View Full Version: What if... Civil War (The real one)

Haven Of Wiidom > Non-Fiction > What if... Civil War (The real one)


Title: What if... Civil War (The real one)


super_wolverine_Man - April 9, 2008 09:37 PM (GMT)
i have a what if... Civil war for all you military fanitics out there

What if Stonewall Jackson had never been shot by his own man?

What if great britain had become allies with the confederates?

What if the north had won antietam?

What if abraham lincoln had never issued the emancipaction proclamation?

... give your opinion on these, and feel free to add some more

Wingman - April 9, 2008 11:46 PM (GMT)
My parents are both born and raised Arkansans, and though I was born in New Jersey, and we now live in Pennsylvania, they, and partially, I, still have some loyalty to the Durty South.

1. North probably would have won, but at significantly more cost and more lives lost.

2. North would be screwed.

3. This was the weakest the Confederate Army was prior to about late 1863, and if the North had won this, we would have decisively crushed Lee's already weakened army.

4. We still would have won, but the slaves would have been in slavery a lot longer. Or, once we won, we could have just used miltary force to free the slaves. Also, this act might have not made Lincoln so many enemies, like, say, John Wilkes Booth. Think about it!! If Abraham Lincoln, one of the two greatest presidents of the United States, had lived, think of the effects on post war situations. That is an intersting thing to ponder!!

Wingman - April 10, 2008 12:02 AM (GMT)
BTW, I like your attention to military fights for all us military geeks, super_wolvie!

super_wolverine_Man - April 10, 2008 12:16 AM (GMT)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 9 2008, 11:46 PM)
My parents are both born and raised Arkansans, and though I was born in New Jersey, and we now live in Pennsylvania, they, and partially, I, still have some loyalty to the Durty South.

1. North probably would have won, but at significantly more cost and more lives lost.

2. North would be screwed.

3. This was the weakest the Confederate Army was prior to about late 1863, and if the North had won this, we would have decisively crushed Lee's already weakened army.

4. We still would have won, but the slaves would have been in slavery a lot longer. Or, once we won, we could have just used miltary force to free the slaves. Also, this act might have not made Lincoln so many enemies, like, say, John Wilkes Booth. Think about it!! If Abraham Lincoln, one of the two greatest presidents of the United States, had lived, think of the effects on post war situations. That is an intersting thing to ponder!!

cool. nice points of view, so keep it going make your own Civil war what ifs

Wingman - April 10, 2008 12:41 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 9 2008, 08:16 PM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 9 2008, 11:46 PM)
My parents are both born and raised Arkansans, and though I was born in New Jersey, and we now live in Pennsylvania, they, and partially, I, still have some loyalty to the Durty South.

1. North probably would have won, but at significantly more cost and more lives lost.

2. North would be screwed.

3. This was the weakest the Confederate Army was prior to about late 1863, and if the North had won this, we would have decisively crushed Lee's already weakened army.

4. We still would have won, but the slaves would have been in slavery a lot longer. Or, once we won, we could have just used miltary force to free the slaves. Also, this act might have not made Lincoln so many enemies, like, say, John Wilkes Booth. Think about it!! If Abraham Lincoln, one of the two greatest presidents of the United States, had lived, think of the effects on post war situations. That is an intersting thing to ponder!!

cool. nice points of view, so keep it going make your own Civil war what ifs

OK.

(1) What if General Joe Hooker hadn't been relieved of command?

(2) What if Colonel Joshua Chamberlain, commander of the 20th Maine Regiment which had been anchoring the extreme flank of Little Round Top, had been killed in action during Gettysburg?

(3) What if the Union had immediately mass produced Henry and Spencer repeating rifles at the start of the war, rather than waiting three years?

(4) What if Abraham Lincoln's bodyguard hadn't taken leave from his post on that night in Ford's Theater?


These are kinda tough, but they give you things to ponder.

super_wolverine_Man - April 10, 2008 07:05 PM (GMT)
HEY! what the heck happened to my reply. I posted answers to all of those questions! oh well i'll just do it again

1. wait hooker, was dismissed from duty after the battle of Gettysburgh and replaced by meade, right? If this is the case i think this was a wise choice, in my opinion, Meade was the second best general the union had, next to grant. Had Hooker never resigned, his agressive style of fighting, may not have been the most wise choice. I think the union needed somebody who was smart, and a little cautious, not Joe, who was attack attack attack.

2. It's amazing how people don't know what this is, I mean what of the most famous military manuevers of all-time, and in my opinion the dissicive (spelling) Moment, which gave the union the battle of Gettysburgh. To me that was the turning moment of the war. Had it not have happened i fully believe that, the Confederates would have won gettysburgh, and quite possibly the war.

3. I'm sorry i don't understand this question

4. I don't think that abes bodyguard may have been much help. I mean the only way out of the box was to jump down to the stage below. John wilkes booth was guarding the only other exit holding a gun, lincoln's bodyguard may have been able to stall booth for a moment, but with nowhere to run. Abe would have been gunned down eventually.




whew* alright let's discuss these for awhile.

Wingman - April 11, 2008 01:47 AM (GMT)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 10 2008, 03:05 PM)
HEY! what the heck happened to my reply. I posted answers to all of those questions! oh well i'll just do it again

1. wait hooker, was dismissed from duty after the battle of Gettysburgh and replaced by meade, right? If this is the case i think this was a wise choice, in my opinion, Meade was the second best general the union had, next to grant. Had Hooker never resigned, his agressive style of fighting, may not have been the most wise choice. I think the union needed somebody who was smart, and a little cautious, not Joe, who was attack attack attack.

2. It's amazing how people don't know what this is, I mean what of the most famous military manuevers of all-time, and in my opinion the dissicive (spelling) Moment, which gave the union the battle of Gettysburgh. To me that was the turning moment of the war. Had it not have happened i fully believe that, the Confederates would have won gettysburgh, and quite possibly the war.

3. I'm sorry i don't understand this question

4. I don't think that abes bodyguard may have been much help. I mean the only way out of the box was to jump down to the stage below. John wilkes booth was guarding the only other exit holding a gun, lincoln's bodyguard may have been able to stall booth for a moment, but with nowhere to run. Abe would have been gunned down eventually.




whew* alright let's discuss these for awhile.

1. Actually, Hooker was relieved of duty after the Battle of Chancellorsville, a strategic Union defeat, but it did little to improve the situation of the Confederacy, and was replaced by Meade BEFORE the battle of Gettysburg. No matter.

2. You're spot on. Joshua Laurence Chamberlain was one of the greatest figures in Civil War history, because of his amazing command as he held the flank of the Union army at Gettysburg. I'm heartened to see that you share my opinion of this man and his command, the 20th Maine.

3. Basically, the Henry and Spencer were some of the first lever action rifles, each holding between 8 and 12 shots, roughly. If they had started mass producing this weapon right when fighting broke out, many more Union troops early in the war would have had rapid fire weapons rather than old, single shot, muzzle loading weapons. Mass fire is the key to most firearms engagements, so this would have given an overwhelming advantage to the Union. The idiot who ran the US arms procurement bureau, I can't remember his name, was more than anyone else responsible for many of the dead in the Civil War. He repeatedly refused to buy these repeating rifles, because he though it would encourage the troops to "waste expensive ammunition". If I was Lincoln, I would have executed the SOB by firing squad, that's how much I hate him. I'll find out his name later and post it. Then you can look him up.

super_wolverine_Man - April 11, 2008 01:48 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 11 2008, 01:47 AM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 10 2008, 03:05 PM)
HEY! what the heck happened to my reply. I posted answers to all of those questions! oh well i'll just do it again

1. wait hooker, was dismissed from duty after the battle of Gettysburgh and replaced by meade, right? If this is the case i think this was a wise choice, in my opinion, Meade was the second best general the union had, next to grant. Had Hooker never resigned, his agressive style of fighting, may not have been the most wise choice. I think the union needed somebody who was smart, and a little cautious, not Joe, who was attack attack attack.

2. It's amazing how people don't know what this is, I mean what of the most famous military manuevers of all-time, and in my opinion the dissicive (spelling) Moment, which gave the union the battle of Gettysburgh. To me that was the turning moment of the war. Had it not have happened i fully believe that, the Confederates would have won gettysburgh, and quite possibly the war.

3. I'm sorry i don't understand this question

4. I don't think that abes bodyguard may have been much help. I mean the only way out of the box was to jump down to the stage below. John wilkes booth was guarding the only other exit holding a gun, lincoln's bodyguard may have been able to stall booth for a moment, but with nowhere to run. Abe would have been gunned down eventually.




whew* alright let's discuss these for awhile.

1. Actually, Hooker was relieved of duty after the Battle of Chancellorsville, a strategic Union defeat, but it did little to improve the situation of the Confederacy, and was replaced by Meade BEFORE the battle of Gettysburg. No matter.

