quietfan 233 Posted July 2, 2015 Share Posted July 2, 2015 Hard to believe this debate is still going on. It is still perfectly legal for persons to fly the Confederate Flag if they wish. It is perfectly legal for a business to manufacture or sell, or not make or sell, as it chooses. And perfectly legal to buy. Nobody's rights have been stepped on, freedom of speech is intact, and isn't the idea of letting the merchant decide what to put on his shelves or advertising part of the point of democratic free-market capitalism? The only real change is that it has been removed from government/state property. It never had any official status with the federal government, rather it's the flag of an enemy, so IMO it never belonged on federal property. Where it's been removed from state properties, it has been at the decision and order of democratically elected leaders in those states without any federal pressure. Obviously it symbolizes different things to different people. But what it symbolizes means nothing in terms of its legality, and private organizations or merchants can make their own decisions on how they approach its or any symbolism. For myself, the only part of southern history associated with it that I can feel proud of is the battlefield genius and tactical mastery of southern armies and generals against great odds and the courage they exhibited. Otherwise, I see it as the battle flag of an armed treasonous rebellion for 4-5 years, followed by about 150 years of misappropriation by racist, terrorist hate groups. No, I don't think everyone waving a Confederate Flag is racist or a member of the KKK, but I think many people blind themselves to that aspect of its history in their quest for regional or cultural pride. I don't condemn them for that, but it saddens me. Personally I see little difference between waving it and waving a Nazi flag. Yes, Hitler & WWII are a piece of German history. Yes, German generals and German combat forces often exhibited brilliance and bravery in that war. It is still legal to make, sell, or wave a Nazi flag in this country (though not in Germany, by contrast). And much like the Confederate Battle Flag, artistically the swastika has always been an aesthetically pleasing graphic design or motif. But I would never fly one because: 1. (And most importantly!) I wouldn't want to offend anyone else over a symbol or piece of cloth, 2. I don't want to be associated with the hate groups that usurp it for their own evil philosophies, and 3. I don't won't anyone to feel sad for me (as I described in my previous paragraph) thinking I was exercising my rights while being blind to the evil associated with the symbol. The particular numbers and demographics of a CNN poll have no affect on my reasons for not flying it. And I don't think mere polls should determine what others decide to do with it; I respect their rights to their choices. . . . . . . . (Late editing simply to correct some grammar, typos, etc. I know the difference between "wave" and "waive" but apparently my fingers didn't. ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aujeff11 6,243 Posted July 2, 2015 Share Posted July 2, 2015 I'm surprised that 11% of blacks in the south disagree. Add that to the 75% of whites and you have an overwhelming majority of people who are on the same "page". Are you serious or, are you just trying to give me a headache? I'm serious in the fact that 11% of the blacks in the south agreed that the flag meant pride and not hate....and if you put the two together that is a big % overall. Step away from the Tylenol. ;)/> That is not how math works! Did I misread something or did it say that 75% of whites and 11% of blacks in the south though that the flag represented pride and not hate? Did I miss something. Well, I'm not sure of how the population is divided and, not sure what qualifies as white but, you do not necessarily have an "overwhelming majority". Ok...overwhelming majority of the people polled. Fair enough? ;)/> 57% is overwhelming? he is talking about the south. Not the whole population Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,367 Posted July 2, 2015 Share Posted July 2, 2015 I'm surprised that 11% of blacks in the south disagree. Add that to the 75% of whites and you have an overwhelming majority of people who are on the same "page". Are you serious or, are you just trying to give me a headache? I'm serious in the fact that 11% of the blacks in the south agreed that the flag meant pride and not hate....and if you put the two together that is a big % overall. Step away from the Tylenol. Heck, I am still trying to understand Clarence Thomas, Thomas Sowell, Herman Caine, Allen West, Ben Carson.... So blacks can only think one way? Of course not. But then, I didn't say that, did I? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,367 Posted July 2, 2015 Share Posted July 2, 2015 Of course the irony here is that "heritage" or "pride" is not really defined. The only thing that's not in doubt is the flag's actual history. And that of the rest of the world. Cough Cough Cough Sorry, I don't really get that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,367 Posted July 2, 2015 Share Posted July 2, 2015 Hard to believe this debate is still going on. It is still perfectly legal for persons to fly the Confederate Flag if they wish. It is perfectly legal for a business to manufacture or sell, or not make or sell, as it chooses. And perfectly legal to buy. Nobody's rights have been stepped on, freedom of speech is intact, and isn't the idea of letting the merchant decide what to put on his shelves or advertising part of the point of democratic free-market capitalism? The only real change is that it has