguin felt impelled to flee to
    Mexico in order to 'seek refuge amongst (his) enemies' (his words).

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juan_Seguin
  15. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    17 May '13 20:15
    Originally posted by moon1969
    Texans were both hispanic and anglo.
    And some were Mexicans.