(Untitled)

May 10, 2010 06:15

rambles, history

Leave a comment

Comments 19

pridefall May 10 2010, 13:27:37 UTC
I would take a class by you.

Reply

precto May 10 2010, 23:01:26 UTC
I would love to finish getting my degree and start teaching.

Reply

pridefall May 10 2010, 23:31:49 UTC
do it do it do it.

Reply


(The comment has been removed)

precto May 10 2010, 23:02:09 UTC
The more you know!

Reply


newcenturysace May 10 2010, 17:47:34 UTC
This is pretty much 100% correct. I love history, this is a totally awesome post.

I will say that American muskets themselves where somewhat more accurate at a longer range thanks to a minor technical improvement- They also took somewhat longer to reload, and American militia men had very little training in how to use them, which significantly reduced their advantage such that shot by shot, it didn't ultimately help all that very much.

Reply

precto May 10 2010, 23:09:08 UTC
Some had Kentucky Rifles, which in the right hands were awesome but after forty or so shots, needed to be cleaned. Which was obviously bad in open battle.

Thankfully, Brown Bess muskets and the French variant were in large enough quantities that they could be used by the average person. But they lacked rear sights.

Reply

newcenturysace May 10 2010, 23:20:33 UTC
Pretty much this, yes. That and their load time made them pretty terrible for any sort of normal campaign. They really where a few tens of yards more accurate, and that with the myth that the entire war was fought with guerrilla tactics is probably where the "Americans where expert marksmen" myth came from, though.

In it's own way, this contributes its own additional disadvantage- The American's equipment was by and large 'whatever they could get', which makes organization among troops even more challenging than usual.

I've noticed that people really don't understand just how poorly the American army fared before the French stepped in and helped us organize and contributed any degree of actual military experience. Which makes me laugh because of how much most Americans today seem to dislike the French.

Reply

precto May 10 2010, 23:25:43 UTC
It makes me laugh that when fights closed to melee range, American soldiers were specifically taught to rip British guns out of their hands because none of the Americans had bayonets.

And yeah, the only two generals who actually did fairly decently without the French were Benedict Arnold (before his turning traitor) and Nathaniel Greene. Two of the most underrated people in the American Revolution.

Reply


gonsai May 10 2010, 19:59:31 UTC
Tell that to Glenn Beck.

/watched an episode where he sucked off Washington's historical cock for half an hour and was so distracted I forgot to change the channel.

Reply

precto May 10 2010, 23:00:43 UTC
Don't get me started on my burning rage for that man and his inability to accurately portray anything.

Reply

gonsai May 10 2010, 23:03:33 UTC
Oh please do! I love hearing people fill him with verbal holes.

Reply

precto May 10 2010, 23:06:45 UTC
Let's just say

myself and the majority of my IRL friends are mostly conservative (more liberal socially)

and we all hate Fox News programs with a passion.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up