been removed from government/state property. It never had any official status with the federal government, rather it's the flag of an enemy, so IMO it never belonged on federal property. Where it's been removed from state properties, it has been at the decision and order of democratically elected leaders in those states without any federal pressure. Obviously it symbolizes different things to different people. But what it symbolizes means nothing in terms of its legality, and private organizations or merchants can make their own decisions on how they approach its or any symbolism. For myself, the only part of southern history associated with it that I can feel proud of is the battlefield genius and tactical mastery of southern armies and generals against great odds and the courage they exhibited. Otherwise, I see it as the battle flag of an armed treasonous rebellion for 4-5 years, followed by about 150 years of misappropriation by racist, terrorist hate groups. No, I don't think everyone waiving a Confederate Flag is racist or a member of the KKK, but I think many people blind themselves to that aspect of its history in their quest for regional or culture pride. I don't condemn them for that, but it saddens me. Personally I see little difference between waiving it and waving a Nazi flag. Yes, Hitler & WWII are a piece of German history. Yes, German generals and German combat forces often exhibit brilliance and bravery in that war. It is still legal to make, sell, or waive a Nazi flag in this country (though not in Germany, by contrast). And much like the Confederate Battle Flag, artistically the swastika has always been an aesthetically pleasing graphic design or motif. But I would never fly one because: 1. (And most importantly!) I wouldn't want to offend anyone else over a symbol or piece of cloth, 2. I don't want to be associated with the hate groups that usurp it for their own evil philosophies, and 3. I don't won't anyone to feel sad for me (as I described in my previous paragraph) thinking I was exercising my rights while being blind to the evil associated with the symbol. The particular numbers and demographics of a CNN poll have no affect on my reasons for not flying it. And I don't think mere polls should determine what others decide to do with it; I respect their rights to their choices. Well stated. The relatively large number of people who take pride in the heritage the flag represents just goes to prove that sometimes the losers get to "write history". I never really thought about the parallels between the Confederacy and Nazi Germany regarding military prowess. Each had the finest military machine the world had ever seen but both regimes were based on evil concepts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aujeff11 6,243 Posted July 2, 2015 Share Posted July 2, 2015 Hard to believe this debate is still going on. It is still perfectly legal for persons to fly the Confederate Flag if they wish. It is perfectly legal for a business to manufacture or sell, or not make or sell, as it chooses. And perfectly legal to buy. Nobody's rights have been stepped on, freedom of speech is intact, and isn't the idea of letting the merchant decide what to put on his shelves or advertising part of the point of democratic free-market capitalism? The only real change is that it has been removed from government/state property. It never had any official status with the federal government, rather it's the flag of an enemy, so IMO it never belonged on federal property. Where it's been removed from state properties, it has been at the decision and order of democratically elected leaders in those states without any federal pressure. Obviously it symbolizes different things to different people. But what it symbolizes means nothing in terms of its legality, and private organizations or merchants can make their own decisions on how they approach its or any symbolism. For myself, the only part of southern history associated with it that I can feel proud of is the battlefield genius and tactical mastery of southern armies and generals against great odds and the courage they exhibited. Otherwise, I see it as the battle flag of an armed treasonous rebellion for 4-5 years, followed by about 150 years of misappropriation by racist, terrorist hate groups. No, I don't think everyone waiving a Confederate Flag is racist or a member of the KKK, but I think many people blind themselves to that aspect of its history in their quest for regional or culture pride. I don't condemn them for that, but it saddens me. Personally I see little difference between waiving it and waving a Nazi flag. Yes, Hitler & WWII are a piece of German history. Yes, German generals and German combat forces often exhibit brilliance and bravery in that war. It is still legal to make, sell, or waive a Nazi flag in this country (though not in Germany, by contrast). And much like the Confederate Battle Flag, artistically the swastika has always been an aesthetically pleasing graphic design or motif. But I would never fly one because: 1. (And most importantly!) I wouldn't want to offend anyone else over a symbol or piece of cloth, 2. I don't want to be associated with the hate groups that usurp it for their own evil philosophies, and 3. I don't won't anyone to feel sad for me (as I described in my previous paragraph) thinking I was exercising my rights while being blind to the evil associated with the symbol. The particular numbers and demographics of a CNN poll have no affect on my reasons for not flying it. And I don't think mere polls should determine what others decide to do with it; I respect their rights to their choices. Well stated. The relatively large number of people who take pride in the heritage the flag represents just goes to prove that sometimes the losers get to "write history". I never really thought about the parallels between the Confederacy and Nazi Germany regarding military prowess. Each had the finest military machine the world had ever seen but both regimes were based on evil concepts. I don't know if the confederacy was a military machine. They had tactically sound leadership but as pointed out on this thread, they were not very organized and they faced a high desertion rate. On top of that, they were outnumbered in manpower and equipment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AURaptor 1,122 Posted July 2, 2015 Share Posted July 2, 2015 we're not Americans. We are hyphenated segregated compartmentalized .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,367 Posted July 2, 2015 Share Posted July 2, 2015 Hard to believe this debate is still going on. It is still perfectly legal for persons to fly the Confederate Flag if they wish. It is perfectly legal for a business to manufacture or sell, or not make or sell, as it chooses. And perfectly legal to buy. Nobody's rights have been stepped on, freedom of speech is intact, and isn't the idea of letting the merchant decide what to put on his shelves or advertising part of the point of democratic free-market capitalism? The only real change is that it has been removed from government/state property. It never had any official status with the federal government, rather it's the flag of an enemy, so IMO it never belonged on federal property. Where it's been removed from state properties, it has been at the decision and order of democratically elected leaders in those states without any federal pressure. Obviously it symbolizes different things to different people. But what it symbolizes means nothing in terms of its legality, and private organizations or merchants can make their own decisions on how they approach its or any symbolism. For myself, the only part of southern history associated with it that I can feel proud of is the battlefield genius and tactical mastery of southern armies and generals against great odds and the courage they exhibited. Otherwise, I see it as the battle flag of an armed treasonous rebellion for 4-5 years, followed by about 150 years of misappropriation by racist, terrorist hate groups. No, I don't think everyone waiving a Confederate Flag is racist or a member of the KKK, but I think many people blind themselves to that aspect of its history in their quest for regional or culture pride. I don't condemn them for that, but it saddens me. Personally I see little difference between waiving it and waving a Nazi flag. Yes, Hitler & WWII are a piece of German history. Yes, German generals and German combat forces often exhibit brilliance and bravery in that war. It is still legal to make, sell, or waive a Nazi flag in this country (though not in Germany, by contrast). And much like the Confederate Battle Flag, artistically the swastika has always been an aesthetically pleasing graphic design or motif. But I would never fly one because: 1. (And most importantly!) I wouldn't want to offend anyone else over a symbol or piece of cloth, 2. I don't want to be associated with the hate groups that usurp it for their own evil philosophies, and 3. I don't won't anyone to feel sad for me (as I described in my previous paragraph) thinking I was exercising my rights while being blind to the evil associated with the symbol. The particular numbers and demographics of a CNN poll have no affect on my reasons for not flying it. And I don't think mere polls should determine what others decide to do with it; I respect their rights to their choices. Well stated. The relatively large number of people who take pride in the heritage the flag represents just goes to prove that sometimes the losers get to "write history". I never really thought about the parallels between the Confederacy and Nazi Germany regarding military prowess. Each had the finest military machine the world had ever seen but both regimes were based on evil concepts. I don't know if the confederacy was a military machine. They had tactically sound leadership but as pointed out on this thread, they were not very organized and faced a high desertion rate. On top of that, they were outnumbered in manpower and equipment. True. (Well, except for perhaps the poorly organized part.) Nevertheless, military prowess is as military prowess does, so I stand by my statement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icanthearyou 4,462 Posted July 2, 2015 Share Posted July 2, 2015 I'm surprised that 11% of blacks in the south disagree. Add that to the 75% of whites and you have an overwhelming majority of people who are on the same "page". Are you serious or, are you just trying to give me a headache? I'm serious in the fact that 11% of the blacks in the south agreed that the flag meant pride and not hate....and if you put the two together that is a big % overall. Step away from the Tylenol. ;)/> That is not how math works! Did I misread something or did it say that 75% of whites and 11% of blacks in the south though that the flag represented pride and not hate? Did I miss something. Well, I'm not sure of how the population is divided and, not sure what qualifies as white but, you do not necessarily have an "overwhelming majority". Ok...overwhelming majority of the people polled. Fair enough? ;)/> 57% is overwhelming? he is talking about the south. Not the whole population How did you come to that conclusion? I did not see any indication of sample size for either, black or white southerners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aujeff11 6,243 Posted