Are there some countries it would be better just to see broken up?

Your flag is much less ugly. No complaints on the maple leaf on my part.

At any rate, if it ever happens it won't be an annexation. It would be a merger, and it'll only happen if an EU-like treaty is signed first. Then I guess it wouldn't be neither the US nor Canada, but some sort of supranational American Union.

edited 26th Jun '11 6:46:52 PM by SavageHeathen

I'm probably not the first to suggest this, but the US ought to be split along the Mason-Dixon. Just let me pack my shit and move to Illinois and then "Operation: Renovation" can commence.

I SAY MERGE EUROPE!

Fuck that. I'm not a European. I'm human.

MERGE WORLD BORDERS! Because I love humanity more than I pledge my alliegence to the Great Supranation.

edited 26th Jun '11 6:49:35 PM by Inhopelessguy

@Kitsune: Part of me thinks that you reallowing the CSA into the Union was a bad idea in hindsight - but who knew the CSA would still cling to a lost cause?

Why not Balkanize Brazil... wait, there's no reason to do that.

I'm conflicted. On one hand, my state was the last to secede and the first to rejoin the Union. On the other, fuck this hellhole and everyone in it who isn't me.

Isn't Tennessee divided with regards to attitudes though? I've heard East Tennessee was less... South-y.

What? Maybe it's because I've lived in a rural part of the state from about 2003 to 2010, but it's about as hick as you can get without cross-burning.

It's the rural part.

On-topic, I support redrawing Africa's borders. South Sudan is a step in this direction which I approve.

Is S. Sudan a real country now? Has the ruling passed?

They're set to be independent July 9, after the referendum voted overwhelmingly in favor of secession from Sudan.

Not true. There's about as many people in Canada as there are presently in the state of California. The demographics by proportion won't change that much. The Senate will have to add members but it won't sway into some irremovable supermajority in favor of the left.

Exactly. Canada's population is too small to make any appreciable difference in the House of Representatives if each province were admitted as a state each.

The Senate would get slightly more liberal, however. If every province is admitted as a state, that means 20 new Senators.

This really doesn't relate to the topic at hand.

edited 26th Jun '11 9:09:09 PM by Pentadragon

Again, plus, Canada's not entirely Liberal.

Anyway, back on topic.

Hmmm. I dunno. I can't think of any examples at the moment. >.>

No, Canada is not entirely Liberal but in general we are more leftist, even our right wing party supporters are more leftist then their American compatriots.

On an on topic note, I'll throw my vote in for Tibet, it's really just getting ridiculous.

My vote is that China should be annexed by Bhutan.

@Major Tom: But we still have massive potential for growth.

^ Canada's been saying that for 150 years. It's still population wise a tenth that of the US. (And 220 years ago, the two countries/territories were comparable population wise.)

Wait till Global Warming catches up. Massive numbers of people begging for the now Temperate Climate of the Yukon.

Hey, I'll have bought prime tropical beachfront property in Texas, Florida and California by then!

Also bring on the global warming! I hate the freezing Colorado winters!

@Major Tom: Uh, no Canada has never had population rivalling you guys.

But bluehap is right.

^ Not for nearly 200 years it hasn't. At the time of the Revolutionary War and the immediate timeframe after, the two places were quite comparable. It was nowhere near the 10:1 Americans to Canadians disparity we see today.

Their small population also shunts off their hopes of being an economic superpower. Large population nations become economic powerhouses because they can field a wide range of industries and workers leading to astronomical productivity figures. (Why do you think the world's goods are so dominated by the Americans and Chinese? Both have one thing in common: lots of people.)

Or if something else happens that causes large immigration. Like a war, or something.

Uh, no, Canada did not have a population comparable to the US at any relevant time.

Let's see, in 1790, it was...somewhat under 200,000 according to what estimates I found. The US was...about 4 million.

First of all, your. And second of all, Canada has always had a small population. It's grown with the same trends as the US. Everywhere excluding Quebec was sparsely populated until 1812, and some years we actually had higher emigration then immigration.

Exactly.

But that will change as enviornmental refugees flee and more land is livable.

edited 28th Jun '11 7:47:44 PM by Erock