Re: The United States in Full Thrust

On Thu, 26 Apr 2001, Brian Burger wrote:

> Well, we're probably all lucky that Mr. Atkinson is temporarily
absent,
> given his habit of coming down on
> 'yet-another-breakaway-NAC-colony/American-Revolution-redone' like a
ton
> of rectangular building thingies.

I was waiting for SOMEone to mention that.  ;-)

> Personally, I'm rather amused by the GZGverse's NAC. Britian and
Canada
> coming to the aid of a collapsing US & helping re-establish sane
> government sounds pretty cool... Of course, I'm notoriously
Canadian...
> 
> I'll reserve my comments on homegrown breakaway NAC colonies to
merely:
> Why does only the NAC appear to have massive numbers of breakaway
> colonies? Why are all these colonies mostly American? Should all these
> revolts be taking place in 2176?

I'm guessing because 95% of all the people who propose these NAC
breakaway
colonies (that are primarily of American origin) are Americans who have
a difficult time dealing with or identifying with the NAC as Jon wrote
it up?	;-)  I haven't taken a formal poll on the matter, but that's
my guess.

> And why hasn't anyone written about the infamous Andromedan Tea Party
yet?

PC issues?  :-/

I wanna know why there aren't any/as many ESU/FSE/NSL seperatist
movements. But then again, if I think about it real hard (hurts the
brain these days, unfortunately), see above guess/comment. All the
seperatist proposers (90% or more of 'em, anyway) are 'Mericans
and can't identify very well with the ESU/FSE/NSL powers. So no one
comes up with them (there are a few, but there are *very* few when
compared to the NAC splits).

Ya know, if you take all the NAC seperatist movements and lump them
together, the NAC would no longer be a Power worthy of notice by even
the LLAR.

Oh well. I'm an American of NSL/FSE descent. I like the NAC just as
they are now. I just prefer to support the UNSC.  :-)

> Tongue in cheek,

Tongue in other cheek,