Sailorman wrote:Luigi: So your saying the people (women/children)in the Branch Church in Waco were violating the law and should have been slaughtered/executed like cattle for practicing their religion? That its ok to storm a church where you believe there is an illegal gun (there wasn't) Its ok to inject deadly gas and start a fire with tanks in buildings holding women and innocent children? Its ok to spry a building where women and children are with automatic weapons when no one is firing on you? The BATF/FBI F*cked up big time and got away with killing innocent people.

So the government was right at Ruby Ridge? Why then did a survivor receive millions of dollars from a court. Its ok to shoot a man's dog then his children on their own property without first handing them a search warrant from a court of law? Its ok to around on a man's property without first handing him a search warrant from a court of law and/or showing a badge? Its ok to shoot a mother holding a baby from 300 meters+ away with a high powered sniper rifle? BTW/ I love northern Idaho. A religious person would call it "gods country."

Its the same thing that started the American Civil War. People questioning federal government's rights over states(peoples) rights. Remember, its not the United Federal Government of Washington DC, but the United States of America and each state has its own set of laws. To maintain its iron-fisted control, the criminals in Washington DC must slap down all opposition even if it means violating the freedom of religion, right to assembly, and the right to be secure in your person (own house/property.)

I must say, it's very refreshing to meet Americans like Sailorman, people who question what the media fees them and understand what is going on. Too often we are showered with right-wing BS by people who wouldn't admit Ted Bundy was nasty, simply because he was American.

As I said, slavery was about 20%/25%of it. Slavery was a good excuse for the high ups in the south to form a country that was more friendly to agriculture exports and industrialization imports. The Slavery issue was a way to get the common man to fight for you. Actually having a relative that fought in the civil war instead of being some Eurpo-trash or Brit looking in from the outside, I've done extensive research. My area is actually WWI & WWII small arms, but the civil war has interest for me. BTW/ I have fired actual Civil War and Revolutionary War small arms and been to civil war battle fields. . My firearms collection is 60 firearms with 35,000 rounds of ammo. Pictured is the pride of my collection. A WWII era Browning 1919A4. Sorry (not really), my home country allows me to collect firearms, not just look at them through glass in some museum.

Sailorman, is that the Browning they used in bombers like the Mitchell and FF?

Let's just call it 22.5% which I guess is accurate because you had a relation who was a civil war veteran. Ok, sorry to mix things up with documents and stuff.

The 1919a4 was used in/on a lot of things, but the preferred arm for a B-17,B-24, B-25 was the M2 .50 cal Browning Machine gun. The 1919a4 (.30cal) was more portable for ground troops and for use on personnel carriers, tanks, etc. Fixed bases would have .50cal mounted for defense and anti-aircraft. My favorite is the Korean war quad mount (4) M2 .50cal browning's

What is interesting is some B-25Hs experimented with mounting a .75mm howitzer (ship buster). The B-25J model had 8 .50 cal brownings in the nose and 4 in side-packs

The Americans made some great aircraft, Mustang, Lightning, Catalina, Corsair gull-wing etc.

Sadly, it seems the latest multi-purpose, I think the F22, is a complete mess, and not up to mixing it with the latest Russian fighters, if it ever gets finished.

What about the new Chinese fighter that the Chinese military refuses to by because its a POS? The new airlines flying into Snookyville, is financed by China and is flying POS Chinese turbo-props that are copies of a POS Russian design. Guess I won't be flying out of Snooky anytime soon, but with all the Chinese I've seen here lately, they must not care about their lives

BTW/ Word has it that the new F-35 is an even bigger POS than the F-22.

JBTrain wrote:

Sailorman wrote:JB: You need to study the American Civil War. (my great-great grandfather fought in it and was shot at Shilo.) Slavery was about 20 to 25 % of the reason. The north was industrialized and the south was agriculture and it was all about economics, money, industrialization(and the withholding of it) and import/export.
BTW/ If Lee had attacked Washington DC instead of going to Gettysburg, things would be a little different. The south had limited resources, so needed a swift attack at the heart of the Union, not a wasted battle in some farm town.

