CHAT Musings on Trump, Lee, civil war, and vax

V

vestige

Deceased
Walrus said:
Uncivil war = impossible to define right now, I think.
But Biden-supporting neighbor is probably the best place to start in a local sense. Securing the AO and all that, yanno. One thing about it, the tribe can't be put at risk by inaction. And that's all I'll say about that.
Click to expand...
Election coming up soon. Take notes.
 
MinnesotaSmith

MinnesotaSmith

Membership Revoked
Dozdoats said:
But the gallant Hood of Texas
Played hell in Tennessee


Oh my feet are torn and bloody, and my heart is full of woe,

I'm going back to Georgia, to find my Uncle Joe,

You may talk about your Beauregard, and sing of Bobby Lee,

But the gallant Hood of Texas, he played hell in Tennessee.

-- Civil War Lyrics The Yellow Rose of Texas by Emily D. West | Civil War Music (civilwarheritagetrails.org)
Click to expand...
More likely helped lose the war for the Confederacy ASAP. (The Battle of Franklin was handled WORSE by him than was Fredericksburg by Burnside.) He made the merely competent Johnston J.E. look like a genius.
 
Millwright

Millwright

Knuckle Dragger
_______________
The War of Yankee Aggression will have few parallels with what is about to happen.

For a tactical perspective, look at Bosnia, Argentina and other recent failed states and the mayhem that ensued.

Plan on the violence being greater by an order of magnitude...too many armed people for it not to be.
 
Last edited:
helen

helen

Panic Sex Lady
Raggedyman said:
well then - I ask the same (type) question of YOU as you did of me earlier . . .

WHAT do YOU intended to do . . . AND . . . exactly what is "an applicable concept" from your point of view?
Click to expand...
I asked you first. But it's late. I intend to - have already volunteered and been accepted - to provide food and necessities and serve as a go-between for a good sized group of unvax if they are restricted from leaving their homes. How long? I dunno. Our enemies outside the country will decide that. I had a long series of discussions with my pastor about how I - unclean and no longer fully human - could turn it to some good before I died doing it. I did it because that's the only way I can take care of many others, and not just financially.

So - am I the enemy? I sure as shit didn't tattoo it on my forehead, so I might be hard to spot. Since I don't know you either, I might hand you a pie or something by mistake. :hugs:
 
H

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
Millwright said:
The War of Yankee Aggression will have few parallels with what is about to happen.

For a tactical perspective, look at Bosnia, Argentina and other recent failed states and the mayhem that ensued.

Plan on the violence being greater by an order of magnitude...too many armed people for it not to be.
Click to expand...

Yeah.

See the FerFal posts....
 
H

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
MinnesotaSmith said:
That certainly did not help.
But, worse yet IMO was Jefferson Davis's choices of Western commanders such as Braxton Bragg & Pemberton (another Paulus IMO), and not making better/quicker use of NB Forrest. If Forrest had been put in command at Forts Henry & Donelson, and in overall command at Shiloh and the whole Western theater thereafter, I think the Confederacy would have gotten its freedom. With a competing vision and nation right across the Ohio River to tamp down tyrannical impulses in the North, both the North and South would have been freer. (The blacks, of course, being economically increasingly useless, would desirably eventually have been repatriated home to Africa.)
Click to expand...

Forrest wasn't a member of the club, societally/politically nor a ring knocker.

You didn't see the Napoleonic idea of every man having a "marshal's baton in his haversack" until deep into the war and even then it was sparingly applied with social connections still holding influence over merit.
 
Mtsilverback

Mtsilverback

Veteran Member
If CW occurs it will most likely be a fourth generational war. And that may not get the job done. I am trending to the idea seemingly random but targeted acts of violence.
the mob would on occasion bring in help from out of town.
 
Magdalen

Magdalen

Veteran Member
Trouble said:
Sorry but your Lee facts are kind of bullshit, just sayin. The US had its ass handed to them on more occasions at the hands of Lee than anyone else in history. It was a war of attrition. He was the better tactician. The north was led by the second string much like our govt today. The south captured tons of so called "advanced " weaponry and imported more of the best rilfes of the time, the Enfield rifled musket. The north had more bodies to throw into the fray, and that is exactly how they won. It wasn't because the US army was superior in any way. Period.
Had he continued to fight the war on the defensive instead of trying go offensive he would've eventually ground down the union army and they would've had their independence and we would be far better off today. But Jeff Davis pushed him to invade which led to his biggest losses.
Click to expand...

And Lee was hamstrung by his own general at Gettysburg, General Longstreet (*spit). If Longstreet had moved when ordered too, Lee might have won Gettysburg, and things might be different.

Also, Lee was a true gentleman, "those people" as he called the Federals, were not.
 
rhughe13

rhughe13

Heart of Dixie
Lincoln stopped prisoner exchanges for a reason too. Released Southerners went back into the fight, and it was causing more Northern casualties than it was worth. I have a 2nd Great Grandfather that was captured at Vicksburg twice and released and fought until the end of the war. Not sure what happened to his Northern counterparts from exchange. If you are a byproduct of the civil war, consider yourself lucky to be here. I have approximately 60 Confederate ancestors, and I think there were at least 3 or 4 that were captured and released.
 

Attachments

  • Ziphnia Estes Single Photo.jpg
    Ziphnia Estes Single Photo.jpg
    203.4 KB · Views: 10
Last edited:
N

night driver

ESFP adrift in INTJ sea
Reference the map showing Ohio as Non-compliant-Dewine has said (MORE than once) that the Turnip has made an error with the mandates. Atty Gen Yost is making a lot MORE anti-mandate noises as well.
The RED color on the map for us may well be accurate.


OK a guy can hope, right?
 
rhughe13

rhughe13

Heart of Dixie
Civil Vaccination War
War of Vaccination Aggression
War for Vaccination Independence
War Between the Vaxes
And of course slavery.
 
W

Walrus

Veteran Member
fi103r said:
err Rwanda x Bosnia in Beruit probably comes close
Click to expand...
Could be. Beirut hasn't had a functional government in a long time; it's all factions with warlords with government figureheads to give the impression to NGOs and the UN that there's actually someone to sign for the supplies and money flowing in all the time. And it used to be the jewel of the Middle East.
 
F

fi103r

Veteran Member
Millwright said:
The real enemy ain't local.

We are fairly shy on representatives, even.

Location, location, location.
Click to expand...
what,!no local dhimiwit county orfice/democommie cell?
the ‘civic leaders’ that praise burn loot murder and persecute ‘clotshot resistors’ or mandate bs for the sake of killing the rest of the economy are somehow ‘invisible’? that’s what 4th gen war is all about take the fight to the tyrants and wanna be chechist/stazi get in their face and call them on their bs. Stupid ought to be painful and they embarras the term ‘civil’
 
artichoke

artichoke

Greetings from near tropical NYC!
helen said:
Trump was booed for saying something like, "Take the shot. I did. "

Then he let the subject go.

Trump praised Robert E. Lee and said he would have won the war in Afghanistan.

Lincoln offered Lee command of the northern army. Lee, history says, declined in favor of leading the southern army.

Lee, the self-disciplined, brilliant West Point graduate, effed up seven major battles out of eight, eventually surrendered, and spent the rest of his life trying to heal the divide.

What's up with that? The industrialized north had advanced weaponry and unlimited capital. The agriculture-dependent south was on the defense, with outdated weapons and their families in danger.

Lee kept throwing away his finest on battle after battle without adapting to the advanced firepower and technology of the north.

I was a little kid when I raised my hand in class and asked the teacher if Lincoln and Lee had a deal to save the Union. The teacher said he wondered too.

Trump was blamed for January 6. We're about to have a repeat in DC on September 18. So what does Trump do this time? He says take the shot, I did. And nothing else.

After that - after that - the purported leader of the free world announced his unilateral decision. He used every divisive bit of psyop language to enrage the unvax and to encourage us-them antagonism in the vax.

There's more, he said, this week. Before September 18, there's more coming from him.

Civil war in this country doesn't have a handy meridian line to distinguish us from them this time. There is no safe place to hide the kids. The last announcement is a deliberate provocation, but hey! Right before September 18 we will get even more!