2. You're spot on. Joshua Laurence Chamberlain was one of the greatest figures in Civil War history, because of his amazing command as he held the flank of the Union army at Gettysburg. I'm heartened to see that you share my opinion of this man and his command, the 20th Maine.

3. Basically, the Henry and Spencer were some of the first lever action rifles, each holding between 8 and 12 shots, roughly. If they had started mass producing this weapon right when fighting broke out, many more Union troops early in the war would have had rapid fire weapons rather than old, single shot, muzzle loading weapons. Mass fire is the key to most firearms engagements, so this would have given an overwhelming advantage to the Union. The idiot who ran the US arms procurement bureau, I can't remember his name, was more than anyone else responsible for many of the dead in the Civil War. He repeatedly refused to buy these repeating rifles, because he though it would encourage the troops to "waste expensive ammunition". If I was Lincoln, I would have executed the SOB by firing squad, that's how much I hate him. I'll find out his name later and post it. Then you can look him up.

thanks for the interesting bit of info on general Hooker and henry and spencer.

hey wingman, how did you learn so much, cause i know it wasn't school.

super_wolverine_Man - April 11, 2008 01:52 PM (GMT)
what's that you say you want some more

1. What if the union had initially followed General Scott's plan, rather than to allow General McDowell to do a direct advance leading to the battle of Bull Run.

2. What if Virginia Hadn't seceded from the union

3. What if the south had been allowed to break free from the union and the civil war never happened?

4. What if General Robert E. Lee was shot and killed rather than "Stonewall" Jackson

5. What if the Battle of Gettysburg never happened

Wingman - April 11, 2008 01:59 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 11 2008, 09:48 AM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 11 2008, 01:47 AM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 10 2008, 03:05 PM)
HEY! what the heck happened to my reply. I posted answers to all of those questions! oh well i'll just do it again

1. wait hooker, was dismissed from duty after the battle of Gettysburgh and replaced by meade, right? If this is the case i think this was a wise choice, in my opinion, Meade was the second best general the union had, next to grant. Had Hooker never resigned, his agressive style of fighting, may not have been the most wise choice. I think the union needed somebody who was smart, and a little cautious, not Joe, who was attack attack attack.

2. It's amazing how people don't know what this is, I mean what of the most famous military manuevers of all-time, and in my opinion the dissicive (spelling) Moment, which gave the union the battle of Gettysburgh. To me that was the turning moment of the war. Had it not have happened i fully believe that, the Confederates would have won gettysburgh, and quite possibly the war.

3. I'm sorry i don't understand this question

4. I don't think that abes bodyguard may have been much help. I mean the only way out of the box was to jump down to the stage below. John wilkes booth was guarding the only other exit holding a gun, lincoln's bodyguard may have been able to stall booth for a moment, but with nowhere to run. Abe would have been gunned down eventually.




whew* alright let's discuss these for awhile.

1. Actually, Hooker was relieved of duty after the Battle of Chancellorsville, a strategic Union defeat, but it did little to improve the situation of the Confederacy, and was replaced by Meade BEFORE the battle of Gettysburg. No matter.

2. You're spot on. Joshua Laurence Chamberlain was one of the greatest figures in Civil War history, because of his amazing command as he held the flank of the Union army at Gettysburg. I'm heartened to see that you share my opinion of this man and his command, the 20th Maine.

3. Basically, the Henry and Spencer were some of the first lever action rifles, each holding between 8 and 12 shots, roughly. If they had started mass producing this weapon right when fighting broke out, many more Union troops early in the war would have had rapid fire weapons rather than old, single shot, muzzle loading weapons. Mass fire is the key to most firearms engagements, so this would have given an overwhelming advantage to the Union. The idiot who ran the US arms procurement bureau, I can't remember his name, was more than anyone else responsible for many of the dead in the Civil War. He repeatedly refused to buy these repeating rifles, because he though it would encourage the troops to "waste expensive ammunition". If I was Lincoln, I would have executed the SOB by firing squad, that's how much I hate him. I'll find out his name later and post it. Then you can look him up.

thanks for the interesting bit of info on general Hooker and henry and spencer.

hey wingman, how did you learn so much, cause i know it wasn't school.

You want the long or short version?

I'll give you the long, since I ain't got anything better to do. :P

My mom, bless her heart, read to me alot when I was just a baby, too young even to read yet. But she was convinced in the theory that if you read alot to your kid when he's little, he'll be more eager to read when he is able too. She stuck with that, and it paid off. By the time I was four, I was reading fairly well, and I haven't looked back. That's the key to what I do. I read almost anything if I have the time. Couple that with my father's late blooming interest in all things history, warfare, and politics, and he introduced me to these insanely cool things. One of the first things I remember was him telling me about the A-10 Thunderbolt, which you can shoot the engine, part of the wing, a stabilizer, or a rudder off, and it will still make it home.

I am homeschooled, and have been so since second grade. That gives me more flexibility with what I do, and it keeps me away from alot of the crud in public schools these days, no offense. It pains me when I talk to some of my friends, including the girl I'm currently "interested in", and they say that the only time they read books is when the HAVE to for school. I feel sad for them, because I know how much great stuff they're missing. It also saddens me because it is fulfilling that age old saying, "Those who don't remember history are doomed to repeat it." I am determined to not be caught as someone who doesn't remember history.

Short version: I read alot, like to do it, and have parents who are fine with buying loads of books. I also have a well used library card. BTW, I just got done reading "Red Storm Rising" and "SSN" by Tom Clancy, and they were both awesome. Have you read any good books lately?

super_wolverine_Man - April 11, 2008 02:17 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 11 2008, 01:59 PM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 11 2008, 09:48 AM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 11 2008, 01:47 AM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 10 2008, 03:05 PM)
HEY! what the heck happened to my reply. I posted answers to all of those questions! oh well i'll just do it again

1. wait hooker, was dismissed from duty after the battle of Gettysburgh and replaced by meade, right? If this is the case i think this was a wise choice, in my opinion, Meade was the second best general the union had, next to grant. Had Hooker never resigned, his agressive style of fighting, may not have been the most wise choice. I think the union needed somebody who was smart, and a little cautious, not Joe, who was attack attack attack.

2. It's amazing how people don't know what this is, I mean what of the most famous military manuevers of all-time, and in my opinion the dissicive (spelling) Moment, which gave the union the battle of Gettysburgh. To me that was the turning moment of the war. Had it not have happened i fully believe that, the Confederates would have won gettysburgh, and quite possibly the war.

3. I'm sorry i don't understand this question

4. I don't think that abes bodyguard may have been much help. I mean the only way out of the box was to jump down to the stage below. John wilkes booth was guarding the only other exit holding a gun, lincoln's bodyguard may have been able to stall booth for a moment, but with nowhere to run. Abe would have been gunned down eventually.




whew* alright let's discuss these for awhile.

1. Actually, Hooker was relieved of duty after the Battle of Chancellorsville, a strategic Union defeat, but it did little to improve the situation of the Confederacy, and was replaced by Meade BEFORE the battle of Gettysburg. No matter.

2. You're spot on. Joshua Laurence Chamberlain was one of the greatest figures in Civil War history, because of his amazing command as he held the flank of the Union army at Gettysburg. I'm heartened to see that you share my opinion of this man and his command, the 20th Maine.

3. Basically, the Henry and Spencer were some of the first lever action rifles, each holding between 8 and 12 shots, roughly. If they had started mass producing this weapon right when fighting broke out, many more Union troops early in the war would have had rapid fire weapons rather than old, single shot, muzzle loading weapons. Mass fire is the key to most firearms engagements, so this would have given an overwhelming advantage to the Union. The idiot who ran the US arms procurement bureau, I can't remember his name, was more than anyone else responsible for many of the dead in the Civil War. He repeatedly refused to buy these repeating rifles, because he though it would encourage the troops to "waste expensive ammunition". If I was Lincoln, I would have executed the SOB by firing squad, that's how much I hate him. I'll find out his name later and post it. Then you can look him up.

thanks for the interesting bit of info on general Hooker and henry and spencer.

hey wingman, how did you learn so much, cause i know it wasn't school.

You want the long or short version?

I'll give you the long, since I ain't got anything better to do. :P

My mom, bless her heart, read to me alot when I was just a baby, too young even to read yet. But she was convinced in the theory that if you read alot to your kid when he's little, he'll be more eager to read when he is able too. She stuck with that, and it paid off. By the time I was four, I was reading fairly well, and I haven't looked back. That's the key to what I do. I read almost anything if I have the time. Couple that with my father's late blooming interest in all things history, warfare, and politics, and he introduced me to these insanely cool things. One of the first things I remember was him telling me about the A-10 Thunderbolt, which you can shoot the engine, part of the wing, a stabilizer, or a rudder off, and it will still make it home.

