• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Tentative agreement reached on tax cuts

Ocean City said:
Funny, that's what Southerners thought at the start of the civil war. They believed their familiarity with guns and hunting would allow them to easily beat the the city-dwelling yankees. They learned the hard way that individual skill with a weapon is hardly a factor in how wars are won.
Click to expand...



Can you link to this?
 
Ocean City said:
Funny, that's what Southerners thought at the start of the civil war. They believed their familiarity with guns and hunting would allow them to easily beat the the city-dwelling yankees. They learned the hard way that individual skill with a weapon is hardly a factor in how wars are won.
Click to expand...

Actually, you have that bass ackwards. It was the north that thought it would be an easy victory. The first major battle was in Manassas, VA at the Battle of Bull Run. High society from Washington, DC rode to the battlefield to watch the northern troops under McDowell whip the Rebs. Instead, it was McDowell that got whupped and both Mcdowell and the society folks fled back to Washington in a panic. Lincoln fired McDowell and put McClelland in charge. Lincoln urged McClelland to attack Virginia which he did. He was also promptly whipped at the Second Battle of Bull Run.

A working knowledge of history is handy. Too bad many of today's youth don't have it.
 
Gill said:
Actually, you have that bass ackwards. It was the north that thought it would be an easy victory. The first major battle was in Manassas, VA at the Battle of Bull Run. High society from Washington, DC rode to the battlefield to watch the northern troops under McDowell whip the Rebs. Instead, it was McDowell that got whupped and both Mcdowell and the society folks fled back to Washington in a panic. Lincoln fired McDowell and put McClelland in charge. Lincoln urged McClelland to attack Virginia which he did. He was also promptly whipped at the Second Battle of Bull Run.

A working knowledge of history is handy. Too bad many of today's youth don't have it.
Click to expand...

That's the way I understood the prelude and beginning of the Civil War. So I checked my memory and low and behold, Ocean City seems to be misinformed.

About.com said:
Aftermath of Bull Run

In the fighting at Bull Run, Union forces lost 460 killed, 1,124 wounded, and 1,312 captured/missing, while the Confederates incurred 387 killed, 1,582 wounded, and 13 missing. The remnants of McDowell's army flowed back into Washington and for some time there was concern that the city would be attacked. The defeat stunned the North which had expected an easy victory and led many to believe that the war would be long and costly. On July 22, Lincoln signed a bill calling for 500,000 volunteers and efforts began to rebuild the army.
Click to expand...

LINK: First Battle of Bull Run - Civil War First Battle of Bull Run

The Union thought Manassas (Bull Run) would have been an easy victory and would have put the South in it's place. The Union was wrong. I can't remember any view from the South that the war or fighting the North would be easy in any stretch of the imagination. All the major manufacturing centers were in the North as were all the trading centers.

http://armstrong-history.wikispaces.com/file/view/Civil+War+-+Early+Battles.pdf
 
haymarket said:
And somehow, someway I bet you have a definition of FAIR that just happens to coincidently benefit the rich also?
Click to expand...

FAIR would be everyone and every business, coughing up 5%. How much revenue would that come out to be?

I bet it would be more than you would get by raising taxes on the rich by 3%. Not to mention, people would gladly pay a measly 5% and be done with it. They could have the option to pay it weekly, monthly, quarterly, or annually. Also, with the option to make extimated payments for the following year.
 
Ockham said:
Yep, PenPencil22 who wrote the article is a link alright. :lamo

I don't know... I like my history a little more ... legitimate.
Click to expand...

I suspect you like your sources to simply agree with either your ideology or your own biases and damn their credentials or expertise.
 
haymarket said:
I suspect you like your sources to simply agree with either your ideology or your own biases and damn their credentials or expertise.
Click to expand...

Well, your link just doesn't have anything behind it. No annotations, no references. PenPencil22 maybe a 12 year old who got an A on a report he handed into his 6th grade teacher and decided to put it on the internet. Whereas, my About.com link has sources, links, references and the guy who wrote it is pictured and at least seems to be a Military Historian - he's called one. Assuming that's true, I think a Military Historian with an MA from University of Delaware holds a little edge over the no source PenPencil22 when it comes to information on the interwebz. :shrug:
 
get real santa. this is not about proving that a bunch of Southerners told a historian that they could shoot better. Southerners believed that they were going to win in the same way that Turtle believes he and a small band of right wingers could hold off a citizen revolution because he is well armed. That was the context of the comment made by the other poster. If you do not like the link, lump it, screw it, forget it, F it. Thats up to you. It shows it was not something made up off the cuff and was not so much a definitive academic treatise on an aspect of history but a comment by Ocean that everybody thinks they are going to win the fight because they are better.