Media says that in spite of crop losses to drought, shortages of hard goods from overseas, and lack of manpower - if you can't find your favorite snack at the store, it's because hoarders got it all.

Trump=unvax=hoarders=enemy. Look for the connections in this week's pre-rally announcement. Trump neutered accusations that he promotes unvax before that becomes part of the September 18 rhetoric.

Don't fall for us-them thinking. It's just psyop to get everyone fighting right here while our country has awfully bad enemies outside.

Civil War is a bad, terminally bad idea. You should really be a rebel and keep that talk off the table.
Click to expand...
Trump said take the vax before. Trump never took the vax. Trump threw his most earnest, and possibly finest, under the bus on 1/6. Lindell, Giuliani and Sidney Powell are each hanging out there alone facing about $1 billion judgments, apiece if Dominion wins the civil suits it's brought against them. Trump hasn't commented.

The analogy to an interesting question about Lee is entirely appropriate.

I suspect the reason Breyer said opaquely that the Pennsylvania v. Texas case didn't meet the normal standards for court consideration, is that Trump asked them not to consider it. And that that is classified. Just speculation, I have no special info, but it's how the pieces fit together for me.
 
Last edited:
artichoke

artichoke

Greetings from near tropical NYC!
Mtsilverback said:
If CW occurs it will most likely be a fourth generational war. And that may not get the job done. I am trending to the idea seemingly random but targeted acts of violence.
the mob would on occasion bring in help from out of town.
Click to expand...
But the idea of a territorial war is attractive now, because we have to divide. Roughly: vaxed here, unvaxed over there. It's an irreconcilable difference. Some will choose to be with the "other", but formal accommodations would be made, for example vaxed in unvaxed-land have to take ivermectin regularly every week or two to keep down otherwise undetectable viral load.

There is no longterm solution with us sharing the same patch of dirt. And so a war of conquest makes less sense. If you conquer the whole USA you still have the same problem as before of implementing the needed separation.
 
Sid Vicious

Sid Vicious

Veteran Member
The federal government is losing power all over the place foreign and domestically. I suspect that the feds are desperately wanting an armed conflict to solidify their power. My wild assed guess is that one day we are to wake up like the Russians back in the 90s with a worthless dollar and no federal government. That's how I suspect we will balkanize as the red states create a new federal government and move forward.
 
W

Walrus

Veteran Member
artichoke said:
But the idea of a territorial war is attractive now, because we have to divide. Roughly: vaxed here, unvaxed over there. It's an irreconcilable difference. Some will choose to be with the "other", but formal accommodations would be made, for example vaxed in unvaxed-land have to take ivermectin regularly every week or two to keep down otherwise undetectable viral load.

There is no longterm solution with us sharing the same patch of dirt. And so a war of conquest makes less sense. If you conquer the whole USA you still have the same problem as before of implementing the needed separation.
Click to expand...
Thoughtful post, but allow me, please, to diverge from your thoughts on a few points.

1. I see nothing attractive about a war of any kind, but most especially what I'm now calling Uncivil War 2 or UCW2. (I suspect you feel the same way).
2. Who are going to be uprooted for the separation, vaxxed or unvaxxed? I don't see either of them moving voluntarily.
3. With all their fixation on "horse paste", it's difficult to envision ivermectin being accepted by the unvaxxed as a reasonable solution - science, empirical results and meta-analysis of the many studies notwithstanding. IOW, don't confuse the enemy - yes, that's what they have solidified themselves into - with facts.
4. What I bolded - your best point with which I completely agree. But we're not the ones (generally) who feel and act that way.
5. I don't see the upcoming UCW2 as a war of conquest as much as I see it as a war of desperate survival. This will be fought in an environment of no operable grid, no food, a completely failed logistics system, horrible health/sanitation conditions, almost non-existent medical care and - even after the initial "sorting" of those who don't make it past the opening salvos - confusion identifying the enemy.
6. Your conclusion seems to assume that there will be a reasonable number of survivors on either side (or the various sides which coalesce) before a surrender or truce or things sputtering out just due to exhaustion. At this point, it's difficult to foresee UCW2 ending without a pretty-much-complete annihilation of the enemy, unless an outside solution is forced onto the survivors, a la the Bosnia/Herzegovina impasse.
 
artichoke

artichoke

Greetings from near tropical NYC!
Walrus said:
Thoughtful post, but allow me, please, to diverge from your thoughts on a few points.

