Author Topic: Another Disaster Reporter has a Rod Serling Moment (Read 3767 times)

rabbidrabbit · « **Reply #90 on:** September 14, 2005, 02:13:11 PM »

naw, that would dispell his pointless point.

Raider179 · « **Reply #91 on:** September 14, 2005, 02:21:30 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by rabbidrabbit
They did quite well even at lex and concord.. you might want to read past chapter 3..

LoL Lex and Concord were Basically the same engagement... And their were minutemen involved as well. The militia itself is worthless.

In the majority of their battles 75% they fled. That is not the sign of a good defensive or offensive army. You need to read back over chapter 3.

Raider179 · « **Reply #92 on:** September 14, 2005, 02:24:13 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Toad
Who do you think made up the initial cadre of the Contintental Army?

The Continental Army was no powerhouse either. GW lost/tied 7 of 10 battles. And his 3 victories were little more than raids. GW's strategy was to AVOID major battles because he knew keeping the Army Alive was the only way the revolution would continue. And that in a toe to toe engagement with the British he would get spanked.

Raider179 · « **Reply #93 on:** September 14, 2005, 02:26:03 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Toad
He might also want to check out some former militia officers that were in the Continental Army.

Yeah you might. Considering Militia officers were the most worthless of All. They were frequently not interested in military affairs and only held positions in the militia for social interests/standing. I will concede there were a few good men but for the majority the Militia was a bunch of worthless men who would run at the first sign of a real fight. Not to mention mutiny.

Toad · « **Reply #94 on:** September 14, 2005, 02:43:23 PM »

George Washington, Virginia Militia

You need to do a bit more study.

lazs2 · « **Reply #95 on:** September 14, 2005, 02:45:22 PM »

raider... A nation of riflemen is not the militia as such. In the revolutionary war the milita "fled" I woulda fled too... they were much better at firing from cover and retreating than standing in a line and taking a volley... many british troops considered them total cowards because they would fire from great distance from behind cover and then flee... when the british had to flee the militia sniped at them from cover..

This was all considered very unsportsmanlike... It has been said that if the militia stood they would have been slaughtered... even their rifles were meant for slow deliberate fire rather than the hogged out british smoothbores that could be loaded even when fouled with many shots.

but... back to a nation of riflemen.... you being on the "rifle team" must know that the more you shoot the better you get.. Alvin York did not learn to shoot in the army.

In the civil war the confederates with their higher rifleman skills (and love of firearms) killed the union soldiers (loafer wearing taxi riders) by a margin of allmost two to one...

The swiss are all excellent riflemen... not because they watch westerns on tv or because they had a few hours practice in the ROTC... but because they love shooting and have military rifles and machine guns in their homes and are required to remain proficient... they have huge shooting festivals and guns are a common sight.

I just got back from the range and cleaning my guns... Their I met a WWII vet and his college age grandson (really good kid) I let the kid shoot my M1 and my 44 mag.. he loved it and was respectful and polite and an extremely good shot. In fact... everyone at the range today was cheerful and friendly... lots of laughing and helping each other out.... some were sighting in huinting rifles but most.... were just out having a really good time... nothing evil about it. everyone was armed... there were no police and no government to make us behave... we all got along just fine and no one shot anyone else.

The kid was saying that his brother lived in Wa. and had a concealled carry permit and how easy it was to get... he simply could not understand why we couldn't all have one.

guns, hot rods and home schooling (or vouchers) there are those that fear anyone who is an individual enough to cherish these things. (paraphrase from Jeff Cooper)

lazs

Raider179 · « **Reply #96 on:** September 14, 2005, 02:50:43 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Toad
George Washington, Virginia Militia

You need to do a bit more study.

Are you gonna tell me GW was a good general? lmao Like I said he lost more battles than he won. And the ones he won were smaller raids not full on engagements where he got his arse handed to him like in NY.

lazs2 · « **Reply #97 on:** September 14, 2005, 02:55:00 PM »

Washington won the battles he had to. He managed to keep the army together under the most adverse conditions. I believe that he was pretty glad that most of his army and the militia allready knew how to shoot since he didn't get a lot of time and money to do it.

but ok.... we get it... you think guns are evil. You might allow some of us to have hunting rifles tho..... for now.

lazs

lasersailor184 · « **Reply #98 on:** September 14, 2005, 03:00:37 PM »

I find it rather funny that after having lost multiple gun arguments, Raider has resorted to attacking the militia idea.

Raider179 · « **Reply #99 on:** September 14, 2005, 03:00:46 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
raider... A nation of riflemen is not the militia as such. In the revolutionary war the milita "fled" I woulda fled too... they were much better at firing from cover and retreating than standing in a line and taking a volley... many british troops considered them total cowards because they would fire from great distance from behind cover and then flee... when the british had to flee the militia sniped at them from cover..

This was all considered very unsportsmanlike... It has been said that if the militia stood they would have been slaughtered... even their rifles were meant for slow deliberate fire rather than the hogged out british smoothbores that could be loaded even when fouled with many shots.

but... back to a nation of riflemen.... you being on the "rifle team" must know that the more you shoot the better you get.. Alvin York did not learn to shoot in the army.

