Why is it that rural fags suck at war

>>34130216
>why do Eastern european rural peasants suck at war, its almost like you need to be a superior german with an education to win!

>AXAXAXAXAXA intensifies

>>34130216
Shitty bait.

>>34130216
War is an industrial endeavor, ruralfags make the best soldiers but you need industry to supply the bombs, bullets, and boots.

>>34130229
>slavaboo education

>>34130216
>what are the Boer wars

>>34130216
>crops out the strength and industrial capacity figures

step up your bait game, dullard.

>>34130216
Most confederate generals graduated from West Point before the war. Further, most soldiers on both sides had basically no formal education.

Fun fact, Robert E Lee and US Grant graduated from West Point only a few years apart.

>>34130294
My ancestors in Sherman's army were uneducated illegal migrant Irishman who had just arrived and were promised citizenship if they fought for this nice Tecumseh guy, and if they didn't they'd be deported.

Credit where its due, they got their citizenship. the point being that a lot of Union army types weren't city-slickers with university degrees, many were basically hicks of various nationalities dragged into a war that wasn't really theirs.

File: Fennian Raids.jpg (280KB, 1267x951px) Image search: [Google]

280KB, 1267x951px

>>34130315
>dragged into a war that wasn't really theirs.
It was a training endeavor for the future liberation of Canada.

>>34130359
At the museum I worked for last semester we have a sporterized Needham conversion that the Irish used when they invaded Canada through Albany to hold it hostage and "trade" it for Irish Independence. They got their asses handed to them, a few were killed, and they were sent back to America. The government figured they really didn't need more punishment and actually gave them their rifles back. Two years after the first invasion, they tried again

>>34130216
Most of the Union soldiers were "rural fags"

>>34130407
Actually the Fenians performed quite well in the '66 raids, successfully winning battles and before being forced to retreat into America by the approach of massively superior Canadian forces. The rest of the raids over the next five years were less successful because the Canadians took them seriously and generally had advance warning, though the overall K:D ratio for the conflict remained in the Fenian's favor by a large margin.

Which says more about how few people were killed than anything else.

In all the Fenian Raids mostly followed a simple pattern: The Fenians attack and have initial success, Canada sends a force to deal with them, outgunned the Fenians retreat, America arrests them and mostly slaps them on the wrist.

>>34130520
Most people were "rural fags."

>>34130216
This is why we need flags
I bet this fucker is a leaf
The same fucking leaf who posted this rural and suburban shit on /pol/ for months

>>34130216
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Battle_of_Sabine_Pass

>>34130216
I thought confederates were generally considered to be better marksman than the Union troops?

>Confederates
>Rural fags
>Literally had slaves so they didn't have to do rural shit

Lets discredit the rurals beating america twice in Korea and Vietnam slso

>>34131064
>beating America
>in Korea

>>34131071
>North Korea doesn't exist


W...we... we won guys!

>>34131064
>literally had slaves
I'm sure the 7% that actually owned slaves really put a lot of effort into the war

>>34130216
>thinking the union won the civil war due to better education

Lol

>>34131111
>implying the only reason they exist isn't because of china
>implying Vietnam or Korea would've turned out the same way without mass help from soviets and neighboring countries

double lol

The South also had more military colleges.

Not to mention the Union suffered more causalities (Dead and wounded).

>>34130216
It's simple: Cotton is not a strategic resource.

File: fuckthesouth.jpg (10KB, 297x170px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 297x170px

>>34130216

>1860
>North is 35.7% urban
>South is 9.6%

>North has 22.1 million people
>South has 9.1 million people

>North has 14.2 million rural people
>South has 8.2 million rural people

The civil war was mostly a bunch of peasant draftees from the sticks fighting it out for reasons that largely didn't concern them. The north simply had more than twice as many people as the south, which is a pretty big advantage in a fucking slaughter of a war of attrition.

>>34133703
Also helps that the South was totally fucked in almost every way that mattered.

File: Soon (2).jpg (39KB, 680x365px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 680x365px

>>34131111
>North Korea doesn't exist

...Soon...

>>34130216
i hate to break it to you.
but the north was rural too at the time

File: usscairo.jpg (107KB, 740x500px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 740x500px

>>34131432
I think the war would have been over a lot sooner had Lincoln thrown the hammer down. He was convinced for the longest time that the majority of southerners wanted unity instead of treason and could be therefore reasoned with.

>>34133736
when?

>>34133746
>secession
>treason

Oh boy...this again...

>>34133703
>>34133714
If anything it's a testament to how sloppy the North was at the beginning that the war lasted as long as it did.

>>34133746
So was Lincoln any good or did he just get Obama'd in the history books? Seems to me he killed a lot of Americans.

File: here comes the pain (4).jpg (46KB, 530x298px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 530x298px

>>34133754
Covfefe: from the Euskara Batua word meaning "GBU-57 in 30 minutes"

>>34133756
>>34133763
Because lincoln told the South to secede and start the war by attacking fort sumter

>>34133756
I was just thinking the same thing
>>34133746
I hope we're living I'm the future you wanted.

>>34133763
Lincoln got Obamad but he understood one thing neither southerners nor liberals today understand.

Niggers are dumb and impulsive. When free they'll commit crime on scales unimaginable for white society. That's why he wanted them to go back to Africa.

>>34133780
or maybe he did it so they'd avoid constant lynching and harassment from inbred hicks

>>34133774
But engaging in secession (which has long standing international legal foundation prior to 1860), they were no longer subject to the U.S. constitution or federal laws, the negates the premise of treason.

The new national entity, through one of its federated constituent parts told the the now-foreign military personnel in Fort Sumter to leave, declaring them all persona non grata. The constituent federated entity intended to nationalize the fort (again, long standing legal foundations to this). Said foreign nationals refused to leave the territory they were now considered to be alien in and, as military personnel of a foreign nation, could be construed as hostile as no agreement was in place between the two national entities regarding their disposition.

The recently formed Confederate States of America reacted as one would to de facto hostile foreign forces in their territory.

You can paint it how you want but, from a purely legal perspective, the CSA was well within their rights to do as they did.

>>34133756
They saw the republic as a threat to their bullshit. If they had managed to get more states to secede and the split was in their favor, do you'd think they'd happily walk away with their independence? They saw free states as a threat before the war, and forced their system on them by way of the fugitive slave act. I dont see why they wouldn't have forced slavery on a defenseless north had the tables been turned.

The confederacy would have been a threat to every slave free nation on its border that refused to cooperate.

>>34133837
You're arguing unverifiable shoulda-woulda-couldas that have no bearing on whether the Southern states were legally capable or allowed to secede from the union.

>>34133779
Things could have been a lot worse.

You know what fuck it things turned out great. The 20th century was our century and that happened because of Lincoln. Growing up middle class in america in the 20th century was a paradise.

>>34133860
yeah and I dont give a damn because slavery was wrong. Those evil sons of bitches had to have it their way, they had to run themselves off a cliff.

>>34133834
>secession (which has long standing international legal foundation prior to 1860)
lelnope.

Secession has, as a general rule, never been recognised as legitimate by those in charge, and probably never will be.

Why settle for half of what you have, instead of all of what you have, even if you need to genocide some folks.

>>34133875
If you have a more productive idea for what to do with niggers, I'm listening.

>>34133884
You mean like when the US seceded from Britain? Damn those southerners - how dare they secede from our secession?!

>>34133902
>You mean like when the US seceded from Britain?
Yep, and like 95% of all other secessions.

>>34133875
Appeal to emotion, bad rhetoric here. You're also discounting the de facto slavery of Irish and other white Catholic immigrants in the North during the same period and the press-ganging of blacks by Northerners during reconstruction that amounted to forced labor without event he basic consideration of feeding, clothing, and sheltering the "free" blacks that were forced to work as "prisoners".

Slavery would have ended in the south regardless as they grew more and more limited by trade partners who didn't want to deal with a slave nation forcing the eventual emancipation of black slaves.

File: 1491514953342.png (251KB, 600x451px) Image search: [Google]

251KB, 600x451px

>>34133865
>The 20th century was our century and that happened because of Lincoln

Actually it was our century because the eurofags can't keep their hands to themselves and after they spent a few years breaking each other's toys we'd swoop in, kick all their asses and take their lunch money. Then we'd also take their comelier wenches and their smartest nerds home to do our housework and science for us.

Let us not forget that the reason we moved to America in the first place is because an inhospitable wilderness full of bears, wolves and stone-age savages is still preferable to living in "civilized" Europe.

>>34133884
Silesian War 1740
War of Bavarian Succession 1778
Belgium Secession of 1830
Brazilian Secession of 1825
Texas Secession in 1836
Republic of the Rio Grande 1840
Yucatan Republic 1843


I'm not going back as far as Hugo de Groot

>>34133970
...You're proving me right?

>>34133982
They were all secessions that were recognized as legitimate, that proves your right how, precisely?

>>34133990
If there was a war over it, then it's not seen as legitimate.

>>34133995
Incorrect, this is a matter of international law. Not to mention that with Belgium, Brazilian, Republic of the Rio Grande, Yucatan Republic, and the eventual release of Silesia to Prussia by the Austrians it demonstrates even the "aggrieved" nation accepted the outcome of the secession.

>>34134013
Yeah, not because a lack of trying, but because they were forced into a certain position, eg. defeat.

International law was a pretty flimsy concept until pretty recently, it didn't exist in any meaningful sense, it's like talking about laws of war before they started to really be codified and ratified.

>>34133995
>If there was a war over it, then it's not seen as legitimate.

Please explain.

>>34134101
If you have to go to war to secede, then whoever you're fighting does not recognise your act of independence as a legitimate action.

>>34134078
The majority of our International Law concepts come from 1600 - 1840, and it was hardly flimsy as it enabled a recognized nation to make treaties. Britain and France both recognized the CSA which meant that two sovereign nations recognized the sovereign right to exist of the CSA. You're also ignoring the fact that a Federal Republic, as the U.S. was in 1860 means the components are acting in a participatory fashion and there is no organ of government whether expressed or tacit that prevents the non-participation of said components.

No matter how you want to slice or rationalize it, by the letter of the law, the U.S. Civil War WAS indeed a War of Northern Aggression. How one feels about it has no bearing on the legal foundation here.

>>34134123
There was no defined legal mechanism for secession from the federation, therefore they couldn't legally withdraw unilaterally.

>>34134134
There didn't need to be as in a Federation each component piece retains a measure of self determination, the sanction of withdrawal of status vis-a-vis the other component members is what keeps individuals territories or states in line. All that would, technically, be required is for a state to alter or de-ratify their state constitution and declare their intent to withdraw their ratification of the of the Federal Constitution and...voilà...you're no longer part of the United States and no longer subject to the benefits pursuant to being a member there-of.

You sure do like the idea of a monolithic authoritarian central Government.

>>34134156
>There didn't need to be as in a Federation each component piece retains a measure of self determination
Yes, a measure. It's not absolute and unlimited, it never has been, hence why most secession involves war.

>You sure do like the idea of a monolithic authoritarian central Government.
No, I'm simply talking about reality.

If I had >1000km2 and $100 million, I'd probably try secession myself.

>>34134192
Whether or not the original component nation opts to go to war or not over the secession doesn't make said secession any less legal. Lincoln could have saved at least half a million lives by waiting them out and using diplomatic leverage to ensure the south had no trading partners save the North, promised a relaxation of tariffs (which the South was paying, de facto, to the Norrth prior to 1860) on the stipulation they re-ratify the U.S. constitution and end chattel slavery and reconstituted the country around 1864.

>>34134217
I didn't say war makes it legal or illegal, I said the lack of legality causes the war.

Because without legal provisions for secession, a polity can't legally secede. Which is why it was ruled illegal.

>>34134013
The entire concept of "international law" is an oxymoron. It's hard to think of a bigger bullshit idea.

>>34134257
But there was no lack of legality, a nation's interest and legality don't always coincide, hence most of what happened in the 20th century.

Secession is a founded on the concept of plebiscite for which there has been legal precedent for as long as there was anything resembling representative government. You're utterly wrong on the second point, sorry to tell you.

>>34134265
If that were true there would be no such things as treaties or nation state recognition.

>>34134268
>You're utterly wrong on the second point, sorry to tell you.
Not me, the Supreme Court.

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/74/700/case.html

>>34134275
Treaties need to be ratified within the legal system of each state to have legal effect. They don't just become law automatically.

>>34134282
Notice the year of this case?
1868...3 years after the surrender and it was still fresh on everyone's minds.

This is also a case of a Federal Entity codifying into law a monolithic quasi-authoritarian Federal Government.

By this logic if the Supreme Court decides to interpret the 2nd Amendment to mean that only a State's National Guard (a well regulated militia) can keep and bear arms you'll have no recourse except to join your state National Guard or hand over the guns.