I am homeschooled, and have been so since second grade. That gives me more flexibility with what I do, and it keeps me away from alot of the crud in public schools these days, no offense. It pains me when I talk to some of my friends, including the girl I'm currently "interested in", and they say that the only time they read books is when the HAVE to for school. I feel sad for them, because I know how much great stuff they're missing. It also saddens me because it is fulfilling that age old saying, "Those who don't remember history are doomed to repeat it." I am determined to not be caught as someone who doesn't remember history.

Short version: I read alot, like to do it, and have parents who are fine with buying loads of books. I also have a well used library card. BTW, I just got done reading "Red Storm Rising" and "SSN" by Tom Clancy, and they were both awesome. Have you read any good books lately?

so basically you read like a maniac. hmmmmm good books let's see... no i can't say i have not on the historical topic anyways.

Wingman - April 11, 2008 02:28 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 11 2008, 10:17 AM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 11 2008, 01:59 PM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 11 2008, 09:48 AM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 11 2008, 01:47 AM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 10 2008, 03:05 PM)
HEY! what the heck happened to my reply. I posted answers to all of those questions! oh well i'll just do it again

1. wait hooker, was dismissed from duty after the battle of Gettysburgh and replaced by meade, right? If this is the case i think this was a wise choice, in my opinion, Meade was the second best general the union had, next to grant. Had Hooker never resigned, his agressive style of fighting, may not have been the most wise choice. I think the union needed somebody who was smart, and a little cautious, not Joe, who was attack attack attack.

2. It's amazing how people don't know what this is, I mean what of the most famous military manuevers of all-time, and in my opinion the dissicive (spelling) Moment, which gave the union the battle of Gettysburgh. To me that was the turning moment of the war. Had it not have happened i fully believe that, the Confederates would have won gettysburgh, and quite possibly the war.

3. I'm sorry i don't understand this question

4. I don't think that abes bodyguard may have been much help. I mean the only way out of the box was to jump down to the stage below. John wilkes booth was guarding the only other exit holding a gun, lincoln's bodyguard may have been able to stall booth for a moment, but with nowhere to run. Abe would have been gunned down eventually.




whew* alright let's discuss these for awhile.

1. Actually, Hooker was relieved of duty after the Battle of Chancellorsville, a strategic Union defeat, but it did little to improve the situation of the Confederacy, and was replaced by Meade BEFORE the battle of Gettysburg. No matter.

2. You're spot on. Joshua Laurence Chamberlain was one of the greatest figures in Civil War history, because of his amazing command as he held the flank of the Union army at Gettysburg. I'm heartened to see that you share my opinion of this man and his command, the 20th Maine.

3. Basically, the Henry and Spencer were some of the first lever action rifles, each holding between 8 and 12 shots, roughly. If they had started mass producing this weapon right when fighting broke out, many more Union troops early in the war would have had rapid fire weapons rather than old, single shot, muzzle loading weapons. Mass fire is the key to most firearms engagements, so this would have given an overwhelming advantage to the Union. The idiot who ran the US arms procurement bureau, I can't remember his name, was more than anyone else responsible for many of the dead in the Civil War. He repeatedly refused to buy these repeating rifles, because he though it would encourage the troops to "waste expensive ammunition". If I was Lincoln, I would have executed the SOB by firing squad, that's how much I hate him. I'll find out his name later and post it. Then you can look him up.

thanks for the interesting bit of info on general Hooker and henry and spencer.

hey wingman, how did you learn so much, cause i know it wasn't school.

You want the long or short version?

I'll give you the long, since I ain't got anything better to do. :P

My mom, bless her heart, read to me alot when I was just a baby, too young even to read yet. But she was convinced in the theory that if you read alot to your kid when he's little, he'll be more eager to read when he is able too. She stuck with that, and it paid off. By the time I was four, I was reading fairly well, and I haven't looked back. That's the key to what I do. I read almost anything if I have the time. Couple that with my father's late blooming interest in all things history, warfare, and politics, and he introduced me to these insanely cool things. One of the first things I remember was him telling me about the A-10 Thunderbolt, which you can shoot the engine, part of the wing, a stabilizer, or a rudder off, and it will still make it home.

I am homeschooled, and have been so since second grade. That gives me more flexibility with what I do, and it keeps me away from alot of the crud in public schools these days, no offense. It pains me when I talk to some of my friends, including the girl I'm currently "interested in", and they say that the only time they read books is when the HAVE to for school. I feel sad for them, because I know how much great stuff they're missing. It also saddens me because it is fulfilling that age old saying, "Those who don't remember history are doomed to repeat it." I am determined to not be caught as someone who doesn't remember history.

Short version: I read alot, like to do it, and have parents who are fine with buying loads of books. I also have a well used library card. BTW, I just got done reading "Red Storm Rising" and "SSN" by Tom Clancy, and they were both awesome. Have you read any good books lately?

so basically you read like a maniac. hmmmmm good books let's see... no i can't say i have not on the historical topic anyways.

It doesn't have to be historical. It can be anything. Good literature takes many forms. History is just one of them.

super_wolverine_Man - April 11, 2008 06:53 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 11 2008, 02:28 PM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 11 2008, 10:17 AM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 11 2008, 01:59 PM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 11 2008, 09:48 AM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 11 2008, 01:47 AM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 10 2008, 03:05 PM)
HEY! what the heck happened to my reply. I posted answers to all of those questions! oh well i'll just do it again

1. wait hooker, was dismissed from duty after the battle of Gettysburgh and replaced by meade, right? If this is the case i think this was a wise choice, in my opinion, Meade was the second best general the union had, next to grant. Had Hooker never resigned, his agressive style of fighting, may not have been the most wise choice. I think the union needed somebody who was smart, and a little cautious, not Joe, who was attack attack attack.

2. It's amazing how people don't know what this is, I mean what of the most famous military manuevers of all-time, and in my opinion the dissicive (spelling) Moment, which gave the union the battle of Gettysburgh. To me that was the turning moment of the war. Had it not have happened i fully believe that, the Confederates would have won gettysburgh, and quite possibly the war.

3. I'm sorry i don't understand this question

4. I don't think that abes bodyguard may have been much help. I mean the only way out of the box was to jump down to the stage below. John wilkes booth was guarding the only other exit holding a gun, lincoln's bodyguard may have been able to stall booth for a moment, but with nowhere to run. Abe would have been gunned down eventually.




whew* alright let's discuss these for awhile.

1. Actually, Hooker was relieved of duty after the Battle of Chancellorsville, a strategic Union defeat, but it did little to improve the situation of the Confederacy, and was replaced by Meade BEFORE the battle of Gettysburg. No matter.

2. You're spot on. Joshua Laurence Chamberlain was one of the greatest figures in Civil War history, because of his amazing command as he held the flank of the Union army at Gettysburg. I'm heartened to see that you share my opinion of this man and his command, the 20th Maine.

3. Basically, the Henry and Spencer were some of the first lever action rifles, each holding between 8 and 12 shots, roughly. If they had started mass producing this weapon right when fighting broke out, many more Union troops early in the war would have had rapid fire weapons rather than old, single shot, muzzle loading weapons. Mass fire is the key to most firearms engagements, so this would have given an overwhelming advantage to the Union. The idiot who ran the US arms procurement bureau, I can't remember his name, was more than anyone else responsible for many of the dead in the Civil War. He repeatedly refused to buy these repeating rifles, because he though it would encourage the troops to "waste expensive ammunition". If I was Lincoln, I would have executed the SOB by firing squad, that's how much I hate him. I'll find out his name later and post it. Then you can look him up.

thanks for the interesting bit of info on general Hooker and henry and spencer.

hey wingman, how did you learn so much, cause i know it wasn't school.

You want the long or short version?

I'll give you the long, since I ain't got anything better to do. :P

My mom, bless her heart, read to me alot when I was just a baby, too young even to read yet. But she was convinced in the theory that if you read alot to your kid when he's little, he'll be more eager to read when he is able too. She stuck with that, and it paid off. By the time I was four, I was reading fairly well, and I haven't looked back. That's the key to what I do. I read almost anything if I have the time. Couple that with my father's late blooming interest in all things history, warfare, and politics, and he introduced me to these insanely cool things. One of the first things I remember was him telling me about the A-10 Thunderbolt, which you can shoot the engine, part of the wing, a stabilizer, or a rudder off, and it will still make it home.

I am homeschooled, and have been so since second grade. That gives me more flexibility with what I do, and it keeps me away from alot of the crud in public schools these days, no offense. It pains me when I talk to some of my friends, including the girl I'm currently "interested in", and they say that the only time they read books is when the HAVE to for school. I feel sad for them, because I know how much great stuff they're missing. It also saddens me because it is fulfilling that age old saying, "Those who don't remember history are doomed to repeat it." I am determined to not be caught as someone who doesn't remember history.