July 2, 2015 Share Posted July 2, 2015 Hard to believe this debate is still going on. It is still perfectly legal for persons to fly the Confederate Flag if they wish. It is perfectly legal for a business to manufacture or sell, or not make or sell, as it chooses. And perfectly legal to buy. Nobody's rights have been stepped on, freedom of speech is intact, and isn't the idea of letting the merchant decide what to put on his shelves or advertising part of the point of democratic free-market capitalism? The only real change is that it has been removed from government/state property. It never had any official status with the federal government, rather it's the flag of an enemy, so IMO it never belonged on federal property. Where it's been removed from state properties, it has been at the decision and order of democratically elected leaders in those states without any federal pressure. Obviously it symbolizes different things to different people. But what it symbolizes means nothing in terms of its legality, and private organizations or merchants can make their own decisions on how they approach its or any symbolism. For myself, the only part of southern history associated with it that I can feel proud of is the battlefield genius and tactical mastery of southern armies and generals against great odds and the courage they exhibited. Otherwise, I see it as the battle flag of an armed treasonous rebellion for 4-5 years, followed by about 150 years of misappropriation by racist, terrorist hate groups. No, I don't think everyone waiving a Confederate Flag is racist or a member of the KKK, but I think many people blind themselves to that aspect of its history in their quest for regional or culture pride. I don't condemn them for that, but it saddens me. Personally I see little difference between waiving it and waving a Nazi flag. Yes, Hitler & WWII are a piece of German history. Yes, German generals and German combat forces often exhibit brilliance and bravery in that war. It is still legal to make, sell, or waive a Nazi flag in this country (though not in Germany, by contrast). And much like the Confederate Battle Flag, artistically the swastika has always been an aesthetically pleasing graphic design or motif. But I would never fly one because: 1. (And most importantly!) I wouldn't want to offend anyone else over a symbol or piece of cloth, 2. I don't want to be associated with the hate groups that usurp it for their own evil philosophies, and 3. I don't won't anyone to feel sad for me (as I described in my previous paragraph) thinking I was exercising my rights while being blind to the evil associated with the symbol. The particular numbers and demographics of a CNN poll have no affect on my reasons for not flying it. And I don't think mere polls should determine what others decide to do with it; I respect their rights to their choices. Well stated. The relatively large number of people who take pride in the heritage the flag represents just goes to prove that sometimes the losers get to "write history". I never really thought about the parallels between the Confederacy and Nazi Germany regarding military prowess. Each had the finest military machine the world had ever seen but both regimes were based on evil concepts. I don't know if the confederacy was a military machine. They had tactically sound leadership but as pointed out on this thread, they were not very organized and faced a high desertion rate. On top of that, they were outnumbered in manpower and equipment. True. (Well, except for perhaps the poorly organized part.) Nevertheless, military prowess is as military prowess does, so I stand by my statement. Military prowess didn't turn them into a machine. Sorry. Prowess gave them a fighting chance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexava 6,973 Posted July 2, 2015 Share Posted July 2, 2015 we're not Americans. We are hyphenated segregated compartmentalized .... you don't say Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AURaptor 1,122 Posted July 2, 2015 Share Posted July 2, 2015 we're not Americans. We are hyphenated segregated compartmentalized .... you don't say Yep. Identify politics seems to be what defines us. We're not Americans. We're black, gay, female, Latino, victimized and discriminated against, all in need of our own special status. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,367 Posted July 3, 2015 Share Posted July 3, 2015 Hard to believe this debate is still going on. It is still perfectly legal for persons to fly the Confederate Flag if they wish. It is perfectly legal for a business to manufacture or sell, or not make or sell, as it chooses. And perfectly legal to buy. Nobody's rights have been stepped on, freedom of speech is intact, and isn't the idea of letting the merchant decide what to put on his shelves or advertising part of the point of democratic free-market capitalism? The only real change is that it has been removed from government/state property. It never had any official status with the federal government, rather it's the flag of an enemy, so IMO it never belonged on federal property. Where it's been removed from state properties, it has been at the decision and order of democratically elected leaders in those states without any federal pressure. Obviously it symbolizes different things to different people. But what it symbolizes means nothing in terms of its legality, and private organizations or merchants can make their own decisions on how they approach its or any symbolism. For myself, the only part of southern history associated with it that I can feel proud of is the battlefield genius and tactical mastery of southern armies and generals against great odds