>>34134275
>If that were true there would be no such things as treaties or nation state recognition.
Nations exist so that different groups of people in different places can have different laws - that's what the entire fucking concept of a nation is *for*. "International law" - in other words, the idea that a bunch of stuffed suits can get together in a building in Geneva and pronounce one law for everybody - defeats the purpose of nations. So take that globalist bullshit and flush it down the toilet.

Anyhow, to take today of all days - the day when President Trump told the "international community" where they could cram their global warming agreement - to try to stand on "international law" is a joke. "International law" exists until someone who has the power to do so decides they don't feel like following it anymore. Eurocrats have spent the whole day screaming about how America can't just say we aren't going to play along with that bit of "international law" from now on, but guess what - 6800 nuclear warheads say we can, and anyone who doesn't like it can go kick rocks. That's how the real world works. It's not that "might makes right" in any objective moral sense, but the the victors get to write the history books to make themselves look like the good guys. Secession in 1776 was great but secession in 1861 was terrible because if you get to write the history books, then you can make your worst hypocrisy look like the highest of principles.

Chairman Mao was right - all law really does grow out of the barrel of a gun. Maybe it shouldn't, but I don't like in Shouldland, and neither do you.

>>34134322
>but I don't like in Shouldland
"live"
4chan not having an edit feature sucks. Also, covfefe.

>>34134322
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peace_of_Westphalia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugo_Grotius
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Geneva_Convention
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Admiralty_law

Educate yourself, this is a 370 year old codification of centuries of accepted practice between nation states. The U.N. didn't create international law and there were enforcement mechanisms in place centuries before the 1918 and the League of Nations.

>>34130216
Industrialization coupled with a lack of week men due to a lack of previous luxuries equals a very deadly enemy.

Imagine the first man to wear power armour versus the millionth after everyone has begun to rely on it too heavily.

For the first man, it simply enhanced his already legitimate abilities.

For the millionth, he cannot live (and obviously fight) without it.

This is what the rapid industrialization has done to the planet.

But still; Hard times create strong men, who create good times which create weak men, who then create hard times.

The confederates, unfortunately for them, caught the strongest of men.

>>34134336
None of that shit stopped WWI from happening, just like the League of Nations didn't stop WWII from happening. I repeat: "international law" exists until someone who has the power to do so decides they don't feel like following it anymore. This is not a rare occurrence.

>>34130216
Because they're dumb. It's not exactly rocket surgery.

>>34134322
The Paris Climate Agreement didn't have any foundation in international law or much of anything else; it is a carbon credit trading scheme meant to siphon off U.S. Dollars into European notional-services without anything remotely binding in it. We left a club we were getting saddled with the bill for...not a treaty.

>>34134348
You just described every law ever, it works until it doesn't, then you have an enforcement mechanism...for international law, it's sanctions; political, economic, and military by other nations who want the offending party to behave.

>>34130241
We lost those (SA fag here)

>>34134350
>The Paris Climate Agreement didn't have any foundation in international law or much of anything else; it is a carbon credit trading scheme meant to siphon off U.S. Dollars into European notional-services without anything remotely binding in it. We left a club we were getting saddled with the bill for...not a treaty.
True, but not really very relevant because the rest of the world is treating it as if it *is* enforceable international law. And in a sense, they're right - it's exactly as enforceable as any other international law; meaning that it goes out the window the second that someone who has the power to do so decides that don't feel like following it anymore.

We're arguing past each other because you're arguing technicalities from some piece of paper that some guys in a room somewhere signed, and I'm arguing the cold realities of the real world, where all that stuff ain't worth a bucket of warm piss.

File: 9rkX9GtNb2rvnaaLvj4PVTjsoxe.jpg (329KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

329KB, 1920x1080px

>>34134340
>imagine the first man to wear power armor

Go back to the future where you belong

>>34134355
>You just described every law ever, it works until it doesn't, then you have an enforcement mechanism...for international law, it's sanctions; political, economic, and military by other nations who want the offending party to behave.
Now you're getting it! The secession of 1776 got to be legal because the secessionists won, then retroactively made what they did legal. The secession of 1861 got to be illegal because the secessionists lost, and the victors then retroactively made what they had done illegal.

Repeat after me: All law grows out of the barrel of a gun.

>>34134364
Not really, they'll pitch a bitch fit about it, but nobody is recalling ambassadors, nobody is shuttering embassies or consulates, they're not turning our planes away, nor are they going to be able to rescind their recognition of our status as a nation state and nationalize our holdings in those countries. You're just going to have a handful of countries and more specifically their career political/bureaucrat class that aren't going to get to suckle at the petro-dollar tit that will gripe and then nothing will happen.

