Was the Revolution Necessary?

[applesanity]

I wouldn't say "nobody" did. I think an estimated 2000-2500 did die from starvation or disease,

Oh see now you've done it. It's Wikipedia, buddy. Useful to an extent, but not ever definitive - especially on a page with two citations.

I shall refer you to Barbara Macdonald Powell of Cornell, one of the most definitive sources on Valley Forge:

Everyone knows that Washington told the Continental Congress horrible stories - so what was the result? More rations, more supplies, and no orders to fight or march during wintertime. Excellent tactics, I'd say.

Studies done by the National Park Service during the 1970's show that nobody - as in nada, zip, el zilcho - starved or froze to death, and that morale was high. The 10,000-man army encamped there received a million pounds of flour and a million pounds of meat and fish every month. - which amounts to more than 3 pounds of flour and 3 pounds of meat and fish per day. The only fear was in the supply chains getting interrupted - hence the abundance of food. Additional studies showed that that winter at Valley Forge was no worse or better by any significan measure than any other winter. In fact, the winter spent in Morristown, New Jersery was worse - but not by a lot.

Also, language changes over time, buddy.

The 18th-century use of the term "naked" meant that you were going without "proper" clothing, as opposed to no clothing.

Pilgrims didn't dress in black or wear those funny hats and buckles. Paul Revere was apprehended before being able to make any midnight ride. GW never carried the U.S. flag as we know it into battle.

Thanks for playing.

 

[Guy B. Meredith]

Back to basic high school American history class for you.

 

[applesanity]

Back to basic high school American history class for you.

Lame, dude. High school history taught me that GW never told a lie, that Reconstruction was good for the South, that the Civil War was fought to free the slaves, that MLK, Jr. was a saint, that Lynn Cheney was and still is right, that the Vietnam War was an absolute disaster for the American troops vs. the VC, that the 2nd Amendment concerns only the National Guard ...well you get the point.

The kinda stuff that GW pulled off during the war couldn't be imagined today, now that we have embedded reporters and instantaneous communication lines. Times change, buddy.

Welcome to the real world. There's no reason to be ashamed. Accept it. Embrace it.

 

[Doug.38PR]

Paul Revere was apprehended before being able to make any midnight ride.

Actually he was captured AFTER or DURING the ride, not before it.


So washington told horrible stories to the congress....so what? Who's to say they weren't true. Moral certainly was high by the time it was over. Winter ANYTIME back then was harsh. Back then, even being without a good overcoat could mean life or death. Remember this predated the days of gas heating, space heaters and retreating to a crisp warm heated car when walking in cold climate (BTW, winters 200 years ago were A LOT worse than they have been in recent years. I've read of Santa Anna's army marching through the snow as they headed across the deserts of South Texas towards the Alamo. And 20 or so years later the U.S. Second Cavalry in Texas marching through snow as they headed south towards Brownsville or elsewhere along the Texas/Mexican border)

I don't see how the National Parks service could prove that nobody died at valley forge. I would believe Geo. Washington who lived back then before I would believe some lispy voice guy in a smoky the bear hat.
No I haven't just read this in wikipedia, true you must take it with a grain of salt...the same is true of federal paid park rangers.

http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/valleyforge.htm



BTW, Guy. B. Merideth, he does have a point, high school (public that is) is the best place for becoming a well rounded indoctrinated robot for a political agenda. However....Mr. Sanity just happens to be wrong on many points here. I don't believe GW never told a lie, but that's not the point of the story. I don't necessarily believe he chopped down a cherry tree either, but that's not the point of the story. Myth (doesn't mean it's not true) is supposed to drive home a particular point and in this case it's that Washington was a man if integrity and character.

 

[Wildalaska]

it's that Washington was a man if integrity and character

Must have developed that after he massacred some canadians in the French and Indian War

WildisthereamonumnenttocolonelchivingtonsomewhereAlaska

 

[gc70]

It seems like a good time to find the middle of the road.

The Signers undoubtedly believed in the principles of freedom - if not at first, then later. Some of them may have started with high principles and were later enticed by the opportunity for wealth and power. Some of them may have started with a lust for wealth and power and later embraced high principles. And for some, their original motivation may have endured.