In the civil war the confederates with their higher rifleman skills (and love of firearms) killed the union soldiers (loafer wearing taxi riders) by a margin of allmost two to one...

The swiss are all excellent riflemen... not because they watch westerns on tv or because they had a few hours practice in the ROTC... but because they love shooting and have military rifles and machine guns in their homes and are required to remain proficient... they have huge shooting festivals and guns are a common sight.

I just got back from the range and cleaning my guns... Their I met a WWII vet and his college age grandson (really good kid) I let the kid shoot my M1 and my 44 mag.. he loved it and was respectful and polite and an extremely good shot. In fact... everyone at the range today was cheerful and friendly... lots of laughing and helping each other out.... some were sighting in huinting rifles but most.... were just out having a really good time... nothing evil about it. everyone was armed... there were no police and no government to make us behave... we all got along just fine and no one shot anyone else.

The kid was saying that his brother lived in Wa. and had a concealled carry permit and how easy it was to get... he simply could not understand why we couldn't all have one.

guns, hot rods and home schooling (or vouchers) there are those that fear anyone who is an individual enough to cherish these things. (paraphrase from Jeff Cooper)

lazs

I agree with the first part of what you say about militia.

Then you jump ahead to the Civil war and that is not the same thing. You said Founding Fathers and I called you on it. The founding fathers knew what a mess the Militia was and you yourself just said "In the revolutionary war the milita "fled" I woulda fled too" Thats all the proof I need to show the militia was not as you put it "I feel that the founding fathers were correct in thinking (as do the swiss) that a nation of riflemen was a good safeguard to freedom..."

By founding fathers you do mean the ones at the time of the Revolutionary war right? I am not aware of any others

Again Civil War is not founding fathers. Now do you mean during the Civil war or the Revolutionary war?

By human nature the more often you do something the more proficient you become. It's not their "love" of guns that makes them good. It's practice and training. lol You can love your gun all you want but if you don't take it and go shoot on a regular basis you are gonna suck with it.

I never said a gun range isn't fun. I have had some great times at them. I mowed my yard today, no one got shot out there either. lol

I don't agree about vouchers either but we can save that for another day.

Toad · « **Reply #100 on:** September 14, 2005, 03:01:41 PM »

At the time, the British Army was THE pre-eminent land military force on the planet.

Washington, all things considered, did an absolutely amazing job.

Like I said, I think you need to do more study. Whether you like it or not, there would have been NO successful American Revolution without the militias and their officers.

Raider179 · « **Reply #101 on:** September 14, 2005, 03:03:47 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
Washington won the battles he had to. He managed to keep the army together under the most adverse conditions. I believe that he was pretty glad that most of his army and the militia allready knew how to shoot since he didn't get a lot of time and money to do it.

but ok.... we get it... you think guns are evil. You might allow some of us to have hunting rifles tho..... for now.

lazs

Ummm no he didn't. He just barely managed to keep his army alive long enough for the french to come to our rescue.

It's not guns are evil, its people who are ignorant enough to believe that a militia is a good defense. They are worthless when it comes to defense/offense.

Yeah your right, I don't want all the guns though, just yours.

Raider179 · « **Reply #102 on:** September 14, 2005, 03:05:29 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by lasersailor184
I find it rather funny that after having lost multiple gun arguments, Raider has resorted to attacking the militia idea.

hey whatever happened to gettin shown in the other thread???

You didn't do anything but run and hide and now your back for a few more one-liners with absolutely nothing to say that matters.

Welcome back. At least the rest of us can offer information on the subject at hand. Must suck to be sitting there wondering what everyone else is discussing.

rabbidrabbit · « **Reply #103 on:** September 14, 2005, 03:06:50 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Raider179
LoL Lex and Concord were Basically the same engagement... And their were minutemen involved as well. The militia itself is worthless.

In the majority of their battles 75% they fled. That is not the sign of a good defensive or offensive army. You need to read back over chapter 3.

I did not say they were different occasions so your jab there remains pointless.

they inflicted a 10 to 1 causualty ratio on the british troops during the course of the fight. Not quite worthless.

BTW, what is your point to this hijack anyways? Are you trying to negate the 2nd by spewing some dubious and irrelevent semi-factoids?

Raider179 · « **Reply #104 on:** September 14, 2005, 03:07:56 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Toad
At the time, the British Army was THE pre-eminent land military force on the planet.

Washington, all things considered, did an absolutely amazing job.

Like I said, I think you need to do more study. Whether you like it or not, there would have been NO successful American Revolution without the militias and their officers.

Hardly, The only importance I really see that the militia played was to keep the general populace thinking they were doing there part. Most militiamen didn't want to be there, hence the frequent desertion and mutinies and fleeing from the field of battle.

You want to talk success, we would not have been successful without the French. The militia could have taken a backseat and it would not have seriously hurt the war effort. That is not to say they didn't help, I just don't place this as "the most important" part of our defense unlike others seem to think is this thread.