Lakota Indians declare independence

[Mr Bean]

Reviewing the map of area they want to claim, there's a couple hundred square miles they want to claim, several bases and over a dozen national guard armories. No Nuclear silos though, but plenty of repair and rearm, airstrips and armories. Plus entire towns, cities, trillions of dollers worth of investment and US property.

If they became a true Sovereign nation, it's not like they can compensate the US government for much of any of it. Nor can you give a town back, or a power plant.

So in essence Flagg, your saying that the US government should give up a chunk of four different states, with a few trillion dollars worth of non-refundable assets to a bunch of great grandsons and grand daughters of people the US government terribly mistreated?

And we just call it squares? We are even now?

[CaptainChewbacca]

Its actually FIVE states. Both Dakotas, Montana, Nebraska, and Wyoming.

[Flagg]

So in essence Flagg, your saying that the US government should give up a chunk of four different states, with a few trillion dollars worth of non-refundable assets to a bunch of great grandsons and grand daughters of people the US government terribly mistreated?

And we just call it squares? We are even now?

Wow, when you put it that way, I sound like an idiot. Luckily for me, I never suggested that. I made the assumption that they were talking about the land currently given to them as reservations. The ares shown in red on this map:



To my knowledge, that's their land, that they own and control. Anyone outside of the tribe that has property on that land would be leasing it from the tribe. If they were talking about taking that land and making their own little country or countries, then I wouldn't give a flying fuck. I'd say "let 'em have it and good luck to them".

Apparently this group of nutters is wanting the entire area shown in yellow. My response to that is "keep dreaming".

But it's looking to me like these douchers don't even represent any tribal organization and their talk of liens sounds like a campaign of economic terrorism.

[Rahvin]

The thing is, there's no possible way the US could realistically prosecute an actual military campaign with today's media. It would tear the country apart.

We could bring this movement down the same way "Petoria" was brought down on "Family Guy."

Not really. I think there are natural gas deposits on their reservations.

Failing that, they are on the high plains so wind power is an option.

It takes time and money to develop a power infrastructure. Lots of time, and even more money. Wind generators don't just spring up, and natural gas doesn't conveniently put itself into storage tanks. Some power plants already exist of course - but there is no way that the entire area is self-sufficient. They're going to need imports of power, food, medicine, etc.

If they were only talking about the reservation proper, which as I understand it is completely sovereign and separate from the US, I would say "let them go, they'll be begging to re-enter in a few months." Since they do in fact seem to be talking about land that includes some serious US government assets and high-population areas (more to the point, it includes land that is simply not part of the legally sovereign reservation land), the US government wouldn't take this lightly.

But then, there's absolutely no way the tribe can enforce their secession, either. They have no standing military or military asse4ts (unless you count what they want to take with them in their secession - I dont think the soldiers stationed there will take kindly to that). This is just blowing hot air.

[Darth Wong]

But then, there's absolutely no way the tribe can enforce their secession, either. They have no standing military or military asse4ts (unless you count what they want to take with them in their secession - I dont think the soldiers stationed there will take kindly to that). This is just blowing hot air.

They could terrorize people living on land that they claim as their own, and then whenever the authorities show up, the people doing all the dirty work could retreat into their reserves and the entire community could refuse to co-operate with the police. That sort of tactic has been employed before.

[Illuminatus Primus]

The thing is, there's no possible way the US could realistically prosecute an actual military campaign with today's media. It would tear the country apart.

You're crazy if you think even the sensitive American populace would sit on their ass and tolerate fellow suburbanites being terrorized or arsoned or expropriated by Amerindian terrorists, and not expect a forceful response.

[Rahvin]

But then, there's absolutely no way the tribe can enforce their secession, either. They have no standing military or military asse4ts (unless you count what they want to take with them in their secession - I dont think the soldiers stationed there will take kindly to that). This is just blowing hot air.

They could terrorize people living on land that they claim as their own, and then whenever the authorities show up, the people doing all the dirty work could retreat into their reserves and the entire community could refuse to co-operate with the police. That sort of tactic has been employed before.

And that would certainly make living there pretty damned horrible. But it wouldn't keep the military off of US bases, it wouldn't stop police enforcement of tax evasion, it wouldn't prevent the US government from cuttting off all aid and trade with the reservation proper...

Really, it would look more like a gang on a larger scale. It would not look much like a successful secession and annexation. I would assume the national guard would be called in to restore order (whatever they can scrape up of it anyway, thanks Bush) with constant patrols.

The tribe would not gain anything from doing this. Instead, they would lose all of the support they currently get from the US, and make themselves criminals. Hell, with the current US stance on "terrorism," guerrilla and terror warfare sounds like about the worst tactic they could use.

[Flagg]

But then, there's absolutely no way the tribe can enforce their secession, either. They have no standing military or military asse4ts (unless you count what they want to take with them in their secession - I dont think the soldiers stationed there will take kindly to that). This is just blowing hot air.

They could terrorize people living on land that they claim as their own, and then whenever the authorities show up, the people doing all the dirty work could retreat into their reserves and the entire community could refuse to co-operate with the police. That sort of tactic has been employed before.

