Tag Archives: Civil War

Let’s Even The Playing Field

Posted on by

On Saturday, PJ Media posted an article titled, “Time To Fight Dirty.” Frankly, I was put off by the title, but when I read the article, I realized that there were some good ideas there.

The article notes:

After witnessing the banana republic court spectacle in New York City this week, I ask our elected Republicans… have you seen enough? Are you going to continue lobbing limpwristed slaps at your enemy’s shoulder as they continue to kick you below the belt? Are you still hiding behind the whole “civility” façade, which the Left abandoned decades ago? Or are you ready to actually man up and fight like our lives, our loved ones, and our liberties depend on it?

We need to start fighting dirty, like they do. If we don’t, what remains of our constitutional order will continue to dissipate until all that remains is the totalitarian state they’ve been working for generations to achieve, complete with state censorship, show trials, and political prisoners.

And when I say we need to fight dirty, let me clarify what I am not saying. I am not saying that we should persecute innocent people, like the Left does. I am saying that we need to go full-throttle, no-holds-barred lawfare against those who do break the law and smugly get away with it.

The article lists a number of times Democrats have broken laws and suffered no consequences. The author of the article believes that there need to be consequences for anyone who breaks the law. I agree.

The article concludes:

The fiercely abolitionist Quakers contributed absolutely nothing towards winning the Civil War, nor was slavery ended by peaceful legislative process. It was ended by the soldiers who slashed and burned their way through Mississippi and Georgia, backed by a Republican president who suspended habeas corpus, who emancipated slaves with a constitutionally-tenuous executive fiat, and who secured the passage of the Thirteenth Amendment via corruption and bribery. And they were right to do so. America is a better place because Larry Hogan’s forefather wasn’t president in 1860.

They all get away with it. They always get away with it. If we win in November, our leaders must ensure that they don’t get away with it, no matter how dirty the fight gets. We need to do to them what they’ve been doing to us, and we need the moral courage to do so. Fighting is dirty only if just one side is doing it.

Holding EVERYONE accountable for their misdeeds is the only way American can move forward. Our laws need to apply to everyone.

This Makes No Sense

Posted on by

Breitbart reported yesterday that Black Lives Matter protesters tore down a statue of Col. Hans Christian Heg, an immigrant from Norway who died fighting for the Union against slavery, on Tuesday night in Madison, Wisconsin.

Local ABC affiliate WKOW reported:

Protesters pulled down the Forward statue that normally stands outside the State Capitol and left it lying in the middle of the road.

…

The same group also tore down the Col. Hans Christian Heg statue a short time later. The group then went on to throw the statue into Lake Monona. Heg fought for the Union during the Civil War and was a stark opponent of slavery during that time.

I can almost understand the BLM’s anger against Confederate leaders and soldiers, but this is simply wanton destruction of public property. It makes no sense. It is simply the actions of an ignorant, angry mob.

The article provides a short summary of Colonel Heg’s life:

The Wisconsin Historical Society describes Col. Heg as follows:

Heg migrated to the United States from Norway as a child in 1840 and spent his youth at Muskego, in Waukesha County, Wisconsin. As a young man he went to California in the Gold Rush and stayed from 1849-1851. He returned to Wisconsin in 1851 following the death of his parents in order to care for his younger siblings and manage the family farm.

…

In the fall of 1861 a new Scandinavian regiment was recruited and Heg accepted appointment as its colonel. The 15th Wisconsin Infantry, made up largely of recent immigrants, went into training at Camp Randall in December and left for the South on March 2, 1862.

…

On December 30, 1862, at the battle of Stones River, Heg’s regiment lost more than 100 men. His horse was shot out from under him and his general called him “the bravest of the brave.” In February 1863 Heg was put in command of the entire brigade and pursued retreating Confederate troops through Tennessee, briefly into Alabama, and across the state line to Chickamauga, Georgia.

…

On the afternoon of September 19, 1863, Heg was charging forward at the front of his troops when he was shot in the abdomen. He managed to stay in the saddle for a short time, but loss of blood compelled him to leave the field and move to a hospital behind the lines where he died the next morning.

This is simply lawlessness–it has nothing to do with protesting anything.

Cowardice In The Senate

Posted on by

Our Senators and Congressmen are elected representatives. They are voted in by the people they are supposed to represent. A certain amount of transparency is expected from them so that the voters can decide whether or not to reelect them. Unfortunately, some of our cowardly Senators have learned how to get around that transparency and avoid taking responsibility for the votes they cast in the Senate.

