- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: How are you remembering Union Soldiers that died in the Civil War
Posted on 5/29/17 at 1:40 pm to WhiskeyPapa
Posted on 5/29/17 at 1:40 pm to WhiskeyPapa
quote:
Who does that? What agency?
Usually the ceremonies are held by people of the German-American community. There are German speakers along with American dignitaries and military.
Here is one such ceremony attended by the Governor of Utah and a brigadier general or two.
German Memorial Day services
1
Posted on 5/29/17 at 1:42 pm to WhiskeyPapa
quote:
Exactly. I have not been unclear on that.
It was a different era. You did what you were told or you face the firing squad yourself. You would have pulled that trigger damn quick to save your own arse.
Posted on 5/29/17 at 1:45 pm to SavageOrangeJug
He's holier than thou. He'd gladly let his family die then die himself rather than kill an innocent.
Of course hes lying through his teeth. He'd walk up and slit the throat of an innocent if it meant he and his family got to live.
Anyone who says they wouldn't is an absolute liar.
Of course hes lying through his teeth. He'd walk up and slit the throat of an innocent if it meant he and his family got to live.
Anyone who says they wouldn't is an absolute liar.
Posted on 5/29/17 at 1:47 pm to Volvagia
quote:
The mentality back then was the United States were a series of quasi independent association of states. See: 10th Amendment. Outside of clearly defined federal responsibilities, the states were supreme.
The head busting "Preserve the Union" bunch up North didn't seem think states were supreme.
Nor the near 150,000 White Southern Loyalist who fought for the Union & plenty of others who didn't actually fight.
Nor West Virginia who wanted no part of Virginia nor their treasonous war nor the other 4(?) border slave states.
Everyone in the South / slave states weren't on board for Treason & remained loyal to the Union.
Posted on 5/29/17 at 1:47 pm to beerJeep
quote:
The German soldiers knew they were going to frick up Poland just because they could.
And my point remains.
They served. Or they and their families died.
They were glad to be attacking Poland - a new adventure!
Seen this movie?
The plotters were all Christians. They couldn't stand by any longer.
Making excuses for bad people is pretty bad.
A plaque in the inner courtyard of the Memorial to the German Resistance, near the spot where Stauffenberg and others were executed in July 1944
“The real damage is done by those millions who want to 'survive.' The honest men who just want to be left in peace. Those who don’t want their little lives disturbed by anything bigger than themselves. Those with no sides and no causes. Those who won’t take measure of their own strength, for fear of antagonizing their own weakness.
Those who don’t like to make waves—or enemies. Those for whom freedom, honour, truth, and principles are only literature. Those who live small, mate small, die small. It’s the reductionist approach to life: if you keep it small, you’ll keep it under control. If you don’t make any noise, the bogeyman won’t find you.
But it’s all an illusion, because they die too, those people who roll up their spirits into tiny little balls so as to be safe. Safe?! From what?
Life is always on the edge of death; narrow streets lead to the same place as wide avenues, and a little candle burns itself out just like a flaming torch does. I choose my own way to burn.”
-- Sophie Scholl
May 9, 1921 - February 22, 1943
Executed for anti-Nazi activities at age 21.
At least Sophie and her Brother Hans -executed the same day- weren't like everyone else.
Posted on 5/29/17 at 1:49 pm to sugar71
quote:
The mentality back then was the United States were a series of quasi independent association of states. See: 10th Amendment. Outside of clearly defined federal responsibilities, the states were supreme.
Obviously not as two million soldiers who served in the Union Army can attest.
Posted on 5/29/17 at 1:52 pm to SavageOrangeJug
quote:
Exactly. I have not been unclear on that. It was a different era.
You did what you were told or you face the firing squad yourself.
The German soldiers rolling on Poland had no problem with it whatsoever. They knew what the Drang Nach osten was, and they supported it.
Posted on 5/29/17 at 1:54 pm to WhiskeyPapa
Now you're just deflecting. Actually, flailing is closer to the truth.
Posted on 5/29/17 at 1:55 pm to WhiskeyPapa
your shtick is pathetic dude. I like how you bring in a MOVIE.
Also, the plots on Hitlers life were from within the high command. We're talking about the grunt. The average man taken out of his house.
quote:
Sophie Scholl
Oh look. Another non grunt. Another person we aren't talking about. She seems like a pretentious, selfish count who died for remembrance. She died for her ideology.
I don't trust anyone who is willing to die for an ideology. You live once. Live for yourself. No idea is worth dying for.
Keep moving the goal post. None of it changes the fact that if you were a German citizen in your late teens early 20s during the war or the interwar period. You would have said yes sir, and gunned down innocent people to save your own hide.
Hell, I'd slit YOUR throat. Today. No remorse. If It meant I got to live.
If it comes down to it, and it's you or me. I'll kill you every time. I at least have the balls to admit that. Unlike you.
Posted on 5/29/17 at 2:01 pm to WhiskeyPapa
quote:
They were glad to be attacking Poland - a new adventure!