Don't be surprised if other nations withdraw from it in the coming weeks.

>>34134376
You crypto-anarchists are amusing, escaping or suffering a sanction doesn't confer legality, hence exonerated prisoners who suffered the sanction, but were legally vindicated lost...but weren't involved in anything illegal. Or you can take people like dear old Orenthal James who won...but legally excoriated.

Here's my question for you, do you think the War in Iraq had legal foundation or was it a totally illegal act?

>>34131111
>South Korea does exist

It's not a loss either.

>>34133805
You know he didn't like blacks right? You can find slavery reprehensible and not like blacks.

>>34130229
> not understanding that Russia only survived because of their communist leadership

The Nazies had pushing through all the democratic nations and monarchies it encountered with ease, it was communism that stopped them. We all owe our freedom and the freedom of our children for generations to come to communism.

File: not sure if bait.png (27KB, 527x409px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 527x409px

>>34134427

Nigguh....


Nigguh?


Nigguh!

File: 8734.png (28KB, 318x744px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 318x744px

Reminder: yankee fucking shits lost 75k troops than the south

SEVENTY FIVE FUCKING THOUSAND

>>34134461
>yankee fucking shits lost 75k troops than the south

And it seems like the South lost the ability to spell.

>>34134478
This would be an issue of how to utilize proper syntax, not an issue of proper spelling.

File: Italian Militiaman 1260-1392-38.jpg (397KB, 1563x1200px) Image search: [Google]

397KB, 1563x1200px

Daily reminder that in the medieval ages of Europe, peasantfaggots had castles and knights behind while citizens were required to own weapons and armor and serve a term in a militia and were responsible for their own defense.

>>34134496
Daily reminder that feudalism was awful and you'd likely be dead now thanks to infant mortality rates, starvation, and disease.

File: Guts hates kids.png (1MB, 749x1172px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 749x1172px

>>34134511
Or a certain swordsman's lust for killing Apostles

>>34134496
>citizens were required to own weapons

Lol no, citizens only existed to provide taxes for the king so he could pay his knights and keep then loyal.

>>34134362
The only people that lost were the Dutch. Learn your fucking history.

>>34134532
>citizens only existed to provide taxes for the king so he could pay his knights and keep then loyal.
If you're an Anglocuck, sure.

Continental cities, especially in Germany and Italy, were responsible for their own defense and had their own fucking government given that feudal lords cant own cities most of the time there.

File: South Internally BTFO.jpg (36KB, 316x244px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 316x244px

>>34134461
And it seems the south lost their will to fight.

>>34134568
Having your kit literally fall apart from exposure and no shoes since you marched out of Virginia does that...

>>34133763
He set a ton of precedent for simply suspending the bill of rights and imprisoning people from the other party for speaking out. The original tyrant.

>>34130216
Having an industry helps, too.

Don't think for a moment that the northern conscripts had any better education than the southern ones on average.
Same goes for the generals of both sides : they were the product of their time and had the same formation prior to the war.

>>34134577
Or not having a kit at all once Britain's cotton trade deal fell though.

>>34134362
IIRC you won the first one, it was only three months but it was enough to shock the Brits. The second one you lost but still put up a good fight.

>>34134511
>starvation
The population of Europe exploded under feudalism because the farming techniques were so efficient.

>>34130216

Thats because most of the Union soldiers were German/Irish forced conscripts who were fighting not only for their lives, but also for their citizenship after being drafter right off the boat.

Germans make the best soldiers for obvious reasons. Angry American slave owners and southern rednecks never stood a chance.

>>34135132
>>34134511
All societies with positive fertility rates and no sudden expansion of food production (through conquest or agricultural development) suffers from periodic famine. Feudalism has nothing to do with it.

>>34133757
Considering that the majority of trained and experienced army leaders were part of the Confederacy it's actually impressive that they didn't do more damage to the Union.
Had they pushed up the coastline and prevented the Union Navy from building up the war would have gone in their favor.

File: think.gif (2MB, 460x259px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 460x259px

>>34130216
>Rural fags suck at war
>Backwater goat fucker and riceman rural fags have given 2 world superpowers absolute hell in both Afghanistan and Vietnam

>>34130216
lol I'm related to Braxton Bragg.

>>34130216

>Union defeats Confederacy
>Lincoln assassinated
>before he can deport freed slaves to South America

Pyrrhic victory.