Bang, bang shoot'em up 1, 2, 3!
#91
You have a link to back this up. I googled it and cant find any info. I did find that they did join the union on Dec. 14, 1819.
Southern States Order of Succession I am going to look a little longer and will repost if/when I find a link to the absence of Alabama. I have found several that stated it DID rejoin the Union, however, every site that states that has a different date for when it rejoined, so I'm not sure how accurate the information is. Also, all of those sites state that there were only 11 states that seceded, when in fact there were 13. The two they leave off continuously are Missouri and Kentucky, which I have found supporting information on that. I guess I actually do have to do research for a change now since I made such a bold claim, however, I have indeed found this information in this past, the only question is how reliable was my source before.
__________________
#93
Confederate Heartland Offensive/ Kentucky Campaign Don't know about Missouri, but I can't imagine all these Civil War sites would somehow "mistakenly" forget about 2 whole states IF they had published a declaration of secession.
__________________
Remember... friends are few and far between. TRUCKIN' AIN'T FOR WUSSES!!! "I am willing to admit that I was wrong." The Rev.
#95
Popping my head in for a second to point something out that should be glaringly apparent, but gets lost in the argument about who has the bigger guns.
. . .
"I" made no such assumption. I referred to a civilian uprising that, for purpose of argument, was intent on overthrowing the government.... and thus declaring war on IT! I implied that the U.S. Military would do IT'S JOB... and defend our nation, union and government "against ALL enemies, foreign OR DOMESTIC" as it says in their OATH.
* However.... Lincoln did exactly THAT.
. . .
Again, you are partially correct. They ALSO have standing orders to NOT follow any "illegal" order. But, even under such an order.... what YOU say.... to attack the civilian population (without provocation,) you wouldn't have a military COUP (necessarily.) You'd have a military "rebellion" or "stand-down." [And chaos.]
Usually... and in general.... a military coup is not a "bottom up" rebellion by troops given an order they don't like. It is a "top down" (and very secretive) PLAN to secure the support of the troops under the command of some very HIGHLY PLACED Generals to overthrow a government and especially aimed at it's leader.
. . .
Well.... I believe you are misguided in your historical knowledge. Several posters here agree with me that, during the Civil War, MANY families were split either by "lines of demarcation" or by philisophical beliefs. I don't know of any ACTUAL cases of "brother against brother," but I'm SURE there were soldiers that had to wage war on cities, towns or areas that they had "attachments" to! There are MANY stories of opposing soldiers meeting during a "cease fire" and talking about the SAME "home" and memories.
Point I was making is that the north vs. the south was nearly the equivalent of two separate countries – really was, considering the southern states had seceded and had they been victorious in the war, would have likely created a new nation. In other words, binding ties aside, it would have been a whole lot easier for the two sides to fight each other than the direction we are going today. Again, if it came to an all-out armed conflict between our government and her citizens TODAY, you are going to find that by and large, American troops are not going to go to war against their friends and families. . . .
Well, we agree on this. Unfortunately, I fear that there is such a movement afoot that MAY not be so "small scale." But, my contention stands that, if SOME Americans take up arms against our government, for anything OTHER than "self protection" against what YOU call the government declaring WAR on the citizens... or perhaps an "all out ban" on guns in the country (which will NEVER happen,) ....
The U.S. Military will do it's JOB and put such a revolt DOWN! It may be ugly. But, it will NOT be much of a contest.
Now, do you honestly think that 70 million well-armed and well-stocked American citizens, fighting on their own property for their own family, friends, and freedoms, would not be much of a contest? Talk about delusional. :roll: . . .
Again... I have said nothing about such a "full scale" uprising. I've mentioned that the TEA Party wears guns and talks TALL about "Second Amendment remedies"... and they STIR THE POT!
I have said NOTHING (and neither has Obama) about an armed attempt to disarm American citizens! I disagree with you that an all-out uprising is not a FAR-fetched scenario! I continue to believe that the remedy in America... is the VOTE! And MOST Americans, regardless of how angry they might be, are NOT advocates of militarist insurrection against our government.