Just curious. How many first hand accounts and journals of German soldiers whom were participants in the attack on Poland have you read? You seem pretty damn sure of how they felt.
If you have, in fact, read some. Please, tell me where to find them. I do love me some first hand accounts and journals and I will read them.
Because everything that I have read states what I've been saying. They're ordinary men. Following orders.
Also, I know this may come off as a surprise.. But in every war, the first hand accounts are always cheerful and of talks of adventure and excitement.
Read up on some American journals leading up to our first attacks in world war one. Nothing but excitement about the big adventure across the pond to destroy old fritz.
This post was edited on 5/29/17 at 2:05 pm
Posted on 5/29/17 at 2:05 pm to SavageOrangeJug
quote:
It was a different era. You did what you were told or you face the firing squad yourself.
Did you know that Nazi Germany had very permissive personal gun control laws?
"The 1938 German Weapons Act, the precursor of the current weapons law, superseded the 1928 law. As under the 1928 law, citizens were required to have a permit to carry a firearm and a separate permit to acquire a firearm. But under the new law:
Gun restriction laws applied only to handguns, not to long guns or ammunition. The 1938 revisions completely deregulated the acquisition and transfer of rifles and shotguns, and the possession of ammunition.[8]
The legal age at which guns could be purchased was lowered from 20 to 18.[9]
Permits were valid for three years, rather than one year.[9]
More classes of user were exempt from the requirement to hold an acquisition permit; holders of annual hunting permits, government workers, and NSDAP (the National Socialist German Workers' Party, aka the Nazi party) members were no longer subject to gun ownership restrictions. Prior to the 1938 law, only officials of the central government, the states, and employees of the German Reichsbahn Railways were exempted.[8]
Manufacture of arms and ammunition continued to require a permit, with the proviso that such permits would no longer be issued to any company even partly owned by Jews; Jews could not manufacture or deal in firearms or ammunition.[8]
LINK
I know you are not very smart so I will explain this to you. In 1938 the Nazis had no problem getting compliance with their policies.
You are conflating -- that is a big word but I am going to use it any way -- what little you know with what actually happened.
Once the USAAF and the RAF were burning every city in Germany to the ground and the war in Russia especially was in the toilet - The Nazis DID go to very repressive measures - especially by threatening the families of high ranking officers.
But in 1939 they were not doing that. They didn't have to. German soldiers were perfectly fine with attacking Poland. And France and the Low Countries.
The German people were somewhat antsy about another two front war, but that was in the future in 1939.
This post was edited on 5/29/17 at 2:07 pm
Posted on 5/29/17 at 2:06 pm to sugar71
How is it that ANYTHING you said contested ANYTHING I did.
All I said was from 1776 to 1865, the idea was discussed as a legal possibility and never shot down.
However, you are 100% wrong in saying (and emote laughing) that "the Preserve the Union bunch up North didn't seem think (sic) states were supreme."
In your rush to defend your preconceived viewpoint you missed the implications of the words: You can (gasp) think that the states trump the federal government outside of aforementioned defined areas of responsibility AND believe a state doesn't have a right to separate themselves from the Union. That isn't even a contradictory thought process.
You are just as bad as the other guy making a rash, off the cuff, judgement of someone. Rushing to a judgement so fast that it is more a reaction than a considered thought, and filling in the gaps created by the skipped logical steps with assumptions.
All I said was from 1776 to 1865, the idea was discussed as a legal possibility and never shot down.
However, you are 100% wrong in saying (and emote laughing) that "the Preserve the Union bunch up North didn't seem think (sic) states were supreme."
In your rush to defend your preconceived viewpoint you missed the implications of the words: You can (gasp) think that the states trump the federal government outside of aforementioned defined areas of responsibility AND believe a state doesn't have a right to separate themselves from the Union. That isn't even a contradictory thought process.
You are just as bad as the other guy making a rash, off the cuff, judgement of someone. Rushing to a judgement so fast that it is more a reaction than a considered thought, and filling in the gaps created by the skipped logical steps with assumptions.
Posted on 5/29/17 at 2:08 pm to WhiskeyPapa
Sigh. You have resorted to using Wikipedia to make your arguments. Get gud.
Your lack of knowledge on the subject is just amazing. Just bow out dude. You're out manned and out gunned. You're fighting a losing battle. And you know it. It's why you're constantly changing the subject and now backing up your bullshite with Wikipedia.
Your lack of knowledge on the subject is just amazing. Just bow out dude. You're out manned and out gunned. You're fighting a losing battle. And you know it. It's why you're constantly changing the subject and now backing up your bullshite with Wikipedia.
Posted on 5/29/17 at 2:14 pm to Volvagia
quote:
All I said was from 1776 to 1865, the idea was discussed as a legal possibility and never shot down.
Yes it was. You should review the Prize Cases.
Prize Cases (1863) – 67 U.S. 635[1] – was a case argued before the Supreme Court of the United States in 1862 during the American Civil War. The Supreme Court's decision declared constitutional the blockade of the Southern ports ordered by President Abraham Lincoln. The opinion in the case was written by Supreme Court Justice Robert Cooper Grier...
