https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_of_the_Crowns
Posted on 04/19/2018 2:08:50 PM PDT by fugazi
1775: An expedition of 700 British regulars under the command of Lt. Col. Frances Smith departs Boston to seize and destroy military stores of the Massachusetts Militia in Concord. At dawn, 70 militia members led by Capt. John Parker meet the British at Lexington, and the two sides briefly skirmish. The Americans withdraw and regroup, attacking the redcoats again at North Bridge with a much larger force, forcing the British to turn back towards Boston.
The American Revolution has begun.
1861: 86 years to the day after the “shot heard round the world,” Massachusetts volunteers headed for Washington, D.C. are attacked by a secessionist mob in Baltimore. Four soldiers and eight rioters die in the opening shots of the American Civil War.
Meanwhile, Pres. Abraham Lincoln orders a Naval blockade of Confederate ports in South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Florida, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas. The blockade is extended to North Carolina and Virginia the following week.
1917: The Army-chartered transport ship SS Mongolia becomes the first vessel to challenge Germany’s naval blockade of England. Fitted with three 6-in. guns manned by Naval crews, Mongolia drives off and damages – possibly sinking – a German U-boat in the United States’ first Naval engagement since entering World War I.
1945: Following the most massive artillery, Naval gunfire and air bombardment of the Pacific War, U.S. soldiers and Marines of Lt. Gen. Simon Bolivar Buckner Jr.’s combined Tenth Army launch a coordinated ground assault against the dug-in Japanese defenders of the infamous Shuri Line on Okinawa.
In June, Buckner, the son of Confederate Gen. Simon Bolivar Buckner, becomes the highest-ranking U.S. officer killed in action during World War II. His replacement, Maj. Gen. Roy S. Geiger is the only Marine to ever...
(Excerpt) Read more at victoryinstitute.net ...
Buckner Sr. is the first Confederate general to surrender an army and will be one of the last. Buckner Jr. is born in 1886 and was personally granted an appointment to West Point (on his father's request) by Pres. Theodore Roosevelt.
Incidentally, Buckner Sr.'s childhood friend was Union general Thomas J. Wood, whom he faced in the Battles of Perryville (Ala.) and Chickamagua (Ga.)
And to this day, Mass. defends your right to keep and bear............oh. Sorry.
The American Revolution has begun.
Those slave owning Americans should not have been allowed to secede from the United Kingdom because slavery is evil. First thing they did was to engage in armed insurrection against their Union.
We visited the Lexington and Concord battlefields last September. Wonderful experience. I highly recommend it.
Bandwith Hogg, are you going to jump onto every thread and make it about your own personal obsession?
Do Waco & Oklahoma City count?
Well, that’s what you get for drinking all that Sterno.
1960 first flight of the Intruder. What an awesome aircraft that was.
I comment on many issues having nothing to do with the Civil War, but when I see an opportunity to make what I consider to be a very relevant point, I take it.
I've pointed out numerous times that the Colonies were a bunch of slave holding states who were trying to break away from a Union, but for some reason they do not get constantly accused of doing it only to protect slavery.
I wanted to illustrate how ridiculous this accusation is when it is also applied to the American war for independence.
The more I look at what's going on in the Country, the more I realize that the Washington "establishment" basically reflects the positions of the Washington/New York/Boston corridor. The nation is more or less governed by what those people believe are in their best interest, and one of the main reasons this occurs is because they own the Media/Industrial complex, and use it to disseminate propaganda that they think is beneficial to their acquisition of wealth and power.
Why should you object to that? It's true.
u get it. unlucky u.
I've seen evidence of it since 1992 when the media deliberately manipulated the news to help Bill Clinton win. I saw another clue in 1995 where every talking head on the media came out against balancing the Federal budget. I couldn't understand why any rational person would be against balancing the Federal budget by cutting spending.
I finally realized, the people benefiting from the Federal money fountain would be the only people who would oppose cutting the Federal budget, and therefore the Media must be controlled by people who benefit from excessive Federal borrowing and spending.
I didn't realize the connection to the Civil War until about three years ago. Now it seems like it's getting clearer with each passing month as I keep adding data points that reinforce this view.
Blah, blah, blah. That has nothing to do with the subject of the thread.
The nation is more or less governed by what those people believe are in their best interest, and one of the main reasons this occurs is because they own the Media/Industrial complex, and use it to disseminate propaganda that they think is beneficial to their acquisition of wealth and power.
This is a capitalist country. Old money and established corporations have their say. But money is more spread around the country than it was in 1950, 1900, or 1850. The things you object to Washington have more of a base in the country as a whole -- certainly in the urban/suburban parts of the country -- than you think.
It's quite insulting to think that the Waltons or Buffets or Huntsmans or Gateses of the country are just tails to some New York Establishment. Whatever they are and for good or ill, they have real power in the country.
Of course they aren't going to make some radical break with the ways of wealthy people elsewhere in the country. They aren't going to take to wearing buckskin clothing, riding mules, spinning their own thread and churning their own butter. But what you think of as New York or the Northeast Corridor is just the way privileged people in all parts of the country think and behave. If you had their money, you'd be like them, wherever you live.
Good one.
Remember Waco!
Or are we forbidden?
That's true. It is merely a continuation of discussions we've been having on other threads.
The things you object to Washington have more of a base in the country as a whole -- certainly in the urban/suburban parts of the country -- than you think.
With them controlling the news, and the money supply from Washington DC, why would they not?
It's quite insulting to think that the Waltons or Buffets or Huntsmans or Gateses of the country are just tails to some New York Establishment. Whatever they are and for good or ill, they have real power in the country.
Of course they aren't going to make some radical break with the ways of wealthy people elsewhere in the country.
You notice something in the first two sentences, and then explain it in the next. Everybody like to be in the "in" crowd, and much power is derived from social connections. The "elite" society of this nation is in that Washington/New York/Boston corridor. They are our aristocracy.
If you had their money, you'd be like them, wherever you live.
I think you might very well be surprised. I don't like to talk about anything in my own personal life because information can provide your enemies with an advantage, but I grew up being taught that all this "stuff" is transitory, and in the larger scheme of things, meaningless.
I don't value "rich" things. I can afford "nice" stuff, I just don't care about it. If I had their wealth, I would probably try to wreck the existing media system, because I see it as the most dangerous force facing us.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_of_the_Crowns
If you were around 50 or 100 years ago, you'd realize how absurd it is to make that statement today. The country has changed utterly from the days of the Vanderbilts, Astors, and Whitneys and their cotillions.
We don't have an "aristocracy" any more. We have elites, but you can find them in cities all across the country. Rich people tend to go back East for education, but I doubt any sane person would say that New York is anywhere near as powerful or as influential as it was 50 or 100 years ago.
I'm not saying that the country is egalitarian, but it's no longer like 60 families run the whole thing anymore or like every decision has to go through JP Morgan nowadays.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.