and the courage they exhibited. Otherwise, I see it as the battle flag of an armed treasonous rebellion for 4-5 years, followed by about 150 years of misappropriation by racist, terrorist hate groups. No, I don't think everyone waiving a Confederate Flag is racist or a member of the KKK, but I think many people blind themselves to that aspect of its history in their quest for regional or culture pride. I don't condemn them for that, but it saddens me. Personally I see little difference between waiving it and waving a Nazi flag. Yes, Hitler & WWII are a piece of German history. Yes, German generals and German combat forces often exhibit brilliance and bravery in that war. It is still legal to make, sell, or waive a Nazi flag in this country (though not in Germany, by contrast). And much like the Confederate Battle Flag, artistically the swastika has always been an aesthetically pleasing graphic design or motif. But I would never fly one because: 1. (And most importantly!) I wouldn't want to offend anyone else over a symbol or piece of cloth, 2. I don't want to be associated with the hate groups that usurp it for their own evil philosophies, and 3. I don't won't anyone to feel sad for me (as I described in my previous paragraph) thinking I was exercising my rights while being blind to the evil associated with the symbol. The particular numbers and demographics of a CNN poll have no affect on my reasons for not flying it. And I don't think mere polls should determine what others decide to do with it; I respect their rights to their choices. Well stated. The relatively large number of people who take pride in the heritage the flag represents just goes to prove that sometimes the losers get to "write history". I never really thought about the parallels between the Confederacy and Nazi Germany regarding military prowess. Each had the finest military machine the world had ever seen but both regimes were based on evil concepts. I don't know if the confederacy was a military machine. They had tactically sound leadership but as pointed out on this thread, they were not very organized and faced a high desertion rate. On top of that, they were outnumbered in manpower and equipment. True. (Well, except for perhaps the poorly organized part.) Nevertheless, military prowess is as military prowess does, so I stand by my statement. Military prowess didn't turn them into a machine. Sorry. Prowess gave them a fighting chance. First, I'd like to clarify something: By "machine", I am referring to the Confederate military forces, not the "nation" - or their political organization. And I am not referring to their strategic possibilities over the long term. Likewise, I am not talking about logistical capability. I am referring to the combat effectiveness of their fighting forces. Again, the analogy between them and the Nazis is fairly valid. The Wehrmacht was a military "machine". And even though the Germans eventually lost their strategic initiative, they were still damn effective in combat. Of course, just like the Confederacy, this effectiveness was eventually eliminated through attrition and superior strategic capabilities. I am actually warming up to this analogy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quietfan 233 Posted July 3, 2015 Share Posted July 3, 2015 Of course, one significant difference between the Confederacy and the Nazi regime: Unlike Hitler, the Confederate government did not demonstrate any overt expansionist imperial dreams of conquest beyond hoping the other slave states would join them. But then, who knows what may have developed had the South won the war and independence? Might they later have looked greedily toward territory in Mexico, the Caribbean, or the southwestern US? Expansion of slavery into the western territories was one of the big talking points in the national debate over slavery. For that matter, independence in 1865 would have still given them time to make a play for overseas colonies during the later nineteenth century land grabs by major western powers. That's when we (the USA) got Puerto Rico, Guam, Hawaii, and the Philippines and most of Africa was "divvied up" between European powers. Actually, if the CSA was going to continue the institution of slavery, it might have made sense to them to fight for a piece of the African "pie". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aujeff11 6,243 Posted July 3, 2015 Share Posted July 3, 2015 Hard to believe this debate is still going on. It is still perfectly legal for persons to fly the Confederate Flag if they wish. It is perfectly legal for a business to manufacture or sell, or not make or sell, as it chooses. And perfectly legal to buy. Nobody's rights have been stepped on, freedom of speech is intact, and isn't the idea of letting the merchant decide what to put on his shelves or advertising part of the point of democratic free-market capitalism? The only real change is that it has been removed from government/state property. It never had any official status with the federal government, rather it's the flag of an enemy, so IMO it never belonged on federal property. Where it's been removed from state properties, it has been at the decision and order of democratically elected leaders in those states without any federal pressure. Obviously it symbolizes different things to different people. But what it symbolizes means nothing in terms of its legality, and private organizations or merchants can make their own decisions on how they approach its or any symbolism. For myself, the only part of southern history associated with it that I can feel proud of is the battlefield genius and tactical mastery of southern armies and generals against great odds and the courage they exhibited. Otherwise, I see it as the battle flag of an armed treasonous rebellion for 4-5 years, followed by about 150 years of misappropriation by racist, terrorist hate groups. No, I don't think everyone waiving a Confederate Flag is racist or a member of the KKK, but I think many people blind themselves to that aspect of its history in their quest for regional or culture pride. I don't condemn them for that, but it saddens me. Personally I see little difference between waiving it and waving a Nazi flag. Yes, Hitler & WWII are a piece of German history. Yes, German generals and German combat forces often exhibit brilliance and bravery in that war. It is still legal to make, sell, or waive a Nazi flag in this country (though not in Germany, by contrast). And much like the Confederate Battle Flag, artistically the swastika has always been an aesthetically pleasing graphic design or motif. But I would never fly one because: 1. (And most importantly!) I wouldn't want to offend anyone else over a symbol or piece of cloth, 2. I don't want to be associated with the hate groups that usurp it for their own evil philosophies, and 3. I don't won't anyone to feel sad for me (as I described in my previous paragraph) thinking I was exercising my rights while being blind to the evil associated with the symbol. The particular numbers and demographics of a CNN poll have no affect on my reasons for not flying it. And I don't think mere polls should determine what others decide to do with it; I respect their rights to their choices. Well stated. The relatively large number of people who take pride in the heritage the flag represents just goes to prove that sometimes the losers get to "write history". I never really thought about the parallels between the Confederacy and Nazi Germany regarding military prowess. Each had the finest military machine the world had ever seen but both regimes were based on evil concepts. I don't know if the confederacy was a military machine. They had tactically sound leadership but as pointed out on this thread, they were not very organized and faced a high desertion rate. On top of that, they were outnumbered in manpower and equipment. True. (Well, except for perhaps the poorly organized part.) Nevertheless, military prowess is as military prowess does, so I stand by my statement. Military prowess didn't turn them into a machine. Sorry. Prowess gave them a fighting chance. First, I'd like to clarify something: By "machine", I am referring to the Confederate military forces, not the "nation" - or their political organization. And I am not referring to their strategic possibilities over the long term. Likewise, I am not talking about logistical capability. I am referring to the combat effectiveness of their fighting forces. Again, the analogy between them and the Nazis is fairly valid. The Wehrmacht was a military "machine". And even though the Germans eventually lost their strategic initiative, they were still damn effective in combat. Of course, just like the Confederacy, this effectiveness was eventually eliminated through attrition and superior strategic capabilities. I am actually warming up to this analogy. I knew what you meant by machine. I will continue to argue that the confederate forces looked more like a patchwork military force, however. I read just yesterday that many of their soldiers only had roughly three weeks of training before being baptized by fire and the army was so broke, that they had to supply their weapons. How can a military become a machine without the supplies and rations requisite for battle? Germany was a machine. They rolled through their weaker European foes like a hot knife into butter. It took a coalition effort to stop the nazis! If you called the confederate military a " formidable foe" I'd have to agree. But to call the confederate military along with the Nazi army "each the finest military machine the world had ever seen" is wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,367 Posted July 3, 2015 Share Posted July 3, 2015 Hard to believe this debate is still going on. It is still perfectly legal for persons to fly the Confederate Flag if they wish. It is perfectly legal for a business to manufacture or sell, or not make or sell, as it chooses. And perfectly legal to buy. Nobody's rights have been stepped on, freedom of speech is intact, and isn't the idea of letting the merchant decide what to put on his shelves or advertising part of the point of democratic free-market capitalism? The only real change is that it has been removed from government/state property. It never had any official status with the federal government, rather it's the flag of an enemy, so IMO it never belonged on federal property. Where it's been removed from state properties, it has been at the decision and order of democratically elected leaders in those states without any federal pressure. Obviously it symbolizes different things to different people. But what it symbolizes means nothing in terms of its legality, and private organizations or merchants can make their own decisions on how they approach its or any symbolism. For myself, the only part of southern history associated with it that I can feel proud of is the battlefield genius and tactical mastery of southern armies and generals against great odds and the courage they exhibited. Otherwise, I see it as the battle flag of an armed treasonous rebellion for 4-5 years, followed by about 150 years of misappropriation by racist, terrorist hate groups. No, I don't think everyone waiving a Confederate Flag is racist or a member of the KKK, but I think many people blind themselves to that aspect of its history in their quest for regional