On March 10, 1863, the Court ruled that the states of the Southern Confederacy were in insurrection and at war against the United States by acts of belligerency on April 12 and April 17, 1861, to wit: the firing upon Fort Sumter and the Privateering Act proclaimed by Confederate President Jefferson Davis. Lincoln's Proclamation of Blockade was made on April 19, 1861, [Navy Official Records, Series 1, Volume 5, page 620] two days after Davis's call for privateers and it was founded upon acting against privateers, not an open policy of warfare as was later recommended by the ranking General of the Army, Winfield Scott."
LINK
Insurrection against the lawful government. All that legal secession/tenth amendment crap was shot down right away.
Posted on 5/29/17 at 2:18 pm to WhiskeyPapa
Idk how I've just now realized this.
You're literally just searching on Wikipedia then copy and pasting and trying to sound informed on the subject.
Holy. fricking. shite.
Id bet 100 bucks that you had zero idea who the German chick and her brother were, nor their stories, until you typed into Google "anti-nazi resistance" and scoured Wikipedia.
You are the lowest of the low.
Bow the frick out and never try to pass off shite you Googled as your own thoughts or knowledge.
You are a literal piece of shite.
You're literally just searching on Wikipedia then copy and pasting and trying to sound informed on the subject.
Holy. fricking. shite.
Id bet 100 bucks that you had zero idea who the German chick and her brother were, nor their stories, until you typed into Google "anti-nazi resistance" and scoured Wikipedia.
You are the lowest of the low.
Bow the frick out and never try to pass off shite you Googled as your own thoughts or knowledge.
You are a literal piece of shite.
Posted on 5/29/17 at 2:21 pm to beerJeep
quote:
Sophie Scholl Oh look. Another non grunt. Another person we aren't talking about. She seems like a pretentious, selfish count who died for remembrance. She died for her ideology.
Wow.
Sophie Scholl was executed for anti-nazi activities - distributing anti-nazi leaflets.
She was executed the same day as her trial.
You are in luck!
This whole movie - made in Germany in 2005 - is available on Youtube.
Sophie Scholl the Final Days
Jump over to 1:32:40 on this video and hear Sophie talk anbout human dignity - something you didn't hear much about in Nazi Germany - or the CSA.
She was beheaded.
Maybe you like the Nazis as much as you like the confederates? There are some similarities.
This post was edited on 5/29/17 at 2:34 pm
Posted on 5/29/17 at 2:23 pm to WhiskeyPapa
quote:
You should review the Prize Cases
You should think about words instead of just reading and repeating them.
I do know about the Prize Cases.
I also know that it started after the Civil War started, and therefore not relevant at all to discussions as to the perceived legality during succession.
The extra two years in the quote is from regardless of stated in-war pronouncements, the legality would be determined by the outcome of the war.
You know, kinda like how Lincoln only freeing the slaves in territory not loyal to him and allowing slavery to remain everywhere else? Wouldn't have meant shite if the Union hadn't won.
This post was edited on 5/29/17 at 2:24 pm
Posted on 5/29/17 at 2:27 pm to WhiskeyPapa
You're a piece of work. quote:
Sophie Scholl was executed for anti-nazi activities - distributing anti-nazi leaflets.
And you had no idea who she was until you Googled 30 min ago. If you're going to argue with me, I'd prefer you use your own arguments. Instead of googling.
quote:
She was executed the same day as her trial.
And you know what? She did zero good by dying. Meanwhile, she could have kept her mouth shut and not died for her ideology like the countless other non selfish Germans who helped countless jews escape.
She was a selfish and pretentious count. If she weren't, she wouldn't be known today. She would be a random German who did good.
quote:
She was beheaded.
And how many people did she save, post mortem? Zero.
quote:
Maybe you like the Nazis as much as you like the confederates? There are some similarities
you really are a joke. Come up with one original arguement. Just one.
I'd love to have this discussion face to face that way you don't have Google and the internet to form your thinly laced arguments upon.
I'd wipe the floor with you, even more so than I'm doing now.
Sit down, boy.
Posted on 5/29/17 at 2:37 pm to Volvagia
quote:
I do know about the Prize Cases.
I also know that it started after the Civil War started, and therefore not relevant at all to discussions as to the perceived legality during succession.
'succession'? WTF is that?
It is hard to run court cases on events that have not happened.
The Supreme Court disallowed all this "club of states"/tenth amendment crap as soon as it presented itself.
Why don't you just stick with what the actual people said - rebellion was imperative to protect slavery.
This post was edited on 5/29/17 at 2:38 pm
Posted on 5/29/17 at 2:40 pm to beerJeep
quote:
Come up with one original arguement. Just one.
Oh, I dunno. You don't hear the Nazis and the Slave Power compared that often. But what were the Nazis but an advance on the ideas of the so-called CSA?
Page 14 of 19
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News