Also go watch the movie Gettysburg, its great. It was sponsored by Ted Turner and you get to see him die in the movie. (along with a bunch of governors and higher ups that wanted cameo appearances in the movie.

I don't know where you get 20-25%. Instead of movies perhaps read the documents of secession yourself, there's no question that slavery was the core issue. You can call it "economics" if you like but the documents are crystal clear it was the slave economy they sought to protect and a lot of good people who loved their dogs and kids and such gave their lives in doomed pursuit of that protection, Southern revisionism notwithstanding . Arguments to the contrary are if you'll excuse the language, applesauce.

Mississippi :


"Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery—the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin… "

Other states documents referenced here:


http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/arc ... er/396482/

It wasnt the core issue. It was about state rights. Lincoln didnt even mention freeing the fucking slaves till half way into the war cause the union was losing. In addition!!! after the civil war America in slaved the Chinese.

I have no purpose directly or indirectly to interfere with the institution of slavery in the states where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so. <<LINCOLN

There is a natural disgust in the minds of nearly all white people to the idea of indiscriminate amalgamation of the white and black races ... A separation of the races is the only perfect preventive of amalgamation, but as an immediate separation is impossible, the next best thing is to keep them apart where they are not already together. If white and black people never get together in Kansas, they will never mix blood in Kansas ...<<<LINCOLN

The hard on for Lincoln thx to the media is out of control. WORST U.S PRESIDENT EVER. Obama #2 Bush somewhere in the teens.



Taxed the piss out of the south to feed the north. Mexican American war it was southerns who had to fight and the north did fuck all. South was naturally pissed...and was more pissed about tariffs. The south was looking to pull out 40 years before the civil war broke out.

Take your shitty fucking article and shove it. Are you even American? If you are Im disgusted by your lack of knowledge and more so you embarrassed every American on this forum.

The Add Jay wrote:
I have no purpose directly or indirectly to interfere with the institution of slavery in the states where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so. <<LINCOLN

Lincoln was "hell bent" on saving the Union at any cost:
My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or destroy Slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave, I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves, I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone, I would also do that. A letter from President Lincoln http://www.nytimes.com/1862/08/24/news/ ... union.html

The Add Jay wrote: There is a natural disgust in the minds of nearly all white people to the idea of indiscriminate amalgamation of the white and black races ... A separation of the races is the only perfect preventive of amalgamation, but as an immediate separation is impossible, the next best thing is to keep them apart where they are not already together. If white and black people never get together in Kansas, they will never mix blood in Kansas ...<<<LINCOLN

However once the Union was "saved" he was convinced that racial segregation was necessary and was planning on removing the ex slaves to a foreign colony:

It is better for us both, therefore, to be separated. I know that there are free men among you, who even if they could better their condition are not as much inclined to go out of the country as those, who being slaves could obtain their freedom on this condition. I suppose one of the principal difficulties in the way of colonization is that the free colored man cannot see that his comfort would be advanced by it. You may believe you can live in Washington or elsewhere in the United States the remainder of your life [as easily], perhaps more so than you can in any foreign country, and hence you may come to the conclusion that you have nothing to do with the idea of going to a foreign country. This is (I speak in no unkind sense) an extremely selfish view of the case..............

The question is if the colored people are persuaded to go anywhere, why not there [Liberia]? One reason for an unwillingness to do so is that some of you would rather remain within reach of the country of your nativity. I do not know how much attachment you may have toward our race. It does not strike me that you have the greatest reason to love them. But still you are attached to them at all events.

The place I am thinking about having for a colony is in Central America. It is nearer to us than Liberia---not much more than one-fourth as far as Liberia, and within seven days' run by steamers. Unlike Liberia it is on a great line of travel---it is a highway. The country is a very excellent one for any people, and with great natural resources and advantages, and especially because of the similarity of climate with your native land---thus being suited to your physical condition. http://quod.lib.umich.edu/l/lincoln/lin ... w=fulltext

great thread!