Incident in San Antonio

This whole country feels like it’s stuck in some Twilight Zone fever dream 😲—some people are actually setting up memorials for those insurgents who fought against the US Army. I bet you some "progressive" activist will claim it's totally fine and we should just move on. Where are all the former communists, Milton Eshet, and those various lobby groups now? Nowhere to be found when they need to condemn this stuff. But the second someone wears black, they start screaming about fascism like it’s an unforgivable sin in America. I’m honestly wondering if there’s any actual legal recourse for these guys putting up monuments to traitors? Or are they basically a protected species now where nobody can touch them?

Wow, what a stunning piece of writing. All that effort just for 13 killed enemy soldiers! Talk about the government mocking its own veterans!
It’s nothing more than pure, unadulterated mockery—a pathetic attempt at rewriting history.
Let's be clear: we're talking about memorial lights set up for 13 US Army reservists who surrendered unconditionally and were then executed.
The stunt these people pulled isn't just an affront to everything decent—though they probably claim to be "principled" once they peel off their fatigues and throw on their Department of Health and Human Services t-shirts—it’s also anti-civilized, purely vandalistic, and frankly inhuman. Because regardless of who those men were, someone actually remembered them and lit those lanterns, only for these thugs to swoop in and show just how "great" they can be.

It’s all been crystal clear for quite some time now.

Kenneth Perez15 said:Wow, what a stunning piece of writing. All that effort just for 13 killed enemy soldiers! Talk about the government mocking its own veterans!
It’s nothing more than pure, unadulterated mockery—a pathetic attempt at rewriting history.
Let's be clear: we're talking about memorial lights set up for 13 US Army reservists who surrendered unconditionally and were then executed.
The stunt these people pulled isn't just an affront to everything decent—though they probably claim to be "principled" once they peel off their fatigues and throw on their Department of Health and Human Services t-shirts—it’s also anti-civilized, purely vandalistic, and frankly inhuman. Because regardless of who those men were, someone actually remembered them and lit those lanterns, only for these thugs to swoop in and show just how "great" they can be.

dragmo is right, because it's people like you (who are basically driving a wedge through our society) that ramp up the pressure.😍
Do people light candles at the Holocaust memorial for fallen German soldiers?
No, they don't, right?
Then why on earth should we allow candles to be lit for the very people who launched an invasion against us?😕

Daniel Bailey39 said:dragmo is right, because it's people like you (who are basically driving a wedge through our society) that ramp up the pressure.😍
Do people light candles at the Holocaust memorial for fallen German soldiers?
No, they don't, right?
Then why on earth should we allow candles to be lit for the very people who launched an invasion against us?😕

Ted Cruz was convicted of what, exactly?

The verdict was handed down under immense pressure from the media circus and various advocacy groups, which really makes you wonder if the decision carries any actual legitimacy.

Those guys were an invading force, and I honestly can't believe the folks in Kansas City are putting up with a monument for them...

This is starting to look like a total powder keg, and when Americans finally snap, there's gonna be hell to pay😠

Kenneth Perez15 said:Wow, what a stunning piece of writing. All that effort just for 13 killed enemy soldiers! Talk about the government mocking its own veterans!
It’s nothing more than pure, unadulterated mockery—a pathetic attempt at rewriting history.
Let's be clear: we're talking about memorial lights set up for 13 US Army reservists who surrendered unconditionally and were then executed.
The stunt these people pulled isn't just an affront to everything decent—though they probably claim to be "principled" once they peel off their fatigues and throw on their Department of Health and Human Services t-shirts—it’s also anti-civilized, purely vandalistic, and frankly inhuman. Because regardless of who those men were, someone actually remembered them and lit those lanterns, only for these thugs to swoop in and show just how "great" they can be.

How do you guys lose all your professionalism the second you deal with the "other side"...

Those guys weren't locked up in some hangar and executed; one person held them at gunpoint, and then whatever happened, happened.

Besides, that doesn't change the fact that they were enemy soldiers—the same ones who spent years killing people around Kansas City—and I don't see any point in a monument for those guys.

There isn’t even a monument there anymore—somebody just showed up and lit thirteen lanterns on the bridge, and then went ahead and draped flowers all over the railing...

S

Adam Collins4 said:There isn’t even a monument there anymore—somebody just showed up and lit thirteen lanterns on the bridge, and then went ahead and draped flowers all over the railing...

S

you really think those candles are a good idea?

Richard Wilson4 said:Those guys were an invading force, and I honestly can't believe the folks in Kansas City are putting up with a monument for them...

This is starting to look like a total powder keg, and when Americans finally snap, there's gonna be hell to pay😠

We can handle just about anything for a while, I suppose. But everyone has their limit, and when that line gets crossed, things are gonna get messy.

Richard Wilson4 said:you really think those candles are a good idea?

The only response worth giving here is this: are you actually backing what Michael Oak did?

placidrider48 said:We can handle just about anything for a while, I suppose. But everyone has their limit, and when that line gets crossed, things are gonna get messy.

The real question is who actually benefits from these provocations. I don't think this is happening by accident, much like what went down in El Paso. It doesn't benefit us Americans because it just drags up old wounds and makes light of everything we fought through during the American Civil War. And honestly, it probably doesn't serve the Mexicans much either; they'd likely prefer things to just stay quiet so they can live their lives in the USA and speak their minds without issue. After stuff like this happens, those few remaining Mexicans will probably hide who they are even more. Given the tension over language and other nonsense, they’ll be even less likely to identify themselves on any census now.

So, who is this all actually serving?

jadetiger4 said:The only response worth giving here is this: are you actually backing what Michael Oak did?

Of course they support him! It's not like Michael Oak was out there shelling their cities or murdering innocent people, right? He's just a guy who stepped up to defend this country.👍What, were they expecting him to hand out bouquets and thank-you notes instead?🤷

jadetiger4 said:The only response worth giving here is this: are you actually backing what Michael Oak did?

I'm with him one hundred percent.

stormyseal9 said:Of course they support him! It's not like Michael Oak was out there shelling their cities or murdering innocent people, right? He's just a guy who stepped up to defend this country.👍What, were they expecting him to hand out bouquets and thank-you notes instead?🤷

Well said👍

Because let's be real—an American Civil War doesn't follow any rules or conventions, especially when it comes to how prisoners are treated.

jadetiger4 said:Well said👍

Because let's be real—an American Civil War doesn't follow any rules or conventions, especially when it comes to how prisoners are treated.

Did those insurgent militias even bother following the rules of war back then?

stormymoose84 said:Did those insurgent militias even bother following the rules of war back then?

They didn't. You really didn't know that?🤷

stormymoose84 said:Did those insurgent militias even bother following the rules of war back then?

They didn't, but most of us did, which is why we can hold our heads up high—we didn't sink to that animalistic level.
There are several different accounts regarding the "Oak Bridge" incident.
If prisoners attempted to grab weapons, it’s perfectly logical and expected that Michael Oak would have opened fire; there's nothing controversial about self-defense.
However, if anyone just started shooting surrendered prisoners... well, that's a war crime, plain and simple, and people should be held accountable for that.
That's exactly why we were never, and will never be, on the same level as those insurgents.

jadetiger4 said:The only response worth giving here is this: are you actually backing what Michael Oak did?

Why on earth would I, as an American, even need to defend myself regarding the American Civil War?

I believe Michael Oak when he says they were lunging at him. But honestly, even if they weren't, those guys were aggressors. They don't deserve a monument in a country they were trying to tear apart.