virginia s g0vt. p0ised t0 spark civil unrest

Right? Left? Centre?
Political news and debate.
Put your views and articles up for debate and destruction!
wesw
Posts: 9646
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2014 1:24 am
Location: the eastern shore

virginia s g0vt. p0ised t0 spark civil unrest

Post by wesw »

and the sherriff s and lcal gvt s are p0ised t0 f0rm well regulated militias, as is their, and 0ur right.

the drac0nian and unc0nstituti0nal laws that are in the w0rks are ast0undingly unwise.

I w0uld p0st a link, but hey, I g0tta be me.

:ok

wesw
Posts: 9646
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2014 1:24 am
Location: the eastern shore

Re: virginia s g0vt. p0ised t0 spark civil unrest

Post by wesw »

Virginia is set t0 spark its third rev0luti0n.

User avatar
Bicycle Bill
Posts: 9797
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2015 1:10 pm
Location: Living in a suburb of Berkeley on the Prairie along with my Yellow Rose of Texas

Re: virginia s g0vt. p0ised t0 spark civil unrest

Post by Bicycle Bill »

Why not?  They did so well with the other two.
Wait — what other two revolutions?

The American Revolution?  Most events leading up to the Revolution happened north of there — the Boston Massacre, the Boston Tea Party, the Sons of Liberty, the Continental Congress in Philly, and Paul Revere's Ride.  And when 'The Shot Heard 'Round the World' was fired, it was at the "rude bridge which arched the flood" in Concord, Massachusetts.  Valley Forge was in New York; when Washington crossed the Delaware it was to attack the Hessians in Trenton, NJ; and most of the critical battles were fought in locations other than Virginia such as Massachusetts (the Battle of Bunker Hill), New Jersey (the Battle of Monmouth), and New York (Battles of Saratoga, White Plains, Bennington, Brooklyn Heights, and Long Island — a/k/a the Battle of Harlem Heights).  Virginia was the site of the Siege of Yorktown, the penultimate battle of the revolution, which ended with the surrender of the British troops under Lord Cornwallis to General Washington after all the fight had been taken out of them elsewhere.

The Civil War (a/k/a The War of the Rebellion)?  OK, Virginia had a little more to do with this one, I'll give you that.  Richmond was, after all, the capital of the Confederacy; Robert E. Lee (who eventually became supreme commander of the Confederate forces) was also a Virginian; the first battle between the two armies took place at Manassas; and many areas of Virginia and its environs were turned into battlefields.  But again, the first shots were fired at Fort Sumter in Charleston, SC; when General Sherman was sent to bisect the south he marched his armies to the sea through Georgia, not Virginia; the Confederacy's president was born in Kentucky and lived in Mississippi when he was called to office; and the fact that he was the one and only president of the Confederacy sort of tells us all we need to know about how this particular revolution played out.

So go ahead.  Let Virginia start another "revolution".  It'll get settled out soon enough.
Image
-"BB"-
Yes, I suppose I could agree with you ... but then we'd both be wrong, wouldn't we?

User avatar
Sue U
Posts: 9103
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:59 pm
Location: Eastern Megalopolis, North America (Midtown)

Re: virginia s g0vt. p0ised t0 spark civil unrest

Post by Sue U »

Bicycle Bill wrote:Valley Forge was in New York;
Ummm ..... the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania would like a word with you.
GAH!

User avatar
Bicycle Bill
Posts: 9797
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2015 1:10 pm
Location: Living in a suburb of Berkeley on the Prairie along with my Yellow Rose of Texas

Re: virginia s g0vt. p0ised t0 spark civil unrest

Post by Bicycle Bill »

Sue U wrote:
Bicycle Bill wrote:Valley Forge was in New York;
Ummm ..... the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania would like a word with you.
Ooops!! :oops: :oops:

But my point still stands — it wasn't Virginia.
Image
-"BB"-
Yes, I suppose I could agree with you ... but then we'd both be wrong, wouldn't we?

Big RR
Posts: 14911
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 9:47 pm

Re: virginia s g0vt. p0ised t0 spark civil unrest

Post by Big RR »

Bill--perhaps Meade could confirm this, but as I recall, I don't thibk the Confederacy ever had a "supreme commander", and Lee commanded only the Army of Northern Virginia. This was certainly the most important CSA army, and the one which defended Richmond and saw the most battles, but I think for the bulk of the war Lee was not a general but a colonel (and he wore a colonel's uniform). I agree it is nitpicking, but that is my understanding. Indeed, it was this lack of coordination among the CSA armies that gave the confederacy a lot of trouble.

User avatar
Sue U
Posts: 9103
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:59 pm
Location: Eastern Megalopolis, North America (Midtown)

Re: virginia s g0vt. p0ised t0 spark civil unrest

Post by Sue U »

It's a very popular spot for biking, thought you should know in case you're ever out here.
GAH!

User avatar
Lord Jim
Posts: 29716
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 12:44 pm
Location: TCTUTKHBDTMDITSAF

Re: virginia s g0vt. p0ised t0 spark civil unrest

Post by Lord Jim »

most of the critical battles were fought in locations other than Virginia
Yeah, well before you go dissin' The Commonwealth Of Virginia's role in the Revolutionary War, you might recall this little event.. (it was in all the papers):
Surrender at Yorktown

Image

On October 19, 1781, British General Charles Cornwallis surrendered his army of some 8,000 men to General George Washington at Yorktown, giving up any chance of winning the Revolutionary War. Cornwallis had marched his army into the Virginia port town earlier that summer expecting to meet British ships sent from New York. The ships never arrived.
https://www.loc.gov/item/today-in-history/october-19/

A lot of folks would consider that "critical"...

More info about Virginia's role in the revolution here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia_ ... Revolution

Of course none of this has any relevance to Wes's blather...

As we all know, with his contempt for representative government and his love for an all powerful king, had wes been around at the time of the revolution, he'd have been a royalist supporter of the Red Coats...
ImageImageImage

User avatar
MajGenl.Meade
Posts: 21470
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 8:51 am
Location: Groot Brakrivier
Contact:

Re: virginia s g0vt. p0ised t0 spark civil unrest

Post by MajGenl.Meade »

Big RR wrote:Bill--perhaps Meade could confirm this, but as I recall, I don't thibk the Confederacy ever had a "supreme commander", and Lee commanded only the Army of Northern Virginia. This was certainly the most important CSA army, and the one which defended Richmond and saw the most battles, but I think for the bulk of the war Lee was not a general but a colonel (and he wore a colonel's uniform). I agree it is nitpicking, but that is my understanding. Indeed, it was this lack of coordination among the CSA armies that gave the confederacy a lot of trouble.
One of the weaknesses of any confederacy - state's rats. The contradictory pull of state/political considerations versus the need for central authority/governance. The "lack of coordination" between armies was more a result of following the wrong strategy (an impossible one) rather than the lack of a supreme military commander. Unless you count Scott, McClellan and Halleck (don't), the USA didn't have a real supreme commander until Grant - and his advantage is obvious; strategic and tactical command was easier for the Federals in the shrunken Confederacy.

Jefferson Davis was the Commander in Chief with a strategy of holding all rebel territory no matter what - a doomed policy. It's not that he wasn't "qualified" to be CinC (better so than Lincoln) but that he was bound to be not very good at it by personality and political reality pertaining in the "new nation".

Lee was a General from the get-go in the Confederacy; head of the Army of Virginia until tapped to be Davis' military advisor (March to April 1862) where he exercised more control over strategy than any military commander until he became General in Chief January to April 1865. But you are right - he wore colonel's stars (that is, 3) throughout the war. Apparently intending to add a 4th if the Confederacy was victorious.

Braxton Bragg was Davis' advisor February 1864 to January 1865 with theoretical command of all armies until Lee took over with actual authority. By that time, central command was "easier" for the rebels too - all they had left to do was lose.
For Christianity, by identifying truth with faith, must teach-and, properly understood, does teach-that any interference with the truth is immoral. A Christian with faith has nothing to fear from the facts

Big RR
Posts: 14911
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 9:47 pm

Re: virginia s g0vt. p0ised t0 spark civil unrest

Post by Big RR »

Point taken Meade re Lee's rank and position, but wasn't Winfield Scott the de facto Union general in charge of all the armies. I know he was too old to be a battlefield commander, but I do think he pulled a lot of the main strategy together, at least before Grant.

User avatar
Lord Jim
Posts: 29716
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 12:44 pm
Location: TCTUTKHBDTMDITSAF

Re: virginia s g0vt. p0ised t0 spark civil unrest

Post by Lord Jim »

And let's not forget about Bobby Lee's old man, Light Horse Harry, who served with distinction during The Revolution:
Henry Lee III

Image

Major-General Henry "Light-Horse Harry" Lee III (January 29, 1756 – March 25, 1818) was an early American Patriot and politician. He served as the ninth Governor of Virginia and as the Virginia Representative to the United States Congress. Lee's service during the American Revolution as a cavalry officer in the Continental Army earned him the nickname by which he is best known, "Light-Horse Harry".[note 1] He was the father of Robert E. Lee, commander of the Confederate armies in the American Civil War.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Lee_III
ImageImageImage

User avatar
MajGenl.Meade
Posts: 21470
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 8:51 am
Location: Groot Brakrivier
Contact:

Re: virginia s g0vt. p0ised t0 spark civil unrest

Post by MajGenl.Meade »

Big RR wrote:Point taken Meade re Lee's rank and position, but wasn't Winfield Scott the de facto Union general in charge of all the armies. I know he was too old to be a battlefield commander, but I do think he pulled a lot of the main strategy together, at least before Grant.
He got a mention: "Unless you count Scott, McClellan and Halleck (don't), the USA didn't have a real supreme commander until Grant"

Scott was too old and fat to sit on a horse, let alone an army. Yes, he was HMWBIC but was replaced by McClellan in October 1861. Little Mac looked a good bet to Lincoln etc. following his ahem victories in what became West Virginia (which on the other side Lee took some blame for "losing"). Terrific organizer, GBMcC but out of his depth in overall command - hence Halleck, who hated Grant, did his best to mess up the Mississippi campaign and eventually subsided into a much better role as Grant's chief of staff.

Scott lived long enough to see Grant essentially enact his own much derided "Anaconda Plan" of cutting the Confederacy in two by seizing the Mississippi and then squeezing inward. Poor old "Fuss and Feathers" wasn't in tune with the popular Federal delusion that the war was winnable in Virginia ("on to Richmond!") and other areas were not all that important. Interesting to speculate what might have happened if Scott had remained in charge. Probably not much as he was too bothered by health issues to stand up to the wear and tear of what turned out to be a long and grisly war.
For Christianity, by identifying truth with faith, must teach-and, properly understood, does teach-that any interference with the truth is immoral. A Christian with faith has nothing to fear from the facts

Big RR
Posts: 14911
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 9:47 pm

Re: virginia s g0vt. p0ised t0 spark civil unrest

Post by Big RR »

That is an interesting question; the one thing Scott would have needed is good battlefield generals who could make the decisions in the field and help him strategize to do well, and I don't think he had that. It would have been interesting to have seen what would have happened if he had that from the outset.

wesw
Posts: 9646
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2014 1:24 am
Location: the eastern shore

Re: virginia s g0vt. p0ised t0 spark civil unrest

Post by wesw »

y0u miss the p0int.

User avatar
BoSoxGal
Posts: 20061
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 10:36 pm
Location: The Heart of Red Sox Nation

Re: virginia s g0vt. p0ised t0 spark civil unrest

Post by BoSoxGal »

Is this the hoax you’re nattering on about wesw?
A noted white nationalist fabricated a claim about guns and Virginia’s governor that has spread in the past week throughout social media and on far-right message boards. The hoax has drawn tens of thousands of engagements and views, and some have issued calls to violence in response.

Following the Democratic takeover of the Virginia state legislature in November’s elections, the state’s Democratic governor, Ralph Northam, said he would reintroduce multiple gun safety bills. In response, multiple counties in the state declared themselves “Second Amendment sanctuaries,” adopting largely symbolic resolutions that say they will not enforce what they deem to be unconstitutional gun laws.

On December 13, Rep. Donald McEachin (D-VA) suggested that Northam use the state’s National Guard to enforce the bills if they become law. That same day, the Twitter account for the Virginia National Guard tweeted that it had “not received any requests from the Governor, or anyone on his staff, about serving in a law enforcement role related to any proposed legislation” and encouraging residents to “be patient while we allow our elected officials to work through the legislative process.” Northam himself a day earlier had said that there would be “consequences” if localities did not enforce the law, but he said only that he would “cross that bridge if and when we get to it.”

Also on December 13, Hal Turner, a white nationalist radio host who has a history of spreading false claims and hoaxes, posted on his website that Northam had “allegedly ordered a small cadre of staffers to begin the process for determining how to cut off electricity, telephones/ FAXES, Cellular phones AND DATA, as well as the Internet, in areas where he plans to send Virginia National Guard Troops to forcibly seize guns when the Democrat legislature convenes in January.” Turner further claimed that the order “was allegedly given to a very small and trusted group of staffers, some of whom it turns out, do not agree (at all) with this idea.”
more here
For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
~ Carl Sagan

wesw
Posts: 9646
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2014 1:24 am
Location: the eastern shore

Re: virginia s g0vt. p0ised t0 spark civil unrest

Post by wesw »

never heard 0f it.

gun bills.

User avatar
Scooter
Posts: 17271
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 6:04 pm
Location: Toronto, ON

Re: virginia s g0vt. p0ised t0 spark civil unrest

Post by Scooter »

I get that you and your fellow ammosexuals don't like the fact that Virginia is looking to enact a ban on assault firearms, among other common sense proposals

I also know that the people of Virginia knew that it was coming when they bestowed trifecta control on the Democrats, in a campaign where gun control was a central theme.

And this is far from the first time that you have advocated armed revolution to forestall or overturn a political result that you do not like, because when all is said and done, you do not believe in the rule of law.
"Hang on while I log in to the James Webb telescope to search the known universe for who the fuck asked you." -- James Fell

wesw
Posts: 9646
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2014 1:24 am
Location: the eastern shore

Re: virginia s g0vt. p0ised t0 spark civil unrest

Post by wesw »

0h, its al0t w0rse than that.

read the bills....

learn the extent 0f the pr0p0sed laws

read the news fr0m Virginia.

learn what the sheriffs are d0ing

learn what the t0wns and c0unties are d0ing.

the pe0ple are the g0vt.

g0vern0r blackface is learning, I h0pe.

wesw
Posts: 9646
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2014 1:24 am
Location: the eastern shore

Re: virginia s g0vt. p0ised t0 spark civil unrest

Post by wesw »

I am advocating n0thing.

I am 0bserving and rep0rting.

User avatar
Lord Jim
Posts: 29716
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 12:44 pm
Location: TCTUTKHBDTMDITSAF

Re: virginia s g0vt. p0ised t0 spark civil unrest

Post by Lord Jim »

I am 0bserving and rep0rting.
Actually you're dissembling and misinforming, but thanks for playing...
ImageImageImage

Post Reply