1. I see nothing attractive about a war of any kind, but most especially what I'm now calling Uncivil War 2 or UCW2. (I suspect you feel the same way).
2. Who are going to be uprooted for the separation, vaxxed or unvaxxed? I don't see either of them moving voluntarily.
3. With all their fixation on "horse paste", it's difficult to envision ivermectin being accepted by the unvaxxed as a reasonable solution - science, empirical results and meta-analysis of the many studies notwithstanding. IOW, don't confuse the enemy - yes, that's what they have solidified themselves into - with facts.
4. What I bolded - your best point with which I completely agree. But we're not the ones (generally) who feel and act that way.
5. I don't see the upcoming UCW2 as a war of conquest as much as I see it as a war of desperate survival. This will be fought in an environment of no operable grid, no food, a completely failed logistics system, horrible health/sanitation conditions, almost non-existent medical care and - even after the initial "sorting" of those who don't make it past the opening salvos - confusion identifying the enemy.
6. Your conclusion seems to assume that there will be a reasonable number of survivors on either side (or the various sides which coalesce) before a surrender or truce or things sputtering out just due to exhaustion. At this point, it's difficult to foresee UCW2 ending without a pretty-much-complete annihilation of the enemy, unless an outside solution is forced onto the survivors, a la the Bosnia/Herzegovina impasse.
Click to expand...
I am trying to be a little more optimistic. It might devolve to your 5 and 6 but I'm hoping that some prep now could decrease the carnage.

3 -- I assume you mean the vaxed (you wrote unvaxed) would have trouble accepting ivermectin. In which case fine, they don't have to use it over in vaxed-land. Their policies are not our problem! I suspect they'll be incapable of self-government, but they're invited to prove me wrong and good on them if they do. My suggestion to prescribe it for the vaxed who choose to move to unvaxed-land should be agreeable to those rational folks.

4 -- that's why I am preaching now. I am trying to get us to think that way! If the vaxed are also thinking that way, it's an opportunity! We can maybe get what we want while they think they're pulling a fast one on us.

Also regarding CW scenarios, like the last one foreign powers will be taking a great interest. For example Russia helped the Union side last time. This time we know China wants to clean us off the land because, as Lin Wood reminded us, they need the space.
 
W

Walrus

Veteran Member
artichoke said:
I am trying to be a little more optimistic. It might devolve to your 5 and 6 but I'm hoping that some prep now could decrease the carnage.

3 -- I assume you mean the vaxed (you wrote unvaxed) would have trouble accepting ivermectin. In which case fine, they don't have to use it over in vaxed-land. Their policies are not our problem! I suspect they'll be incapable of self-government, but they're invited to prove me wrong and good on them if they do. My suggestion to prescribe it for the vaxed who choose to move to unvaxed-land should be agreeable to those rational folks.

4 -- that's why I am preaching now. I am trying to get us to think that way! If the vaxed are also thinking that way, it's an opportunity! We can maybe get what we want while they think they're pulling a fast one on us.

Also regarding CW scenarios, like the last one foreign powers will be taking a great interest. For example Russia helped the Union side last time. This time we know China wants to clean us off the land because, as Lin Wood reminded us, they need the space.
Click to expand...
Good stuff, thanks for the reply. Being optimistic helps ward off the insanity and depression; I don't think it's bad to be hopeful. Being watchful, aware of the possibilities and realistic about the present situation while retaining hope for a better outcome doesn't seem to me to be sticking one's head in the sand.

You're right about #3; I meant vaxxed. If they choose not to use ivermectin, that's certainly their right to choose that path.

But they're not satisfied with that; as usual, fascists want to decide which choices are available to us all. If they'd just allow doctors to treat their patients as the patients and doctors decide their courses of action between themselves, that'd be ok. One can always change from a recalcitrant doctor to another, more reasonable one, but the threat of a doctor's losing their certification is a Dobbin of a different color.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top