Your link was very nice and thorough. If it only spoke to the issue in question it might even be deemed useful.
 
Last edited:
Animus said:
The dems are spineless. They sicken me almost as much as the republicans.

American politics: giving more money to those who don't need it since 2000.
Click to expand...

Two lies in one sentence

1) giving money to people--sorry tax cuts or keeping the tax rates the same is hardly GIVING anyone money

2) "who don't need it" who are you to say who needs it. THe government certainly doesn't need more money that it will waste any way
 
Zyphlin said:
And somehow, someway I bet you have a definition of "FAIR" that just happens to coincidently benefit the poor also?
Click to expand...

fair starts with two concepts

1) paying for what you use

2) treating everyone equally

progressive taxes fail either definition
 
haymarket said:
get real santa. this is not about proving that a bunch of Southerners told a historian that they could shoot better. Southerners believed that they were going to win in the same way that Turtle believes he and a small band of right wingers could hold off a citizen revolution because he is well armed. That was the context of the comment made by the other poster. If you do not like the link, lump it, screw it, forget it, F it. Thats up to you. It shows it was not something made up off the cuff and was not so much a definitive academic treatise on an aspect of history but a comment by Ocean that everybody thinks they are going to win the fight because they are better.

Your link was very nice and thorough. If it only spoke to the issue in question it might even be deemed useful.
Click to expand...

more errors--the people who are on my side of your revolution will beat your side. why? because we have enough people and we are far far better trained in what counts.

a bunch of SEIU thugs, lesbian activists, and college professors are gonna last along time against guys who shoot competitively and spend their free time stalking deer and shooting coyotes?
 
Ocean City said:
Funny, that's what Southerners thought at the start of the civil war. They believed their familiarity with guns and hunting would allow them to easily beat the the city-dwelling yankees. They learned the hard way that individual skill with a weapon is hardly a factor in how wars are won.
Click to expand...

plenty of North/union guys knew how to hunt and shoot well. And the north was better nourished and didn't have the deleterious issue of massive hookwork infestations that plagued the southernn volunteers. The north also had far more facilities to manufacture munitions and weapons--the south was mainly importing stuff which was diminished through Union Naval blockades. having been on the US shooting team and a three time all-american and then general counsel for gun clubs, gun dealers and a couple Title II manufacturers (machine guns) I can tell you that I haven't run into many socialists, communists, liberal democrats or Obamatards in my travels around the USA competing or meeting with gun makers and world class shooters.
 
Erod said:
God forbid taxes be fair.

It's a lot easier to hate rich people for their hard work, intellect, and success.
Click to expand...

Stop making fallacious arguments.

The fact is we just added 7 billion to our deficit by giving money to those who don't need it. Good work America.
 
Animus said:
Stop making fallacious arguments.

The fact is we just added 7 billion to our deficit by giving money to those who don't need it. Good work America.
Click to expand...

I am waiting for you to prove people don't need the money that is taken from them and the government "needs" it more

you have a computer and some people don't even have electricity

if your family has more than one car you don't need it if someone is walking?

if you have a college degree you have more education t han you "need" if someone else didn't make it through highschool

Guess what--need has no relevance to what we can own. We can have what we can pay for and someone like you has no relevance to what I want or need.
 
haymarket said:
I suspect you like your sources to simply agree with either your ideology or your own biases and damn their credentials or expertise.
Click to expand...

How about sources that are legitimate in the sense that the source has some provable knowledge about the subject, rather than Wiki or answers.com, where any Joe the Moron can write about nuclear physics?
 
Ockham said:
That's the way I understood the prelude and beginning of the Civil War. So I checked my memory and low and behold, Ocean City seems to be misinformed.
Click to expand...

If you think that Southerners didn't have better shooting and hunting skills than Northerners, and that the Southerners thought this would turn the Civil War in their favor, then you really need to go take a Civil War history class. I have a degree in American History and that is such common knowledge I will not even waste my time to find you a link showing that Southerners in the Antebellum south were competent shooters and hunters.
 
Animus said:
Stop making fallacious arguments.

The fact is we just added 7 billion to our deficit by giving money to those who don't need it. Good work America.
Click to expand...

So, if someone makes X, and is allowed to keep the same amount of that (after taxes) after this extension, that they are allowed to keep today, that's giving them money? Really? It's not money they actually earned? It's a gift from the government?

What an odd concept.
 