What we do know - without recourse to any authoritative sources - is that they were human beings. Some were good, some were bad, and most were in between. Whatever their character or motivation, they triumphed in their struggle and helped create a new nation with a new form of government. For that, we owe them a debt of gratitude.

 

[applesanity]

Remember this predated the days of gas heating, space heaters

But Valley Forge didn't predate the invention of... CAMPFIRES.

so what? Who's to say they weren't true.

Oooh, logical fallacy of the highest. You can't prove that the Flying Spaghetti Monster doesn't exist. So it must exist!

I've read of Santa Anna's army marching through the snow

... And you've missed the point all together.

I don't see how the National Parks service could prove this. I would believe Geo. Washington who lived back then before I would believe some lispy voice guy in a smoky the bear hat.

Where did I say Ranger Bob did the study? That's right - I didn't. The National Park Service funded a team of archeologists and historians. They studied the supply lines, ration orders, they dug up the dirt, they read the letters that the soldiers sent and received.

I think an estimated 2000-2500 did die

So praytell, where are their bodies? That's right - there weren't any. If an archeologist can find the thousands-year old remains of Troy, I'm sure they can find a corpse or two buried under 200+ years of myths and propaganda. The fact that Valley Forge wasn't as bad as GW made it out to be does not in any way, diminish their purpose, their mission, or their fight for independence. Don't be a Lynn Cheney.

Also, I'm kinda disappointed that I gave you an ample supply of proven facts and figures and your reply amounted to, "no, it can't be..."

Paul Revere never made it to Concord. He never shouted "THE BRITISH ARE COMING!" because that's just well, dumb. Yeah, go ahead and report yourself to every British sentry at every street corner. Step away from that book of Longfellow poems. Prescott made it to Concord. Revere and Dawes were stopped at Lincoln.

What we do know - without recourse to any authoritative sources - is that they were human beings. Some were good, some were bad, and most were in between. Whatever their character or motivation, they triumphed in their struggle and helped create a new nation with a new form of government. For that, we owe them a debt of gratitude.

Exactly. Why do we insist on having our founders viewed as saints? Respect and gratitude does not necessitate ignorance, naivete, or irrational hero-worship. I would like to think that they were just as human as you or me, and that in the end, their great experiment worked out just fine.

 

[Doug.38PR]

But Valley Forge didn't predate the invention of... CAMPFIRES.

Applesanity, have you ever tried to warm yourself by a campfire in freezing tempatures? It's not easy. It's like cooking a frozen solid steak. It gets well done on one side, but still frozen on the other. It can work, if you improvise, but it is a FAR cry from a heated building that we take for granted today in a healthy environment.

Where did I say Ranger Bob did the study? That's right - I didn't. The National Park Service funded a team of archeologists and historians. They studied the supply lines, ration orders, they dug up the dirt, they read the letters that the soldiers sent and received.

But Ranger bob is the one who probably tells everybody that at the park. A few points about this:
1) I highly doubt the excavated the entire area of Valley forge in a search for bodies

2) Those who did die didn't die all at once and probably not all at the location Valley Forge and probably weren't buried all in one big place like Arlington cemetary....in fact, now that I think about it, I wonder if they were cremated. 6 ft of snow, freezing, not the ideal circumstances for a great burial detail to dig up a ditch to dump bodies into ESPECIALLY IF THEY DIED OF DISEASE. (and again, they probably didn't die all at once or in the same place)

3) Diseases I understand are the most common cause of death in war (at least back then) this is especially true in the dead of winter. Not just starvation

4) I'm sure food did arrive at times, but why do you think Washington kept demanding it...they needed it!

5) Moral was high, it shows remarkable strength for an army of men to hold together under such circumstances...that's a testament of strenght

6) Moral increased considerably after Baron Friedrich Wilhelm von Steuben arrived with reinforcements and to help train the army.

Paul Revere never made it to Concord. He never shouted "THE BRITISH ARE COMING!" because that's just well, dumb. Yeah, go ahead and report yourself to every British sentry at every street corner. Step away from that book of Longfellow poems. Prescott made it to Concord. Revere and Dawes were stopped at Lincoln.