Short version: I read alot, like to do it, and have parents who are fine with buying loads of books. I also have a well used library card. BTW, I just got done reading "Red Storm Rising" and "SSN" by Tom Clancy, and they were both awesome. Have you read any good books lately?

so basically you read like a maniac. hmmmmm good books let's see... no i can't say i have not on the historical topic anyways.

It doesn't have to be historical. It can be anything. Good literature takes many forms. History is just one of them.

haven't had much time for reading of late :(

super_wolverine_Man - April 11, 2008 07:01 PM (GMT)
hey wingman what do you think of these

1. What if the union had initially followed General Scott's plan, rather than to allow General McDowell to do a direct advance leading to the battle of Bull Run.

2. What if Virginia Hadn't seceded from the union

3. What if the south had been allowed to break free from the union and the civil war never happened?

4. What if General Robert E. Lee was shot and killed rather than "Stonewall" Jackson

5. What if the Battle of Gettysburg never happened



i wish more people would reply on these historical threads.

Wingman - April 11, 2008 07:47 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 11 2008, 02:53 PM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 11 2008, 02:28 PM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 11 2008, 10:17 AM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 11 2008, 01:59 PM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 11 2008, 09:48 AM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 11 2008, 01:47 AM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 10 2008, 03:05 PM)
HEY! what the heck happened to my reply. I posted answers to all of those questions! oh well i'll just do it again

1. wait hooker, was dismissed from duty after the battle of Gettysburgh and replaced by meade, right? If this is the case i think this was a wise choice, in my opinion, Meade was the second best general the union had, next to grant. Had Hooker never resigned, his agressive style of fighting, may not have been the most wise choice. I think the union needed somebody who was smart, and a little cautious, not Joe, who was attack attack attack.

2. It's amazing how people don't know what this is, I mean what of the most famous military manuevers of all-time, and in my opinion the dissicive (spelling) Moment, which gave the union the battle of Gettysburgh. To me that was the turning moment of the war. Had it not have happened i fully believe that, the Confederates would have won gettysburgh, and quite possibly the war.

3. I'm sorry i don't understand this question

4. I don't think that abes bodyguard may have been much help. I mean the only way out of the box was to jump down to the stage below. John wilkes booth was guarding the only other exit holding a gun, lincoln's bodyguard may have been able to stall booth for a moment, but with nowhere to run. Abe would have been gunned down eventually.




whew* alright let's discuss these for awhile.

1. Actually, Hooker was relieved of duty after the Battle of Chancellorsville, a strategic Union defeat, but it did little to improve the situation of the Confederacy, and was replaced by Meade BEFORE the battle of Gettysburg. No matter.

2. You're spot on. Joshua Laurence Chamberlain was one of the greatest figures in Civil War history, because of his amazing command as he held the flank of the Union army at Gettysburg. I'm heartened to see that you share my opinion of this man and his command, the 20th Maine.

3. Basically, the Henry and Spencer were some of the first lever action rifles, each holding between 8 and 12 shots, roughly. If they had started mass producing this weapon right when fighting broke out, many more Union troops early in the war would have had rapid fire weapons rather than old, single shot, muzzle loading weapons. Mass fire is the key to most firearms engagements, so this would have given an overwhelming advantage to the Union. The idiot who ran the US arms procurement bureau, I can't remember his name, was more than anyone else responsible for many of the dead in the Civil War. He repeatedly refused to buy these repeating rifles, because he though it would encourage the troops to "waste expensive ammunition". If I was Lincoln, I would have executed the SOB by firing squad, that's how much I hate him. I'll find out his name later and post it. Then you can look him up.

thanks for the interesting bit of info on general Hooker and henry and spencer.

hey wingman, how did you learn so much, cause i know it wasn't school.

You want the long or short version?

I'll give you the long, since I ain't got anything better to do. :P

My mom, bless her heart, read to me alot when I was just a baby, too young even to read yet. But she was convinced in the theory that if you read alot to your kid when he's little, he'll be more eager to read when he is able too. She stuck with that, and it paid off. By the time I was four, I was reading fairly well, and I haven't looked back. That's the key to what I do. I read almost anything if I have the time. Couple that with my father's late blooming interest in all things history, warfare, and politics, and he introduced me to these insanely cool things. One of the first things I remember was him telling me about the A-10 Thunderbolt, which you can shoot the engine, part of the wing, a stabilizer, or a rudder off, and it will still make it home.

I am homeschooled, and have been so since second grade. That gives me more flexibility with what I do, and it keeps me away from alot of the crud in public schools these days, no offense. It pains me when I talk to some of my friends, including the girl I'm currently "interested in", and they say that the only time they read books is when the HAVE to for school. I feel sad for them, because I know how much great stuff they're missing. It also saddens me because it is fulfilling that age old saying, "Those who don't remember history are doomed to repeat it." I am determined to not be caught as someone who doesn't remember history.

Short version: I read alot, like to do it, and have parents who are fine with buying loads of books. I also have a well used library card. BTW, I just got done reading "Red Storm Rising" and "SSN" by Tom Clancy, and they were both awesome. Have you read any good books lately?

so basically you read like a maniac. hmmmmm good books let's see... no i can't say i have not on the historical topic anyways.

It doesn't have to be historical. It can be anything. Good literature takes many forms. History is just one of them.

haven't had much time for reading of late :(

Why the heck not? You know alot about alot, so where did you find out about it?

Wingman - April 11, 2008 07:57 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 11 2008, 03:01 PM)
hey wingman what do you think of these

1. What if the union had initially followed General Scott's plan, rather than to allow General McDowell to do a direct advance leading to the battle of Bull Run.

2. What if Virginia Hadn't seceded from the union

3. What if the south had been allowed to break free from the union and the civil war never happened?

4. What if General Robert E. Lee was shot and killed rather than "Stonewall" Jackson

5. What if the Battle of Gettysburg never happened



i wish more people would reply on these historical threads.

1. I don't know enough about the battle of Bull Run to comment. Sorry.

2. Then General Robert E. Lee would have been leading Union troops from the get-go, and they would have destroyed the Confederacy within six months.

3. Slaves would have had to have waited for much longer until they were free, we wouldn't have become as big a nation as we are now, we would have not participated in WWI, and we wouldn't have had the strength to fight WWII. Soviets would be the current superpower right now, and we would all be speaking Russian, paying our Party dues, and saluting each other as "Comrade".

4. There would be no Arlington National Cemetary, the South would have crumbled without the leadership of their main general, and Jackson simply didn't have the same charm and capability that Lee had, though he was second to none in the support, second in command general position. As supreme officer, he wouldn't have been able to win the war for them.

5. Joshua Laurence Chamberlain wouldn't have become famous...probably, Lee would have attacked Washington instead, and we would not have had our glory as the state in which one of the bloodiest battles in world history took place. Darn.

super_wolverine_Man - April 12, 2008 04:38 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 11 2008, 07:57 PM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 11 2008, 03:01 PM)
hey wingman what do you think of these

1. What if the union had initially followed General Scott's plan, rather than to allow General McDowell to do a direct advance leading to the battle of Bull Run.

2. What if Virginia Hadn't seceded from the union

3. What if the south had been allowed to break free from the union and the civil war never happened?

4. What if General Robert E. Lee was shot and killed rather than "Stonewall" Jackson

5. What if the Battle of Gettysburg never happened



i wish more people would reply on these historical threads.

1. I don't know enough about the battle of Bull Run to comment. Sorry.

2. Then General Robert E. Lee would have been leading Union troops from the get-go, and they would have destroyed the Confederacy within six months.

3. Slaves would have had to have waited for much longer until they were free, we wouldn't have become as big a nation as we are now, we would have not participated in WWI, and we wouldn't have had the strength to fight WWII. Soviets would be the current superpower right now, and we would all be speaking Russian, paying our Party dues, and saluting each other as "Comrade".

4. There would be no Arlington National Cemetary, the South would have crumbled without the leadership of their main general, and Jackson simply didn't have the same charm and capability that Lee had, though he was second to none in the support, second in command general position. As supreme officer, he wouldn't have been able to win the war for them.

5. Joshua Laurence Chamberlain wouldn't have become famous...probably, Lee would have attacked Washington instead, and we would not have had our glory as the state in which one of the bloodiest battles in world history took place. Darn.