And that would certainly make living there pretty damned horrible. But it wouldn't keep the military off of US bases, it wouldn't stop police enforcement of tax evasion, it wouldn't prevent the US government from cuttting off all aid and trade with the reservation proper...

Really, it would look more like a gang on a larger scale. It would not look much like a successful secession and annexation. I would assume the national guard would be called in to restore order (whatever they can scrape up of it anyway, thanks Bush) with constant patrols.

The tribe would not gain anything from doing this. Instead, they would lose all of the support they currently get from the US, and make themselves criminals. Hell, with the current US stance on "terrorism," guerrilla and terror warfare sounds like about the worst tactic they could use.

And if any future Lakota nation were to pull that shit I would expect F-22's and Apache gunships to send a nice "Don't Tread On Me" message that will be very hard to ignore.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

If this is real, I'm so going to put together an army and filibuster their country.

[Lonestar]

If this is real, I'm so going to put together an army and filibuster their country.

You don't have a hair on your ass if you don't follow through with that statement.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

If this is real, I'm so going to put together an army and filibuster their country.

You don't have a hair on your ass if you don't follow through with that statement. :)

Well, it isn't. Rather than an actual secession, it's the loser of the last tribal elections getting egged on by Chavez and the Bolivians into declaring independence for cheap inter-American relational propaganda points.

[Dillon]

First rule of Native Affairs: every time that a community's leaders get their people riled up against the White Man, the native leaders themselves end up mysteriously profiting and/or expanding their control over their people.

This story appears to be no exception. It's a naked power-grab by the people in charge of the community, who are already running it into the ground and blaming the White Man. You see the same thing up here: native communities which suffer from unholy levels of mismanagement that they conveniently blame on the White Man.

It always amazes me that these people have the gall to blame the White Man for their socio-economic woes. Yes, they lost their traditional roaming grounds hundreds of years ago, and much of their population died from smallpox and other imported European diseases. But that doesn't explain why their communities are full of fucking welfare bums and alcoholics today; people are responsible for our own choices in life. Even natives.

Ironically, it's the guilt felt by the descendants of the conquerors that's led to the disaster that's modern Native culture.

I guarantee you, you give any group of people so much money and land that they don't have to work, and they'll turn into a group of useless, unskilled morons. Much like North American "black culture", Natives just want hold on to the past and milk it for all it's worth.

[Uraniun235]

Why bother? I've driven through that area. Let 'em have it.

Precedent Flagg, you let ANY part of the US succeed your going to set Precedent.

The union must be whole for now and forever.

"Must be"? The last few years have led me to wonder if that sentiment is necessarily true.

[Patrick Degan]

Reviewing the map of area they want to claim, there's a couple hundred square miles they want to claim, several bases and over a dozen national guard armories. No Nuclear silos though, but plenty of repair and rearm, airstrips and armories. Plus entire towns, cities, trillions of dollers worth of investment and US property.

If they became a true Sovereign nation, it's not like they can compensate the US government for much of any of it. Nor can you give a town back, or a power plant.

So in essence Flagg, your saying that the US government should give up a chunk of four different states, with a few trillion dollars worth of non-refundable assets to a bunch of great grandsons and grand daughters of people the US government terribly mistreated?

And we just call it squares? We are even now?

Please. You're talking as if anybody is going to take this seriously —including the Lakota Sioux. Means and his little fanclub are about on the same par as the Republic of Texas nutjobs who like to fantasize that they've seceeded from the United States. Nobody even knows what their phone number is.

[Vehrec]

Why bother? I've driven through that area. Let 'em have it.

Precedent Flagg, you let ANY part of the US succeed your going to set Precedent.

The union must be whole for now and forever.

"Must be"? The last few years have led me to wonder if that sentiment is necessarily true.

While I do accept that 'A house devided against itself cannot stand', I believe that the US could do with some Housecleaning. After all, "From time to time, the Tree of Liberty must be watered with the blood of patriots". I nominate the 'patriots' on Capital Hill.

[Flagg]

Precedent Flagg, you let ANY part of the US succeed your going to set Precedent.

The union must be whole for now and forever.

"Must be"? The last few years have led me to wonder if that sentiment is necessarily true.

While I do accept that 'A house devided against itself cannot stand', I believe that the US could do with some Housecleaning. After all, "From time to time, the Tree of Liberty must be watered with the blood of patriots". I nominate the 'patriots' on Capital Hill.

I nominate the ones in the red states. Mainly the southern ones.

[Flagg]

If this is real, I'm so going to put together an army and filibuster their country.

You don't have a hair on your ass if you don't follow through with that statement.

Well, it isn't. Rather than an actual secession, it's the loser of the last tribal elections getting egged on by Chavez and the Bolivians into declaring independence for cheap inter-American relational propaganda points.

Yeah, it's just so much nonsense. I think the AFP ran with it without realizing that they were dealing with 5 PR whores who represent no one but themselves.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

You don't have a hair on your ass if you don't follow through with that statement. :)

Well, it isn't. Rather than an actual secession, it's the loser of the last tribal elections getting egged on by Chavez and the Bolivians into declaring independence for cheap inter-American relational propaganda points.

