Fighting Men

Yeah, I'm not accusing one side over the other, this is meant as a non-partisan view of this (longstanding) and disturbing practise.
Just meant as in this thread it's used in connection to try to describe one as "psychopathic", never mind that those who killed him posed his body as a "trophy", drug the body up down the street behind a horse, cut off a finger to steal a gold ring, decapitated his head to stick on telegraph post, then later union troops find flowers on his grave, so trample the gravesite with horses and urinate on the grave, would seem his enemies exhibited "psychopathic" behavior as well if one wishes to apply the term to wartime. They clearly had a lack of empathy for their enemies as well.

Personally I maintain as often as it has happened in our history, and that the majority can go back to normal civilian lives postwar, the actions conducted during war most often do not reflect any severe psychological personality traits, or they would all become serial killers postwar if it indeed was some permanent personality trait..........
 
It would appear that Q and A forgot that there was a war which was occuring around them and would not set aside this penny anti differences.If these partisans in would have been lead by a man skilled in this warfare and could have had the respect of his men and been dedicated to the Confederate cause or had a cause in common instead of a force of revivals and those seeking vandeators against the past .Quantrill while at times successful leader he failed to maintain this primary respect and dedication of the ones he should have and needed.No general officer would have allowed anyone to threaten his command,Removal of the disease or risk the body becoming infected. Either
by subtle means or demonstrate that this challenge would not be tolerated;Spartacus as with Quantrill ,allowed his forces to be divided.What could he had accomplished against the Romans with that force ?What could Quantrill done in that theater with Anderson force?
In insurgency warfare there is always going to be various splits among the insurgents. It is far from easy for any insurgent group to stay united.
We can't know what would of occurred if Quantrell offed Anderson but a revenge killing is not out of the question.
Highly doubtful that at the end of the day even a unitied Confederate guerrilla force in Missouri would of made much difference in the outcome of the Union counterinsurgency campaign which ultimately was successful.
Leftyhunter
 
Just meant as in this thread it's used in connection to try to describe one as "psychopathic", never mind that those who killed him posed his body as a "trophy", drug the body up down the street behind a horse, cut off a finger to steal a gold ring, decapitated his head to stick on telegraph post, then later union troops find flowers on his grave, so trample the gravesite with horses and urinate on the grave, would seem his enemies exhibited "psychopathic" behavior as well if one wishes to apply the term to wartime. They clearly had a lack of empathy for their enemies as well.

Nothing wrong with aPersonally I maintain as often as it has happened in our history, and that the majority can go back to normal civilian lives postwar, the actions conducted during war most often do not reflect any severe psychological personality traits, or they would all become serial killers postwar if it indeed was some permanent personality trait..........
Nothing wrong with a little light hearted fun.
Leftyhunter
 
Nothing wrong with a little light hearted fun.
Leftyhunter
Have really no idea what that means or what you consider "lighthearted fun". But whatever it is, guess would have acknowledge each side would be as susceptible and entitled to the "light hearted fun"........so one then one couldn't condemn anyone for the very behavior you discount as "light hearted fun", after all you just defined it as simply "light hearted fun"

I certainly recognize both sides did the same things, so dont condemn one over the other for the same behavior. Would seem rather hypocritical to do so.
 
Last edited:
Have really no idea what that means or what you consider "lighthearted fun". But whatever it is, guess would have acknowledge each side would be as susceptible and entitled to the "light hearted fun"........so one then one couldn't condemn anyone for the very behavior you discount as "light hearted fun", after all you just defined it as simply "light hearted fun"

I certainly recognize both sides did the same things, so dont condemn one over the other for the same behavior. Would seem rather hypocritical to do so.
Yeah, when I was writing the op I was thinking to get away from old partisan rankles. Being a Brit means I have no axe to grind, one way or another.
 
Yeah, when I was writing the op I was thinking to get away from old partisan rankles. Being a Brit means I have no axe to grind, one way or another.
I feel the same as a Midwesterner, who had family on both sides as well :bounce:

Not everyone in the US identifies as Northern or Southern, plenty of mid-westerners and westerners
 
Last edited:
Well, I can't say much about that aspect of fighting when I have an ancestor who wore a necklace made of the bow fingers of his enemies, and another who kept a pile of skulls outside his lodge! Souvenirs never came into it - it was a spiritual matter. (Although if one goes back and digs up one's enemies - all fifteen of them - just to strew their bones all over, I'd have to figure there was more than one screw loose...Yep, that was my skull collecting ancestor again! :x3:)
 
Well, I can't say much about that aspect of fighting when I have an ancestor who wore a necklace made of the bow fingers of his enemies, and another who kept a pile of skulls outside his lodge! Souvenirs never came into it - it was a spiritual matter. (Although if one goes back and digs up one's enemies - all fifteen of them - just to strew their bones all over, I'd have to figure there was more than one screw loose...Yep, that was my skull collecting ancestor again! :x3:)
That, Diane, is an outstanding anecdote! A bit of ghoulush and a bit of undying anger. I dunno about having a loose screw. I think the screw was entirely missing!
 