or culture pride. I don't condemn them for that, but it saddens me. Personally I see little difference between waiving it and waving a Nazi flag. Yes, Hitler & WWII are a piece of German history. Yes, German generals and German combat forces often exhibit brilliance and bravery in that war. It is still legal to make, sell, or waive a Nazi flag in this country (though not in Germany, by contrast). And much like the Confederate Battle Flag, artistically the swastika has always been an aesthetically pleasing graphic design or motif. But I would never fly one because: 1. (And most importantly!) I wouldn't want to offend anyone else over a symbol or piece of cloth, 2. I don't want to be associated with the hate groups that usurp it for their own evil philosophies, and 3. I don't won't anyone to feel sad for me (as I described in my previous paragraph) thinking I was exercising my rights while being blind to the evil associated with the symbol. The particular numbers and demographics of a CNN poll have no affect on my reasons for not flying it. And I don't think mere polls should determine what others decide to do with it; I respect their rights to their choices. Well stated. The relatively large number of people who take pride in the heritage the flag represents just goes to prove that sometimes the losers get to "write history". I never really thought about the parallels between the Confederacy and Nazi Germany regarding military prowess. Each had the finest military machine the world had ever seen but both regimes were based on evil concepts. I don't know if the confederacy was a military machine. They had tactically sound leadership but as pointed out on this thread, they were not very organized and faced a high desertion rate. On top of that, they were outnumbered in manpower and equipment. True. (Well, except for perhaps the poorly organized part.) Nevertheless, military prowess is as military prowess does, so I stand by my statement. Military prowess didn't turn them into a machine. Sorry. Prowess gave them a fighting chance. First, I'd like to clarify something: By "machine", I am referring to the Confederate military forces, not the "nation" - or their political organization. And I am not referring to their strategic possibilities over the long term. Likewise, I am not talking about logistical capability. I am referring to the combat effectiveness of their fighting forces. Again, the analogy between them and the Nazis is fairly valid. The Wehrmacht was a military "machine". And even though the Germans eventually lost their strategic initiative, they were still damn effective in combat. Of course, just like the Confederacy, this effectiveness was eventually eliminated through attrition and superior strategic capabilities. I am actually warming up to this analogy. I knew what you meant by machine. I will continue to argue that the confederate forces looked more like s patchwork military force. I read just yesterday that many of their own soldiers only had roughly three weeks of training until being baptized by fire and the army was so broke, that they had to supply their weapons. Germany was a machine. They rolled through their weaker European foes like a hot knife into butter. It took a coalition effort to stop the nazis! If you called the confederate military a " formidable foe" I'd have to agree. But to call the confederate military along with the Nazi army "each the finest military machine the world had ever seen" is wrong. There was not an army in the world that could have matched the Army of Northern Virginia for the first two years of the war. Granted, much of that was due to the difference in leadership, but the fighting qualities and mobility of the Confederates were without parallel as evidenced by the results. The Confederacy enjoyed many advantages such as operation on home ground with interior lines, but they also enjoyed a qualitative difference in the beginning. Heck, it was at least two years before the Union could field cavalry that was the equal to the Southern cavalry. I regret using the term "machine" if that is what your hang-up is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quietfan 233 Posted July 3, 2015 Share Posted July 3, 2015 There was not an army in the world that could have matched the Army of Northern Virginia for the first two years of the war. You may be right. Certainly the A. of N.V. had tremendous success at the time. But a claim might also be made for the contemporary military forces of Bismark's Prussia. Helmuth von Moltke had become chief of the Prussian General Staff in 1857 and proceeded to redesign the operational and strategic philosophy of the army. Albrecht von Roon became Prussian Minister of War in 1859, initiating a reorganization of the army and its training techniques. They were backed by a much stronger industrial base than the Confederate states and also armed with bolt action needle guns rather than the older, slower muzzle loaders of our Civil War. Prussia proceeded to defeat Denmark (1864), Austria (1866), and France (1870) in rapid succession with relative ease. I don't know how quickly this military reformation was achieved or what may have happened a few years earlier if they had fought Lee in ~1862-'63. (And of course, the foundations and traditions laid down by this Prussian military renaissance were largely responsible for the success of German armies in both world wars.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IndianTiger 95 Posted July 3, 2015 Share Posted July 3, 2015 I hesitate to add anything to this, but had to share my thoughts... The gracious, warm , welcoming and friendly southerners are generally not the ones waving the flag around. That is the south, that I fondly remember. Honestly, true southern pride can be shown without the in your face flag waving. Very difficult to appreciate what is to be a minority, until you are in their shoes. Live with your family outside of your comfort zone, that teaches a lot. Just my 2 cents.