3. Slaves would have had to have waited for much longer until they were free, we wouldn't have become as big a nation as we are now, we would have not participated in WWI, and we wouldn't have had the strength to fight WWII. Soviets would be the current superpower right now, and we would all be speaking Russian, paying our Party dues, and saluting each other as "Comrade".


man that would suck. :angry:

Wingman - April 12, 2008 07:32 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 12 2008, 12:38 PM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 11 2008, 07:57 PM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 11 2008, 03:01 PM)
hey wingman what do you think of these

1. What if the union had initially followed General Scott's plan, rather than to allow General McDowell to do a direct advance leading to the battle of Bull Run.

2. What if Virginia Hadn't seceded from the union

3. What if the south had been allowed to break free from the union and the civil war never happened?

4. What if General Robert E. Lee was shot and killed rather than "Stonewall" Jackson

5. What if the Battle of Gettysburg never happened



i wish more people would reply on these historical threads.

1. I don't know enough about the battle of Bull Run to comment. Sorry.

2. Then General Robert E. Lee would have been leading Union troops from the get-go, and they would have destroyed the Confederacy within six months.

3. Slaves would have had to have waited for much longer until they were free, we wouldn't have become as big a nation as we are now, we would have not participated in WWI, and we wouldn't have had the strength to fight WWII. Soviets would be the current superpower right now, and we would all be speaking Russian, paying our Party dues, and saluting each other as "Comrade".

4. There would be no Arlington National Cemetary, the South would have crumbled without the leadership of their main general, and Jackson simply didn't have the same charm and capability that Lee had, though he was second to none in the support, second in command general position. As supreme officer, he wouldn't have been able to win the war for them.

5. Joshua Laurence Chamberlain wouldn't have become famous...probably, Lee would have attacked Washington instead, and we would not have had our glory as the state in which one of the bloodiest battles in world history took place. Darn.

3. Slaves would have had to have waited for much longer until they were free, we wouldn't have become as big a nation as we are now, we would have not participated in WWI, and we wouldn't have had the strength to fight WWII. Soviets would be the current superpower right now, and we would all be speaking Russian, paying our Party dues, and saluting each other as "Comrade".


man that would suck. :angry:

Exactly. Only half of the country would exist today, and Russia would have still grown powerful. We probably wouldn't have been able to fight a two front war in WWII against Japan and Germany, and thus Russia would grow strong while we languish.

super_wolverine_Man - April 13, 2008 08:50 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 12 2008, 07:32 PM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 12 2008, 12:38 PM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 11 2008, 07:57 PM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 11 2008, 03:01 PM)
hey wingman what do you think of these

1. What if the union had initially followed General Scott's plan, rather than to allow General McDowell to do a direct advance leading to the battle of Bull Run.

2. What if Virginia Hadn't seceded from the union

3. What if the south had been allowed to break free from the union and the civil war never happened?

4. What if General Robert E. Lee was shot and killed rather than "Stonewall" Jackson

5. What if the Battle of Gettysburg never happened



i wish more people would reply on these historical threads.

1. I don't know enough about the battle of Bull Run to comment. Sorry.

2. Then General Robert E. Lee would have been leading Union troops from the get-go, and they would have destroyed the Confederacy within six months.

3. Slaves would have had to have waited for much longer until they were free, we wouldn't have become as big a nation as we are now, we would have not participated in WWI, and we wouldn't have had the strength to fight WWII. Soviets would be the current superpower right now, and we would all be speaking Russian, paying our Party dues, and saluting each other as "Comrade".

4. There would be no Arlington National Cemetary, the South would have crumbled without the leadership of their main general, and Jackson simply didn't have the same charm and capability that Lee had, though he was second to none in the support, second in command general position. As supreme officer, he wouldn't have been able to win the war for them.

5. Joshua Laurence Chamberlain wouldn't have become famous...probably, Lee would have attacked Washington instead, and we would not have had our glory as the state in which one of the bloodiest battles in world history took place. Darn.

3. Slaves would have had to have waited for much longer until they were free, we wouldn't have become as big a nation as we are now, we would have not participated in WWI, and we wouldn't have had the strength to fight WWII. Soviets would be the current superpower right now, and we would all be speaking Russian, paying our Party dues, and saluting each other as "Comrade".


man that would suck. :angry:

Exactly. Only half of the country would exist today, and Russia would have still grown powerful. We probably wouldn't have been able to fight a two front war in WWII against Japan and Germany, and thus Russia would grow strong while we languish.

it's funny things always tend to work out eventually

Wingman - April 14, 2008 11:46 AM (GMT)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 13 2008, 04:50 PM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 12 2008, 07:32 PM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 12 2008, 12:38 PM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 11 2008, 07:57 PM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 11 2008, 03:01 PM)
hey wingman what do you think of these

1. What if the union had initially followed General Scott's plan, rather than to allow General McDowell to do a direct advance leading to the battle of Bull Run.

2. What if Virginia Hadn't seceded from the union

3. What if the south had been allowed to break free from the union and the civil war never happened?

4. What if General Robert E. Lee was shot and killed rather than "Stonewall" Jackson

5. What if the Battle of Gettysburg never happened



i wish more people would reply on these historical threads.

1. I don't know enough about the battle of Bull Run to comment. Sorry.

2. Then General Robert E. Lee would have been leading Union troops from the get-go, and they would have destroyed the Confederacy within six months.

3. Slaves would have had to have waited for much longer until they were free, we wouldn't have become as big a nation as we are now, we would have not participated in WWI, and we wouldn't have had the strength to fight WWII. Soviets would be the current superpower right now, and we would all be speaking Russian, paying our Party dues, and saluting each other as "Comrade".

4. There would be no Arlington National Cemetary, the South would have crumbled without the leadership of their main general, and Jackson simply didn't have the same charm and capability that Lee had, though he was second to none in the support, second in command general position. As supreme officer, he wouldn't have been able to win the war for them.

5. Joshua Laurence Chamberlain wouldn't have become famous...probably, Lee would have attacked Washington instead, and we would not have had our glory as the state in which one of the bloodiest battles in world history took place. Darn.

3. Slaves would have had to have waited for much longer until they were free, we wouldn't have become as big a nation as we are now, we would have not participated in WWI, and we wouldn't have had the strength to fight WWII. Soviets would be the current superpower right now, and we would all be speaking Russian, paying our Party dues, and saluting each other as "Comrade".


man that would suck. :angry:

Exactly. Only half of the country would exist today, and Russia would have still grown powerful. We probably wouldn't have been able to fight a two front war in WWII against Japan and Germany, and thus Russia would grow strong while we languish.

it's funny things always tend to work out eventually

For the better, that is.

super_wolverine_Man - April 14, 2008 08:52 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 14 2008, 11:46 AM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 13 2008, 04:50 PM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 12 2008, 07:32 PM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 12 2008, 12:38 PM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 11 2008, 07:57 PM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 11 2008, 03:01 PM)
hey wingman what do you think of these

1. What if the union had initially followed General Scott's plan, rather than to allow General McDowell to do a direct advance leading to the battle of Bull Run.

2. What if Virginia Hadn't seceded from the union

3. What if the south had been allowed to break free from the union and the civil war never happened?

4. What if General Robert E. Lee was shot and killed rather than "Stonewall" Jackson

5. What if the Battle of Gettysburg never happened



i wish more people would reply on these historical threads.

1. I don't know enough about the battle of Bull Run to comment. Sorry.

2. Then General Robert E. Lee would have been leading Union troops from the get-go, and they would have destroyed the Confederacy within six months.

3. Slaves would have had to have waited for much longer until they were free, we wouldn't have become as big a nation as we are now, we would have not participated in WWI, and we wouldn't have had the strength to fight WWII. Soviets would be the current superpower right now, and we would all be speaking Russian, paying our Party dues, and saluting each other as "Comrade".

4. There would be no Arlington National Cemetary, the South would have crumbled without the leadership of their main general, and Jackson simply didn't have the same charm and capability that Lee had, though he was second to none in the support, second in command general position. As supreme officer, he wouldn't have been able to win the war for them.

5. Joshua Laurence Chamberlain wouldn't have become famous...probably, Lee would have attacked Washington instead, and we would not have had our glory as the state in which one of the bloodiest battles in world history took place. Darn.

3. Slaves would have had to have waited for much longer until they were free, we wouldn't have become as big a nation as we are now, we would have not participated in WWI, and we wouldn't have had the strength to fight WWII. Soviets would be the current superpower right now, and we would all be speaking Russian, paying our Party dues, and saluting each other as "Comrade".


man that would suck. :angry:

Exactly. Only half of the country would exist today, and Russia would have still grown powerful. We probably wouldn't have been able to fight a two front war in WWII against Japan and Germany, and thus Russia would grow strong while we languish.

it's funny things always tend to work out eventually

For the better, that is.

yeah that's im sayin, no matter how bad things get they always tend to workout for teh better

Wingman - April 15, 2008 01:09 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 14 2008, 04:52 PM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 14 2008, 11:46 AM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 13 2008, 04:50 PM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 12 2008, 07:32 PM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 12 2008, 12:38 PM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 11 2008, 07:57 PM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 11 2008, 03:01 PM)
hey wingman what do you think of these

1. What if the union had initially followed General Scott's plan, rather than to allow General McDowell to do a direct advance leading to the battle of Bull Run.

2. What if Virginia Hadn't seceded from the union

3. What if the south had been allowed to break free from the union and the civil war never happened?

4. What if General Robert E. Lee was shot and killed rather than "Stonewall" Jackson

5. What if the Battle of Gettysburg never happened



i wish more people would reply on these historical threads.

1. I don't know enough about the battle of Bull Run to comment. Sorry.

2. Then General Robert E. Lee would have been leading Union troops from the get-go, and they would have destroyed the Confederacy within six months.

3. Slaves would have had to have waited for much longer until they were free, we wouldn't have become as big a nation as we are now, we would have not participated in WWI, and we wouldn't have had the strength to fight WWII. Soviets would be the current superpower right now, and we would all be speaking Russian, paying our Party dues, and saluting each other as "Comrade".

4. There would be no Arlington National Cemetary, the South would have crumbled without the leadership of their main general, and Jackson simply didn't have the same charm and capability that Lee had, though he was second to none in the support, second in command general position. As supreme officer, he wouldn't have been able to win the war for them.

5. Joshua Laurence Chamberlain wouldn't have become famous...probably, Lee would have attacked Washington instead, and we would not have had our glory as the state in which one of the bloodiest battles in world history took place. Darn.

3. Slaves would have had to have waited for much longer until they were free, we wouldn't have become as big a nation as we are now, we would have not participated in WWI, and we wouldn't have had the strength to fight WWII. Soviets would be the current superpower right now, and we would all be speaking Russian, paying our Party dues, and saluting each other as "Comrade".


man that would suck. :angry:

Exactly. Only half of the country would exist today, and Russia would have still grown powerful. We probably wouldn't have been able to fight a two front war in WWII against Japan and Germany, and thus Russia would grow strong while we languish.

it's funny things always tend to work out eventually

For the better, that is.

yeah that's im sayin, no matter how bad things get they always tend to workout for teh better

But often it takes strong men who know what they believe and are willing to take the bull by the horns to make things right. The Battle of Gettysburg didn't win itself. Hitler wasn't forced to retreat to the gates of his own city just because he chose to. It took great men to beat them back.

super_wolverine_Man - April 15, 2008 02:05 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 15 2008, 01:09 PM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 14 2008, 04:52 PM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 14 2008, 11:46 AM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 13 2008, 04:50 PM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 12 2008, 07:32 PM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 12 2008, 12:38 PM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 11 2008, 07:57 PM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 11 2008, 03:01 PM)
hey wingman what do you think of these

1. What if the union had initially followed General Scott's plan, rather than to allow General McDowell to do a direct advance leading to the battle of Bull Run.

2. What if Virginia Hadn't seceded from the union

3. What if the south had been allowed to break free from the union and the civil war never happened?

4. What if General Robert E. Lee was shot and killed rather than "Stonewall" Jackson

5. What if the Battle of Gettysburg never happened



i wish more people would reply on these historical threads.

1. I don't know enough about the battle of Bull Run to comment. Sorry.

2. Then General Robert E. Lee would have been leading Union troops from the get-go, and they would have destroyed the Confederacy within six months.

3. Slaves would have had to have waited for much longer until they were free, we wouldn't have become as big a nation as we are now, we would have not participated in WWI, and we wouldn't have had the strength to fight WWII. Soviets would be the current superpower right now, and we would all be speaking Russian, paying our Party dues, and saluting each other as "Comrade".

4. There would be no Arlington National Cemetary, the South would have crumbled without the leadership of their main general, and Jackson simply didn't have the same charm and capability that Lee had, though he was second to none in the support, second in command general position. As supreme officer, he wouldn't have been able to win the war for them.

5. Joshua Laurence Chamberlain wouldn't have become famous...probably, Lee would have attacked Washington instead, and we would not have had our glory as the state in which one of the bloodiest battles in world history took place. Darn.

3. Slaves would have had to have waited for much longer until they were free, we wouldn't have become as big a nation as we are now, we would have not participated in WWI, and we wouldn't have had the strength to fight WWII. Soviets would be the current superpower right now, and we would all be speaking Russian, paying our Party dues, and saluting each other as "Comrade".


man that would suck. :angry:

Exactly. Only half of the country would exist today, and Russia would have still grown powerful. We probably wouldn't have been able to fight a two front war in WWII against Japan and Germany, and thus Russia would grow strong while we languish.

it's funny things always tend to work out eventually

For the better, that is.

yeah that's im sayin, no matter how bad things get they always tend to workout for teh better

But often it takes strong men who know what they believe and are willing to take the bull by the horns to make things right. The Battle of Gettysburg didn't win itself. Hitler wasn't forced to retreat to the gates of his own city just because he chose to. It took great men to beat them back.

yes, but think about all the bad things that have happened throughout history, they have all eventually led to something good,

Wingman - April 15, 2008 02:08 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 15 2008, 10:05 AM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 15 2008, 01:09 PM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 14 2008, 04:52 PM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 14 2008, 11:46 AM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 13 2008, 04:50 PM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 12 2008, 07:32 PM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 12 2008, 12:38 PM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 11 2008, 07:57 PM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 11 2008, 03:01 PM)
hey wingman what do you think of these

1. What if the union had initially followed General Scott's plan, rather than to allow General McDowell to do a direct advance leading to the battle of Bull Run.

2. What if Virginia Hadn't seceded from the union

3. What if the south had been allowed to break free from the union and the civil war never happened?

4. What if General Robert E. Lee was shot and killed rather than "Stonewall" Jackson

5. What if the Battle of Gettysburg never happened



i wish more people would reply on these historical threads.

1. I don't know enough about the battle of Bull Run to comment. Sorry.

2. Then General Robert E. Lee would have been leading Union troops from the get-go, and they would have destroyed the Confederacy within six months.

3. Slaves would have had to have waited for much longer until they were free, we wouldn't have become as big a nation as we are now, we would have not participated in WWI, and we wouldn't have had the strength to fight WWII. Soviets would be the current superpower right now, and we would all be speaking Russian, paying our Party dues, and saluting each other as "Comrade".

4. There would be no Arlington National Cemetary, the South would have crumbled without the leadership of their main general, and Jackson simply didn't have the same charm and capability that Lee had, though he was second to none in the support, second in command general position. As supreme officer, he wouldn't have been able to win the war for them.

5. Joshua Laurence Chamberlain wouldn't have become famous...probably, Lee would have attacked Washington instead, and we would not have had our glory as the state in which one of the bloodiest battles in world history took place. Darn.

3. Slaves would have had to have waited for much longer until they were free, we wouldn't have become as big a nation as we are now, we would have not participated in WWI, and we wouldn't have had the strength to fight WWII. Soviets would be the current superpower right now, and we would all be speaking Russian, paying our Party dues, and saluting each other as "Comrade".


man that would suck. :angry:

Exactly. Only half of the country would exist today, and Russia would have still grown powerful. We probably wouldn't have been able to fight a two front war in WWII against Japan and Germany, and thus Russia would grow strong while we languish.

it's funny things always tend to work out eventually

For the better, that is.

yeah that's im sayin, no matter how bad things get they always tend to workout for teh better

But often it takes strong men who know what they believe and are willing to take the bull by the horns to make things right. The Battle of Gettysburg didn't win itself. Hitler wasn't forced to retreat to the gates of his own city just because he chose to. It took great men to beat them back.

yes, but think about all the bad things that have happened throughout history, they have all eventually led to something good,

But ask yourself, "How were they led to turn out OK?" The concentration camps: liberated by Allied troops. The tyranny of the Saddam Hussein regime: freed by US troops. The attacks by German on Europe during BOTH world wars: stopped and eventually pushed back by British, American, and French troops.

DataSnake - April 15, 2008 02:20 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 15 2008, 02:08 PM)

But ask yourself, "How were they led to turn out OK?" The concentration camps: liberated by Allied troops. The tyranny of the Saddam Hussein regime: freed by US troops. The attacks by German on Europe during BOTH world wars: stopped and eventually pushed back by British, American, and French troops.

Saddam Hussein: Put in power by the US government as an ally against Iran.
The Holocaust: During WWII, the US gov. actively tried to HIDE info about what Hitler was up to. I don't know why, because it would have been a GREAT PR tool, but that's what they did.