He was turning out the milita ON THE WAY to Concord throughout the countryside, the british sentries were in Boston not out in the country. Yes he was captured, but yes he did make his famous ride and yell, "Call out the militia, the redcoats/british are coming"

Also, I'm kinda disappointed that I gave you an ample supply of proven facts and figures and your reply amounted to, "no, it can't be..."

And I've giving you facts and figures and you say, no that's not true too. So we have two conflicting beliefs based on two different sources. I still don't think that study proves that nobody died at valley forge. There has been too much information to the contrary over the past 200 years to say there was. Regardless, this much can be said, Valley Forge was Harsh, and was certainly no picnic. If you think it was soldiers singng merily around the campfire while nibbling away at a leg of turkey or mutton and drining down hot coffee while going into the nearest town for ball dances while Washington writes BS letters to Congress while he can sit in his rented Big house and charm the ladies and enjoy time with his wife for a winter vacation, think again. Now, I know that you don't go that far, but I think to say that "nobody, zero, zip nada" died at VF is highly dubious.

Exactly. Why do we insist on having our founders viewed as saints? Respect and gratitude does not necessitate ignorance, naivete, or irrational hero-worship. I would like to think that they were just as human as you or me, and that in the end, their great experiment worked out just fine.

Though the Christian is still affected by Original Sin, he is nevertheless a Christian or a Saint as the Bible calls him. Something different than what he was as as a nonbeliever.
No the Founding Fathers were not perfect but that doesn't mean they weren't saints. their character and influence and strength as well as that of their generation is something that has inspired and molded this land of ours for generations. That alone says something. I would counter....or rather clarify, that we need to stop trying to tear them down to make low men of today look good. That's what all the cynics want. That's why they are the ones always screaming and whining that "So and So owned slaves" or "so and so fought Indians" or "so and so bought lands that were stolen from Indians" or "So and So was a rich white male" or "the Founders were sexist" or "the founder's were racist" or "the founders were rich" and all these other politically correct self righteous asinine slogans. At it's root, it's all about cyinics making themselves look good, because they are really shallow lowlives themselves. They would have you believe that there is no good in the world (apart from their little sphere), no such thing as altruism, nothing bigger than themselves and nobody to admire. (I KNOW THAT"S NOT WHAT YOU APPLESANITY ARE SAYING, but there are plenty out there who would have you believe this....I heard them teaching classes all through college:barf

Lame, dude. High school history taught me that GW never told a lie, that Reconstruction was good for the South, that the Civil War was fought to free the slaves, that MLK, Jr. was a saint, that Lynn Cheney was and still is right, that the Vietnam War was an absolute disaster for the American troops vs. the VC, that the 2nd Amendment concerns only the National Guard ...well you get the point.

The National Park Service and said hired "historians" will also tell you this load of horse dump too

 

[Justme]

The best thing about the US government and constitution is that it does not depend on having men of great wisdom and/or integrity to make it work. It works despite the country trying to commit suicide in the mid 1800s. It works despite having horrible presidents like Harding and Grant. It works despite having activist judges for the last 200 years. It works despite having congress full of career politicians who worry mainly about their own power.

It's a miracle that it works, but by God it works. The founding fathers, whatever their motives, put together a pretty good foundation for a society, and we have added layers and layers of paint and plaster over the years but it still holds up.

I like that paint and plaster, and I like that foundation. That way I don't like radicals like Ron Paul who want to strip away all the plaster, God only knows what cracks the plaster is covering. And I don't like radicals like Ralph Nader who want to mess around with the foundation.

That's right, I'm a radical moderate and think each generation should fix the cracks we find and put a new coat of paint now and again. Everyone wants to build something new but nobody wants to do maintenance. I think it's time that all americans embraced the idea of maintenance, and realise what we have didn't get built in a couple of days back in the 1700s but has taken a couple of centuries to get to this point. And this point is pretty damn good for most americans, we need to patch a few things and paint some others but I do get sick of people telling me how horrible things have gotten.

 

[Jason_G]

Wow, there were alot of posts on this, so if somebody already mentioned this then forgive my redundancy:

I took a course in western medical history with a professor who got his Ph.D. in medical history from Johns Hopkins. He mentioned that there's a theory that is rapidly gaining credibility and attention from doctors and historians:

King George III was going insane at the time leading up to the Revolution because of a metabolic disorder called porphyria. The disease causes mental instability and insanity once certain toxic metabolites build up in the body. Alot of historians and physicians claim that this could've very well been the reason for the war. If he hadn't been sick, things very well could've taken a more diplomatic turn.

Take it for what it's worth.

Jason

 

[applesanity]

It can work, if you improvise, but it is a FAR cry from a heated building that we take for granted today in a healthy environment.

Again, you're inserting your sense of the world as you know it, into what life was like back then. How did any army encamp themselves for the Winter during the 18th century? There is no actual proof that Valley Forge was any better or worse. By your logic, the British must have been suffering real bad too - seeing as how the redcoats didn't have space heaters.

I highly doubt the excavated the entire area of Valley forge

Don't tell an archeologist how to do his job. You're not an archeologist.

ESPECIALLY IF THEY DIED OF DISEASE.

Did I say disease? When have I ever, ever mentioned that word? Oh wait. I didn't. I was talking about starvation and freezing to death.

but why do you think Washington kept demanding it...they needed it!

So... what's your point? Divided evenly, every soldier would have received over 6 pounds of food a day. It was a brilliant tactic on GW's behalf, of creating a buffer zone of surplus rations, should supply lines get interrupted. What, are they gonna starve from overeating?

And I've giving you facts and figures and you say, no that's not true too.

No. No you have not. You have only given a priori arguments - all of which amount to "no, that doesn't make much sense in regards to how I view the world."

I cited you an actual study conducted in Valley Forge and the only thing you've managed is telling me that archeologists are dumb.

we need to stop trying to tear them down to make low men of today look good.

Nobody is tearing them them down. Humanizing them is not the same as tearing them down. Please, please, pretty please stop trying to be Lynn Cheney.

You've missed the point so entirely. Is reality so hard to bear?

The fact that our founding fathers were *human* does not - i repeat, does not - in any way whatsoever diminish what they accomplished. The fact that our National Anthem is sung to the tune of a drinking song does not in any way diminish its meaning. The fact Thomas Jefferson owned and probably slept with a few slaves does not in no way whatsover diminish his accomplishments. The fact that George Washington probably told a few lies during his lifetime (and had some terrible hygeine to boot) does not in any way whatsoever diminish what he did for our country. Hah did you catch the subtle comment in that last sentence? Proper hygeine then is not the same as proper hygeine now - just as war tactics then are not war tactics now.

And since you brought religion into the argument... somehow... the fact that Jesus Christ questioned God's decisions, while on the crucifix ("Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?"), does not in any way diminish His sacrifice or love of mankind.

The fact that one day (if you haven't already), you'll beat your father in basketball, baseball, wealth, and assets, does not in any way diminish all the things he did for you during your upbringing. He's only human. So were GW, TJ, BF, and all the rest.

Do you get it yet? Probably not. But do go on, worshipping your founding fathers as saints and stuff. They deserve your respect and gratitude; they never asked for your idolization.

 

[Wildalaska]

hat we need to stop trying to tear them down to make low men of today look good. That's what all the cynics want. That's why they are the ones always screaming and whining that "So and So owned slaves" or "so and so fought Indians" or "so and so bought lands that were stolen from Indians" or "So and So was a rich white male" or "the Founders were sexist" or "the founder's were racist" or "the founders were rich" and all these other politically correct self righteous asinine slogans. At it's root, it's all about cyinics making themselves look good, because they are really shallow lowlives themselves. They would have you believe that there is no good in the world (apart from their little sphere), no such thing as altruism, nothing bigger than themselves and nobody to admire. (I KNOW THAT"S NOT WHAT YOU APPLESANITY ARE SAYING, but there are plenty out there who would have you believe this....I heard them teaching classes all through college

So now we get to the nitty gritty..simply because one side distorts history, the other side can do it it too.....

Most of the founders were racists (as we understand the word today)...so what, deal with it.

Most of the founders owned slaves...so what, deal with it.

Most of the founders expolited Indians, so what, sorry, deal with it.

Simply becasue some folks are ignorant doesnt mean its OK for you to be.

Understanding history means simply that..understanding...not kowtowing to myth or just playing tu quoque

WildgunsarefunAlaska

 

[applesanity]

not kowtowing to myth or just playing tu quoque

You might have to post a definition of that. Or what does it matter - how do you explain logical fallacies to someone who relies on them?

 

[4V50 Gary]

Quote:
it's that Washington was a man if integrity and character

Must have developed that after he massacred some canadians in the French and Indian War

Actually, he massacred some Frenchmen and their Indian guides at Jumonville Glen, which is near Fort Necessity and Pittsburg. Snuck up on them early in the morning and gunned them down.

[Moderator Hat On] No Name Calling. We're watching.

 

[Bruxley]

So we've degraded to requiring sinlessness for credibility. Perfect. Nobody meets that standard so whip it out as case and point and get out the mirror because YOU are also guilty and therefore non credible by your very own standard.

Were these Frenchmen a threat? I mean it WAS called the French and Indian WAR right? Lemme guess these were benevolent folks just looking for the orphanage so they could delivery some homemade cookies right.

BACK ON TOPIC.
Revolutionary War. Revolutionized the world, not just this Nation. All that from the motivation of money grubbing and monopolization of power?

The butting of heads is often interesting, sometimes informative, and usually entertaining. The complimentary contrasts between the left and right (also founding labels for these ideologies) is fully, completely, and absolutely invaluable. Either side, unchecked, will veer into the proverbial ditch.

The premise that the Revolutionary War was a concoction of aristocracy to bring about the means for them to gain more wealth and power is unfounded, undocumented, and counter to the VAST and VOLUMINOUS writings of the day. Simply appeasing their British counterparts would have achieved that in SPADES with much better result and less effort.

The argument is only set upon the base cynicism and perhaps self aggrandized views of a few.

I have pondered this thread quite a bit since my last post. I can only hope those few are just entertaining themselves with stirring the fire rather then actually holding their own nation in that perspective.

Many have lived in the community where Honor and principled sacrifice are alive and strong. It truly saddens me that outside that community not only are those virtues less prevalent, but undermining and scoffing those principles is 'enlightened' or 'progressive' to so many.

Bash me. Scoff me. Do what you must. But today, tomorrow and till my death I will not be seduced, beguiled, or intoxicated into belittling the Honor and good name of Men that did so much.

You may. I no longer believe you can restrain yourself from it. But someday long from now you will not only be dead, but will have been dead for so long that not one person remains that recalls you ever existed. Those that will never face that have done that in one and only one way.....they effected the lives of many people. Good or bad. The men and the deeds they performed effect the vast majority for the good. And that effect continues today. Yet there are those that would work to dishonor them.

That said I am done with this discussion about these honored men. The result of their deeds ought to speak well enough of them.

 

[Doug.38PR]

Actually, he massacred some Frenchmen and their Indian guides at Jumonville Glen, which is near Fort Necessity and Pittsburg. Snuck up on them early in the morning and gunned them down.

Good strategy, the element of surprise.

So now we get to the nitty gritty..simply because one side distorts history, the other side can do it it too.....

Most of the founders were racists (as we understand the word today)...so what, deal with it.

A loaded word that didn't even exist 100 years ago. So the heck what?

Most of the founders owned slaves...so what, deal with it.

So the heck what? Nothing wrong with that per se and in that day and age and under the circumstances perfectly understandable

Most of the founders expolited Indians, so what, sorry, deal with it.

A broad generalization. Most of them wanted peaceful policies with the Indians and/or to Christianize them. Also the Indians were not the Noble Savage that lived in a paradise utopia at one with nature until the dirty white man came along and trashed the place making the indian cry. (I.E. Dances with Wolves) They were not something the white settlers wanted for neighbors for understandable reasons (you might likely find your scalp lifted or your child smashed against a rock if not careful). The Indians often allied themselves or were armed by foreign nations like England, France and Spain to attack American settlers (fifth columners of sorts) as such the Founding Fathers and later generation were realistic about this. This of course does not justify the way the Indians were treated at different periods in the 400 years of American history, but it doesn't encourage me to hate my ancestors or feel guilty because "they were all a bunch of white males who brutalized women, Indians, blacks and the poor." Won't work WA, try your cynical drivel elsewhere.

