Not sure about the methodology behind this map but I can confirm a LOT of rural Alaska has a huge drugs and booze problem (yes there is still bootlegging here)
Imagine if Texas tries to secede and loses all federal drug enforcement, its military bases, and federal funding. Pretty sure the cartels would be wheeling Abbott out of the state house.
Texas will not lose a war to the cartels if we’re being completely realistic. The state of Texas between its national guard, police, sheriff, and swat departments has access to tanks, armored, vehicles, planes, helicopters and modern military strategy, logistics and training.
A military would be formed by those organizations mentioned above and people will be recruited from a sizable population. Additionally, cartels taking control of Texas would be a threat to US and Mexican national security, so those countries would have an interest in potentially deploying troops of their own, with it almost guaranteed that Mexico would be sending troops. In the long run, Mexico needs to destroy the cartels and their hold over the country, and allying with the Texan military might be their chance to do so.
A direct invasion of Texas would be a struggle for many modern militaries, and almost impossible for a cartel militia. On top of everything I talked about above, the population in Texas is generally very well armed and local towns and cities would be forming their own defense forces if it came to that.
In conclusion, Texas won’t actually leave the US and I wasted 10 mins typing this out.
One thing I'm curious about is how much of the equipment is owned by the government? And if texas seceeded would they have to (or be told to) return it all?
Guns are plenty, but armored vehicles and the like I assume are own by the feds?
Yea that would be a big determining factor for the strength of the Texas military. A lot of state police, sherrifs and SWAT have armored vehicles, which is owned by the state/local governments, but definitely not enough vehicles for a full military force without the national guard equipment. I’m not sure if NG equipment is owned by the feds or state government, but even if it is owned by the feds, launching a military operation to recover that equipment in the (likely) event that Texas doesn’t willingly hand it over might not be worthwhile for the feds. Just look at how much equipment we forfeited in Afghanistan so we could gtfo of that war.
It would never come to that because Mexican gangsters/cartels wouldn’t last a second against the fire and man power of the National Guard, sheriff, city police, etc. (and they’d never try because they know that).
It’s more like if they tried and it lasted more than a day the US or the companies with assets there would supply Texas with what they needed to win.
I mean tbf a rump version of all of these would remain. The bases can't really leave and many of the staff of the state Dea will probably form an analogous operation in the new independent Texas and a rump portion of the military would become the new Texas militia or whatever. And I'm sure that Abbott(or whoever comes next) will work out a deal with the cartels somehow lol.
Today OP learns you can't sell drugs to farmlands and bison.
Btw, what's the metric used to determine this? In big city even 0.1% of the population will be larger than a small city's 10% population.
Not sure if it's the smallest population, but the one in east central SD is Beadle County, with less than 20k people.
Side note: Of the 5 places I've lived in my life, 4 of them are HIDTA zones (Albuquerque, NM; Sturgis, SD; Huron, SD; and Rapid City, SD)
The long skiny county in the top right corner of arizona ... I have lived there. There is nothing there, just some small towns and reservations. I'm finding this surprising
No. 65% or more of the Appalachia population section live in Louisville, Lexington, Knoxville and Nashville. Just 4 counties out of that mass of purple.
It's interesting to me how few of these areas there are in Georgia? The Atlanta metro, and then it looks like just the immediate area around Savannah? But other than that it's apparently not on their radar? I know there are other small cities in Georgia, maybe too small to have a dedicated zone? Idk
Lmao cities and then all of southern Appalachia
And..half of Wyoming.
And all of Alaska except arctic lands lol
And most of California
OP "But cities are bad though!"
Not very often you see a county-level map where all 50 states get markings. Even New Castle County, DE gets in
That one is rather easy. Wilmington is the county seat and is adjacent to Philadelphia, nuff said there. Kensington Beach woohoo
That’s a big chunk of rural Appalachia though (I live in it, doesn’t surprise me)
/r/peopleliveinruralappalachia
The I-5 corridor is no joke
What the hell is the point of that legend?
Came here to say this... That's the most nonsensical color coding I've ever seen.
Washington State? I think you mean “Northwest”
Oregon? Idaho? Same thing, Washington? Never heard of it.
Not sure I agree with the conclusion OP. A lot of these areas are wide open and rural.
Not sure about the methodology behind this map but I can confirm a LOT of rural Alaska has a huge drugs and booze problem (yes there is still bootlegging here)
Classifying north Alabama and Northwest Arkansas as gulf coast is certainly a choice
Imagine if Texas tries to secede and loses all federal drug enforcement, its military bases, and federal funding. Pretty sure the cartels would be wheeling Abbott out of the state house.
New Mexico but for Mexico
Texas will not lose a war to the cartels if we’re being completely realistic. The state of Texas between its national guard, police, sheriff, and swat departments has access to tanks, armored, vehicles, planes, helicopters and modern military strategy, logistics and training. A military would be formed by those organizations mentioned above and people will be recruited from a sizable population. Additionally, cartels taking control of Texas would be a threat to US and Mexican national security, so those countries would have an interest in potentially deploying troops of their own, with it almost guaranteed that Mexico would be sending troops. In the long run, Mexico needs to destroy the cartels and their hold over the country, and allying with the Texan military might be their chance to do so. A direct invasion of Texas would be a struggle for many modern militaries, and almost impossible for a cartel militia. On top of everything I talked about above, the population in Texas is generally very well armed and local towns and cities would be forming their own defense forces if it came to that. In conclusion, Texas won’t actually leave the US and I wasted 10 mins typing this out.
One thing I'm curious about is how much of the equipment is owned by the government? And if texas seceeded would they have to (or be told to) return it all? Guns are plenty, but armored vehicles and the like I assume are own by the feds?
Yea that would be a big determining factor for the strength of the Texas military. A lot of state police, sherrifs and SWAT have armored vehicles, which is owned by the state/local governments, but definitely not enough vehicles for a full military force without the national guard equipment. I’m not sure if NG equipment is owned by the feds or state government, but even if it is owned by the feds, launching a military operation to recover that equipment in the (likely) event that Texas doesn’t willingly hand it over might not be worthwhile for the feds. Just look at how much equipment we forfeited in Afghanistan so we could gtfo of that war.
I don't think any military could invade Texas
The US could.
And has!
Texas is a $2 trillion cash cow for multinationals corporations. They wouldn’t let all that fall to the cartels.
That would be very dystopian. Mercenaries hired by corporations come to fight drug lords.
It would never come to that because Mexican gangsters/cartels wouldn’t last a second against the fire and man power of the National Guard, sheriff, city police, etc. (and they’d never try because they know that). It’s more like if they tried and it lasted more than a day the US or the companies with assets there would supply Texas with what they needed to win.
They’ve lasted plenty against all of those things my compadre
They’ve lasted after trying to depose Abbott from office? What lol
I mean tbf a rump version of all of these would remain. The bases can't really leave and many of the staff of the state Dea will probably form an analogous operation in the new independent Texas and a rump portion of the military would become the new Texas militia or whatever. And I'm sure that Abbott(or whoever comes next) will work out a deal with the cartels somehow lol.
Pro tip: if you ever decide to establish a city anywhere in the world, don't name it London. It will turn into a drug infested shithole.
Well being in Kentucky sure didn’t help
r/Maryland "somehow this is the Eastern Shore and Western Maryland's fault."
I literally gasped with shock when I saw greenbelt as the HQ /s
It's impressive that drug traffickers even venture into the wilderness of Alaska.
Lots of meth
Minidoka County Idaho is most certainly not a city, ha. I also cannot find a reason why that county is so bad either.
Ita Bannock county (Pocatello) that is highlighted not Minidoka. Pocatello makes sense as it's at the junction of two interstates.
Today OP learns you can't sell drugs to farmlands and bison. Btw, what's the metric used to determine this? In big city even 0.1% of the population will be larger than a small city's 10% population.
I wonder why the Midwest doesn’t have much. Are they all getting fubared on corn alcohol or something
Why traffic meth when you can just make it?
This should exist in a cross stitch
r/goingfullcrossstitch
Hahahahahahaha
r/peopleliveincities
Wow, nothing in the whole of the UP, eh!
Is isle royale a northern Miami or just all outline?
Not sure if it's the smallest population, but the one in east central SD is Beadle County, with less than 20k people. Side note: Of the 5 places I've lived in my life, 4 of them are HIDTA zones (Albuquerque, NM; Sturgis, SD; Huron, SD; and Rapid City, SD)
The long skiny county in the top right corner of arizona ... I have lived there. There is nothing there, just some small towns and reservations. I'm finding this surprising
It's just a map of where people live.
No. 65% or more of the Appalachia population section live in Louisville, Lexington, Knoxville and Nashville. Just 4 counties out of that mass of purple.
None of which are in Appalachia. Maaaaaybe Knoxville. EDIT: Ok, Knoxville is in Appalachia. Whether it “is” Appalachian, I’m not convinced.
Knoxville is definitely Appalachian. The others, no.
I know I live 15 miles east from London on the map.
Damn I guess people are everywhere in rural Alaska
One person per square mile up there. I think the polar bears need put in rehab.
I didn’t know so many people live right on the border with Mexico
I love cocaine
I have never seen a national map with Metairie on it in my life.
Of course they have an HQ in methuen lmao
Good ol Lawrence MA keeps them busy for sure.
Gotta love Lawrence
Wait, alaska?
All the counties I've ever lived in are highlighted.
It's interesting to me how few of these areas there are in Georgia? The Atlanta metro, and then it looks like just the immediate area around Savannah? But other than that it's apparently not on their radar? I know there are other small cities in Georgia, maybe too small to have a dedicated zone? Idk
I like how in MD/DC area the only town or city listed is Greenbelt which is a super small town on the outskirts of 2 major metros lol
That’s where the headquarters is
Over Baltimore? Idk about that lol
“Places where people live and Appalachia”
the legend for this map seems so useless lol.
Easy solution, end the war on drugs and fire half the cops now that we don't need them
Not a good look, Cali.