Author Topic: time for a real thread, a true disussion of the War. A consideration of reality  (Read 3200 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline JBMauser

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 391
Should California be given back to Mexico?

Why not give it to France, they invaded Mexico to gain a foothold, a colony.  Why not give the country back to any Indians that can say they are an organized tribe.

What is going on here?  This is not a discussion of history of the war that started at  Fort Sumpter and ended at Appomattox.   

What is the point of discussing if something that occurred was Legitimate or not.  It happened and that is, or was, reality which trumps analysis in ALL CASES! 

You can would-a, could-a, should-a…till the cows come home but what is the point.  If the paper trail, the national papers et al do not reflect what people did what does that mean?  Since the acts can not be undone and the paper trail is what it is…. The history remains and is more than valid, it is reality.

I left this site some time back because it had degenerated to rubbish.  It seems it has remained in the dumpster.

Here is a topic for discussion and consideration. 

Did the South’s political structure and “States Rights”  which prevented them from overriding each States Government and draw on all of the limited resources both men, material and supplies cripple or hinder their efforts when they needed to smash the Union and cause the desired coup in the North and the ouster or defeat of Lincoln and force the North to sue for peace? If they had a central government that could pull ALL of the reserves held back by each state for Coastal defense or whatever. 

This would be a interesting discussion.  Early on all of the marbles were won by the South.  The North had riots and Lincoln was on thin ice.  If Atlanta held he might have lost the election and the story would have, could have, had a different ending.   States were not “All in” in all cases.  They contributed what they could (wanted to)  They were not forced by a central government to muster all and for all cost to Bloody Sherman.  Or perhaps I they had used every ounce of power they had.   Was another corp or two the trick?  Was states sovernty a liability when perhaps another 10% might have carried the day?

This would be a discussion worth reading I think.   JB

Offline nabob

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 633
Thank you for rescuing us from ourselves by pulling us out of the dumpster.  ::)

Offline JBMauser

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 391
Yeah, that was a bit of trash on my part, sorry. 

I would like to discuss the strength or weakness of the structure of the Confederacy as it related to it's ability to garner, muster and field every last ounce of material and men from it's constituent States early on. 

Did it matter at all?  The idea of a tipping point in the struggle where if a bit more pressure and pain was laid on the North early on could have fanned the political unpopularity of the war in the North enough to topple Lincoln?

Did Davis have the same power over his States as Lincoln did his?  Did the power of each of the Southern States add to the power of the Confederacy or did States Rights get in the way?  I know Congress has to be considered and Harmony of purpose was with the South.  I know this would only be a consideration early into the events.  JB

Offline southernpride

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 25
In my mind the Confederate government was much like the original central U.S. government under the articles of Confederation.  It had too little power and we would have died right off if we had not written the constitution.  The Confederate nation died because it's government did not have the power to raise taxes, troops, etc.  My 2 cents.

Offline Telahnay's g'son

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 374
Lincoln first offered Lee command of the Army of the Potomac which he refused as it would have meant going against his home (Virginia) state.

By all accounts the yankees held superiority in most all areas (ordnance, industrial capacity, manpower, etc.) with a 10:1 margin in some instances.

What they DID NOT have was the will to fight for one's homeland as most Confederate soldiers.

Also, many yankee soldiers were conscripts of recent immigrant groups with many apparently not knowing which end of a rifle was the business end.  Ergo, creation of the NRA (to teach civilian marksmanship) in 1876 by some retired yankee brass.  For example, in the six week period leading up to the Battle of Cold Harbor ~42K yankees were killed by southern bullets.  They were simply replaced by US Grant and that's where he earned his "Butcher" title among many wearing the blue uniforms.  In the end, the Confederacy basically ran out of powder and ball as there were simply way too many yankees to kill for the ordnance at hand.

However, the yankee brass did not forget the lessons learned during that period as during the height of Vietnam ~65% of enlisted troops were rural southerners as the brass knew they usually followed orders and knew how to shoot.  Too bad so many of them died over there often due to the incompetence or cowardice of their commanders.
NRA Life Member
DU Corporate Sponsor
DW Sponsor

Offline southernpride

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 25

By all accounts the yankees held superiority in most all areas (ordnance, industrial capacity, manpower, etc.) with a 10:1 margin in some instances.

What they DID NOT have was the will to fight for one's homeland as most Confederate soldiers.

Also, many yankee soldiers were conscripts of recent immigrant groups with many apparently not knowing which end of a rifle was the business end.  Ergo, creation of the NRA (to teach civilian marksmanship) in 1876 by some retired yankee brass.  For example, in the six week period leading up to the Battle of Cold Harbor ~42K yankees were killed by southern bullets.  They were simply replaced by US Grant and that's where he earned his "Butcher" title among many wearing the blue uniforms.  In the end, the Confederacy basically ran out of powder and ball as there were simply way too many yankees to kill for the ordnance at hand.

However, the yankee brass did not forget the lessons learned during that period as during the height of Vietnam ~65% of enlisted troops were rural southerners as the brass knew they usually followed orders and knew how to shoot.  Too bad so many of them died over there often due to the incompetence or cowardice of their commanders.

Ahmen, to that

Offline Telahnay's g'son

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 374
Another bit of "reality" is according to the 1860 US census, slaves represented the largest single asset (their total economic value as a commodity) of this country, outside of the land itself.

Anyone that doesn't believe the north knew that with destruction of slavery as an institution would also mean the destruction of the south as a political/economic power in this country is living in denial.

Small wonder when Lincoln proposed a modest restitution to slaveholders the radical republicans in congress vehemently opposed such a measure.

What's somewhat ironic is that slavery would've likely went away as mechanization in agribusiness meant the end of large-scale hand labor but the intervention of the north by provoking the war delayed the economic freedom of the former slaves by ~100 years as the south's economic fabric (especially agriculture) was in tatters (by the north's design) until FDR took office and instituted the New Deal Program.  Folks in the south still picked cotton mostly by hand until the advent of WWII made it economically feasible (cotton went from .03 to .50 per pound) for southerners to make the move to large scale mechanization.

NRA Life Member
DU Corporate Sponsor
DW Sponsor

Offline ncmountainman

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 70
I believe if Lee could have had less political interference from Jefferson Davis and another general like Jackson or even Longstreet to spare for the west, then Lee would have not been under as much pressure in the east and would have had more of the manpower and resources that were lost in the west. He could then had the time to continue to manuever to ground of his choosing for a final decisive battle and take the capital. If Jackson had been able to continue in the east....

Offline Telahnay's g'son

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 374
I believe if Lee could have had less political interference from Jefferson Davis and another general like Jackson or even Longstreet to spare for the west, then Lee would have not been under as much pressure in the east and would have had more of the manpower and resources that were lost in the west. He could then had the time to continue to manuever to ground of his choosing for a final decisive battle and take the capital. If Jackson had been able to continue in the east....

IMHO, the yankee navy is the proximate cause for the outcome as their blockade eventually caused us to run out of powder & ball.

All the yankee generals before US Grant were either incompetent, cowards or some of both (there's a very real reason why R.E. Lee was Lincoln's first choice) and even Grant wasn't even near being the same tactical genius of his opponent.  He simply had more bodies (~42K casualties in the 8 weeks leading up to and including, Cold Harbor w/6K alone in the first 30 minutes of that battle) to throw into the cauldron of CSA marksmanship with the end result being we simply ran out of ordnance.
NRA Life Member
DU Corporate Sponsor
DW Sponsor

Offline ncmountainman

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 70
Absolutely, I agree that the yankee navys blockade stripped the south of far too many resources for it to be able to maintain a long drawn out war. The losses in the west were primarily due to the severe shortage in ammo, food and other supplies. The loss of captured western CSA cities, railroads and river trade routes only exacerbated the already extremely difficult supply and manpower situation for the south. Early in the war the southern troops were able to pick up a lot of excellent northern made firearms that were in many cases never fired and only dropped once. Without any serious support from England and the failure for the south to be supplied with any real ammount of guns and ordnance after the blockade suceeded there was no real way to keep up with the highly industrialized north other than force a quick victory with what little remained to fight with. Even with all that the brave southern armys fought the north to the point where Uncle Sam Grant had to strip the Washington garrisons of heavy artillery troops (much to their consternation) to stave off the Army Of Northern Virginias final assault on the capital. If R.E.Lee had the supplies and maybe a few more corps to fight with or as my father says "one more cake of cornbread and a minnie ball" I have no doubt The Army Of Northern Virginia could have kept going until it ran into Canada.

Offline ironfoot

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 547
Lincoln first offered Lee command of the Army of the Potomac which he refused as it would have meant going against his home (Virginia) state.

By all accounts the yankees held superiority in most all areas (ordnance, industrial capacity, manpower, etc.) with a 10:1 margin in some instances.

What they DID NOT have was the will to fight for one's homeland as most Confederate soldiers.

Also, many yankee soldiers were conscripts of recent immigrant groups with many apparently not knowing which end of a rifle was the business end.  Ergo, creation of the NRA (to teach civilian marksmanship) in 1876 by some retired yankee brass.  For example, in the six week period leading up to the Battle of Cold Harbor ~42K yankees were killed by southern bullets.  They were simply replaced by US Grant and that's where he earned his "Butcher" title among many wearing the blue uniforms.  In the end, the Confederacy basically ran out of powder and ball as there were simply way too many yankees to kill for the ordnance at hand.

However, the yankee brass did not forget the lessons learned during that period as during the height of Vietnam ~65% of enlisted troops were rural southerners as the brass knew they usually followed orders and knew how to shoot.  Too bad so many of them died over there often due to the incompetence or cowardice of their commanders.

I agree with most of this.
But the statement "What they DID NOT have was the will to fight for one's homeland as most Confederate soldiers." rings a little hollow, when one considers that more Union soldiers walked into hails of bullets and died in battle than southern soldiers did. Those Union soldiers gave their all.

Act the way you would like to be, and soon you will be the way you act.

Offline ironfoot

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 547
What's somewhat ironic is that slavery would've likely went away as mechanization in agribusiness meant the end of large-scale hand labor but the intervention of the north by provoking the war delayed the economic freedom of the former slaves by ~100 years as the south's economic fabric (especially agriculture) was in tatters (by the north's design) until FDR took office and instituted the New Deal Program.  Folks in the south still picked cotton mostly by hand until the advent of WWII made it economically feasible (cotton went from .03 to .50 per pound) for southerners to make the move to large scale mechanization.



The south provoked the war, by starting the Rebellion to Preserve Slavery.
Lincoln promised to leave slavery alone, where it existed, in an effort to prevent the secession. But that wasn't good enough for the south. The south wanted to expand slavery into the territories.
Act the way you would like to be, and soon you will be the way you act.

Offline Telahnay's g'son

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 374
What's somewhat ironic is that slavery would've likely went away as mechanization in agribusiness meant the end of large-scale hand labor but the intervention of the north by provoking the war delayed the economic freedom of the former slaves by ~100 years as the south's economic fabric (especially agriculture) was in tatters (by the north's design) until FDR took office and instituted the New Deal Program.  Folks in the south still picked cotton mostly by hand until the advent of WWII made it economically feasible (cotton went from .03 to .50 per pound) for southerners to make the move to large scale mechanization.



The south provoked the war, by starting the Rebellion to Preserve Slavery.
Lincoln promised to leave slavery alone, where it existed, in an effort to prevent the secession. But that wasn't good enough for the south. The south wanted to expand slavery into the territories.

I do not fault you for believing this way as after all, the kool-aid up north has a definite "spike" to it.

Lincoln/Congress provoked the war by sending a hostile force to Carolina with the express intent of provoking hostilities by threatening that state's sovereignty.  Heck, they even did again it to provoke another "war" (Black Hills of South Dakota) so as to confisciate land from yet another (Sioux) people.
NRA Life Member
DU Corporate Sponsor
DW Sponsor

Offline Ga.windbreak

  • Trade Count: (22)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 846
  • Gender: Male
First lets get it right about slaves. When we became a country slaves were everywhere not just in the South. As the North grew and slave labor was taking away jobs from newcomers and whites the slaves were sold to Southern plantation owners. In fact in Georgia's original grant it was a slave free state (colony). It had to be as most of the people were from prison (England trying to empty them out). As cotton became king, esp. before the gin the idea of slave labor grew into what it became. The Federal Government said it wanted to stop the slave trade and passed laws to do so. The U.S.Navy was charged to stop the slave ships from coming into US ports. By this time the slave runners had gone from being British to being US Northerners. I guess the navy couldn't do it's job because they never stopped any of those ships. The stage is now set for what happened next. The South had to pay to be able to ship their goods (Cotton) to market. They paid tariffs to the north to ship into northern harbors for their cotton to be sold. The south had no shipping of it's own so it couldn't ship straight to England. The ONLY answer the this problem was to leave the union and make it's own way into the world of nations. Now you better believe the the northerns were not about to let that happen. Abe never cared about the slave one way or the other, all you have to do is read what the man said before being elected and up to Gettysburg. He and the money men in the North were never going to let the South leave without a fight. From the North's point of view it was always about MONEY, nothing more or less. The South was just tired of paying twice for the same services and wanted their FREEDOM. I vinture to say if the South had been given the time (10 to 15 years) Slavery would have died of natural causes. J. Davis talked about it all during he time in office including freeing all who would serve in the Southern cause. The number of slave owners in the CSA was next to nothing. If you think for one second that any of those young men were fighting and dieing for slavery you must be crazy and you've NEVER been put in a situation where you might have to give up your life for what you are fighting for. They were fighting for their homes and for their freedom.

2 side notes:
The last slave ship to slip into Boston harbor was in 1863.
The last person to give up his slaves was, you guessed it, U.S.Grant. His comment was that help nowadays was just to expensive and his slaves seemed happy enough.
"Men do not differ about what
Things they will call evils;
They differ enormously about what evils
They will call excusable." - G.K. Chesterton

"It starts when you begin to overlook bad manners. Anytime you quit hearing "sir" and "ma'am", the end is pretty much in sight."-Tommy Lee Jones in No Country for Old Men

Private John Walker Roberts CSA 19th Battalion Georgia Cavalry - Loyalty is a most precious trait - RIP

Offline wncchester

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3856
  • Gender: Male
The North dropped black slavery in favor of exploiting white immigrants as they were more effective and cheaper, not from any moral compunction. 

Southern planters needed large numbers of workers which were not available at any price in a sparsely populated region.  That need created a market for slaves, fed by Arab (Muslim) slavers in Africa and the ship owners of New England.

Blacks were not treated as trash in the South.  They were expensive to purchase, far too valuable for mistreatment.  They had to be housed, clothed, fed, doctored.  All that was continued even after they "retired" due to age or illness.  No one would say they were living in luxury but they lived about as well as the vast majority of whites at the time, north and south.  And their life expectancy here was better than it was in Africa.

The flood of immigrants into northern ports provided a stream of cheap workers who received none of the advantages every slave had in the South.   They were totally expendable; desperate men who would take brutally hard and dangerous work for little pay.  And they had to provide everything for themselves and their families.  When they were sick or old or injured they were discarded and another equally desperate immigrant worker got his job while the northern bosses just got fatter. 

Those northern rich men were the driving force behind the federal government's previous moves against the South's economy that finally reached the breaking point.  It was they who bought politicians and then used tariffs to bilk profit from the exports of the South, they who wanted to force the South to purchase the new, but too expensive, farming implements coming on the market.   

Had the South been allowed to sell its exports properly, it would have been possible to more rapidly make the needed changes for building a more mechanized economy and, eventually, a slave free society.  But the north's fat boys wanted to squeeze the south's golden goose faster.  They wouldn't wait until things could settle out in the southern economy so they paid politicians and publishers and some preachers to foment public outrage in opposition to slavery.  It worked.  They didn't think the South would actually rebel but, when it did, they simply got fatter by feeding war materials into the north's side of the bloody fray.  And other northern men, both older ones and thousands of new immigrants looking for jobs, stood in line for their turn to get shot so the rich guys could do it! 