Simply becasue some folks are ignorant doesnt mean its OK for you to be.

I don't mind you being ignorant. You are happy with yourself.

Understanding history means simply that..understanding...not kowtowing to myth or just playing tu quoque

And you have 0 understanding of history as you have demonstrated all throughout this thread by claiming the American Rev is nothing more than greedy white male slave owners and indian cheaters who started the Revolution for power and money.

WildgunsarefunAlaska

At least here I can say +1

No. No you have not. You have only given a priori arguments - all of which amount to "no, that doesn't make much sense in regards to how I view the world."

I cited you an actual study conducted in Valley Forge and the only thing you've managed is telling me that archeologists are dumb.

No, I used reasoning to question what these archeologists and historians concluded (or what you say they conclueded....or what you say the source that told you said they concluded.)
I also provided several links (besides wikipedia) that claim that there were deaths and suffering at Valley Forge.
Two different sources (mine and yours), two different conclusions.

 

[Al Norris]

And just to empathize what Gary just said... We are watching - No more religious references. The topic is about the revolution, not the crusades.

 

[applesanity]

Revolutionized the world, not just this Nation. All that from the motivation of money grubbing and monopolization of power?

Like I already said - there's a formal term for this kind of fallacy that you've committed multiple times. But I'll stick to the colloquial: "Cart Before the Horse."

The premise that the Revolutionary War was a concoction of aristocracy to bring about the means for them to gain more wealth and power is unfounded, undocumented, and counter to the VAST and VOLUMINOUS writings of the day.

1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhetoric - just like how the Iraq war is all about "bringing freedom and democracy to the Iraqis," right? Right?
2. Enlightenment philosophy can't bankroll a war. Money bankrolls a war. And the financiers prefer staying in the black. Follow the money trail. Sure, you can believe in your own ideals and all, but you better have more than hopes and dreams if you're gonna throw your whole contry into war.

Simply appeasing their British counterparts would have achieved that in SPADES with much better result and less effort.

Wow. Just... Wow. Had you been reading the posts that many others have written, you'll see why you're so very much wrong on this one.

The argument is only set upon the base cynicism and perhaps self aggrandized views of a few.

Say what? Realpolitik is not an aggrandized world view. Skepticism is not a bad thing.

till my death I will not be seduced, beguiled, or intoxicated into belittling the Honor and good name of Men that did so much.

Nobody is belittling them. We are trying to understand them as human beings. They were not Gods. The fact that they had human needs and human wants does not in any way diminish their accomplishments. Why am I repeating myself?

The result of their deeds ought to speak well enough of them.

Hey, I recognize that! It's something Lynn Cheney would say.

And some insight into Apple perspective

[EDIT]It appears this post has been deleted - so i'm not gonna quote the actual link[/EDIT]

nice hammer and sickle there comrade.

Oh here's why I keep having repeat myself.... Bruxley, I gotta ask you: do you read the posts and replies on threads before posting your own thoughts? Well, do ya? You dismiss opposing views without substantiation, and you have made no effort to rebute the counter-arguments made against your arguments.

Here's something from Post #38 - from waayyyy back... but it appears you haven't been reading:

Wow, you fell for it? I never thought anyone would ever, but you managed! Geez man, it's called *satire.* I even mentioned the point of the *satire* in the FAQ section. My NSFW website is full of anti hippie, anti tree hugger, anti pinko commie stuff. I'd post you the direct links, but they're not kosher on TFL.

Additionally, attacking the messenger is never a good way to win an argument.

Think of it this way: if I had a nondescript favicon for my site, would you be so interested? Thanks for helping to drive traffic to my website. It's exactly what I wanted.

Quick - anyone who clicked on that link: doesn't it just REEK of satire and parody? Huh? Well, it seems Bruxley missed it. [EDIT]it was a link to a page satirizing a communist call to arms[/EDIT]

And you missed these links too:

wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque

 

[Bruxley]

Crusades??? I miss a post?

 

[Doug.38PR]

^
I looked back and saw nada on the Crusades. I know I didn't post anything on them