Wingman - April 15, 2008 02:40 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (DataSnake @ Apr 15 2008, 10:20 AM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 15 2008, 02:08 PM)

But ask yourself, "How were they led to turn out OK?" The concentration camps: liberated by Allied troops. The tyranny of the Saddam Hussein regime: freed by US troops. The attacks by German on Europe during BOTH world wars: stopped and eventually pushed back by British, American, and French troops.

Saddam Hussein: Put in power by the US government as an ally against Iran.
The Holocaust: During WWII, the US gov. actively tried to HIDE info about what Hitler was up to. I don't know why, because it would have been a GREAT PR tool, but that's what they did.

I know about Saddam. I was unaware of the Holocaust thing. Are you saying, then that we're bad because of an intelligence screwup, but you don't give us any credit when we free hundreds of thousands of starved, half-dead Jews? For a flap of judgment of putting Saddam in power, are you then forgetting what we'd done to right our wrong? You seem to look only at the negative. There are always lessons to be learned, but we righted the wrongs we did in both cases.

DataSnake - April 15, 2008 04:41 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 15 2008, 02:40 PM)
QUOTE (DataSnake @ Apr 15 2008, 10:20 AM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 15 2008, 02:08 PM)

But ask yourself, "How were they led to turn out OK?" The concentration camps: liberated by Allied troops. The tyranny of the Saddam Hussein regime: freed by US troops. The attacks by German on Europe during BOTH world wars: stopped and eventually pushed back by British, American, and French troops.

Saddam Hussein: Put in power by the US government as an ally against Iran.
The Holocaust: During WWII, the US gov. actively tried to HIDE info about what Hitler was up to. I don't know why, because it would have been a GREAT PR tool, but that's what they did.

I know about Saddam. I was unaware of the Holocaust thing. Are you saying, then that we're bad because of an intelligence screwup, but you don't give us any credit when we free hundreds of thousands of starved, half-dead Jews? For a flap of judgment of putting Saddam in power, are you then forgetting what we'd done to right our wrong? You seem to look only at the negative. There are always lessons to be learned, but we righted the wrongs we did in both cases.

You appear to look only at the positive. Therefore, in order to maintain a proper balance, I point out the negative facts you overlook. I see the positive too, but I see no need to repost what has already been mentioned.

super_wolverine_Man - April 15, 2008 06:57 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 15 2008, 02:08 PM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 15 2008, 10:05 AM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 15 2008, 01:09 PM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 14 2008, 04:52 PM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 14 2008, 11:46 AM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 13 2008, 04:50 PM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 12 2008, 07:32 PM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 12 2008, 12:38 PM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 11 2008, 07:57 PM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 11 2008, 03:01 PM)
hey wingman what do you think of these

1. What if the union had initially followed General Scott's plan, rather than to allow General McDowell to do a direct advance leading to the battle of Bull Run.

2. What if Virginia Hadn't seceded from the union

3. What if the south had been allowed to break free from the union and the civil war never happened?

4. What if General Robert E. Lee was shot and killed rather than "Stonewall" Jackson

5. What if the Battle of Gettysburg never happened



i wish more people would reply on these historical threads.

1. I don't know enough about the battle of Bull Run to comment. Sorry.

2. Then General Robert E. Lee would have been leading Union troops from the get-go, and they would have destroyed the Confederacy within six months.

3. Slaves would have had to have waited for much longer until they were free, we wouldn't have become as big a nation as we are now, we would have not participated in WWI, and we wouldn't have had the strength to fight WWII. Soviets would be the current superpower right now, and we would all be speaking Russian, paying our Party dues, and saluting each other as "Comrade".

4. There would be no Arlington National Cemetary, the South would have crumbled without the leadership of their main general, and Jackson simply didn't have the same charm and capability that Lee had, though he was second to none in the support, second in command general position. As supreme officer, he wouldn't have been able to win the war for them.

5. Joshua Laurence Chamberlain wouldn't have become famous...probably, Lee would have attacked Washington instead, and we would not have had our glory as the state in which one of the bloodiest battles in world history took place. Darn.

3. Slaves would have had to have waited for much longer until they were free, we wouldn't have become as big a nation as we are now, we would have not participated in WWI, and we wouldn't have had the strength to fight WWII. Soviets would be the current superpower right now, and we would all be speaking Russian, paying our Party dues, and saluting each other as "Comrade".


man that would suck. :angry:

Exactly. Only half of the country would exist today, and Russia would have still grown powerful. We probably wouldn't have been able to fight a two front war in WWII against Japan and Germany, and thus Russia would grow strong while we languish.

it's funny things always tend to work out eventually

For the better, that is.

yeah that's im sayin, no matter how bad things get they always tend to workout for teh better

But often it takes strong men who know what they believe and are willing to take the bull by the horns to make things right. The Battle of Gettysburg didn't win itself. Hitler wasn't forced to retreat to the gates of his own city just because he chose to. It took great men to beat them back.

yes, but think about all the bad things that have happened throughout history, they have all eventually led to something good,

But ask yourself, "How were they led to turn out OK?" The concentration camps: liberated by Allied troops. The tyranny of the Saddam Hussein regime: freed by US troops. The attacks by German on Europe during BOTH world wars: stopped and eventually pushed back by British, American, and French troops.

wm i'm talking over the period of a few decades, i'm talking hundreds upon hundreds of years, I mean the dark ages leading to the reniassiance

super_wolverine_Man - April 15, 2008 06:58 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (DataSnake @ Apr 15 2008, 04:41 PM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 15 2008, 02:40 PM)
QUOTE (DataSnake @ Apr 15 2008, 10:20 AM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 15 2008, 02:08 PM)

But ask yourself, "How were they led to turn out OK?" The concentration camps: liberated by Allied troops. The tyranny of the Saddam Hussein regime: freed by US troops. The attacks by German on Europe during BOTH world wars: stopped and eventually pushed back by British, American, and French troops.

Saddam Hussein: Put in power by the US government as an ally against Iran.
The Holocaust: During WWII, the US gov. actively tried to HIDE info about what Hitler was up to. I don't know why, because it would have been a GREAT PR tool, but that's what they did.

I know about Saddam. I was unaware of the Holocaust thing. Are you saying, then that we're bad because of an intelligence screwup, but you don't give us any credit when we free hundreds of thousands of starved, half-dead Jews? For a flap of judgment of putting Saddam in power, are you then forgetting what we'd done to right our wrong? You seem to look only at the negative. There are always lessons to be learned, but we righted the wrongs we did in both cases.

You appear to look only at the positive. Therefore, in order to maintain a proper balance, I point out the negative facts you overlook. I see the positive too, but I see no need to repost what has already been mentioned.

thanks for commenting on my topic datasnake.

Wingman - April 15, 2008 08:33 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 15 2008, 02:57 PM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 15 2008, 02:08 PM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 15 2008, 10:05 AM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 15 2008, 01:09 PM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 14 2008, 04:52 PM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 14 2008, 11:46 AM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 13 2008, 04:50 PM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 12 2008, 07:32 PM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 12 2008, 12:38 PM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 11 2008, 07:57 PM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 11 2008, 03:01 PM)
hey wingman what do you think of these

1. What if the union had initially followed General Scott's plan, rather than to allow General McDowell to do a direct advance leading to the battle of Bull Run.

2. What if Virginia Hadn't seceded from the union

3. What if the south had been allowed to break free from the union and the civil war never happened?

4. What if General Robert E. Lee was shot and killed rather than "Stonewall" Jackson

5. What if the Battle of Gettysburg never happened



i wish more people would reply on these historical threads.

1. I don't know enough about the battle of Bull Run to comment. Sorry.

2. Then General Robert E. Lee would have been leading Union troops from the get-go, and they would have destroyed the Confederacy within six months.

3. Slaves would have had to have waited for much longer until they were free, we wouldn't have become as big a nation as we are now, we would have not participated in WWI, and we wouldn't have had the strength to fight WWII. Soviets would be the current superpower right now, and we would all be speaking Russian, paying our Party dues, and saluting each other as "Comrade".

4. There would be no Arlington National Cemetary, the South would have crumbled without the leadership of their main general, and Jackson simply didn't have the same charm and capability that Lee had, though he was second to none in the support, second in command general position. As supreme officer, he wouldn't have been able to win the war for them.

5. Joshua Laurence Chamberlain wouldn't have become famous...probably, Lee would have attacked Washington instead, and we would not have had our glory as the state in which one of the bloodiest battles in world history took place. Darn.