After the war, most Blacks assumed the North would be like heaven and many trekked there in hope.  Those hopes were soon dashed.  They were worse than expendable in the North, they were unwanted and despised far more than they had previously been.  Abandoned and without hope, masses of them died from starvation, sickness and exposure in the northern "heaven".  That's part of why the race riots of the 1960s-1970s period were more intensely bitter, expansive and bloody in the north than in the south, and racial hatred remains more intense up there today.  The roots of the northern Black's hatred of whites runs deep!

And that's the truth!



Common sense is an uncommon virtue

Offline ironfoot

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 547
Act the way you would like to be, and soon you will be the way you act.

Offline Ga.windbreak

  • Trade Count: (22)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 846
  • Gender: Male
Secession a view from the North. Just goes to show that some Northerners get it.

http://vtcommons.org/node/177

I also want to add a few other links that should be of interest to everyone that really wants to know the truth about slavery in the U.S. and who made the most money from it even after the War.


http://www.slavenorth.com/denial.htm

http://www.slavenorth.com/profits.htm

http://www.slavenorth.com/index.html

http://www.etymonline.com/cw/lincoln.htm

http://www.etymonline.com/cw/secession.htm

http://library.uncg.edu/slavery_petitions/
"Men do not differ about what
Things they will call evils;
They differ enormously about what evils
They will call excusable." - G.K. Chesterton

"It starts when you begin to overlook bad manners. Anytime you quit hearing "sir" and "ma'am", the end is pretty much in sight."-Tommy Lee Jones in No Country for Old Men

Private John Walker Roberts CSA 19th Battalion Georgia Cavalry - Loyalty is a most precious trait - RIP

Offline billy_56081

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (5)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8575
  • Gender: Male
  I'm just glad everything that happened in the past did. Change the past n alot of us wouldn't be here.


  Good thing for all the wars,rapes,murders, floods, plagues and pestilence that got me here.

  I don't wanna change anything in the past.
99% of all Lawyers give the other 1% a bad name. What I find hilarious about this is they are such an arrogant bunch, that they all think they are in the 1%.

Offline wncchester

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3856
  • Gender: Male
[billy_  I'm just glad everything that happened in the past did. Change the past n alot of us wouldn't be here. quote]

Billy, we couldn't change anything in the past if we wished.  The issue here is to better understand why, how and for what that war occurred.  And the basic truth isn't what's taught in the "History" books.

I like being here.  But I suppose if I wasn't, it wouldn't bother me much.
Common sense is an uncommon virtue

Offline Bob Riebe

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7478
quote author=wncchester link=topic=101907.msg1098410900#msg1098410900 date=1183209647]

After the war, most Blacks assumed the North would be like heaven and many trekked there in hope.  Those hopes were soon dashed.  They were worse than expendable in the North, they were unwanted and despised far more than they had previously been.  Abandoned and without hope, masses of them died from starvation, sickness and exposure in the northern "heaven".  That's part of why the race riots of the 1960s-1970s period were more intensely bitter, expansive and bloody in the north than in the south, and racial hatred remains more intense up there today.  The roots of the northern Black's hatred of whites runs deep!

And that's the truth!
[/quote]
I am from Minn. you cannot get much farther north, and to say the "north" hated blacks worse than the south is foolish.
Where I was raised negros as we called them were a non-issue; I did not hear bad words about them until Johnson, who may have had a big heart, but was incrdibly ignorant to think money was the problem, created his "Great Society" which reformed black society from struggling but free, into slaves of the Dem. party which replaced hard work with free money as long as they did not get too uppity.

One reason negros were not of concern up here was the unadulterated hatred between ethinic groups of northern Europe accentuated by spitting hatred between Roman Catholics and Lutherans.
Many families were split up if one married into the wrong religious group.

My hometown was near the invisible divide between the mackeral snappers (RC) and the bastard Lutherans.
Johnson with his ignorance made it easier to hate someone whose skin was a different color, than someone who, at least to the children until they were properly educated, who on the surface was the same.

I grew up watching Amos and Andy on TV. To me it was just another TV show, one that was as funny as the Honeymooners but still just a TV show. The color of the skin meant nothing.
Now when that RC sob Kennedy ran for president....


Bob

Offline wncchester

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3856
  • Gender: Male
Wellll...Bob, addressing the relevant parts of your post, your defense of the North seems to be largely based on the premise that the world didn't exist before you were born in Minnesota. Would you grant that (1) things might have changed during that 100 year time lag and (2) not many blacks actually went into the frozen wastes of Minn in 1865?   And, might you agree that other northern whites may have felt differently in such places as DC, Baltimore, Detroit, Cleveland, Boston, Philadelphia, New York, etc. when tens of thousands of those poor, lost, hungry and desperate agricultural workers drifted into town? 

No ethnic minority ever gets much notice until they become a substantial part of a communities population AND becomes some sort of burden, so Minnesota isn't really a sound standard for northern views of blacks, either then or now. 

Finally, I agree that there are few problems that liberals haven't made worse when they've had sufficient power to implement their improvement plans.  Perhaps especially so for poor blacks.  Few people today remember that LBJ got his Great Society plans passed only with the support of most Republicans, and over the objections of most Democrats.  FAT LOT of good it has done either the Republicans or blacks!  Or LBJ's legacy.
Common sense is an uncommon virtue

Offline usbone1

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27
  • Gender: Male
  • Fight to fly. Fly to fight. Fight to win.
My background:  raised just outside Dallas, Texas, in 50's and 60's.  Drafted in '69 and had fun, so stayed for 21.  Now it seems to me that while the Northern invaders (that term made me stop and think a while Folks) enjoyed some material advantage, the South enjoyed a real advantage in trained manpower (in shooting, walking/marching, living out in the woods--stuff we need soldiers to do.)  Some large percentage of Yankee officers were political appointees totally void of troop handling skills and tactics.  'Bout the only military place the North could initially stand up 1 against 1 was in the navy, and that wasn't 1 against 1, hence the blockade worked. 

It takes about 2 years to train a good NCO, the North needed them just as much as the South.  That Darwinian process of battle identified those best able to become NCO's and even officers.  The North had more conscripted man power and needed good NCO's even more than the Southern troops (who could live on their own) and probably shoot better to begin with.  By the time this process was underway, it was 1863, going on 1864...and the blockade was effective.  Grant realized the projected way to win was to put his army next to Lee's and win the resulting war of attrition.  Can't call Grant an astute student of tactics, but he recognized the one weakness in the Army of Northern Virginia and went after it.  Cold Harbor's just didn't happen often enough for Lee to neutralize this manpower deficit.  Superb fighting spirit got worn down as their adversaries increased in skill level. 

Then Sherman takes Atlanta and sees an opportunity to begin to reduce that superb Southern fighting spirit by waging war on its very support...the families back home.  Hence the 'march to the sea' and associated atrocities that have been documented.   The battle generals of the south had to learn that all viable support for them and their troops was to be denied.

The final lost battles became quite one-sided as all these effects culminated in a very one-way competition.  Subsequent to Grant's 'superb' treatment of Lee, Lincoln is assassinated and a very polarized congress begins one of the poorest events in American history:  the reconstruction of the southern states.  Is it safe to say, to wonder how history might have been changed if Lincoln had been allowed to live, and ease the return of the 13 southern states back in to the Union?  I know my 6th and 7th grade history classes in Texas reinforced a genuine animosity for all things Yankee based on the reconstruction period.  That's where the felonies occurred, too numerous to document them all.  A vindictive victor continued to wage an economic war after the last army was surrendered.  (Not unlike what France and England attempted to do to Germany after the first world war.) 

This got way too long, sorry Folks.  Hard to condense so many lost lives in to one or two concise paragraphs.  I sure was happy to have some Texas boys next to me in the early 70's though.  Just wish our President had been a warrior instead of a politician, but that's another rant.
 
USMC (Retired)
NRA Lifetime, Patron
Commercial SE/Multi-Engine (Land) with Instrument Airplane
Commercial Glider Aero Tow