maddogdrivethru.net

Open all night
It is currently Sun Dec 17, 2017 3:36 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 223 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 ... 23  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Reading
PostPosted: Wed Nov 09, 2016 1:05 am 
Offline
buck private
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 8:01 am
Posts: 14348
Reputation points: 9532
nelmsm wrote:
doggie wrote:
Reconstruction was a direct result, and thus part of the ACW.


Well secession led to the ACW so it all falls at their own feet.
I agree ... but many would argue they had a right to Secede.

_________________
Merry Christmas to all


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Reading
PostPosted: Sat Nov 12, 2016 11:42 am 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2008 12:33 pm
Posts: 19719
Location: LV-426
Reputation points: 12194
Quote:
Nobody in the North died from Confederate blockades, bombardments, or scorched earth policie


That is incorrect. Secesh regularly pillaged the Shenandoah Valley, northern Virginia, southern Missouri, northern Arkansas, and much of Kansas. Homes were burned and looted, farms stripped of all provisions and stock. Van Dorn's "Army of the West" was particularly disdainful of property rights, both of traitors and of loyal citizens. And Lee invaded Pennsylvania solely for the purpose of plunder.

_________________
"Fuck the king." - Sandor Clegane

"And the story was whatever was the song what it was." - Dire Straits


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Reading
PostPosted: Sat Nov 12, 2016 7:37 pm 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 4:43 pm
Posts: 13181
Reputation points: 2401
abradley wrote:
nelmsm wrote:
...
Well secession led to the ACW so it all falls at their own feet.
I agree ... but many would argue they had a right to Secede.

What does your constitution say about secession?

If nothing, anything goes. Like a civil war.

Perhaps a future supreme court will declare the civil war unconstitutional and everything after that will be revoked.

And the buffalo will be back and injuns will dance.



My heart is full.

_________________
The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt

Mit der Dummheit kämpfen selbst Götter vergebens.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Reading
PostPosted: Sat Nov 12, 2016 8:15 pm 
Offline
buck private
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 8:01 am
Posts: 14348
Reputation points: 9532
IIRC the Articles of Confederation were a gathering of many states, in the Constitution it was forming a more 'perfect' union.

What does that mean? It's the difference between 'the' and 'these'.

To Southerners it meant 'These United States'. And the right to leave the union.

To Northerners it was 'The United States.' They were bound together.

_________________
Merry Christmas to all


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Reading
PostPosted: Sat Nov 12, 2016 8:22 pm 
Offline
buck private
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 8:01 am
Posts: 14348
Reputation points: 9532
nero wrote:
What does your constitution say about secession?

If nothing, anything goes. Like a civil war.

Perhaps a future supreme court will declare the civil war unconstitutional and everything after that will be revoked.

And the buffalo will be back and injuns will dance.

[youtube]h...[/youtube]

My heart is full.
Was the secession of the Confederate states illegal?
http://history.stackexchange.com/questi ... es-illegal

_________________
Merry Christmas to all


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Reading
PostPosted: Sat Nov 12, 2016 8:28 pm 
Offline
Honorary Texan
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 2:11 am
Posts: 9309
Location: Hole-in-the-Wall
Reputation points: 7398
If your revolution succeeds, then it's legal. If it fails....that's another story.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Reading
PostPosted: Thu Nov 17, 2016 4:22 pm 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 4:43 pm
Posts: 13181
Reputation points: 2401
Old Eagle wrote:
If your revolution succeeds, then it's legal. If it fails....that's another story.

When a mutiny succeeds it can be a revolution, if not, it is just a mutiny.

So it goes.

PS. I am a little bit surprised finding you contributing to this thread, the title only should have scared you away. :roll:

_________________
The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt

Mit der Dummheit kämpfen selbst Götter vergebens.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Reading
PostPosted: Fri Nov 18, 2016 1:29 pm 
Offline
PFC

Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2008 11:00 pm
Posts: 251
Location: wichita, ks
Reputation points: 1082
abradley wrote:
IIRC the Articles of Confederation were a gathering of many states, in the Constitution it was forming a more 'perfect' union.

What does that mean? It's the difference between 'the' and 'these'.

To Southerners it meant 'These United States'. And the right to leave the union.

To Northerners it was 'The United States.' They were bound together.


To be fair, there were northern sentiments of secession as well during Jefferson's presidency as well as Madison's. When the Federalists were getting their behinds kicked, many argued in favor of taxachussetts and new hampshire leaving the union.

These didn't amount to anything, but the belief that such an option existed was represented in their arguments.

“British policy makers thought what they would do is induce New Englanders to secede from the union, to break away from the United States,” Allison says.

And it almost worked. Strong made his own overtures to the British, offering to negotiate a separate peace. Meanwhile, leaders from across New England convened in Hartford, Connecticut, to discuss their grievances with the federal government and produce a list of demands on which their continued participation in the union would be conditional. But a funny thing happened on their way to present the document to Washington — President Madison won the war.


http://radioboston.legacy.wbur.org/2012 ... succession


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Reading
PostPosted: Fri Nov 18, 2016 2:11 pm 
Offline
buck private
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 8:01 am
Posts: 14348
Reputation points: 9532
abradley wrote:
{Snip}The conclusion of the review convinced me to continue, after all, haven't been to the cabin yet. Wonder if there's any sex there?
I continued and yes the cabin had plenty of sex.

Just finished the book and enjoyed.

His take on combat strikes true to me.

Plan on getting more of the series, not happy with the LGBT themes, but the rest of the read makes it worth while.

Am mulling what to read next.

_________________
Merry Christmas to all


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Reading
PostPosted: Sun Nov 20, 2016 1:00 pm 
Offline
buck private
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 8:01 am
Posts: 14348
Reputation points: 9532
Made my choice:
Quote:
Shanghai 1937 Is China’s Forgotten Stalingrad
Remember this epic urban battle between China and Japan

Japanese marines at the Battle of Shanghai in 1937. Photo via Wikipedia
In the summer of 1937, the “Pearl of the Orient” became a slaughterhouse. A million Chinese and Japanese soldiers engaged in savage urban combat in China’s coastal city of Shanghai.
Before the battle, Shanghai had been a thriving metropolis bustling with Western traders and missionaries, Chinese gangsters, workers and peasants and Japanese soldiers and businessmen.
As many as 300,000 people died in the epic three-month struggle that pitted China’s best divisions against Japanese marines, tank, naval gunfire and aircraft.
Yet even in China, few people remember the Battle of Shanghai, says Peter Harmsen, author of Shanghai 1937: Stalingrad on the Yangtze. The clash receded beneath another horrific memory: the Rape of Nanking.
Shanghai “was one of 22 major battles of the Sino-Japanese War that are listed in official Chinese historiography,” Harmsen told War is Boring in an email. “Many Chinese have heard about the individual battles, but it’s mainly just specialists and military history buffs who actually remember when exactly they took place—and how and why.”
It was an unfortunate confluence of forces that brought war to Shanghai in August 1937. China and Japan had been in limited conflict since 1931, when Japan invaded Manchuria in search of empire and raw materials. In 1937, Japan seized Beijing after the Marco Polo Bridge incident.
Enough was enough. Nationalist Chinese leader Chiang Kai-Shek had spent the 1930s trying to destroy the Communists. Now was the time to stand up to Japan.
Just why he chose Shanghai is unclear, Harmsen explained. “For example, it has been argued that Chiang wanted to demonstrate China’s willingness to resist Japanese aggression in front of a big international audience and therefore picked Shanghai because of its large expat population.”
“Others have pointed out that the river-rich countryside in the Shanghai area offered fewer tactical advantages to Japanese tanks than the flat north Chinese plains,” Harmsen added.
Ironically, it was bellicose Japan that wasn’t looking for a fight in Shanghai. The Japanese army was focused on securing north China, where it could grab territory and resources as well as keep an eye on its arch-rival the Soviet Union.
(Continued)
https://warisboring.com/shanghai-1937-i ... .bi5lbzrkm
The Chinese and Japanese were slaughtering thousands while the international set were occupying ring side seats sometimes meters away.

Interesting read of a forgotten war ... China vs Japan.

_________________
Merry Christmas to all


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 223 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 ... 23  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group