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,367 Posted July 3, 2015 Share Posted July 3, 2015 I hesitate to add anything to this, but had to share my thoughts... The gracious, warm , welcoming and friendly southerners are generally not the ones waving the flag around. That is the south, that I fondly remember. Honestly, true southern pride can be shown without the in your face flag waving. Very difficult to appreciate what is to be a minority, until you are in their shoes. Live with your family outside of your comfort zone, that teaches a lot. Just my 2 cents.. Amen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quietfan 233 Posted July 3, 2015 Share Posted July 3, 2015 I hesitate to add anything to this, but had to share my thoughts... The gracious, warm , welcoming and friendly southerners are generally not the ones waving the flag around. That is the south, that I fondly remember. Honestly, true southern pride can be shown without the in your face flag waving. Very difficult to appreciate what is to be a minority, until you are in their shoes. Live with your family outside of your comfort zone, that teaches a lot. Just my 2 cents.. Well said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icanthearyou 4,462 Posted July 3, 2015 Share Posted July 3, 2015 I hesitate to add anything to this, but had to share my thoughts... The gracious, warm , welcoming and friendly southerners are generally not the ones waving the flag around. That is the south, that I fondly remember. Honestly, true southern pride can be shown without the in your face flag waving. Very difficult to appreciate what is to be a minority, until you are in their shoes. Live with your family outside of your comfort zone, that teaches a lot. Just my 2 cents.. Very well stated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bottomfeeder 244 Posted July 3, 2015 Share Posted July 3, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icanthearyou 4,462 Posted July 3, 2015 Share Posted July 3, 2015 There was not an army in the world that could have matched the Army of Northern Virginia for the first two years of the war. You may be right. Certainly the A. of N.V. had tremendous success at the time. But a claim might also be made for the contemporary military forces of Bismark's Prussia. Helmuth von Moltke had become chief of the Prussian General Staff in 1857 and proceeded to redesign the operational and strategic philosophy of the army. Albrecht von Roon became Prussian Minister of War in 1859, initiating a reorganization of the army and its training techniques. They were backed by a much stronger industrial base than the Confederate states and also armed with bolt action needle guns rather than the older, slower muzzle loaders of our Civil War. Prussian proceeded to defeat Denmark (1864), Austria (1866), and France (1870) in rapid succession with relative ease. I don't know how quickly this military reformation was achieved or what may have happened a few years earlier if they had fought Lee in ~1862-'63. (And of course, the foundations and traditions laid down by this Prussian military renaissance were largely responsible for the success of German armies in both world wars.) Sometimes, I feel a little guilty when I consider that I do not have to pay in order to read some of your posts. I am learning to live with it though. So, don't expect a check. And, I will still argue with you if you slip up. I do thank you for your participation. Aint nuthin worst than you intelectual elitist libural types other an them hippy tree huggin liberal types (Homers). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quietfan 233 Posted July 3, 2015 Share Posted July 3, 2015 There was not an army in the world that could have matched the Army of Northern Virginia for the first two years of the war. You may be right. Certainly the A. of N.V. had tremendous success at the time. But a claim might also be made for the contemporary military forces of Bismark's Prussia. Helmuth von Moltke had become chief of the Prussian General Staff in 1857 and proceeded to redesign the operational and strategic philosophy of the army. Albrecht von Roon became Prussian Minister of War in 1859, initiating a reorganization of the army and its training techniques. They were backed by a much stronger industrial base than the Confederate states and also armed with bolt action needle guns rather than the older, slower muzzle loaders of our Civil War. Prussian proceeded to defeat Denmark (1864), Austria (1866), and France (1870) in rapid succession with relative ease. I don't know how quickly this military reformation was achieved or what may have happened a few years earlier if they had fought Lee in ~1862-'63. (And of course, the foundations and traditions laid down by this Prussian military renaissance were largely responsible for the success of German armies in both world wars.) Sometimes, I feel a little guilty when I consider that I do not have to pay in order to read some of your posts. I am learning to live with it though. So, don't expect a check. And, I will still argue with you if you slip up. I do thank you for your participation. Aint nuthin worst than you intelectual elitist libural types other an them hippy tree huggin liberal types (Homers). Damn! ...and I already told the proprietor holding my tab at the local pub the check was in the mail! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.