Just the News posted an article yesterday that reported the following:

The Senate Armed Services Committee approved a $740 billion 2021 defense authorization bill on Wednesday that establishes a commission that would make recommendations on renaming military bases named after Confederate leaders and implement the plan within three years from the date the bill becomes law.

According to the office of the committee’s top Democrat, Sen. Jack Reed, the committee passed an amendment by voice vote during a closed-door session that would create “a commission to study and provide recommendations” concerning the removal of “names, symbols, displays, monuments, and paraphernalia that honor or commemorate the Confederate States of America.”

The amendment was passed by a voice vote so that no one would know who voted for it and who voted against it. No one is actually taking responsibility for the vote.

The article continues, illustrating the further lack of transparency:

The amendment was approved during a “secret level” markup session that concluded on Wednesday evening. The full text of the amendment, which was introduced by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), has not been made available yet. Warren’s office was not available for comment. The office of Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman James Inhofe (R-Okla.) also did not respond before publication.

Inhofe reportedly said on Thursday that he would seek to change the language of the amendment so that renaming the military bases would not be a congressional requirement.

Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) tweeted on Thursday that he opposed the amendment and “spoke against it” during the closed-door, full committee markup of the defense bill.

“Congress should not be mandating renaming of our bases and military installations,” he wrote.

The House Armed Services Committee has a hearing scheduled in July for the defense authorization bill.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Thursday that Democratic leaders might include renaming military bases and removing Confederate statues from the Capitol as part of the defense bill or as standalone legislation.

The Civil War is a part of American history. There were many brave men who fought on both sides. All of the soldiers fighting for the Union were not fighting because they opposed slavery and all of the soldiers fighting for the Confederacy were not fighting because they supported slavery. There were multiple motives on both sides. Can we please get over ourselves and grow up?

Sometimes It’s Hard To Figure Out Who Your Friends Actually Are

Posted on by

There has been a civil war going on in Libya since 2014. When Muammar Gaddafi was killed in 2011, there was a revolution for less than a year, and a government was established. A new government was elected in 2014, but there were controversies surrounding that election. There has been a civil war in Libya ever since.

On June 28th, The New York Times reported the following:

Libyan government fighters discovered a cache of powerful American missiles, usually sold only to close American allies, at a captured rebel base in the mountains south of Tripoli this week.

The article notes that America supports the current government of Libya. Gen. Khalifa Hifter and his forces are waging a military campaign to overthrow the current government and take over Libya. So where did the American weapons, to be used against a government America supports, come from?

The article notes:

Markings on the missiles’ shipping containers indicate that they were originally sold to the United Arab Emirates, an important American partner, in 2008.

If the Emirates transferred the weapons to General Hifter, it would likely violate the sales agreement with the United States as well as a United Nations arms embargo.

Both the State Department and Defense Department are investigating how the weapons wound up in Libya.

The article continues:

“We take all allegations of misuse of U.S. origin defense articles very seriously,” a State Department official said in a statement. “We are aware of these reports and are seeking additional information. We expect all recipients of U.S. origin defense equipment to abide by their end-use obligations.”

The United States supports United Nations-led efforts to broker a peaceful solution to the Libyan crisis, the official added.

A spokeswoman for the Department of Defense declined to comment further on the matter.

The United Arab Emirates ambassador to Washington, Yousef al-Otaiba, declined to answer questions about the provenance of the missiles.

Finally, the article notes some interesting contradictions in those who support of the current regime and the rebels:

When General Hifter started his assault on Tripoli on April 4, in the face of much international opposition, the Emiratis continued to support him. They supplied a Russian-made surface-to-air missile system, Chinese-made Wing Loong combat drones and Emirati drones, said a senior Western official with knowledge of the arms trade.

Jordan, another American ally to side with General Hifter, sent a Jordanian-made anti-tank system known as Nashshab, the official said.

Turkey, a regional rival of the United Arab Emirates, intervened on the other side of the fight, sending combat drones and armored vehicles to help the United Nations-backed government in Tripoli.

The United States supports the Tripoli government, which it helped install. However, President Trump appeared to endorse General Hifter and his military drive after the two men spoke by telephone in April, hailing his “significant role in fighting terrorism.”

Other American officials later rowed back that position by stressing American support for the United Nations-led political process.

The foreign interventions, which flout a United Nations embargo on all arms sales to Libya, highlight how the conflict set off by the ouster of Libya’s longtime dictator, Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi, in 2011 has partly devolved into a proxy conflict between rival regional powers.

I would just like to note that civil wars are nasty, and it is foolish for outsiders to get involved in them. It really doesn’t sound as if the current government in Libya is the one we should be supporting.

