The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

[JeffroK]

ORIGINAL: paullus99

Canoe - Tennessee is but one of several states (including Texas, Georgia & Wyoming) that are considering similar bills. Unfortunately for them, the issue of "Nullification" by the States of Federal Law was settled even before the Civil War when South Carolina tried to pull the same thing on President Jackson.....

There are a lot of people out there that believe what they read on Facebook & elsewhere on the Internet (all the crazy Obama / socialism garbage).....I don't believe a Democracy like ours was designed (in its present form) to survive a 24 hour news cycle - when politicians are forced to respond on issues in seconds, as opposed to days or weeks. It used to be that a certain calm could be maintained, because news could be digested before decisions were made (and public opinion changed at a much slower pace).

Unless people take a step back, a deep breath, and stop being so freakin' crazy, I am worried about the future.

I dont think any Democracy handles 24hr News/Facebook/Internet very well.

Back in my youth, our Politicians had time to work for the good, not have to answer the barrage of news cameras, blogs etc.

When the Brits went into the Falklands, they carefully controlled the press numbers so that they had time to do the job and explain later. No live shots of belgrano going down, or Sheffield being sunk.

In the 50's, our Prime Minister had time to get a ship to the UK, 6 weeks each way, and spend time there as well (might have been Lizzies Coronation)

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I don't think Georgia is considering anything of this sort, though I know many states have citizens advocating things like this.  But when the legislature seriously considers bills that amount to Nullification and Secession, that's a new level of concern.

From an outsider across the border, the thing that looks most serious for US unity seems to be the hardening ideological divide that gets both sides repeating their mantras and neither side willing to do much compromising.
Democracy is the very essence of compromise, with everyone accepting what the general population wants, even if it rubs them the wrong way. Individualism and Community sides of the issues are not finding common ground.
No wonder Congress is paralysed [and Obama's hair is turning white rapidly].

[desicat]

The fact that this is even being discussed in a forum like this should be sounding alarm bells.

[Bullwinkle58]

I'm thinking of getting business cards printed up with the full cite for the Heller decision. It would save lots of words.

[JohnDillworth]

This thread is bordering on getting locked so we should tread carefully. I believe the media has polarized many peoples thinking. It seems that many folks are willing to take what some media outlets spout at face value. Whether because they believe it, or they want it to be true, and that is sad. The media seems to have as much influence as lobbyists do. Let me see if I can turn this back to the WWII era and leave the usual suspects out. Father Charles Coughlin was most well know and influential in his day. It's worth seeking out his story and see how slippery some slopes can be. He reminds me of some folks on TV and radio now. I'm backing away from this now. I come here to get away

[crsutton]

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I heard something on the radio today that really caused me to sit up, take notice, and seriously wonder where our nation is headed. 

First, a little background:  It's true that our nation is politically divided right now - mainly along urban/collegiate vs. rural lines.  Despite our various woes, I have harbored no serious doubt that these times are considerably better than previous eras in American history, including the Watergate/Vietnam/assassination era of the '60s and '70s, the KKK/lynchings era of the '00s to '30s, and of course the Civil War.

Nevertheless, I am aware that the resentment that leads to serious unrest and violence usually takes time to build.  In the case of the Civil War, you had various nullification and secession movements for 30 years before the actual breach occurred.

So, while our country is mostly peaceful, prosperous and stable, I sometimes look at modern events and wonder, "Is this an isolated incident or is this an early step towards a serious breach?"  For instance, it's kinda easy to dismiss the extremist secession talk that followed the last election, except when you realize it takes early extremist ravings to actually get the ball rolling.

Then, on the radio this morning, I heard news that Tennessee lawmakers are considering a bill that will authorize Tennessee law enforcement to ignore federal statutes deemed unconstitution by Tennessee and for local sheriffs to arrest federal law enforcement trying to enforce said laws.

Danged if this doesn't sound like some kind of eery nullification and fugitive slave law situation resurrected after 160 years. 

We're not even close to a serious breach yet, but I now have no doubt we're taking steps leading that way.

I don't think it is that complicated. Our social experiment depends on a strong and vibrant middle class. You maintain a stong middle class by doing two things. One by restraining the tendency for the concentration of wealth and power into a small group of individuals, and two by devising ways to pull poorer people up into the middle class. We suceeded as a nation for 250 years because we were sucessful in doing this. We are failing as a nation over the past three decades becasuse we are losing control of this process.

Lose the middle class and our great experiment fails. Simple as that. All other political issues do not matter because a healthy and sucessful middle class acts in cohesion to effectively govern the nation....

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: crsutton

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I heard something on the radio today that really caused me to sit up, take notice, and seriously wonder where our nation is headed. 

First, a little background:  It's true that our nation is politically divided right now - mainly along urban/collegiate vs. rural lines.  Despite our various woes, I have harbored no serious doubt that these times are considerably better than previous eras in American history, including the Watergate/Vietnam/assassination era of the '60s and '70s, the KKK/lynchings era of the '00s to '30s, and of course the Civil War.

Nevertheless, I am aware that the resentment that leads to serious unrest and violence usually takes time to build.  In the case of the Civil War, you had various nullification and secession movements for 30 years before the actual breach occurred.

So, while our country is mostly peaceful, prosperous and stable, I sometimes look at modern events and wonder, "Is this an isolated incident or is this an early step towards a serious breach?"  For instance, it's kinda easy to dismiss the extremist secession talk that followed the last election, except when you realize it takes early extremist ravings to actually get the ball rolling.

Then, on the radio this morning, I heard news that Tennessee lawmakers are considering a bill that will authorize Tennessee law enforcement to ignore federal statutes deemed unconstitution by Tennessee and for local sheriffs to arrest federal law enforcement trying to enforce said laws.

Danged if this doesn't sound like some kind of eery nullification and fugitive slave law situation resurrected after 160 years. 

We're not even close to a serious breach yet, but I now have no doubt we're taking steps leading that way.

I don't think it is that complicated. Our social experiment depends on a strong and vibrant middle class. You maintain a stong middle class by doing two things. One by restraining the tendency for the concentration of wealth and power into a small group of individuals, and two by devising ways to pull poorer people up into the middle class. We suceeded as a nation for 250 years because we were sucessful in doing this. We are failing as a nation over the past three decades becasuse we are losing control of this process.

Lose the middle class and our great experiment fails. Simple as that. All other political issues do not matter because a healthy and sucessful middle class acts in cohesion to effectively govern the nation....

Actually, according to IRS figures the "rich" in this country varies substantially, and yes in the past three decades as well. What I mean is that those who make up the top 10% in income changes significantly. Economically, individual Americans are very mobile, both upward and downward. Various media/political speakers want you to gain the impression that there is a permanent divide, but the truth is otherwise.

[Chickenboy]

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Then, on the radio this morning, I heard news that Tennessee lawmakers are considering a bill that will authorize Tennessee law enforcement to ignore federal statutes deemed unconstitution by Tennessee and for local sheriffs to arrest federal law enforcement trying to enforce said laws.

This will go nowhere. Saner, cooler heads will prevail and this law will be quashed, as it should be. While we have a goodly number of problems in this country, the role and heirarchy of the Federal government vis a vis the state governments has been pretty clear. State legislatures can rattle their pens / swords to sate the local populace anger with Washington all they want. So long as they quietly do nothing of the sort in a legally binding manner, it's just so much noise.

PM me anytime you want to get into the juicy stuff. [8D] You should return to your regularly scheduled broadcast before your AAR gets locked.

[Capt. Harlock]

Tennessee lawmakers are considering a bill that will authorize Tennessee law enforcement to ignore federal statutes deemed unconstitution by Tennessee and for local sheriffs to arrest federal law enforcement trying to enforce said laws.

Danged if this doesn't sound like some kind of eery nullification and fugitive slave law situation resurrected after 160 years.

You're very right, it does. The Northern states had "Personal Liberty Laws" which interfered with attempts to return runaway slaves -- and it drove the Southern states nuts. Ironic that Tennessee would think of going that route. But I think that bit of history is too well remembered to be repeated.

[obvert]

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

John does fly escorts and sweeps with his bombers, but he's not careful enough combined with I've been lucky nearly every time I've inserted my fighters at Changhsa.  When I insert, he's either not been careful or he's been unlucky, with a few exceptions.

It's a good thing you're both doing an AAR since you're both so good at spinning the outcomes! [;)]

[kjnoel]

ORIGINAL: obvert

It's a good thing you're both doing an AAR since you're both so good at spinning the outcomes! [;)]

I have to second this. It's fascinating reading both sides, kind of like watching the newsreels from both sides during WW2. The truth is in the middle somewhere [:)]

[Canoerebel]

Thanks for chiming in on the potentially charged political question, gents.  I was confident that you guys would handle it well, as you did, and I really did want your thoughts.  One of the historical topics I've covered most deeply in my years of research and writing has been the efforts of southerners who opposed secession.  They were in a tough position and suffered for their viewpoints.  Anyhow, thanks again for giving your thoughts.  Now I'll get back to the game.
 
In a considerate way, John brought up that I have just violated one of the House Rules.  I used one small B-17E squadron and one small B-17D squadron at Chungking to target two small IJA units moving across open terrain SE of Changsha.  My purpose was to slow down these units.  I had totally forgotten that there is the House Rule prohibiting use of 4EB against troops in the open.  John handled it well.  I'll notify him that I'll stop and that we can re-do the turn if he wishes to.
 
That's one reason I hate House Rules.  While the rule may have a good purpose (to prevent the Allies from using 50 4EB to destroy enemy troops in the open), my use was reasonable and for an entirely different purpose.  So, while I violated the rule, I wasn't violating the spirit of the rule.  Meanwhile, John uses massed 2EB against Chinese in open terrain to totally obliterate them.  So, he keeps the rule, but violates the spirit of the rule (IMO).  I say this only because in China the Allies have an extremely limited ability to offer CAP to troops outside of the few major cities that have supply.  But Japan is free to bring the entire airforce against the Chinese.  Oh well, I'm not going to broach this with John (at least not now, as doing so would seem to be retaliatory for his invoking - properly, I hasten to add - the House Rule).
 
Now, I have a new turn in the box, so it's time to run it and see what's going on. 

[Canoerebel]

ORIGINAL: kjnoel

ORIGINAL: obvert

It's a good thing you're both doing an AAR since you're both so good at spinning the outcomes! [;)]

I have to second this. It's fascinating reading both sides, kind of like watching the newsreels from both sides during WW2. The truth is in the middle somewhere [:)]

It's common to stretch things, but I can't imagine John is claiming that the air war has been going well for him, either in China or anywhere else. On the turn I was referring to, he lost 63 aircraft. I think I lost 15. Overall, John has lost 600+ more aircraft than I have (roughly 2,000 to 1,400). That's a net increase of 600 in the past month or so.

As for the ground war, I do realize both sides are presenting this differently (I know, because I often read the title of John's posts - like "Tipping Point" - so I get a good feel for his state of mind). I honestly think the Chinese are doing fine and that John has mangled things pretty badly in engaging in so many low-odds attacks. He has, however, made some inroads that has him pretty excited. We'll find out soon who's assessment is being more accurate. I don't think the truth "lies somewhere in the middle."

Caveat: I know he's feeding more troops into China. This may eventually unbalance things for the Allies, who aren't able to commit additional reinforcements to the theater at this point. But, as noted earlier, if John is putting most of his eggs into the China basket, that says alot about his situation everywhere else.

[Canoerebel]

4/15/42
 
Australia:  A patroling ASW ship near Lord Howe Island reports detection level of 4/4.  Can a Glen get a look that good or is this likely a CS or more?  I have 180 fighters at Melbourne, so my ships should be okay, but I'm keeping my carriers offshore until the situation resolves just a bit.  No sign of imminent activity in the Perth area.
 
DEI/Philippines:  The Allies still control Batavia, Manado, Clark Field and Bataan.  These should be extinquishes over the next couple of weeks.
 
India:  No signs - yet - of an imminent move on Ceylon, India or Assam.  Viz airfield goes to level three and will get a 75-level base force.  Most of the fighters are spread between Colombo, Madras and Calcutta.
 
China:  Fairly quiet today.  The Chinese have closed off the two road hexsides leading to the interior IJ base.  Those two 4EB squadrons didn't do much damage while breaking the House Rules - 3 B-17E disrupted two squads; two B-17D didn't do anything.  The besieged and isolated little Chinese army at Nanning held against a high odds shock attack and inflicted more casualties than they suffered.  I think I'll open a hexside tomorrow. 
 
Pacific:  Quiet.

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Thanks for chiming in on the potentially charged political question, gents.  I was confident that you guys would handle it well, as you did, and I really did want your thoughts.  One of the historical topics I've covered most deeply in my years of research and writing has been the efforts of southerners who opposed secession.  They were in a tough position and suffered for their viewpoints.  Anyhow, thanks again for giving your thoughts.  Now I'll get back to the game.

In a considerate way, John brought up that I have just violated one of the House Rules.  I used one small B-17E squadron and one small B-17D squadron at Chungking to target two small IJA units moving across open terrain SE of Changsha.  My purpose was to slow down these units.  I had totally forgotten that there is the House Rule prohibiting use of 4EB against troops in the open.  John handled it well.  I'll notify him that I'll stop and that we can re-do the turn if he wishes to.

That's one reason I hate House Rules.  While the rule may have a good purpose (to prevent the Allies from using 50 4EB to destroy enemy troops in the open), my use was reasonable and for an entirely different purpose.  So, while I violated the rule, I wasn't violating the spirit of the rule.  Meanwhile, John uses massed 2EB against Chinese in open terrain to totally obliterate them.  So, he keeps the rule, but violates the spirit of the rule (IMO).  I say this only because in China the Allies have an extremely limited ability to offer CAP to troops outside of the few major cities that have supply.  But Japan is free to bring the entire airforce against the Chinese.  Oh well, I'm not going to broach this with John (at least not now, as doing so would seem to be retaliatory for his invoking - properly, I hasten to add - the House Rule).

Now, I have a new turn in the box, so it's time to run it and see what's going on. 

Ah, but you see my dear Rebel, a 500lb bomb dropped from a two-engine aircraft is a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT animal than the same ordnance dropped from a four-engine plane. The temerity to not recognize the difference ! [:'(]

Down with House Rules!!! [;)]

[witpqs]

Thanks for chiming in on the potentially charged political question, gents.

One more thing about the main point. The sane side of the issue is, of course, the bit about following versus not following unlawful orders. That's very stark when it comes to some of the things this forum has dealt with (ie war crimes) and is just as real although less sexy and obvious when it comes to lesser things. The notion of arresting federal officials engaged in enforcing federal law sounds beyond even being 'out on a limb', though. I have heard of at least one case where a county sheriff informed a federal agency that its agents would be physically opposed/arrested if they again conducted an illegal seizing of property (meaning without a proper court order). But that was a matter of an administrative decision by an agency to seize and dispose of the property now (cattle) and let the matter languish in court for perhaps a decade while the family in question decided to incur financial ruin if it fought the legal battle. Facing the specter of a right-now up-front legal battle with a county sheriff stayed their hand. But that was a case where the law (including federal) favored the citizen, and the federal agency in question was clearly misbehaving.

Another big issue where this comes up is over legalizing certain uses of certain drugs. How many states have legalized medical marijuana, or perhaps even gone further. State, county, local officials are not (so far as I understand) required under the constitution to enforce federal laws. So they obey their state, etc. laws. Federal officials can and do prosecute some people who are (presumably) acting within the laws of the state where they are, on the grounds that they are violating federal laws that conflict with them. The legitimacy or illegitimacy of 'medical marijuana' is a different issue altogether.

Law enforcement in the US, as well as military, take an oath to protect, preserve and defend the Constitution.

So there really are multiple issues. First, federal laws that conflict with state laws. Sure federal laws take legal precedent, but many people will not be soothed by that fact. Second, federal laws that are seen (by an individual in question) to clearly be unconstitutional. Third, orders which are seen (by an individual in question) to clearly be unlawful.

My point here, of course, is about framing the issue. I have no magic solution that will make everybody happy.

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

4/15/42
 
Australia:  A patroling ASW ship near Lord Howe Island reports detection level of 4/4.  Can a Glen get a look that good or is this likely a CS or more?  I have 180 fighters at Melbourne, so my ships should be okay, but I'm keeping my carriers offshore until the situation resolves just a bit.  No sign of imminent activity in the Perth area.

DEI/Philippines:  The Allies still control Batavia, Manado, Clark Field and Bataan.  These should be extinquishes over the next couple of weeks.

India:  No signs - yet - of an imminent move on Ceylon, India or Assam.  Viz airfield goes to level three and will get a 75-level base force.  Most of the fighters are spread between Colombo, Madras and Calcutta.

China:  Fairly quiet today.  The Chinese have closed off the two road hexsides leading to the interior IJ base.  Those two 4EB squadrons didn't do much damage while breaking the House Rules - 3 B-17E disrupted two squads; two B-17D didn't do anything.  The besieged and isolated little Chinese army at Nanning held against a high odds shock attack and inflicted more casualties than they suffered.  I think I'll open a hexside tomorrow. 

Pacific:  Quiet.

Yes, but there is no guarantee the plane came from a sub! [:D]

[Canoerebel]

4/16/42
 
Today was a rough day redeemed by John's self-inflicted wounds. 
 
China in the Air:  I set up a snazzy little fighter ambush.  I guessed right - that John would focus his sweeps on Changsha while sending in mostly unescorted bombers to target my little army at his interior base.  So, I moved my P-40Es from Chungking to Changsha, set them at 100% LRCAP over the interior base (two hexes distant). This way, my fighter wouldn't contest the sweeps over Changsha but would get cracks at his unescorted bombers. Only it didn't work that way.  My "LRCAP" flew CAP over Changsha and got mangled by the sweeps - in fact, it looked like they performed extra poorly since they were set at LRCAP.  Meanwhile, essentially none of them flew the actual LRCAP mission.  So I lost a heckuva lot of good fighters for no purpose, other than to learn that such fancy configuring doesn't work well.  That's a lesson worth learning, I suppose.
 
China on the Ground:  I was feeling most glum over these events, but John made me feel better by engaging in two bad attacks.  A shock attack at Changsha cost him 135 squads destroyed and 150 disrupted (the Chinese lost about 7 with about an equal number disrupted).  Then, in the adjacent hex, an IJ deliberate attack cost Japan 100 squads destroyed and 225 disrupted.  The Chinese only lost 2 with 40 disrupted. John has five divisions in these two hexes.  They are really taking it on the chin and aren't going to be worth anything for a long time (since this is just one in a prolonged series of low odds attacks; the fact that John doesn't have a road open to either hex - meaning low supply I hope - is adding to his woes here.)
 
China Situation:  The Japanese are reinforceing the interior base by air, bringing in most of an infantry regiment and some support units.  I am hoping that the best John can do is to bring enough supply to make the base defensible but that his units won't have enough supply to go on the offensive.  If so, the Chinese will be fine.  John is reinforcing Changsha (which should be tantamount to reinforcing defeat) and he's trying to work something through the same gap to get to his interior base, but he doesn't have much to work with short term.  Over at Nanning, the Chinese managed to open one hexside and will get another in a day or two, so that crisis seems averted.  The Chinese are in the process of shifting perhaps 1500 AV from the Sian front (quite and secure) to the Chungking-and-then-forward front.  Overall, the Chinese position seems pretty good and likely to improve short and medium term.
 
Oz:  Part of the KB remains at Port Headland.  Nothing ominious around Melbourne/Sydney right now.
 
DEI:  Batavia finally falls (and I lose a USN sub that had disbanded in port there without asking me).
 
India:  No ominous developments yet.  You know John is going to use Port Blair and the opening created in the Bay of Bengal when he took it to raid India.  I will soon have Hornet, Indomitable and Formidable together and willing to take on any imprudently small carrier force (John's more likely to come fairly heavy than light, but you never know).
 
Pacific:  Quiet.  I've changed prep of a number of RCT at Hawaii to various destinations - some in the Aluetians and some in the Marshalls.  All over the map, the Allies are gearing up to be ready in case there's a chance to take the offensive without threat of the KB.  Prep for a variety of places will be good starting in about one month.  Prep for the Aleutians and Cocos Island are already good, though I have no short term plans of moving either way.

[obvert]

When I attack in China, I'm happy for equal losses of disabled squads, as I know Japan can bring enough supply to make them up quickly. I'm often ready again in another week with AV back to near the previous levels. The Chinese I've faced have not had the supply available to make up those disabled losses, so their AV goes continually down and their moral/fatigue keep going up.

Do you have enough supply to sustain these losses and keep rebuilding these frontline units?

[Canoerebel]

Right now, supply is mostly okay in China.  My units are in red some days, other days they draw supply fully.  I'd say two days out of four, most of my units are fully supplied.  Most of my base supply is low, of course. 
 
The problem for John is that he's had units engage in long series of attacks at poor odds, thus messing up many of his divisions, and many of these units are isolated or are drawing supply only through non-road hexsides.  So I don't think he's winning this war of attrition.  I think the Chinese are.  If he keeps it up, eventually he will weaken some troops enough that the Chinese may be able to break a seige here or there.  If that happens it may be like a snowball - because a success will free up units to move to the next vulernable point, and then the next, etc.  That's not guaranteed to happen, but if John doesn't change his ways it's likely.