• Announcements

    • Zapata

      Abbreviated rules   07/28/2017

      Underdawg did an excellent job of explaining the rules.  Here's the simplified version: Don't insinuate Pedo.  Warning and or timeout for a first offense.  PermaFlick for any subsequent offenses Don't out members.  See above for penalties.  Caveat:  if you have ever used your own real name or personal information here on the forums since, like, ever - it doesn't count and you are fair game. If you see spam posts, report it to the mods.  We do not hang out in every thread 24/7 If you see any of the above, report it to the mods by hitting the Report button in the offending post.   We do not take action for foul language, off-subject content, or abusive behavior unless it escalates to persistent stalking.  There may be times that we might warn someone or flick someone for something particularly egregious.  There is no standard, we will know it when we see it.  If you continually report things that do not fall into rules #1 or 2 above, you may very well get a timeout yourself for annoying the Mods with repeated whining.  Use your best judgement. Warnings, timeouts, suspensions and flicks are arbitrary and capricious.  Deal with it.  Welcome to anarchy.   If you are a newbie, there are unwritten rules to adhere to.  They will be explained to you soon enough.  
Dog

History out of context

209 posts in this topic

14 hours ago, Mark K said:
22 hours ago, hermetic said:

read up on the mexican war

it's stunning how many of the mid level officers were southern born and west point educated

and were the one's who impacted the war's outcome

they learned all about defensive strategy, guerilla warfare, and long marches in horrible conditions

the north sent militias - who tried their hardest to fuck up the entire campaign

the south's military leaders were experienced at the start of the civil war a decade later - the north not so much

 Probably true, except for northerners attempting to fuck it up by sending militias with that intention. The only history that bit has likely ever seen is a history of your large intestine. 

 The south supported the war and the north largely didn't. The issue was the expansion of slavery, and the recent admission of Texas, a new slave state and two more slave supporting senators. Naturally, the volunteers came mostly from the slave states for that one. It is worth noting that 40% of US forces were foriegn born, and most of the foreign born in the US at that time were Irish. It is likely the US forces in Mexico included a heck of a lot of them...and they mostly immigrated to the north. 

didn't mean to imply that the northern militias were intended to fuck things up in mexico, but thanks for asking so nicely for a clarification

the northern militias, or volunteers, sent to mexico were mostly untrained mobs who didn't follow orders and led by officers who's credentials were basically the size of daddy's bank account.  these militias - who were so bad at fighting that the generals had to assign them to supply line duty - perfected the art of ravaging every mexican town and ranch they came across.  this increased the hate against the us army, increased the rise of guerilla warfare against it, and lengthen the war.  taylor and scott couldn't wait to get rid of them

the only group that was worse was the texans

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, hermetic said:

didn't mean to imply that the northern militias were intended to fuck things up in mexico, but thanks for asking so nicely for a clarification

the northern militias, or volunteers, sent to mexico were mostly untrained mobs who didn't follow orders and led by officers who's credentials were basically the size of daddy's bank account.  these militias - who were so bad at fighting that the generals had to assign them to supply line duty - perfected the art of ravaging every mexican town and ranch they came across.  this increased the hate against the us army, increased the rise of guerilla warfare against it, and lengthen the war.  taylor and scott couldn't wait to get rid of them

the only group that was worse was the texans

Cormac McCarthy, in his incredible novel Blood Meridian, touches every so briefly on the US mobs of soldiers/militia/barbarians ravaging Mexican towns during the war. 

One of my favorite lines from that book--- "Hell ain't half full yet, boy."

bloodmer.jpg?w=350&h=540

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, hermetic said:

didn't mean to imply that the northern militias were intended to fuck things up in mexico, but thanks for asking so nicely for a clarification

the northern militias, or volunteers, sent to mexico were mostly untrained mobs who didn't follow orders and led by officers who's credentials were basically the size of daddy's bank account.  these militias - who were so bad at fighting that the generals had to assign them to supply line duty - perfected the art of ravaging every mexican town and ranch they came across.  this increased the hate against the us army, increased the rise of guerilla warfare against it, and lengthen the war.  taylor and scott couldn't wait to get rid of them

the only group that was worse was the texans

Great info. Thanks. What's with the absence of sources? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Mark K said:

The US gubmint didn't use militias in the Mexican American war. There were a few thing which prevented using state militias, primarily state laws which prohibited their usage and foreign soil, but the Constitution itself only allowed for their use to put down insurrections and repel invasions. 

   

Mark, this could use clarification.

Quote

 (Post 194) ...and within six weeks (Gen. Wool)had sent 12,000 troops to the seat of war, fully armed and equipped.

