Preserve more American Civil War sites?

[whitehall]

People tend to have a knee-jerk reaction to the word "preserve". They automatically want things to be preserved because, well just because. They don't care about what it takes to "preserve" an old shack or an overgrown field that Stonewall Jackson might have rode across. All the major CW sites have been preserved. As a matter of fact they have been preserved behind chain link fences and armed guards. Imagine if they decided to "preserve" every plot of land in Europe that had some military conflict. Everything would be fenced in.

I toured six Civil War battlefields last month and they are not behind chain link fences and armed guards. Too many people tour Gettysburg and assume that all Civil War battlefields are that way.

When I toured the battlefield of Second Manassas the battle sights are interspersed with private homes and businesses. You pull off the road where there is a sign and you realize Union forces moved through this guys backyard and that gas station

Fredericksburg is a wonderful site as you stand where Lee had his artillery and walk along the refurbished sunken road. However, the field that union troops fought an died over has long since been consumed by buildings and homes. I don't see why anyone would want to live on ground that was full of thousands of dead and dying brave Union Soldiers

Chancellorsville is fully developed by local homes and you move about trying to figure out what it possibly could have looked like in 1863. The site where Stonewall Jackson was shot is now a major highway. His monument is hidden behind the visitor center

The house where Stonewall Jackson died is well preserved. But the area around the house is a deserted rail yard and industrial zone

While taking the guided tour at First Manassas, my son, who had seen the Ken Burns documentary asked where Wilmer McClains house was. The ranger told him it was about a mile away and was now a CVS parking lot

Not all of the Civil War sites are major battlefields. But to hundreds of towns and villiages, they represent their heritage. Small skirmishes that killed a few dozen men, but contributed to the larger war effort

I used to live in fredericksburg and spotsylvania and mannasas. The history there is pretty amazing. Did you get to see the church in Fredericksburg with the cannon ball still embedded in the brick. That really brings it home.

You are right, the people of those area would probably fight another civil war to keep their battle fields. I remember when they wanted to build a Walmart on a site where George Washington spent time living as a young man near Fredericksburg. That did not go over very well and the Walmart go moved a few miles down the road.

I don't believe there is a chance in hell that Walmart is going to take over an existing CW battlefield park or structure. Some mysterious faction wants a $1.50 donation because they tell us that CW sites are being "lost" at an acre an hour. It ain't true (maybe they have the CW mixed up with the Rain forrest) but History Channel celebrities say it's so. I agree that if you want to "preserve" any historic site go ahead and buy it but don't expect to use taxpayer money to maintain it. It's unclear what the mission of the $1.50 people is or who is behind it. I can't find anything on the internet.

 

[rightwinger]

I toured six Civil War battlefields last month and they are not behind chain link fences and armed guards. Too many people tour Gettysburg and assume that all Civil War battlefields are that way.

When I toured the battlefield of Second Manassas the battle sights are interspersed with private homes and businesses. You pull off the road where there is a sign and you realize Union forces moved through this guys backyard and that gas station

Fredericksburg is a wonderful site as you stand where Lee had his artillery and walk along the refurbished sunken road. However, the field that union troops fought an died over has long since been consumed by buildings and homes. I don't see why anyone would want to live on ground that was full of thousands of dead and dying brave Union Soldiers

Chancellorsville is fully developed by local homes and you move about trying to figure out what it possibly could have looked like in 1863. The site where Stonewall Jackson was shot is now a major highway. His monument is hidden behind the visitor center

The house where Stonewall Jackson died is well preserved. But the area around the house is a deserted rail yard and industrial zone

While taking the guided tour at First Manassas, my son, who had seen the Ken Burns documentary asked where Wilmer McClains house was. The ranger told him it was about a mile away and was now a CVS parking lot

Not all of the Civil War sites are major battlefields. But to hundreds of towns and villiages, they represent their heritage. Small skirmishes that killed a few dozen men, but contributed to the larger war effort

I used to live in fredericksburg and spotsylvania and mannasas. The history there is pretty amazing. Did you get to see the church in Fredericksburg with the cannon ball still embedded in the brick. That really brings it home.

You are right, the people of those area would probably fight another civil war to keep their battle fields. I remember when they wanted to build a Walmart on a site where George Washington spent time living as a young man near Fredericksburg. That did not go over very well and the Walmart go moved a few miles down the road.