3. Slaves would have had to have waited for much longer until they were free, we wouldn't have become as big a nation as we are now, we would have not participated in WWI, and we wouldn't have had the strength to fight WWII. Soviets would be the current superpower right now, and we would all be speaking Russian, paying our Party dues, and saluting each other as "Comrade".


man that would suck. :angry:

Exactly. Only half of the country would exist today, and Russia would have still grown powerful. We probably wouldn't have been able to fight a two front war in WWII against Japan and Germany, and thus Russia would grow strong while we languish.

it's funny things always tend to work out eventually

For the better, that is.

yeah that's im sayin, no matter how bad things get they always tend to workout for teh better

But often it takes strong men who know what they believe and are willing to take the bull by the horns to make things right. The Battle of Gettysburg didn't win itself. Hitler wasn't forced to retreat to the gates of his own city just because he chose to. It took great men to beat them back.

yes, but think about all the bad things that have happened throughout history, they have all eventually led to something good,

But ask yourself, "How were they led to turn out OK?" The concentration camps: liberated by Allied troops. The tyranny of the Saddam Hussein regime: freed by US troops. The attacks by German on Europe during BOTH world wars: stopped and eventually pushed back by British, American, and French troops.

wm i'm talking over the period of a few decades, i'm talking hundreds upon hundreds of years, I mean the dark ages leading to the reniassiance

Well, you're right here.

Wingman - April 15, 2008 08:33 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (DataSnake @ Apr 15 2008, 12:41 PM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 15 2008, 02:40 PM)
QUOTE (DataSnake @ Apr 15 2008, 10:20 AM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 15 2008, 02:08 PM)

But ask yourself, "How were they led to turn out OK?" The concentration camps: liberated by Allied troops. The tyranny of the Saddam Hussein regime: freed by US troops. The attacks by German on Europe during BOTH world wars: stopped and eventually pushed back by British, American, and French troops.

Saddam Hussein: Put in power by the US government as an ally against Iran.
The Holocaust: During WWII, the US gov. actively tried to HIDE info about what Hitler was up to. I don't know why, because it would have been a GREAT PR tool, but that's what they did.

I know about Saddam. I was unaware of the Holocaust thing. Are you saying, then that we're bad because of an intelligence screwup, but you don't give us any credit when we free hundreds of thousands of starved, half-dead Jews? For a flap of judgment of putting Saddam in power, are you then forgetting what we'd done to right our wrong? You seem to look only at the negative. There are always lessons to be learned, but we righted the wrongs we did in both cases.

You appear to look only at the positive. Therefore, in order to maintain a proper balance, I point out the negative facts you overlook. I see the positive too, but I see no need to repost what has already been mentioned.

Well, there is that.

super_wolverine_Man - April 15, 2008 08:59 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 15 2008, 08:33 PM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 15 2008, 02:57 PM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 15 2008, 02:08 PM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 15 2008, 10:05 AM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 15 2008, 01:09 PM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 14 2008, 04:52 PM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 14 2008, 11:46 AM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 13 2008, 04:50 PM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 12 2008, 07:32 PM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 12 2008, 12:38 PM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 11 2008, 07:57 PM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 11 2008, 03:01 PM)
hey wingman what do you think of these

1. What if the union had initially followed General Scott's plan, rather than to allow General McDowell to do a direct advance leading to the battle of Bull Run.

2. What if Virginia Hadn't seceded from the union

3. What if the south had been allowed to break free from the union and the civil war never happened?

4. What if General Robert E. Lee was shot and killed rather than "Stonewall" Jackson

5. What if the Battle of Gettysburg never happened



i wish more people would reply on these historical threads.

1. I don't know enough about the battle of Bull Run to comment. Sorry.

2. Then General Robert E. Lee would have been leading Union troops from the get-go, and they would have destroyed the Confederacy within six months.

3. Slaves would have had to have waited for much longer until they were free, we wouldn't have become as big a nation as we are now, we would have not participated in WWI, and we wouldn't have had the strength to fight WWII. Soviets would be the current superpower right now, and we would all be speaking Russian, paying our Party dues, and saluting each other as "Comrade".

4. There would be no Arlington National Cemetary, the South would have crumbled without the leadership of their main general, and Jackson simply didn't have the same charm and capability that Lee had, though he was second to none in the support, second in command general position. As supreme officer, he wouldn't have been able to win the war for them.

5. Joshua Laurence Chamberlain wouldn't have become famous...probably, Lee would have attacked Washington instead, and we would not have had our glory as the state in which one of the bloodiest battles in world history took place. Darn.

3. Slaves would have had to have waited for much longer until they were free, we wouldn't have become as big a nation as we are now, we would have not participated in WWI, and we wouldn't have had the strength to fight WWII. Soviets would be the current superpower right now, and we would all be speaking Russian, paying our Party dues, and saluting each other as "Comrade".


man that would suck. :angry:

Exactly. Only half of the country would exist today, and Russia would have still grown powerful. We probably wouldn't have been able to fight a two front war in WWII against Japan and Germany, and thus Russia would grow strong while we languish.

it's funny things always tend to work out eventually

For the better, that is.

yeah that's im sayin, no matter how bad things get they always tend to workout for teh better

But often it takes strong men who know what they believe and are willing to take the bull by the horns to make things right. The Battle of Gettysburg didn't win itself. Hitler wasn't forced to retreat to the gates of his own city just because he chose to. It took great men to beat them back.

yes, but think about all the bad things that have happened throughout history, they have all eventually led to something good,

But ask yourself, "How were they led to turn out OK?" The concentration camps: liberated by Allied troops. The tyranny of the Saddam Hussein regime: freed by US troops. The attacks by German on Europe during BOTH world wars: stopped and eventually pushed back by British, American, and French troops.

wm i'm talking over the period of a few decades, i'm talking hundreds upon hundreds of years, I mean the dark ages leading to the reniassiance

Well, you're right here.

Thank you

Wingman - April 15, 2008 09:07 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 15 2008, 04:59 PM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 15 2008, 08:33 PM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 15 2008, 02:57 PM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 15 2008, 02:08 PM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 15 2008, 10:05 AM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 15 2008, 01:09 PM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 14 2008, 04:52 PM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 14 2008, 11:46 AM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 13 2008, 04:50 PM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 12 2008, 07:32 PM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 12 2008, 12:38 PM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Apr 11 2008, 07:57 PM)
QUOTE (super_wolverine_Man @ Apr 11 2008, 03:01 PM)
hey wingman what do you think of these

1. What if the union had initially followed General Scott's plan, rather than to allow General McDowell to do a direct advance leading to the battle of Bull Run.

2. What if Virginia Hadn't seceded from the union

3. What if the south had been allowed to break free from the union and the civil war never happened?

4. What if General Robert E. Lee was shot and killed rather than "Stonewall" Jackson

5. What if the Battle of Gettysburg never happened



i wish more people would reply on these historical threads.

1. I don't know enough about the battle of Bull Run to comment. Sorry.

2. Then General Robert E. Lee would have been leading Union troops from the get-go, and they would have destroyed the Confederacy within six months.

3. Slaves would have had to have waited for much longer until they were free, we wouldn't have become as big a nation as we are now, we would have not participated in WWI, and we wouldn't have had the strength to fight WWII. Soviets would be the current superpower right now, and we would all be speaking Russian, paying our Party dues, and saluting each other as "Comrade".

4. There would be no Arlington National Cemetary, the South would have crumbled without the leadership of their main general, and Jackson simply didn't have the same charm and capability that Lee had, though he was second to none in the support, second in command general position. As supreme officer, he wouldn't have been able to win the war for them.

5. Joshua Laurence Chamberlain wouldn't have become famous...probably, Lee would have attacked Washington instead, and we would not have had our glory as the state in which one of the bloodiest battles in world history took place. Darn.

3. Slaves would have had to have waited for much longer until they were free, we wouldn't have become as big a nation as we are now, we would have not participated in WWI, and we wouldn't have had the strength to fight WWII. Soviets would be the current superpower right now, and we would all be speaking Russian, paying our Party dues, and saluting each other as "Comrade".


man that would suck. :angry:

Exactly. Only half of the country would exist today, and Russia would have still grown powerful. We probably wouldn't have been able to fight a two front war in WWII against Japan and Germany, and thus Russia would grow strong while we languish.

it's funny things always tend to work out eventually

For the better, that is.

yeah that's im sayin, no matter how bad things get they always tend to workout for teh better

But often it takes strong men who know what they believe and are willing to take the bull by the horns to make things right. The Battle of Gettysburg didn't win itself. Hitler wasn't forced to retreat to the gates of his own city just because he chose to. It took great men to beat them back.

yes, but think about all the bad things that have happened throughout history, they have all eventually led to something good,

But ask yourself, "How were they led to turn out OK?" The concentration camps: liberated by Allied troops. The tyranny of the Saddam Hussein regime: freed by US troops. The attacks by German on Europe during BOTH world wars: stopped and eventually pushed back by British, American, and French troops.

wm i'm talking over the period of a few decades, i'm talking hundreds upon hundreds of years, I mean the dark ages leading to the reniassiance

Well, you're right here.

Thank you

Sure thing.




Hosted for free by zIFBoards