"betrayed from 'our' own ranks" and you still call for "unity"????
Any military historian will point out that the winner of most conflicts are those who use what is their strength against their opponent's weakness. The USA government is acknowledged to have nearly unlimited resources and a highly organized (unified) military. Individual citizens will never match that level of "unity" and should not even try!! The first reason why they should not even try is because UNITY IS NOT THEIR STRENGTH!! Diversity is their strength. The book Unintended Consequences is FULLY AWARE of this fact and utilizes it for its plot development. Sam Houston was greatly outnumbered by Santa Anna. Houston won because he understood his own strength and Santa Anna's weakness and Houston chose when and where to engage his numerically superior enemy. Please spare us the pleas for some vague and untenable concept called "unity". --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "goat!" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > All I can say is at the time, I tried to make it so, > but couldn't get any unity. We came close, to getting > some sort of unity, but were betrayed from "our" own ranks. > I think by LT. > Goat > > Curt Howland wrote: > > > > > Yep. The feds were perfectly safe, no one taking shots at them from > > the surrounding terrain. > > > > The lesson of the Redcoat's long, deadly march back to Boston > > after "winning" in Concord has been lost. Maybe that's why it isn't > > taught in government school. > > > > >