An Amazing Perspective

Posted on by

David Vincent Gilbert posted an article recently at Living in the Master’s Shadow. The article is titled, “How Do Civil Wars Happen?” That is a very intriguing question that unfortunately is relevant to current events.

The article points out:

Two or more sides disagree on who runs the country. And they can’t settle the question through elections because they don’t even agree that elections are how you decide who’s in charge.

That’s the basic issue here. Who decides who runs the country? When you hate each other but accept the election results, you have a country. When you stop accepting election results, you have a countdown to a civil war.

The Mueller investigation is about removing President Trump from office and overturning the results of an election. We all know that. But it’s not the first time they’ve done this. The first time a Republican president was elected this century, they said he didn’t really win. The Supreme Court gave him the election. There’s a pattern here.

What do sure odds of the Democrats rejecting the next Republican president really mean? It means they don’t accept the results of any election that they don’t win. It means they don’t believe that transfers of power in this country are determined by elections.

That’s a civil war.

In 1974 the media, in coordination with the Democrat party, drove President Nixon out of office because of a third-rate burglary that he had nothing to do with. If you go back and look at the history of that whole event, you find out many indications that driving Nixon from office was the goal early on. The coordination between members of the Nixon administration and lawyers with connections to the Democrat party was questionable at best. The fact that members of the Kennedy family attended the swearing in of Archibald Cox might be a clue that what was happening was not without political jockeying behind the scenes. That was a high water mark for the press and the Democrat party, and they have not forgotten that. The goal is to accomplish that again by undoing the results of the 2016 election. That is a civil war.

The article continues:

When you consistently reject the results of elections that you don’t win, what you want is a dictatorship. Your very own dictatorship. The only legitimate exercise of power in this country, according to Democrats, is its own. Whenever Republicans exercise power, it’s inherently illegitimate. The Democrats lost Congress They lost the White House. So what did they do? They began trying to run the country through Federal judges and bureaucrats. Every time that a Federal judge issues an order saying that the President of the United States can’t scratch his own back without his say so, that’s the civil war.

Our system of government is based on the constitution, but that’s not the system that runs this country. The Democrat’s system is that any part of government that it runs gets total and unlimited power over the country. If the Democrats are in the White House, then the president can do anything. And I mean anything. He can have his own amnesty for illegal aliens. He can fine you for not having health insurance His power is unlimited. He’s a dictator.

The article concludes:

It’s not a free country when FBI agents who support Hillary take out an “insurance policy” against Trump winning the election. It’s not a free country when Obama officials engage in massive unmasking of the opposition. It’s not a free country when the media responds to the other guy winning by trying to ban the conservative media that supported him from social media.

It’s not a free country when all of the above collude together to overturn an election because the guy who wasn’t supposed to win won.

Have no doubt, we’re in a civil war between conservative volunteer government and a leftist Democrat professional government.

Please follow the link to read the entire article. It is chilling. So how do we end this civil war? We end it by ignoring the mainstream media’s biased reporting and doing our own research into what is actually happening. We do it by voting people out of office who do not support the U.S. Constitution. We remind those in office that they took an oath to defend the U.S. Constitution and hold them accountable to that oath. We return to teaching school children about the U.S. Constitution and the ideas that are included in it. We teach out children to love America–a generation not taught to love America will not be willing to defend it. Teaching children to love America is the only way to secure our future. We can go back to our Constitution, but we all have to work toward that aim.

 

The Value Of Re-enacting

Posted on by

Today’s U.K. Express posted a wonderful story about a 60-year old man who plays a Cavalier swordsman in re-enactments of Civil War battles (British Civil War–not American Civil War).

Mr Thompson had gone to get a paper at the local mini-mart when he heard a disturbance and saw someone at the cash register holding a knife to the clerk’s neck and demanding the money. Mr. Thompson got involved. He used the techniques he has learned as a re-enactor to disarm the man and hold him captive until the police came.

The article reports:

Mr Thompson, 60, said his Cavalier sword play skills, learned as a member of the Sealed Knot Society which re-enacts battles, gave him the strength to tackle the robber.

 He said: “If it wasn’t for the re-enactment group I couldn’t have done it. It is never real when we learn how to deal with knives and swords but the movements are for real.”

 Mr Thompson, a retired lecturer from Prestatyn, north Wales, is a veteran member of the 100-strong group who re-enact Civil War battles in authentic costumes. 

 He holds the rank of second in command of The Earl of Northampton’s Regiment of Foote.

 Mr. Thompson was given a bravery award by the police for his actions.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta