A good piece, thanks for sharing your thoughts. The term "Allied States" is interesting. The "United" in "United States of America" probably contributed to the centralizing and consolidationist trajectory the U.S.A. ended up on. The American states should have always just been an alliance.
I'm opposed to gun control, and I feel like the USA's efforts to prevent nuclear proliferation, aka "arms control", is like gun control on a global scale. At the same time, I don't want to see nuclear proliferation. Every regime (or God forbid, individuals) owning nuclear weapons is probably not the right solution. It would increase the danger in the world by increasing the probability that nukes get used. In the U.S., with guns being as freely available as they are, they do frequently get used improperly, and people die. More nukes spread around the world means this could happen on a larger scale. Is the right solution for the U.S. and Israel to go around the world and bomb other countries to prevent this? That doesn't seem totally right to me, either.
I favor your point #5 regarding the dissolution of the United States government and the emergence of the Allied States of America (if there must still be "states"; Lord hasten the day when people can live freely without coercion!) If such a dissolution were to happen, you spoke about the States purchasing ships, tanks and buildings, etc. from the former Federal Government, but what about the nuclear arsenal? What should happen to them: sell off the nukes, distribute them to the various States, or destroy them?
