|
| 18 Dec 2012 04:59 PM |
| I really miss those olden days where warriors fought with courage by charging at their foes using swords. But nowadays, people just cower behind cover and shoot whatever moves. Thanks to guns, the noble knight has been erased. For good. What happened to conventional bows and arrows? They were faster and more accurate than guns when the guns first started coming around. Swords were awesome, that's why people keep using them even today. But guns just don't make you seem honorable and brave. And bayonets attached to guns just don't make the cut. No pun intended. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 18 Dec 2012 05:37 PM |
| What about flaming arrows? |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 18 Dec 2012 05:46 PM |
| Those are better than bullets. And they have more honor. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 18 Dec 2012 05:50 PM |
Okay, but without guns how would have the Confederate States of America even matched the United States? Guns are good!
------------------------ Long live Conservatism! |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 18 Dec 2012 05:51 PM |
Okay, but without guns how would have the Confederate States of America even matched the United States? Guns are good! ----------------------- Even with guns they didn't match them. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Raximus
|
  |
| Joined: 24 Jun 2012 |
| Total Posts: 2329 |
|
| |
|
|
| 18 Dec 2012 05:55 PM |
| The CSA would never have won in under any circumstances. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 18 Dec 2012 05:55 PM |
| The Confederacy fought good. But they needed more brave men, it's okay though because america has been doing us good for a long time, until Bill Clinton, George Bush, and Obama was elected. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
| |
|
|
| 18 Dec 2012 05:57 PM |
| and GW used guns to stop the british |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 18 Dec 2012 05:59 PM |
| He should've used spears and swords instead. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Raximus
|
  |
| Joined: 24 Jun 2012 |
| Total Posts: 2329 |
|
|
| 18 Dec 2012 06:00 PM |
>MEGA Yes they would The Union generals were idiots South had men like Lee and Jackson The South's army were professional |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 18 Dec 2012 06:00 PM |
| if jesus were alive he would want the guns... |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 18 Dec 2012 06:02 PM |
| Imagine a modern American Civil War, the Confederacy would be crushed immediately. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Raximus
|
  |
| Joined: 24 Jun 2012 |
| Total Posts: 2329 |
|
| |
|
|
| 18 Dec 2012 06:03 PM |
| Aint true kitty, Obama will have brought america into the dirt with the economy and soon they will be like Syria. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 18 Dec 2012 06:04 PM |
| and i know what yur thinking, how would they match the US Military? with GUNS! |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Raximus
|
  |
| Joined: 24 Jun 2012 |
| Total Posts: 2329 |
|
|
| 18 Dec 2012 06:04 PM |
well sorry allow me to expand The North (that would be essentially liberals i suppose) would be full of anti war idiots and hipsters while in the South it would be more professional soldiers not to mention an invasion of the south would be nearly impossible
|
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 18 Dec 2012 06:04 PM |
The South never, ever had a chance of winning the Civil War. Never. It all came down to a numbers game, starting with population. The North had a population of 22 million against the South's 9.1 million which included the slaves. The North rejected repeated offers to "settle this like men via cotton pick off." The Union possessed a navy the South couldn't touch, industry and armaments the South couldn't match, currency backed up in California gold, and women not encumbered by hoop skirts so wide you could hide 30 children under them. Now, this is not meant to suggest that there weren't some close calls for the Union throughout the war -- there were. But the U.S. government had already been through several wars the past fourscore years while the Confederate government was never able to get their crap together. While the Union had transformed Washington, D.C., into the most fortified city on the planet, the Rebels were still fighting over what flag to use. "Well, the red says 'we're fighting for our freedom,' but the stars say 'we're doing it flamboyantly.' Tough choice." When the threat of foreign intervention cropped up, Lincoln threw ambassadors like John Quincy Adams' grandson at the Europeans while the Confederates had nothing to offer but peach cobbler and the overuse of "y'all." In short, the South never stood a chance against the Union politically, militarily or diplomatically. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Raximus
|
  |
| Joined: 24 Jun 2012 |
| Total Posts: 2329 |
|
|
| 18 Dec 2012 06:05 PM |
| the military has always been pretty conservative those in the military would ultimately join the South and fight for their home states instead of a man (obama) who they dont even agree with |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 18 Dec 2012 06:06 PM |
| The only reason I say they would lose right away, is that the US military has Tanks, Helicopters, Missiles, etc. A rebellion today I imagine would be like the Free Syrian army, only simple assault weapons and SOME armor. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 18 Dec 2012 06:07 PM |
| But then again- Im sure there are weapons stationed in southern states already so I could be wrong. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 18 Dec 2012 06:11 PM |
@megaluigi34
It's not widely mentioned, but alot of civillians from Prussia (Pre-Germany) left to North America to help the Union. (and Confederacy to a much lesser extent.) |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Raximus
|
  |
| Joined: 24 Jun 2012 |
| Total Posts: 2329 |
|
| |
|
|
| 18 Dec 2012 06:12 PM |
| Wrong again Kitty...its "Russia" not "Prussia" |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|