That, Diane, is an outstanding anecdote! A bit of ghoulush and a bit of undying anger. I dunno about having a loose screw. I think the screw was entirely missing!

We've wondered! This was a seven foot tall Catawba eagle warrior who was fighting traditional enemies, the Cherokees. They'd captured him and he'd killed the entire party of 15. They buried their warriors and he came back to do what he did, so they sent a party of 25 after him. One day a few greats granddad appeared on a hill yelling insults at them, then turned around and mooned them! Well! So, they went after him and he killed all but two of them. The Cherokees gave up then - go on home and leave us alone! (Eagle warriors were like berserkers to the Vikings - more than a couple tacos short of a combo plate...)
 
We've wondered! This was a seven foot tall Catawba eagle warrior who was fighting traditional enemies, the Cherokees. They'd captured him and he'd killed the entire party of 15. They buried their warriors and he came back to do what he did, so they sent a party of 25 after him. One day a few greats granddad appeared on a hill yelling insults at them, then turned around and mooned them! Well! So, they went after him and he killed all but two of them. The Cherokees gave up then - go on home and leave us alone! (Eagle warriors were like berserkers to the Vikings - more than a couple tacos short of a combo plate...)
So he basically took out their shock troops. Outstanding!
I wonder how he learned to fight like that.
Also somewhat comedic. You write well.
 
So he basically took out their shock troops. Outstanding!
I wonder how he learned to fight like that.
Also somewhat comedic. You write well.

They had a few warrior societies that trained all the time for war...because there was always a war. If the Cherokees got boring, they would take the war path (a literal path for just that purpose) up to New York to pick on the Iroquois. They would run all the way from South Carolina up to New York chanting, "We're coming to kill you! We're coming to kill you!" :laugh: The Catawba in particular were considered to be excellent and highly desirable auxiliaries, and George Washington had a company of Catawba rangers with him during the Revolution. They were the seed for the current Army Rangers.
 
They had a few warrior societies that trained all the time for war...because there was always a war. If the Cherokees got boring, they would take the war path (a literal path for just that purpose) up to New York to pick on the Iroquois. They would run all the way from South Carolina up to New York chanting, "We're coming to kill you! We're coming to kill you!" :laugh: The Catawba in particular were considered to be excellent and highly desirable auxiliaries, and George Washington had a company of Catawba rangers with him during the Revolution. They were the seed for the current Army Rangers.
Wow, you know so much interesting stuff. I love interesting stuff!
 
50th Pennsylvania

Iron Brigade

John Hunt Morgans Cavalry

26th North Carolina


Just to name a few...

I like the story of when the Iron Brigade met the Stonewall Brigade at Brawner's Farm - very good fight indeed. The Iron Brigade was having this fight under a brand new commander, John Gibbons, when their beloved commander Rufus King went down with epilepsy right before the battle. Thomas Jackson commanded the Stonewall Brigade. When it was over, both knew they'd been in a fight, that's for sure. Later, they met again at Gettysburg. "It's them black hat fellers," muttered one rebel!

Another feared fighting unit was the 7th Tennessee, usually under Forrest's direct command. The 7th Tennessee USA had a feared reputation, too. They positively hated each other. One day...the 7th Tennessee CSA met the 7th Tennessee USA! The US one was commanded by Hawkins, the CSA one by Duckworth - however...Forrest was personally present. He rode down the line and addressed the men: "Over yonder is the 7th Tennessee USA. If you don't whip them, never come back here!" Forrest's presence on the field had significant results. Hawkins was sent a surrender note by Duckworth - through his binoculars he saw Forrest...and he promptly surrendered. His men actually cried - they wanted at least a swing at 'em! All of them refused to serve under Hawkins again.
 

Learn About Us
About CivilWarTalk
Contact the Webmaster
Meet the Staff
Link to CivilWarTalk
Join Our Community
Register
Browse Forums
View Today's Discussions
Search the Forum
Get Help
FAQ
Student Guide
Forum Rules & Etiquette
Copyright / DMCA

     Contact Us CivilwarTalk on Facebook CivilWarTalk on YouTube CivilWarTalk on Twitter RSS Feed

Bringing the American Civil War and More to Life.
© 1999 - , CIVILWARTALK, LLC - Site Version 10.0

SlaveryTalk.com - SecessionTalk.com - CivilWarTalk.com - ReconstructionTalk.com
Back
Top