I don't believe there is a chance in hell that Walmart is going to take over an existing CW battlefield park or structure. Some mysterious faction wants a $1.50 donation because they tell us that CW sites are being "lost" at an acre an hour. It ain't true (maybe they have the CW mixed up with the Rain forrest) but History Channel celebrities say it's so. I agree that if you want to "preserve" any historic site go ahead and buy it but don't expect to use taxpayer money to maintain it. It's unclear what the mission of the $1.50 people is or who is behind it. I can't find anything on the internet.

Those battlefields are our heritage. If The History Chanel wants to use the 150th anniversary of the Civil War to raise awareness and protect these landmarks....I applaud them

 

[ginscpy]

I been to Gettysburg and Manassas Civil War battlefields.

Town of Gettysburg wouldn't impress anyone.

 

[whitehall]

I used to live in fredericksburg and spotsylvania and mannasas. The history there is pretty amazing. Did you get to see the church in Fredericksburg with the cannon ball still embedded in the brick. That really brings it home.

You are right, the people of those area would probably fight another civil war to keep their battle fields. I remember when they wanted to build a Walmart on a site where George Washington spent time living as a young man near Fredericksburg. That did not go over very well and the Walmart go moved a few miles down the road.

I don't believe there is a chance in hell that Walmart is going to take over an existing CW battlefield park or structure. Some mysterious faction wants a $1.50 donation because they tell us that CW sites are being "lost" at an acre an hour. It ain't true (maybe they have the CW mixed up with the Rain forrest) but History Channel celebrities say it's so. I agree that if you want to "preserve" any historic site go ahead and buy it but don't expect to use taxpayer money to maintain it. It's unclear what the mission of the $1.50 people is or who is behind it. I can't find anything on the internet.

Those battlefields are our heritage. If The History Chanel wants to use the 150th anniversary of the Civil War to raise awareness and protect these landmarks....I applaud them

Are you paying attention to the issue Norton or have you been inhaling methane again? The CW battlefields are well funded federal sites and important to the tourist agenda of the states they are in. There is no crisis unless it is in the minds of the bi-polar libs who enjoy the tourist dollars but want to arrest a citizen for displaying the Confederate flag. The H.C isn't involved in the $1.50donation (scam?) but they are promoting it. America is not "losing an acre of Civil War sites per hour. It's a dishonest message and the source of the 1.50 fund is still obscure.

 

[rightwinger]

I don't believe there is a chance in hell that Walmart is going to take over an existing CW battlefield park or structure. Some mysterious faction wants a $1.50 donation because they tell us that CW sites are being "lost" at an acre an hour. It ain't true (maybe they have the CW mixed up with the Rain forrest) but History Channel celebrities say it's so. I agree that if you want to "preserve" any historic site go ahead and buy it but don't expect to use taxpayer money to maintain it. It's unclear what the mission of the $1.50 people is or who is behind it. I can't find anything on the internet.

Those battlefields are our heritage. If The History Chanel wants to use the 150th anniversary of the Civil War to raise awareness and protect these landmarks....I applaud them

Are you paying attention to the issue Norton or have you been inhaling methane again? The CW battlefields are well funded federal sites and important to the tourist agenda of the states they are in. There is no crisis unless it is in the minds of the bi-polar libs who enjoy the tourist dollars but want to arrest a citizen for displaying the Confederate flag. The H.C isn't involved in the $1.50donation (scam?) but they are promoting it. America is not "losing an acre of Civil War sites per hour. It's a dishonest message and the source of the 1.50 fund is still obscure.

If you bothered to read your own thread, I was at many of the battlefields last month. Some are in good shape, some are a mess and have allowed infringement of the community onto the battlefields. No, they are not self supporting and the federal government can't buy up critical land and yes, you are acting like a childish moron
Not every battlefield is Gettysburg or Antietam

 

[del]

The History Channel sponsored, "American Pickers" claim that "Civil War sites are being lost to construction at the rate of an acre per hour". The figure seems exaggerated. They want Americans to donate a couple of bucks "to preserve Civil War sites"'. The US seems to be bi-polar these days when it comes to the Civil War heritage. One faction says that Southern Americans should be arrested for flying the Confederate flag while they make money from the tourism that the Civil War generates. How much Civil War acerage should we preserve? We have every major battlefield fenced in and patrolled by Federal Police. Believe me if you pick up a mini ball in a federal park you will spend the night in the slammer if the Cops catch you. If they preserved every acre in Europe that was fought over they would have the whole place fenced in. Enough is enough. Visit Gettysburg or Antitam and quit whining about preserving every place that Civil War troops ever visited.

keep your buck and a half.

stop whining

thanks

 

[whitehall]

The History Channel sponsored, "American Pickers" claim that "Civil War sites are being lost to construction at the rate of an acre per hour". The figure seems exaggerated. They want Americans to donate a couple of bucks "to preserve Civil War sites"'. The US seems to be bi-polar these days when it comes to the Civil War heritage. One faction says that Southern Americans should be arrested for flying the Confederate flag while they make money from the tourism that the Civil War generates. How much Civil War acerage should we preserve? We have every major battlefield fenced in and patrolled by Federal Police. Believe me if you pick up a mini ball in a federal park you will spend the night in the slammer if the Cops catch you. If they preserved every acre in Europe that was fought over they would have the whole place fenced in. Enough is enough. Visit Gettysburg or Antitam and quit whining about preserving every place that Civil War troops ever visited.

keep your buck and a half.

stop whining

thanks

Here's the deal feather face. Either engage in the discussion or take your pecker somewhere else.

 

[del]

The History Channel sponsored, "American Pickers" claim that "Civil War sites are being lost to construction at the rate of an acre per hour". The figure seems exaggerated. They want Americans to donate a couple of bucks "to preserve Civil War sites"'. The US seems to be bi-polar these days when it comes to the Civil War heritage. One faction says that Southern Americans should be arrested for flying the Confederate flag while they make money from the tourism that the Civil War generates. How much Civil War acerage should we preserve? We have every major battlefield fenced in and patrolled by Federal Police. Believe me if you pick up a mini ball in a federal park you will spend the night in the slammer if the Cops catch you. If they preserved every acre in Europe that was fought over they would have the whole place fenced in. Enough is enough. Visit Gettysburg or Antitam and quit whining about preserving every place that Civil War troops ever visited.

keep your buck and a half.

stop whining

thanks

Here's the deal feather face. Either engage in the discussion or take your pecker somewhere else.

i did.

you're whining again.

thanks

 

[whitehall]

keep your buck and a half.

stop whining

thanks

Here's the deal feather face. Either engage in the discussion or take your pecker somewhere else.

i did.

you're whining again.

thanks

It ain't whining if you are right (and funny). It's only whining if you are unhappy and stuck for something to say. You can't seem to please the notorious left wing illustrated by Ed Norton (and bird face). He just keeps posting drivel unrelated to the topic but even drivel is better than bird droppings.

 

[rightwinger]

Here's the deal feather face. Either engage in the discussion or take your pecker somewhere else.

i did.

you're whining again.

thanks

It ain't whining if you are right (and funny). It's only whining if you are unhappy and stuck for something to say. You can't seem to please the notorious left wing illustrated by Ed Norton (and bird face). He just keeps posting drivel unrelated to the topic but even drivel is better than bird droppings.

OK.....we get your reason for starting the thread

Don't send money to protect battlefields....the Government is doing it

Glad to see you out there protecting peoples $1.50

Lame

 

[whitehall]

Those battlefields are our heritage. If The History Chanel wants to use the 150th anniversary of the Civil War to raise awareness and protect these landmarks....I applaud them

Are you paying attention to the issue Norton or have you been inhaling methane again? The CW battlefields are well funded federal sites and important to the tourist agenda of the states they are in. There is no crisis unless it is in the minds of the bi-polar libs who enjoy the tourist dollars but want to arrest a citizen for displaying the Confederate flag. The H.C isn't involved in the $1.50donation (scam?) but they are promoting it. America is not "losing an acre of Civil War sites per hour. It's a dishonest message and the source of the 1.50 fund is still obscure.

If you bothered to read your own thread, I was at many of the battlefields last month. Some are in good shape, some are a mess and have allowed infringement of the community onto the battlefields. No, they are not self supporting and the federal government can't buy up critical land and yes, you are acting like a childish moron
Not every battlefield is Gettysburg or Antietam

Here's the deal RW, first of all it's hard to argue with someone who fakes his internet name. You certainly aren't a "right winger" so what's the point? A sick joke or a genuine effort to camouflage the issues? I seriously doubt your opinion of "infringement of communities" on state or federal "battlefields". It just isn't happening. What is behind the effort to encourage Americans to donate to preserve "new" CW sites which are alleged to be disappearing at a rate equal to the alleged burning of "rain forests".

 

[rightwinger]

Are you paying attention to the issue Norton or have you been inhaling methane again? The CW battlefields are well funded federal sites and important to the tourist agenda of the states they are in. There is no crisis unless it is in the minds of the bi-polar libs who enjoy the tourist dollars but want to arrest a citizen for displaying the Confederate flag. The H.C isn't involved in the $1.50donation (scam?) but they are promoting it. America is not "losing an acre of Civil War sites per hour. It's a dishonest message and the source of the 1.50 fund is still obscure.

If you bothered to read your own thread, I was at many of the battlefields last month. Some are in good shape, some are a mess and have allowed infringement of the community onto the battlefields. No, they are not self supporting and the federal government can't buy up critical land and yes, you are acting like a childish moron
Not every battlefield is Gettysburg or Antietam

Here's the deal RW, first of all it's hard to argue with someone who fakes his internet name. You certainly aren't a "right winger" so what's the point? A sick joke or a genuine effort to camouflage the issues? I seriously doubt your opinion of "infringement of communities" on state or federal "battlefields". It just isn't happening. What is behind the effort to encourage Americans to donate to preserve "new" CW sites which are alleged to be disappearing at a rate equal to the alleged burning of "rain forests".

How many civil war battlefields have you been to? Let me know and we can compare notes on how well they are preserved

 

[whitehall]

If you bothered to read your own thread, I was at many of the battlefields last month. Some are in good shape, some are a mess and have allowed infringement of the community onto the battlefields. No, they are not self supporting and the federal government can't buy up critical land and yes, you are acting like a childish moron
Not every battlefield is Gettysburg or Antietam

Here's the deal RW, first of all it's hard to argue with someone who fakes his internet name. You certainly aren't a "right winger" so what's the point? A sick joke or a genuine effort to camouflage the issues? I seriously doubt your opinion of "infringement of communities" on state or federal "battlefields". It just isn't happening. What is behind the effort to encourage Americans to donate to preserve "new" CW sites which are alleged to be disappearing at a rate equal to the alleged burning of "rain forests".

How many civil war battlefields have you been to? Let me know and we can compare notes on how well they are preserved

Are you kidding? I live in the Shenandoah Valley. How many CW fans have visited New Market where VMI cadets helped defeat the Union army? I often pass the battlefield off 81 north of Harrisonburg and it is maintained in pristine condition. Appomattox is a great tourist attraction and the last time I visited they had an active archeology project going on. When I used to travel to the coast I passed "The Wilderness" and it was well maintained. The last time I visited Manassas it was in good shape. The point is that all the battlefields are well maintained. The "1.50" donation scam doesn't claim to restore old battlefields. It makes the incredible claim that "we are losing Civil War sites at an acre an hour". Who can swallow this lie without wondering what the hell is going on?

 

[Immanuel]

I used to live in fredericksburg and spotsylvania and mannasas. The history there is pretty amazing. Did you get to see the church in Fredericksburg with the cannon ball still embedded in the brick. That really brings it home.

You are right, the people of those area would probably fight another civil war to keep their battle fields. I remember when they wanted to build a Walmart on a site where George Washington spent time living as a young man near Fredericksburg. That did not go over very well and the Walmart go moved a few miles down the road.

I don't believe there is a chance in hell that Walmart is going to take over an existing CW battlefield park or structure. Some mysterious faction wants a $1.50 donation because they tell us that CW sites are being "lost" at an acre an hour. It ain't true (maybe they have the CW mixed up with the Rain forrest) but History Channel celebrities say it's so. I agree that if you want to "preserve" any historic site go ahead and buy it but don't expect to use taxpayer money to maintain it. It's unclear what the mission of the $1.50 people is or who is behind it. I can't find anything on the internet.

Those battlefields are our heritage. If The History Chanel wants to use the 150th anniversary of the Civil War to raise awareness and protect these landmarks....I applaud them

I would as well, but if someone appearing on the History Channel is falsely claiming that historic sites are disappearing in order to attain donations and those donations never find their way to the battlefields, I've got a problem with that.

Come on, an acre an hour? I suspect that if that were so, we would already be out of acreage since the time this claim was made.

Immie