Reparations for slavery: pro or con?

[thorough9]

Originally Posted by john_galt

Well, forget the anti-Semitic T9, he lacks the intellect to have a rational argument about nearly anything. This is obvious from his posts; a collect of raving insults, unprovable claims, and just general nastiness. JR, your "insults" go so far over his brutish mind that he doesn't even know he was insulted. Well, I have made my points that have not been refuted even by the syphilitic ravings of T9 and now it is time to go back to the real world. I post this so the world knows, though I don't think T9 ever will, I am putting T9 into the ignore column. He will go on thinking he has accomplished something like the football player who runs the length of the field into the end zone. He starts his end zone dance only then discovering that he dropped the ball back on the 30 yard line. A fool's fool. So long T9. Auf Wiedersehen.

Well, Well, Well!! Look who's run their little bitch-ass off of the porch to get some more.... You are pathetic, Joana. I guess that you've mustered up enough courage to give it another go and try to respond, now that you think that JR is your backup - typical little playground bullshit. The two of you, together, wouldn't recognize Intellect, Reason, or a Point if they ripped off your heads and shit "Knowledge" down your necks. LMAO! Joana, Weren't you the same little, skirt-wearing, dipshit that was crying for the mods to come and rescue you a couple of posts ago? LMAO! "please close this thread" ROTFLMAO!!!

Do you seriously think that I give a shit if you call me Anti-Semetic? You would be the Subject Matter Expert in all matters concerning hate, prejudice, and unfounded bigotry, wouldn't you, Joana? But that makes sense, considering that the aformentioned qualities are usually the products of cowardice - or a gang-rape - LMAO!!!!

The more that you talk, Joana, the more you just sound like a raving lunatic. You want a football analogy - here's one: You're the F'n Waterboy - the cow-herding, sheep-fucking, Bubba Bouche' - still living in a single-room house, with mommy - the disfuntional supplier of "high quality bullshit" who watches from the sidelines - hoping to pick up something to be repeated later, sucking his thumb.

You and JR together, huh. It takes two of you to even begin to be able to compete - i guess that means that I'm twice the intellectual equal of either of you. LOL.

Here's a bit of "knowledge" for you: There is no safety in numbers. 500 fools in one room, does not make any one particular fool, any less foolish.

Sweet Dreams, Joana! And you stay away from that Foos-Ball! LMAO!

[herfacechair]

Originally Posted by JRLawrence

Wow, very good. I did not know that about the balloon recon. Thank you. From my reading about the first true brass alloy (production of zinc) the impression was left that it was not only the new cannon that stopped the Confederacy, but it was the cannon alone that stopped the capture of the Union troops.

Anyway,

It is long over, and I agree the questions are moot. A study of history does give us insight into how we should make decisions today.

I do believe that without slavery, we would have still had a civil war due to the regional differences. I believe that history supports this view. In addition to the anger and prejudices due to regional differences, when the anger over slavery is thrown into the soup: the pot boiled over.

JR

The US military is good at incorporating new technologies. Sometimes, it takes a while for us to recognize the significance of new developments, but so far we've got a good track record in bringing new technologies in. We'll use new technologies to reduce our death rate, capture rate, injury rate, etc. For example, our current IFAKs… had our combat units in Vietnam had them, they would've experienced less hemorrhage related battlefield deaths. If they had the equipment that we used in Iraq, they could've reduced the KIA, MIA, POW, etc numbers during the Vietnam War.

The Civil War wasn't an exception when it came to utilizing new technologies. Some of the history works I've read describe it as the first "modern" war. Many of the weapon concepts we have today saw their first action during that war. The Gatling gun, and the iron, versus wooden, warships are a couple examples.

The Union's cannons did help cover the union forces as they retreated, and contributed to putting southerners in disarray. But with just 4 or five cannons… without infantry support, those cannons could've easily been overrun from the front and flanked from the sides. Their effectiveness could've been reduced by reducing troop numbers in their kill radius… by spreading the advancing troops out.

I think that it's unfortunate that way too many people see history as nothing but dates, times and names. It takes on a more interesting element when it's seen as a history of the human experience. This is something that we could use when it comes to making decisions today.

Let's take the Battle of Bull run for example.

The Union thought that this was going to be a quick and easy fight, and that the Federal troops were going to quickly put an end to the South's defiance. They were so confident that their families went to watch the battle. When the Union soldiers retreated, their families' spectating positions became barriers that frustrated Union retreat.

Could this have been avoided?

Boadicea (Boudicca) et al made the same mistake when they revolted against the Romans. The Celts enjoyed a series of successes. In their final battle, Celt families formed to watch what they thought would be another easy victory. Instead, the Romans capitalized on their advantage and turned the fight into a one sided slaughter. They pushed the Celts back. The Celts tried to escape, but ran against their spectating families… which caused more Celt warrior deaths.

Union Soldiers could've reduced their KIA, MIA and POW incidences had they been more familiar with that battle, and related it to what they were currently doing.

As for the Civil War,

That was the boiling point for issues that existed during the colonial times. The colonists put these issues aside to deal with a bigger problem. But after the Revolutionary War, the Qausi War with France, The Barbary Wars (Our first War on Terror), and the War of 1812, these issues festered… got put aside temporarily during the Mexican American war. After that war, conditions were ripe that lead us into the Civil War. Without slavery, we could've fought the Civil War later, or we may have had a "crises" near war.

[JRLawrence]

Originally Posted by herfacechair

........
As for the Civil War,

That was the boiling point for issues that existed during the colonial times. The colonists put these issues aside to deal with a bigger problem. But after the Revolutionary War, the Qausi War with France, The Barbary Wars (Our first War on Terror), and the War of 1812, these issues festered… got put aside temporarily during the Mexican American war. After that war, conditions were ripe that lead us into the Civil War. Without slavery, we could've fought the Civil War later, or we may have had a "crises" near war.

The entire quote is very good. As for the civil war, I couldn't make the point better. Very good. The conditions were indeed ripe; Lincoln's elections was the "the final straw".

History is fun, if you look beyond the attempt to influence the present with the telling of only one side of the story.

JR

[thorough9]

Originally Posted by JRLawrence

The entire quote is very good. As for the civil war, I couldn't make the point better. Very good. The conditions were indeed ripe; Lincoln's elections was the "the final straw".

History is fun, if you look beyond the attempt to influence the present with the telling of only one side of the story.

JR

Now, Dr. Who, all you have to do is hop into your handy-dandy time machine, 1 Each, go back in time, and re-write history to fit your bullshit agenda - inconsequential new twists, and all. LOL.
BTW, I bet that you probably jacked-off while reading the "JR is right" posts. ROTFLMAO!!!

P.S. I'd love to get my hand on one of the "books" that you wrote - LMAO!!

[JRLawrence]

Originally Posted by thorough9

P.S. I'd love to get my hand on one of the "books" that you wrote - LMAO!!

Sorry, but my book only sold 96 copies last year. I would call the other a booklet. I don't make much money off the books. The third book is being formated as more of a reference item. The books, and the once in a while journal articles get cited for other work, including patents. So I get listed as an "expert" (X being an unknown quantity, and a spurt is a gushing stream: if you get the joke) in a very narrow field. I get called to testify in court, and/or give a deposition concerning this narrow field of work. Plus, most in this field are older than me. I hate to see them die, but it helps my business.

My other hobby is history, or trying to understand history. It is fun to find something and say: "hay, that is new. I didn't know that!" Learning is fun. With history I am outside of my field. The value of learning history it that knowledge of the past may help us to understand the present. But, you are also right to take the attitude that implies: that may be interesting, but I have to get up tomorrow, go to my job, and make a living for my family.

We all have to go to work! But some things we do for fun.

Life is too short; have a little fun.

JR

[CuteOldGuy]

Originally Posted by JRLawrence

Life is too short; have a little fun.

A big +1!

[simplyme]

How about just NO?