the federal government is immediately on lockdown "holy shit this state is actually wanting to be independent"

The concept keeping our union together is that the federal government provides the external defense while the states manage their internal affairs, it's the best of both worlds. A state would have no desire to succeed simply because they have the ability to freely manage internal affairs as they still don't have the ability to provide adequate external defense

Actually

My issue is when that federal government decides "We're going to both provide this external defense and also have extensive internal affair management as well."

A state would have a desire to secede if they realize they can be financially independent.

That's how the Civil War even started

hoping that the southern states thought they were independent enough to secede from the union

that they didnt even need those stupid tariffs affecting them

Financially independent does not equal ability to externally defend

they didnt need those damn anti-slavery politics

The southern states believed they would be able to externally defend with their combined might, say, a *Confederacy of states* if you will

hold up

you do realize you need an economy

for an army

I have never seen a nation able to have an army with no economy

They thought they were independent enough not to succeed and become a sovereign entity, but to form another competing group of states. That's why we saw USA vs CSA and not USA vs a dozen sovereign states

And yes, of course?

I've never said you don't need an economy for an army

The CSA thoguht they were financially independent enough

They were hoping the European powers would intervene

on their behalf

"because them southerners cotton were worth it"

Yes, that is true, they believed it would occur, however British distaste for slavery as well as technological advancements meant this never happened

Wasn't even a distaste for slavery

it was the fact that British had access to Egyptian Cotton and Indian cotton

But that's another topic

The Confederate States simply lost was because they lost the Western Front.

It was a mixture. Minor military aid for another source of cotton would have been a sound investment for the British but yea it's another topic

Because despite that the east-confederate state are financially sound

a majority of western-confederate states were not

meanwhile in the north

the western and eastern northern states were all financially sound enough to wage a war

The Confederates lost because they didn't have the industrial capacity nor manpower to replenish losses, meanwhile the USA did

which was in the west

The Confederates and Union were stalemating at the Eastern Front

but the real decisive blow was at the Western Front

where Sherman's March to the Sea decisively ended the war.

It was everywhere to be fair, some were much better off but it would have failed either way. Even if only, say, the Eastern states only declared their own group of states, they'd still most likely have lost

i doubt it

This exact reason was, in fact, why Lee made his terrible choice as Gettysburg. He believed the only way to win the war was an absolutely crushing defeat against the Union and that no matter how many battles he "won" he'd always be losing as he could not replenish his men or supplies, hence his charge and subsequent annihilation

The Confederacy just needed the 4 border states