Hypothetical Battles: If every state of the USA declared war against each other, which would win?

New Zealand would win.
Read 'Ape and Essence', by Alduous Huxley

reply to post by ripcontrol


I don't see Texas making it either. Too vast of land to defend per the number of citizens the state has. Plus every state that is able will be going after the refineries en mass. Armies could probably come stage in Texas and no would even know it.

Alaska would have spetsnaz paratroopers landing on its shores minutes after they declared independence

Cruise missiles from Russian subs would be raining down on any military installation, clearing the way for a ground invasion.

Alaska would not stand a chance

reply to post by muse7


True but rule #1 was no foreign aid or intervention. Which puts Alaska in a very nice defensive spot. I don't see them winning though because they don't have the population in which to invade another state.

Texas vs Calif. TEXAS HANDS DOWN
I may live in calif but i am a redneck and would be in place to spy for Texas.
I plan to move back to Texas in a couple years anyway.

I could even turn off the power and water to LA calif without any problem,

Never did like the liberals that run Calif

Originally posted by jeantherapy
With so many interested replies I am no longer convinced this is not a possibility. You guys almost seem to take pleasure in discussing all the horrific scenarios.

Ditto. Endless doom pr0n for all right here!

Texas would win but that wouldn't help anyone else. Texas would define winning by closing it's borders and telling the whole rest of the nation to drop a postcard when they got their stuff together and knew which way was which. I wouldn't see Texas considering it worth their resources or manpower unless directly attacked and then it'd be a real short fight in their favor....and back to closed borders. Just my thoughts on them as nearly a 'people' with their own identity and all. lol....

California would form alliances with Nevada, Oregon and Washington or they'd go lights out and very very hard times indeed within record time. I don't think they need worry about making friends with Arizona. It isn't happening in this lifetime is my guess, either way. However, California turns a good part of it's lights on by power through the grid and Californians went from NIMBY to BANANA. (Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything). That means self reliance on those basic things like water (Colorado River for more than a small % of it) and power isn't something they do well. Achilles heal.. Yikes!

Realistically though, I think once war broke out and law and order/civil order broke down to even a minor degree below smooth running with no prospect of that getting better, we'd see what is currently seen in some California cities now and Detroit. Criminals sitting on the top of the food chain in an open way and not just the Politician types we're used to. I'd predict 3-4 nations would be the end result...for the short term anyway. Texas being one all it's own.

*Oh.. Utah would do the same as Texas and they actually have thought this one out as I understand it.

Originally posted by safetymeeting
Alaska, hands down. We have guns and ammo for days, our own refinery, the terrain that you kids in the lower 48 couldn't handle for a day, as I'm sure the animals would pick most of you clean before you even found someone to fight.

that really shouldn't count because alaska is already in and of itself "a lone nation" .. i've lived there.. i know.. it's nothing like the lower 48,,,

While you guys are fighting, we'll have a party up here in the U.P. When you come to your senses, come and join us.

Texas wins- They control the oil/refineries and have ExxonMobil/Halliburton corporate headquarters.
More military personnel, bases than any other state- could be made up
Access to Gulf gives them relatively quick access to either pacific or atlantic
Better infrastructure to handle catastrophes.
Tough part would be drinking/irrigation water access... New York has the advantage here.
California has no chance.
New York however- they wouldn't be a pushover.

Originally posted by Jason88
I'm voting for Texas as the winner. It has access to plenty of farmland (sorry Alaska), access to the ocean, and strong energy resources. If full out war broke out among the US states; Texas would likely emerge as the most dominant. (I'm in Boston, we'd fight like hell but NY would overrun us in a heartbeat before its own downfall).

Well, Alaska actually grows some world-record setting produce due to the sun in the summer. Case in point:



Potatoes and other root vegetables do well too. Reindeer, cows, chickens, horses and mules also can be raised in South Central AK.

Alaska also has the ocean. America's largest commercial fishing vessel operates in Alaska:

If you have ever eaten a McDonald’s Filet-o-fish there is a good chance that it came from the Alaska Ocean. The Alaska Ocean is the largest catcher/processor ship in the U.S. fleet with a capacity to catch and process 300 tons of Alaskan Pollock each day. The Alaska Ocean yearly catch accounts for nearly 40% of commercial caught fish in the U.S.

Link

I think Alaska would be able to feed itself just fine!

You all aren't even looking at Ohio! We have Wright-Patterson Air Force Base which is currently the largest military base operated by the Air Force in United States territory. We have the tank plant, the only one in the US, and we're not even counting the numerous other military bases, National Guard, and pissed off rednecks! We also grow over 200+ crops and livestock here and we have water everywhere. I think Ohio would be very self sufficient.

reply to post by SumerianSoldier


And your population is ideologically divided. That will surely help.

reply to post by DondeEsta?


The enemy of my enemy...

The question is... How deep is that Ohio/Michigan rivalry?!

One thing we all should consider...

Has anyone looked at the map for nuclear reactors in the USA?

If SHTF, I would avoid the Eastern Seaboard! I understand they can be safely shut down, but if events happened quickly -- there might not be enough time to do so. They would also make prime targets!

reply to post by muse7


Who cares? Most of Alaska is uninhabited. They'd be wasting their missiles. Alaska has it's fair share of missiles as well -- Remember the cold war might be over but the US Military still highly values Alaska's strategic importance! The anti-ballistic missile system has outposts in Alaska

Now their troops might do better than regular American troops, I'll give you that. If anything Russia would want to ally with Alaska in support of it's independence.

I think Canada would be on Alaska's side too. Alaskans are more like Canadians than most of the people in the lower-48.

Food will be a major factor, any state that can`t produce enough food on it`s own to feed it`s people and it`s army ,wont` last long in a war.
Hawaii would have a good chance of surviving, any landlocked state that doesn`t have a navy won`t be attacking hawaii.

Seeing as of yet that no one can even enter Area 51 without getting caught, I'm going to go with Nevada.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000


California would form alliances with Nevada, Oregon and Washington or they'd go lights out and very very hard times indeed within record time. I don't think they need worry about making friends with Arizona. It isn't happening in this lifetime is my guess,

People in Reno and lost wages might join calif but like most of the hill people of calif the rural population of Nevada want nothing to do with the liberal government of calif
www.canyoncountryzephyr.com...

Pennsylvania baby.