politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
The last time they tried a Civil war they failed, and destroyed their own economies in the process. That time, they had some of the best generals available. This time they have Boebert and Trump to lead them,
"Best generals available" might be a bit of a stretch. That's a bit of the Lost Cause mythology still wrattling about the internet.
https://history.info/did-you-know/general-lee-offered-command-union-army/
Lincoln offered Lee command of the Union Army.
Lee almost took it too, he didn't want to secede but he felt like he was betraying his fellow statesmen in Virginia. People forget that before the civil war people didn't think of themselves as Americans, they thought of themselves as citizens of whatever state they were from.
From what I've read, before the War people said "...the United States are..." and after they changed it to "...the United States IS..."
Also, I like the stories that the British had agents who privately encouraged the South to fight the North in order to keep America weak. Putin didn't invent anything new
From what you've read in.. the script of National Treasure?
On the contrary, I think your comment is a bit of a stretch in the other direction. Leaving variances in talent among individuals aside, the officers on both sides were broadly comparable because they had all gone through the same West Point training and were colleagues in the same chain of command, with the same strategy and doctrine, until the Southern ones turned traitor.
I haven't seen that part disputed? To my knowledge there was a very good reason Lee was the superintendent at the US Military Academy and was even offered a Union command before Virginia seceded, and this pattern holds with his underlings too. A lot of Confederate victories were beating odd against bigger Union armies.
When the upper threshold for greatness available to you is a 3/10, a 2.5 looks pretty good.
I understood that pro-union misinformation and propaganda and poor understanding of history is orders of magnitude less harmful than pro-confederate, but it still bothers me. Lee was an incredible general. Jackson, Longstreet, even Early were excellent tacticians. The union could not field anyone who was a match for them until Grant and Sherman.
I love "wrattling". kind of a wrestling-meets-defective-machinery.
Wasn't their general first helping to lead the Union army before Virginia turned against the Union and he turned with them?
Lee was offered comman of the union army by Lincoln.
That part of the mythos is fairly accurate.
Well it doesn't help it any that "lost cause" is 100% what some of our elected officials are spouting currently
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lost_Cause_of_the_Confederacy#:~:text=The%20Lost%20Cause%20of%20the,and%20not%20centered%20on%20slavery.
I assume ending this comment on a comma was intentional but even if it wasn't it's perfect
It was an error. I should have ended with the '...'
The U.S. government has a professional army. They have nothing. And when the vast majority of the country lives paycheck-to-paycheck, you're not going to get a lot of (male, obviously, 'cause ladies is too fragile) bodies on the front lines when people can barely feed their kids on two incomes. Not without a draft. Good luck with that, Texas.
I dont think you know about the rednecks in Texas. They all have guns and have played Call of Duty. That makes them enough of a trained militia in their eyes to make a go at it.
It's not about what they believe they're capable of, it's about what they can actually afford to do. If you have two kids and a house you're just barely able to afford and are in a large amount of debt despite both adults in the household working full time jobs, you're not likely going to let your kids starve in order to fight a war of secession.
Yeah, sure, but you see, it's all THE LIBRULS' FAULT, so you basically MUST go to war to show 'em.
Punish the enemy for all the things I blame them for
???
Profit!
The ??? is "take their money and kill them"
See: Holocaust
whats sad is they do believe that
Presumably they'd be expecting a bunch of folks in the US military with roots in Texas to defect and join them.
It will be defecrors from almost every unit, svery state. And i feel it would be a big percentage.
Why?
Now I wonder. Does Texas even have the ability to draft people into its own "army?" I'm sure they'd have plenty of volunteers itching to fight "the gubment," but the Selective Service my friends were a part of was for the US military.
I suppose if they secede, they can do whatever they want. They will claim sovereignty. So I suppose they could have a draft. I just don't think it would work out well for them.