Sure, there would be the share of Francis' that would be screaming 'I'll kill ya!' as they did just that.
![]() . . .
Well... this is an interesting delusion.
I hadn't THOUGHT about U.N. forces protecting our government against it's OWN military (let alone the people.) But, now that you force me to think about it? I doubt it would happen.
The U.N. Forces KNOW that they cannot win in such a situation. I'm quite sure they would "sit it out" and deal with whoever WINS!
I think you've been playing too many video games, Twilight! And watching TOO much FauxNews!
. . .
I realize that YOU are "chilled" by your delusional scenario... but, I don't believe MOST Americans are.
In general, you are "fearing" that things have gotten so bad that there MUST or WILL or MIGHT be an American ARMED uprising against some supposedly "tyrannical" government (that WE elected) sometime soon.
Furthermore.... you suspect it will be over GUN RIGHTS which MIGHT pit the military (or some PART of them) against it's own government (for the protection of their families.)
I contend that the current "militaristic" attitude is more about policy... and interestingly enough.... perhaps about States' Rights! But, the number of people who count themselves as "Tea Partiers," OR those who would support armed insurrection against our government (and not ALL gun owners would DO so...) are like a gnat on the government's AZZ!!
They will get "noticed," but they can be squashed anytime we get tired of them. That being said, I double-dog dare you to come try and squash me. Now imagine 70 million plus saying the same thing. . . .
For the record... I think they have done us a service in waking us up to government excesses! I hope something GOOD comes of it. But, anyone who thinks it will lead to revolution is DELUSIONAL!
And I appreciate that you didn't say, as so many do... that this is ONLY about Obama!
. . .
Okay... you've made your point. But....
![]()
1) The U.S. Military has DONE so before... against the citizens of the South.
2) NO president would EVER attempt an "all out ban" on GUNS in America!
3) There will never BE an "all out" revolution of the people of America against it's government. The number of people who even THINK about doing such.... LOUD AS THEY MAY BE..... are less than 5% of the population!
4) Under the WORST of secenarios.... I still believe that the MAJORITY of our armed forces will live UP to their oath, and support the government! Obviously, it would be chaos! But, history tells us that "forces" are involved that we don't see on the surface.... such as the "hostage taking" of Baltimore mentioned earlier.
5) In general, I believe this ENTIRE argument to be bogus and not worth the time to discuss! Really! There are more important matters in America today. And the answers lie in a "representative" form of government.... NOT in armed revolution!
The only question remaining is, who is going to fire the first shot?
#96
#97
But, I have to admit that I now understand some of the complaints from those who MIGHT want to respond to one of MY posts... but, just don't have the TIME! :eek2::lol2:
__________________
Remember... friends are few and far between. TRUCKIN' AIN'T FOR WUSSES!!! "I am willing to admit that I was wrong." The Rev.
#98
You gotta "feel" for these states who were, essentially, caught in the middle. Dubya told the World that they either had to be WITH us... or AGAINST us. (Had to squeeze that in.) But, it's interesting that during the Civil War, there were states who clearly stated they would NOT choose a side! Of course, their lands were ravaged anyways! (to some extent.) :hellno:
__________________
Remember... friends are few and far between. TRUCKIN' AIN'T FOR WUSSES!!! "I am willing to admit that I was wrong." The Rev.
#99
Mackman said:
Hobo must be rubbing off on you TF to make a long azz post like that.
![]() And Hobo:
What are you talking about, Mackman? Twilight has ALWAYS been a "closet" Windbag! He just felt shackled by I.B.
![]()
But, I have to admit that I now understand some of the complaints from those who MIGHT want to respond to one of MY posts... but, just don't have the TIME!
I many not agree with you on many things, but I read your posts, even the long ones. Some of the time, I may think you've gone off the deep end. But I still read what you have to say.
#100
I agree, and what I see happening, is this Executive Branch does not care about the Congressional elections this fall. Obama knows he already has unlimited power. He could care less who is keeping/loosing their seat. I'm also seeing the Judicial Branch in the cross hairs, and will soon be made as useless as Congress. (IMO for all you hobos)
__________________
|