Ocean City said:
If you think that Southerners didn't have better shooting and hunting skills than Northerners, and that the Southerners thought this would turn the Civil War in their favor, then you really need to go take a Civil War history class. I have a degree in American History and that is such common knowledge I will not even waste my time to find you a link showing that Southerners in the Antebellum south were competent shooters and hunters.
Click to expand...

can you prove your claims?
 
Whovian said:
So, if someone makes X, and is allowed to keep the same amount of that (after taxes) after this extension, that they are allowed to keep today, that's giving them money? Really? It's not money they actually earned? It's a gift from the government?

What an odd concept.
Click to expand...

people like Animus believe that all wealth belongs to the government so a welfare check, an unemployment benefits payment (long after the "insurance has run out) is the same as a tax cut
 
@ Turtle Dude

Your post was contradictory. You first supported my point by saying that...

TurtleDude said:
The north was better nourished and didn't have the deleterious issue of massive hookwork infestations that plagued the southernn volunteers. The north also had far more facilities to manufacture munitions and weapons--the south was mainly importing stuff which was diminished through Union Naval blockades.
Click to expand...

These types of factors, which I originally was pointing out, are what wins wars, not individual shooting skills. So you backed up my statement with that information but then you immediately contradict yourself and say...

TurtleDude said:
having been on the US shooting team and a three time all-american and then general counsel for gun clubs, gun dealers and a couple Title II manufacturers (machine guns) I can tell you that I haven't run into many socialists, communists, liberal democrats or Obamatards in my travels around the USA competing or meeting with gun makers and world class shooters.
Click to expand...

As we have already pointed out together, this doesn't win wars. Manufacturing, GDP, transportation, technology, etc. wins wars. Wars today are won with planes, tanks, mortars, Navies and assault rifles. Since you are so well versed in weapons, you obviously know that the assault rifle was invented precisely because it was realized that most kills on the battle field are made in short range with small burst. Snipers, rifles and long range shooting skills have become increasingly obsolete on the battle field in the last half century and even more so in the last 20 years which is why we have seen the introduction such carbines as the M4.
 
Last edited:
Ocean City said:
@ Turtle Dude

Your post was contradictory. You first supported my point by saying that...



These types of factors, which I originally was pointing out, are what wins wars, not individual shooting skills. So you backed up my statement with that information but then you immediately contradict yourself and say...



As we have already pointed out together, this doesn't win wars. Manufacturing, GDP, transportation, technology, etc. wins wars. Wars today are won with planes, tanks, mortars, Navies and assault rifles. Since you are so well versed in weapons, you obviously know that the assault rifle was invented precisely because it was realized that most kills on the battle field are made in short range with small burst. Snipers, rifles and long range shooting skills have become increasingly obsolete on the battle field in the last half century and even more so in the last 20 years which is why we have seen the introduction such carbines as the M4.
Click to expand...

you missed the point-you obviously know little about this subject

all things else being equal marksmanship will carry the day. our men in the Pacific were far better shots than the Japanese who were not able to own personal weapons. Alvin York and Carlos Hathcock were both men with illustrious shooting credentials before going to war and those two killed or incapacitated over 200 enemy between them. But in protracted WARFARE (vs assassinations of say despotic politicians or putting down a street riot of left wing rabble) where the combatants are marching 20 miles a day for years, that nutrition means alot.

Snipers are still as important as they were in WWII. that is why M14 rifles are being brought out of mothballs. and while it is true, in a WAR, full auto fire is designed to suppress MOVEMENT so that artillery or air strikes may take out the opposition we are talking about a bunch of rebelling libs trying to take wealth from the industrious.

people like you aren't going to last long in gunfights with people like me
 
Ocean City said:
Bathed in Blood: Hunting & Mastery in the Old South
Click to expand...

Talk about much ado about nothing. Ocean was equating the macho chest beating boasting of Turtle with the idea that outnumbered people believe they have better fighting skills and can still win. That is the way I took it. I provided another persons opinion stating much the same thing. Now some here want to turn this into a academic exercise about Civil War experts. Gimme a break and get real already.

even now he still has to take out a yardstick to pretend how much macho man he is

the people who are on my side of your revolution will beat your side. why? because we have enough people and we are far far better trained in what counts.

a bunch of SEIU thugs, lesbian activists, and college professors are gonna last along time against guys who shoot competitively and spend their free time stalking deer and shooting coyotes?
Click to expand...

You boys can keep your popguns and go back into the lodge and show what you have to kill each other with. This is way way way something I have no interest in at all.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom