Matt Atkinson -- Very interesting Ranger at the National Park Service talks

[Robertinfremont]

Who has been to Gettysburg national park? I have been there and found it very interesting. I located for your viewing pleasure videos of Ranger Matt Atkinson delivering talks as he and visitors explore the park battle sites. And he does it with humor. And watch how he involves the kids. Anyway, as he said, he came from the South and heard every taunt and insult imaginable. But nothing changes how it all happened.

This is but one of his talks. This one has to do with General Hancock. He also has a very good talk and hike at Little Round Top. That is where Gettysburg supposedly was made in the film but he explains where the filming really did happen. So you learn more than history of the battle.

Explore Ranger Atkinson's videos on youtube. I think it will be worth your effort.

 

[swing_voter]

Ken Burn's Civil War is pretty good


YouTube

 

[Irredentist]

Who has been to Gettysburg national park? I have been there and found it very interesting. I located for your viewing pleasure videos of Ranger Matt Atkinson delivering talks as he and visitors explore the park battle sites. And he does it with humor. And watch how he involves the kids. Anyway, as he said, he came from the South and heard every taunt and insult imaginable. But nothing changes how it all happened.

This is but one of his talks. This one has to do with General Hancock. He also has a very good talk and hike at Little Round Top. That is where Gettysburg supposedly was made in the film but he explains where the filming really did happen. So you learn more than history of the battle.

Explore Ranger Atkinson's videos on youtube. I think it will be worth your effort.

I've been to Gettysburg. It's a gorgeous area. I have an uncle who lives nearby and who is also a huge history buff, so he was kind enough to give us a tour. I particularly enjoyed the panorama.

As for the film, it's always been one of my favorites, and I like how it treats all of its characters fairly without demonizing anyone. Although in my personal opinion, the entire Gettysburg campaign was wasted effort on the part of Lee. None of its supposed goals were practically achievable, and it demonstrates how overrated Lee is as a general.

 

[Robertinfremont]

I've been to Gettysburg. It's a gorgeous area. I have an uncle who lives nearby and who is also a huge history buff, so he was kind enough to give us a tour. I particularly enjoyed the panorama.

As for the film, it's always been one of my favorites, and I like how it treats all of its characters fairly without demonizing anyone. Although in my personal opinion, the entire Gettysburg campaign was wasted effort on the part of Lee. None of its supposed goals were practically achievable, and it demonstrates how overrated Lee is as a general.

Lee came whiskers away from winning that battle.

Keep in mind that it was Lee's homeland that was invaded. And this effort was to stop waging war where his people lived and take it to Abe. Abe was an outlaw president who happened to win a war he commenced by invading VA. The deal at Sumter has been vastly overrated by those who favor Abe the Outlaw.

For example, at Little Round Top where the Maine group is lauded in film. Chamberlain was almost defeated there.

As I saw the layout when I was at Gettysburg Lee put too many of his men at great risk by open field warfare. Had he kept using the trees as cofer and fought a guerlla campaign, he had a chance to win. Also at the time communications on both sides were so slow that opportunities for both sides were curtailed.

Reading General Franks book when he conquered both Afghanistan and Iraq one key was instant communications and he always had a clear view of the entire battlefield. Men in combat carried computers which helped Franks know who was out there and where they were.

One thing that helped Chamberlain was his was a fixed position and he defended. But the troops confronting him were mobile and really in need of more speed to communicate movements. For a Confederate General to get orders to attack around dawn to finally attack at 3 in the afternoon is a good way to lose a war quickly.

 

[Robertinfremont]

I've been to Gettysburg. It's a gorgeous area. I have an uncle who lives nearby and who is also a huge history buff, so he was kind enough to give us a tour. I particularly enjoyed the panorama.

As for the film, it's always been one of my favorites, and I like how it treats all of its characters fairly without demonizing anyone. Although in my personal opinion, the entire Gettysburg campaign was wasted effort on the part of Lee. None of its supposed goals were practically achievable, and it demonstrates how overrated Lee is as a general.

Another treat for those who will go to Gettysburg is that nearby is the home Eisenhower retired to after he no longer was president. I agree the area is lovely.

Little mention is made of one more fact. Lee and Jefferson Davis did not always see eye to eye. Davis in his view was the better General than Lee was. And that produced tragic outcomes in a number of battles.

 

[Rexedgar]

Lee came whiskers away from winning that battle.

Keep in mind that it was Lee's homeland that was invaded. And this effort was to stop waging war where his people lived and take it to Abe. Abe was an outlaw president who happened to win a war he commenced by invading VA. The deal at Sumter has been vastly overrated by those who favor Abe the Outlaw.

For example, at Little Round Top where the Maine group is lauded in film. Chamberlain was almost defeated there.

As I saw the layout when I was at Gettysburg Lee put too many of his men at great risk by open field warfare. Had he kept using the trees as cofer and fought a guerlla campaign, he had a chance to win. Also at the time communications on both sides were so slow that opportunities for both sides were curtailed.

Reading General Franks book when he conquered both Afghanistan and Iraq one key was instant communications and he always had a clear view of the entire battlefield. Men in combat carried computers which helped Franks know who was out there and where they were.

One thing that helped Chamberlain was his was a fixed position and he defended. But the troops confronting him were mobile and really in need of more speed to communicate movements. For a Confederate General to get orders to attack around dawn to finally attack at 3 in the afternoon is a good way to lose a war quickly.

I’m only an amateur historian. I have read about and visited Gettysburg more than a few times. Chamberlains’ advantage was that his troops held the high ground and the Maine troops attacked the Alabamians downhill. Chamberlain and his troops actually left a “fixed position” to attack the advancing Southern troops.


I wasn’t aware that either Afghanistan or Iraq had been “conquered.”

 

[Oozlefinch]

Keep in mind that it was Lee's homeland that was invaded.

Uhhh, it was the other way around.

Gettysburg is deep inside Pennsylvania, with the intent to then continue Eastward, with Washington the ultimate goal if it had been successful. Just as had the Maryland Campaign the year before.

The Confederates never hesitated to invade Union territory, they simply lacked the manpower to do so other than in a few "all or nothing" attempts in which they either got their butts kicked, or limped away with a Pyrrhic Victory. Bull Run I and II (Manassas) was like that. They won both engagements, but their forces were so badly mauled and disorganized that they had to cancel their planed attempts to occupy Washington.

I admit, I always chuckle at those that are diehard believers in the "Lost Cause" fantasy.

 

[Oozlefinch]

I wasn’t aware that either Afghanistan or Iraq had been “conquered.”

Was the government in place still intact, and government forces still fighting?

There is a difference between "Conquered" and "Pacified", with far to many confusing the two.

During WWII, France was unquestionably "Conquered" by the Germans, but it was never really "Pacified".

 

[Rexedgar]

Was the government in place still intact, and government forces still fighting?

There is a difference between "Conquered" and "Pacified", with far to many confusing the two.

During WWII, France was unquestionably "Conquered" by the Germans, but it was never really "Pacified".

I’ma gonna stick with my post #6.

 

[Robertinfremont]

I’m only an amateur historian. I have read about and visited Gettysburg more than a few times. Chamberlains’ advantage was that his troops held the high ground and the Maine troops attacked the Alabamians downhill. Chamberlain and his troops actually left a “fixed position” to attack the advancing Southern troops.


I wasn’t aware that either Afghanistan or Iraq had been “conquered.”

A great site to visit. And so close to the Eisehower residence too. I missed it since it was closed for upkeep or ??

If you watch Atkinson videos, on little round top, he explains how close Chamberlain was to losing. Recall he ordered his men to fix bayonets? He was out of ammunition.

As to Franks conquering both Afghanistan and Iraq, forget the media, read his book and follow up with General Mike DeLong's book. Both books present the truth of both wars.

 

[Robertinfremont]

Uhhh, it was the other way around.

Gettysburg is deep inside Pennsylvania, with the intent to then continue Eastward, with Washington the ultimate goal if it had been successful. Just as had the Maryland Campaign the year before.

The Confederates never hesitated to invade Union territory, they simply lacked the manpower to do so other than in a few "all or nothing" attempts in which they either got their butts kicked, or limped away with a Pyrrhic Victory. Bull Run I and II (Manassas) was like that. They won both engagements, but their forces were so badly mauled and disorganized that they had to cancel their planed attempts to occupy Washington.

I admit, I always chuckle at those that are diehard believers in the "Lost Cause" fantasy.

I hear the term yet do not understand it at all. We discuss in details so many wars yet for this one war, some call it a fantasy.

We lost more human beings to combat in that one war I assure you it is no fantasy.

I spoke of Lee's homeland being invaded and you helped me by naming the first battle that Abe commenced, at so called Bull Run or close to the community called Manassas, VA.

Abe was not good at war. He fiddled around with too many officers to be called good.

As to the alleged mauling the Confederate troops took at Manassas, sir, it was the opposite. The reason they did not charge to invade DC was that never had been their intention. That would widen the war, not close it down as they saw things. Sure they would have been better off to cut the head off the snake but we know they kept to VA and did not go to DC. Where the snake was.

 

[Robertinfremont]

Was the government in place still intact, and government forces still fighting?

There is a difference between "Conquered" and "Pacified", with far to many confusing the two.

During WWII, France was unquestionably "Conquered" by the Germans, but it was never really "Pacified".

Both the government of Afghanistan who had been in charge, along with the Government of Iraq, also having been in charge, were removed by General Franks Ergo he won two wars.

 

[Rexedgar]

Uhhh, it was the other way around.

Gettysburg is deep inside Pennsylvania, with the intent to then continue Eastward, with Washington the ultimate goal if it had been successful. Just as had the Maryland Campaign the year before.

The Confederates never hesitated to invade Union territory, they simply lacked the manpower to do so other than in a few "all or nothing" attempts in which they either got their butts kicked, or limped away with a Pyrrhic Victory. Bull Run I and II (Manassas) was like that. They won both engagements, but their forces were so badly mauled and disorganized that they had to cancel their planed attempts to occupy Washington.

I admit, I always chuckle at those that are diehard believers in the "Lost Cause" fantasy.

Gettysburg is situated in Adams County, PA; hardly “deep in PA.”

View attachment 67277680

A great site to visit. And so close to the Eisehower residence too. I missed it since it was closed for upkeep or ??

If you watch Atkinson videos, on little round top, he explains how close Chamberlain was to losing. Recall he ordered his men to fix bayonets? He was out of ammunition.

As to Franks conquering both Afghanistan and Iraq, forget the media, read his book and follow up with General Mike DeLong's book. Both books present the truth of both wars.

View attachment 67277677

View attachment 67277678

Alexander didn’t get it done, the British Empire didn‘t get it done, the USSR didn’t get it done and I’m not seeing where we got it done......

 

[Robertinfremont]

Gettysburg is situated in Adams County, PA; hardly “deep in PA.”

View attachment 67277680




Alexander didn’t get it done, the British Empire didn‘t get it done, the USSR didn’t get it done and I’m not seeing where we got it done......

Oh, Brilliant Tommy Franks made use of the Afghans themselves and did not use his troops to conquer Afghanistan. '

The media hardly paid attention. Read his book please. It is a very good book.

Alexander did conquer Afghanistan. It is why he kept moving into India where he quit his advances.

Tommy Franks gave plenty of help but most was by Air. And he did have men of our military on the ground who handled guiding to targets for the most part. And they handed out millions of dollars to the Afghans who fought the Taliban. I guess what I am saying is Franks used Afghanis as mercanieries. The American media did a very lousy job reporting this war.

Not to trash the media but as I report here, Franks pressed into combat the major forces who were all Afghanis. So naturally our media was not imbedded with the Afghanis.

 

[Robertinfremont]

Gettysburg is situated in Adams County, PA; hardly “deep in PA.”

View attachment 67277680




Alexander didn’t get it done, the British Empire didn‘t get it done, the USSR didn’t get it done and I’m not seeing where we got it done......

One more thing to point out. You did not claim you read the two books. If you read both, you will feel as if you finally have the complete picture of both wars.

Oh, thank you for accurately pointing out that Gettysburg is not deep into PA but actually close to the southern edge, close to Harrisburg and Hershey PA. Three Mile Island is also in that area.

 

[Oozlefinch]

The reason they did not charge to invade DC was that never had been their intention.

I see, the 34,000+ soldiers who had been sent North and were just 25 miles from Washington were just out picking flowers.

 

[Tigerace117]

Lee came whiskers away from winning that battle.

Keep in mind that it was Lee's homeland that was invaded. And this effort was to stop waging war where his people lived and take it to Abe. Abe was an outlaw president who happened to win a war he commenced by invading VA. The deal at Sumter has been vastly overrated by those who favor Abe the Outlaw.

For example, at Little Round Top where the Maine group is lauded in film. Chamberlain was almost defeated there.

As I saw the layout when I was at Gettysburg Lee put too many of his men at great risk by open field warfare. Had he kept using the trees as cofer and fought a guerlla campaign, he had a chance to win. Also at the time communications on both sides were so slow that opportunities for both sides were curtailed.

Reading General Franks book when he conquered both Afghanistan and Iraq one key was instant communications and he always had a clear view of the entire battlefield. Men in combat carried computers which helped Franks know who was out there and where they were.

One thing that helped Chamberlain was his was a fixed position and he defended. But the troops confronting him were mobile and really in need of more speed to communicate movements. For a Confederate General to get orders to attack around dawn to finally attack at 3 in the afternoon is a good way to lose a war quickly.

There is no right to shoot at US soldiers.

The fact that you can’t grasp the importance of the Confederates firing the first shots is rather laughable. Shelling a US fort is an act of war. There wasn’t a country on earth which wouldn’t have treated it as such in 1860. Claiming that “gee, nobody was killed initially” is totally irrelevant; it’s still an act of war. The US was under no obligation to allow the Confederates(who, by the way, happily invaded both West Virginia and Kentucky) to try and murder US troops and do nothing about it.

“Almost” is irrelevant. Chamberlain’s troops kicked your slaver heroes’ asses, and then Lee got crushed once more when he hurled his troops forwards at Pickett’s Charge.

Lee didn’t have the ability to “fight a guerrilla campaign” in Pennsylvania. You can’t fight a guerrilla war in an area where none of the civilian populace supports you. That’s not even getting how the hell Lee was supposed to disperse his field army into groups small enough to conduct guerrilla warfare in the first place without it being crushed in detail. The idea frankly, is ludicrous.,

 

[Jredbaron96]

Went there last August with my dad. Gad a good time with a really great tour guide.

 

[Jredbaron96]

Reading General Franks book when he conquered both Afghanistan and Iraq one key was instant communications and he always had a clear view of the entire battlefield. Men in combat carried computers which helped Franks know who was out there and where they were.

General Franks had such great communication that he completely failed to stop Osama Bin Laden from escaping from Afghanistan and then bungled his duties in both Afghanistan and Iraq.

 

[Robertinfremont]

General Franks had such great communication that he completely failed to stop Osama Bin Laden from escaping from Afghanistan and then bungled his duties in both Afghanistan and Iraq.

That is flat not correct.

What is your source? But never mind, it is not true.

 

[Robertinfremont]

There is no right to shoot at US soldiers.

The fact that you can’t grasp the importance of the Confederates firing the first shots is rather laughable. Shelling a US fort is an act of war. There wasn’t a country on earth which wouldn’t have treated it as such in 1860. Claiming that “gee, nobody was killed initially” is totally irrelevant; it’s still an act of war. The US was under no obligation to allow the Confederates(who, by the way, happily invaded both West Virginia and Kentucky) to try and murder US troops and do nothing about it.

“Almost” is irrelevant. Chamberlain’s troops kicked your slaver heroes’ asses, and then Lee got crushed once more when he hurled his troops forwards at Pickett’s Charge.

Lee didn’t have the ability to “fight a guerrilla campaign” in Pennsylvania. You can’t fight a guerrilla war in an area where none of the civilian populace supports you. That’s not even getting how the hell Lee was supposed to disperse his field army into groups small enough to conduct guerrilla warfare in the first place without it being crushed in detail. The idea frankly, is ludicrous.,

Your actual case is that Abe the outlaw president hit the wrong state. That he had to arrive with troops in the Charleston port of South Carolina. But he did not do that.

Look you are free too to not see how Lee could have waged a guerrilla war. On that issue we have space. But the crap Abe owed the North a full fledged war over some chicken crap fort

is ludicrous. Abe wanted war.

 

[Tigerace117]

Your actual case is that Abe the outlaw president hit the wrong state. That he had to arrive with troops in the Charleston port of South Carolina. But he did not do that.

Look you are free too to not see how Lee could have waged a guerrilla war. On that issue we have space. But the crap Abe owed the North a full fledged war over some chicken crap fort

is ludicrous. Abe wanted war.

Lee absolutely could not have “waged guerrilla war” in Pennsylvania. Claiming he could have is delusional. There was no base for support for the Confederacy in Pennsylvania. The would be guerrillas would have been hunted down within days.

The “chicken crap fort” was still full of US soldiers. It is utterly irrelevant that you think it is “chicken crap”. Shooting at US soldiers on a US base is an act of war. And it was actually the South which never met a potential fight it didn’t love. Spain, Mexico, Great Britain; no amount of killing or potential killing was ever enough in order to keep slavery expanding.

Lincoln had no obligation to let the slaver terrorists try to murder US soldiers.

 

[Robertinfremont]

Lee absolutely could not have “waged guerrilla war” in Pennsylvania. Claiming he could have is delusional. There was no base for support for the Confederacy in Pennsylvania. The would be guerrillas would have been hunted down within days.

The “chicken crap fort” was still full of US soldiers. It is utterly irrelevant that you think it is “chicken crap”. Shooting at US soldiers on a US base is an act of war. And it was actually the South which never met a potential fight it didn’t love. Spain, Mexico, Great Britain; no amount of killing or potential killing was ever enough in order to keep slavery expanding.

Lincoln had no obligation to let the slaver terrorists try to murder US soldiers.

Had you studied the war, you would understand how many of the North hated what Abe did and did not give a **** about slaves. And of course they would help Lees forces had he pressed them to. Not all, but plenty of the north despised what Abe the outlaw pulled.

As to you whining about slavery, whine that 12 presidents owned slaves. Whine this nation was clearly founded on owning slaves. Whine that the South is right.

No troops so much as got a nick or scratch from the shelling. If you studied this, you would understand this conflict.

 

[Robertinfremont]

Went there last August with my dad. Gad a good time with a really great tour guide.

Glad you enjoyed it. I toured much more. I started at Manassas, VA and stuck to the path of Lee's final fight vs Grant up from DC to Appomattox. I later went to Gettysburg since I was staying at Hershey PA with my daughter and her husband.

 

[Robertinfremont]

I see, the 34,000+ soldiers who had been sent North and were just 25 miles from Washington were just out picking flowers.

If you mean the first fight at Manassas, which is where I spoke of, for the South it can be argued that the worst mistake they made was not carrying the fight from Manassas into DC trying to knock out the troops of the North. I doubt many of the North really wanted to fight anyhow. And the North contained a hell of a resistance movement to Abe the Outlaw president.