[Hyperborian]

On the other hand, a very significant number of military bases (packed full of military weapons and equipment) are in California, and thanks to California's out-sized population a major portion of the current active military are native Californians. That's not even taking in to account National Guard units and such.

California would take a very significant chunk of the US military with it if it left the union, and there are native Californians (who, if they backed California, could cause many problems) in key positions throughout the rest of the military as well.

Form a militia? That's ridiculous. California would be a global military power right out the gate, and a nuclear one at that.

[relics443]

You do realize that most members of the military love their country and would not secede? That's why they put their lives on the line.

And if you think the US military would simply allow "New California" to take its weapons and facilities, then I have a bridge to sell you.

[kinghajj]

> California would take a very significant chunk of the US military with it if it left the union

Perhaps, but remember militaries train discipline and chain of command for a reason.

> a very significant number of military bases (packed full of military weapons and equipment) are in California > California would be a global military power right out the gate, and a nuclear one at that.

If there were a serious rebellion, those would be the first targets. Thousands--even tens of thousands--of lost military and civilian lives would be a small price to pay in the US govt's eyes than to let a new nuclear power spring up on its doorstep.

[Hyperborian]

> Perhaps, but remember militaries train discipline and chain of command for a reason.

Indeed, and that's why its so significant that Californians make up such a large portion of the military. They bring that modern world class military training with them. Without that body of already experienced and trained people, a real military would be essentially impossible for years, even decades.

> If there were a serious rebellion, those would be the first targets. Thousands--even tens of thousands--of lost military and civilian lives would be a small price to pay in the US govt's eyes than to let a new nuclear power spring up on its doorstep.

If it actually reached that point, Californians would probably be just as ready for that.

Regardless, though, my point was that it's not so cut and dried as was suggested. The scenario would not be the full might of the US military against defenseless California, it would in essence be a gutted US military in total disarray against a cobbled together smaller portion of the US military.

[mc32]

I think you overestimate it. People who go into the military are more conservative than liberal, on average. They are more patriotic on average and on top of that they are part of the _federal_ government and take orders from them.

I don't see many, or any significant amount going rogue and having a mutiny to please the desires of elites in California they probably have little in common with. It's not like the military is made up of mostly elite-college educated graduates who argue over what makes a good grind for poured over coffee at what temperature and humidity, or what are really authentic sessos tacos.

They are also likely not into the virtue signaling game.

[Hyperborian]

> People who go into the military are more conservative than liberal, on average.

In-group loyalty is paramount to conservatives. Family and community first, and all that.

> They are more patriotic on average...

Exactly, and that supports my argument. If California declares independence, then the patriots from California will either side with their homeland, their communities, the places where their families are... or be traitors to their homeland, community, and family.

What do you think is the more likely thing for a conservative to do?

> I don't see many, or any significant amount going rogue...

If it reached the point where California declared independence, it would be those who sided with the US who were the ones "going rouge".

You are completely ignoring, most importantly, the issue of family. A service member from California almost certainly has their family in California. Your suggestion is that a significant majority of service members would side against their own family. That is what siding with the federal government in the even of California declaring independence would mean. Does that really seem likely to you? That they would side against their own family and home? Especially for a group that tends towards being conservative?

Think about it.

[mc32]

I hope you're just being argumentative and obtuse on purpose. I'd wager most Californians in the US armed forces have greater allegiance to the country than to the state. First and foremost they see themselves as Americans and secondly as whatever state they are from.

People in the armed forces are US military, not CA military, so going rogue would be the ones going against the US. The logic is easy to follow.

[relics443]

And you're ignoring the fact that the family of a conservative service member is most likely conservative as well.

[relics443]

Do you actually think that active duty service members would secede along with their home state? Or that the military would allow it?

[Hyperborian]

Ah, yes, if only the British had responded to the American rebellion by "not allowing it", then the US would have never existed.

That sounds reasonable.

[relics443]

You're making assumptions about what I said. The US army wouldn't give its soldiers a choice of seceding or not. Using your logic that would be like Britain preventing its soldiers from joining the revolution, which most definitely happened.

[increment_i]

This is very unrealistic - those military bases, weapons, and nuclear warheads are property of the US military (whose commander in chief is the President of the United States), not some kind of Californian military outfit that the US is currently leasing.

If a bunch of native Californian generals and colonels tried to commandeer a portion of the US military in support of some Californian revolution, you had better believe that would be seen as an act of war.