Wool may have raised and equipped thousands of troops overnight, but he didn't train two thousand a week. These untrained men were effectively and practically militia. They may have been mustered into the Army, a nice technicality, but that doesn't make them regular troops.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, hermetic said:

didn't mean to imply that the northern militias were intended to fuck things up in mexico, but thanks for asking so nicely for a clarification

the northern militias, or volunteers, sent to mexico were mostly untrained mobs who didn't follow orders and led by officers who's credentials were basically the size of daddy's bank account.  these militias - who were so bad at fighting that the generals had to assign them to supply line duty - perfected the art of ravaging every mexican town and ranch they came across.  this increased the hate against the us army, increased the rise of guerilla warfare against it, and lengthen the war.  taylor and scott couldn't wait to get rid of them

the only group that was worse was the texans

My quibble is that the words "militia" and "volunteer" are NOT interchangeable. The "volunteers" were enrolled in the regular army but kept largely apart from the regular army regiments. They were given officers, by the way, like Wool, who was regular army and among the best we had. The massive mobilization which resulted in the sort of officers you describe was quite typical during the Civil War but not this one. The word which best fits these units is "mercs", or "mercenaries". The gubmint harvested a bunch of poor folk looking for a paycheck and three squares, the later being the bigger issue for a heck of a lot of those sad sacks. 

  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Mark K said:
On ‎9‎/‎20‎/‎2017 at 7:34 AM, hermetic said:

didn't mean to imply that the northern militias were intended to fuck things up in mexico, but thanks for asking so nicely for a clarification

the northern militias, or volunteers, sent to mexico were mostly untrained mobs who didn't follow orders and led by officers who's credentials were basically the size of daddy's bank account.  these militias - who were so bad at fighting that the generals had to assign them to supply line duty - perfected the art of ravaging every mexican town and ranch they came across.  this increased the hate against the us army, increased the rise of guerilla warfare against it, and lengthen the war.  taylor and scott couldn't wait to get rid of them

the only group that was worse was the texans

My quibble is that the words "militia" and "volunteer" are NOT interchangeable. The "volunteers" were enrolled in the regular army but kept largely apart from the regular army regiments. They were given officers, by the way, like Wool, who was regular army and among the best we had. The massive mobilization which resulted in the sort of officers you describe was quite typical during the Civil War but not this one. The word which best fits these units is "mercs", or "mercenaries". The gubmint harvested a bunch of poor folk looking for a paycheck and three squares, the later being the bigger issue for a heck of a lot of those sad sacks. 

congress deemed them interchangeable at the onset of the mexican war, and there was a rather large mobilization

 

The militia system had already proven unreliable by the time of the Mexican War and had undergone substantial revision. Two issues emerged during the War of 1812 that demonstrated its flaws. First, many states prohibited their troops from participating in military operations on foreign soil. Second, by law a militiaman could only serve for a period of ninety days, meaning that recruiting, training, and marshaling occupied most of a unit's time with little left over for campaigning. As a solution to this problem, Congress created a subclass of militia called volunteers who were not confined by these two restrictions. On May 13, 1846, Congress authorized President Polk to raise 50,000 12-month volunteers.

Although both composed a part of the American Army, regulars and volunteers were notably different. Observers noted little interaction between officers and men, with each occupying a clearly defined station within the military establishment. Most Americans avoided enlisting in the regulars, guaranteeing that a high percentage of privates, corporals, and sergeants were foreign born. The combination of aristocratic officers and foreign "hirelings" made many Americans suspicious of the regulars. After all, what American citizen would settle for $7 a month as an army private unless forced to by dire circumstance? The volunteer, on the other hand, seemed to fit the spirit of the young republic because he was a citizen-soldier. Politics entered into the system as most volunteers elected their own officers. Volunteer units were raised locally, allowing friends, neighbors, and relatives to serve together. Although nominally under federal authority, volunteers maintained strong ties to their home states. The democratic nature of the volunteers meant that discipline in this corps was more lax than in the regulars.

More troops were needed as the war progressed. In November 1846, Congress issued an additional call for volunteers after realizing that most of the one year men would leave at the expiration of their terms. This second wave of volunteers was enlisted for the duration of the war. On February 11, 1847, Congress created ten additional regiments of regulars to serve for the period of the war. In all, 26,922 regulars and 73,260 volunteers served at some point during the Mexican War.

 

but - whatever

edit:  from

The American Army in the Mexican War: An Overview

A Conversation With Richard Bruce Winders
Historian and Curator, The Alamo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎14‎/‎09‎/‎2017 at 1:31 PM, SloopJonB said:

Probably because the USA was the last significant country that practiced it legally. Took the worst war in your history to end it.

Time to move on though, as you say.

Long past time actually if you regard entrenched racism as a byproduct of it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_Brazil

               not the last "significant"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now