Yeah, it's just so much nonsense. I think the AFP ran with it without realizing that they were dealing with 5 PR whores who represent no one but themselves.

Well, and some guy from the Bolivian Embassy who thought he could impress the government back home by taking their indigenous rights initiative to the next level!

[Drewcifer]

Seems that not all of The People agree with Mr. Means:

Rodney Bordeaux, chairman of the Rosebud Sioux Tribe, said his community has no desire to join the breakaway nation. Means and his group, which call themselves the Lakota Freedom Delegation, have never officially pitched their views to the Rosebud community, Bordeaux said.

"Our position on that is we need to uphold the treaties, and we're constantly reminding Congress of that message," Bordeaux said. "We're pushing to maintain and to keep the treaties there because they're the basis of our relationship with the federal government."

Their own constitution ultimately defers to the US Government:

Article IV
Powers of the Rosebud Sioux Tribal
Section 1

Enmumerated powers - The Council of the Rosebud Sioux Tribe Shall exercise the following powers subject to any limitation imposed by the statutes or the Constitution of the United States, and subject further to all express restrictions upon such such powers contained in this constitution and attached bylaws. (Amendment No. I - effective June 19, 1962)

Which, speaking of the US Constitution, isn't secession considered to be unconstitutional, thereby making it illegal and also an act of insurrection? (Besides the fact that it's against the law anyhow: US Code)

[Drewcifer]

Locally, this story wasn't considered legitimate enough to be front page news:
(The "LNI" mentioned below is the Lakota Nation Invitational Basketball Tournament)

Lakota announcement: Where does it go?
Posted by Mikel LeFort in The issues

Where should a story like this be played in the Journal? That’s what we asked ourselves after Native American activist Russell Means and his Lakota Sioux group declared Thursday the Lakota Sioux land was a sovereign nation and they were withdrawing from all treaties from the U.S. government.

The debate was compelling in the afternoon meeting.

On the one hand, this was going to be one of the biggest ‘talkers’ of the day, and had already had 121 comments since being posted early afternoon. The LNI is in town. Russell Means is a prominent figure in the Native American community. The treaties and sovereignty are key issues in Indian Country.

On the other hand, there were no tribal presidents in the group which made the announcement, no one from the top ranks of any of the Lakota Sioux tribes. The timing with the LNI was curious. Russell Means has been known to stage public events to get his message out, and there are some Lakotas who don’t feel Means speaks for them.

And so we determined the story would not go on A1, unless we could confirm support of this group’s decision by any of the top officials from any of the Lakota tribes. Otherwise, this may amount to nothing more than talk.

[Mr Bean]

Wow, when you put it that way, I sound like an idiot. Luckily for me, I never suggested that. I made the assumption that they were talking about the land currently given to them as reservations. The ares shown in red on this map:

You never bothered to distinguish between the two Flagg which is why I was after you. CC posted a picture of the "Historic" Lakota nation(in yellow), what they were claiming (Orange) and what they had now(Red). (But they still want it all back it should be noted, the whole Lakota nation)

Even the orange contains several cities and two national guard armories plus that airforce base and the aforementioned power plants/city works.
It was not till the second page and several post later that your stated you were ok with them succeeding with the red portions only.

I restate my firm personal belief that succession can not be tolerated in the United States, no matter how much the previous government screwed over your great-great grandfathers, we are not that government and you are not your great-great grandfather.

OAN:If this is nothing more that hot air, I guess we can stand the B-52's down and recall the ships we've put off the Lakota nation's shores.

[Flagg]

I stated pretty clearly that I thougth they were taking soveriegn land (their current reservations, marked in red), and questioned whether they were actually trying to reclaim historical territorial holdings.

[Hawkwings]

Just a quick thing that's been annoying me:

"succession" means the process of one thing replacing another

"secession" is the act of withdrawing from an alliance, a group, etc.

You want the second word, not the first

[Mr Bean]

Just a quick thing that's been annoying me:

"succession" means the process of one thing replacing another

"secession" is the act of withdrawing from an alliance, a group, etc.

You want the second word, not the first

As always I say the following
1. If I wanted to know English I'd be waiting tables as an English major!
2. It's the internet, the fact I use my good friends the period, and the comma puts me in the top 5% of the internet. I don't have time to proof-read everything as I would for professional publication.

[Oni Koneko Damien]

Just a quick thing that's been annoying me:

"succession" means the process of one thing replacing another

"secession" is the act of withdrawing from an alliance, a group, etc.

You want the second word, not the first

As always I say the following
1. If I wanted to know English I'd be waiting tables as an English major!
2. It's the internet, the fact I use my good friends the period, and the comma puts me in the top 5% of the internet. I don't have time to proof-read everything as I would for professional publication.

Honestly, it's an easily noticeable mistake for anyone who knows of both words, except it with grace.

Yes, I deliberately used 'except' instead of 'accept' to help make the point a little more light-heartedly.

On topic: I have a friend who's going to school in South Dakota for paleontology. Perhaps I should call her and remind her to get her visas and passports in order when she comes to visit for the holidays.