A hypothetical scenario: Crimea vs Baja California
* Suppose, Baja California and Baja California Sur were one state.
* Suppose, the US had a military-installation there that were of global strategic importance.
* Suppose, lots of US-personnel and US-civilians were living in the larger area around that military-base.
* Suppose, a revolution happened in Mexico, with the military and the US-friendly president on one side and a wild mix of violent groups with wildly different agendas, representing 50% of the population, on the other. Suppose streetfighting, Molotov-cocktails and police clashing with protesters for a full month.
* Suppose, the US-friendly president flees abruptly, leaving a vacuum of power.
* Suppose, the revolutionaries include moderates and extremists.
* Suppose, those extremists and likely future-leaders of Mexico loudly demand an end to US-influence on their country.
* Suppose ongoing clashes in the streets between US-friendly and anti-US factions.
Would the US accept the new government of Mexico and leave it up to their discretion whether the US can keep their base there?
Would the US stay idle and risk a loss of military influence, so grave that it wouldn't be able to recuperate from it in the foreseeable future?
Or would the US send in "peacekeepers", to secure the status quo in the one province they care about?
Would the US keep those "peacekeepers" in there as long as it takes for a US-friendly government to return and then still longer?
Would the US trump up a legal pretext to stay there?
