Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Frazzled wrote:This army needs Parrots and Napoleons for its heavy weapons. Conversion opportunities galore.

Not keen on the Southern Cross there though. You shouldn't have that on there or have it modified. You might get your ass beat and/or shot in certain locales for that, with justification.

The General Lee needs Daisy Duke hanging onto the back of course...

There's nothing racist about it man. It's a state's rights issue. Today we see states rights issues contested by the hundred, none of which pertain to racism and/or slavery.

Great army nonetheless and you can't have the 'General Lee' without the Condfederate Flag, it would be like painting it without the '01' or in another colour. Only thing is, is that the army looks like it might be from Texas and the Lee is probably from Georgia.

Awesome. Nice job with the cowboy hats on the roughriders, I hope you'll post a tutorial... I've been thinking about doing a cowboy themed guard force for a while myself. One of the first minis I ever painted was a MkIII Ogre done up as the General Lee:

How far can it jump?

NuggzTheNinja wrote:

Frazzled wrote:This army needs Parrots and Napoleons for its heavy weapons. Conversion opportunities galore.

Not keen on the Southern Cross there though. You shouldn't have that on there or have it modified. You might get your ass beat and/or shot in certain locales for that, with justification.

The General Lee needs Daisy Duke hanging onto the back of course...

There's nothing racist about it man. It's a state's rights issue. Today we see states rights issues contested by the hundred, none of which pertain to racism and/or slavery.

The American Civil War was about more than slavery, but to ignore that slavery was a key issue is to revise history.

cadbren wrote:only thing is, is that the army looks like it might be from Texas and the Lee is probably from Georgia.

he's from virginia. you're off by 650 miles or so.

Klawz wrote:
Anyway, I personally wouldn't use the confederate flag, as it both means things to certain people (one of my ansestors was shot in the back on the yankee side) and some right-wing loonies have misinterpreteted it as the Tea Party Flag (TM).

Fixed it for you.

NuggzTheNinja wrote:

Frazzled wrote:This army needs Parrots and Napoleons for its heavy weapons. Conversion opportunities galore.

Not keen on the Southern Cross there though. You shouldn't have that on there or have it modified. You might get your ass beat and/or shot in certain locales for that, with justification.

The General Lee needs Daisy Duke hanging onto the back of course...

There's nothing racist about it man. It's a state's rights issue. Today we see states rights issues contested by the hundred, none of which pertain to racism and/or slavery.

It's a state's rights issue concerning the legality of slavery which led to thousands of deaths and the suffering of untold millions.

I honestly don't get it, I'm in one of the northern most states and I still see white trash flying the stars and bars. You can be all for state's rights, I really don't care. Just do it in a respectable way.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Che-Vito wrote:

Klawz wrote:
Anyway, I personally wouldn't use the confederate flag, as it both means things to certain people (one of my ansestors was shot in the back on the yankee side) and some right-wing loonies have misinterpreteted it as the Tea Party Flag (TM).

Fixed it for you.

Meh, political rallies are for chumps. This is how we handle them where I come from (not really though).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jhozx819izU&feature=related < Blues Brothers FTW

A lot of stuff here. As one poster noted, the civil war (or as it is more properly called, the War of the Rebellion) was about a complex set of issues, but to ignore the role of slavery as the overriding issue is missing the forest for the trees.

In many ways, the secession was a reaction in the south at losing economic and political domination of the country for the first time in history. Nearly every president before Lincoln was southern, and the south had the advantage in population and production until the industrialization of the 1840's and 50's. Less than a noble quest for "state's rights", the civil war was simply the south taking their toys and going home when things stopped going their way.

Anyway, there were comments made about judging slavery by the standards of the time. Even by 1860, though in the West had moved pretty dramatically away from legalized slavery. Every other industrialized nation had abolished slavery by then, including fully half of the United States. Even in the south, few thinkers were defending slavery on positive moral grounds, rather they simply argued it's central role in the economy and the enormous threat to stability emancipation threatened. Quotes such as:

"We have the wolf by the ear, and we can neither hold him, nor safely let him go. Justice is in one scale, and self-preservation in the other" -Thomas Jefferson

and

"There are few, I believe, in this enlightened age, who will not acknowledge that slavery as an institution is a moral and political evil. It is idle to expatiate on its disadvantages. I think it is a greater evil to the white than to the colored race. While my feelings are strongly enlisted in behalf of the latter, my sympathies are more deeply engaged for the former. The blacks are immeasurably better off here than in Africa, morally, physically, and socially. The painful discipline they are undergoing is necessary for their further instruction as a race, and will prepare them, I hope, for better things. How long their servitude may be necessary is known and ordered by a merciful Providence." -Robert E. Lee

show that even those that defend and prosper from slave labor knew it was wrong.

Finally, to comment on the Battle Flag, as a symbol, I say simply that symbols are read by the beholder. I think that you can come up with really neat historically based flags that use regimental, brigade, and state flags, and avoid the battle flag completely. It's a symbol of a region, to be sure, but it's also linked strongly with a vigorous defense first of chattel slavery and then jim crow laws. Good or ill, when people see that flag, they see a history of conflict and hatred. It's unfair, as southern soldiers were no more or less evil than northern soldiers, and the white southerners of the 1960's weren't more racist than white northerners of the 1960's. but you should be aware that there is a link, and given the pride many modern southerners take in the flag, voluntary use of it is a way of showing solidarity with them. If you're comfortable with that, and I'm not judging it, than knock yourself out.

I love the rough riders. Great work!

The way I see it, whether or not the OP intended the army to be "racist and bigoted" or not, the American Civil War is still an integral part of the history of the country. To say that someone is wrong for making an army based around this theme is a hairs breadth away from claiming it didn't even happen at all.

There are plenty of references to major forces in world history in Warhammer 40k, for example, the Death Korps Of Kreig. Are you telling me a Jewish gamer should get offended every time a DKOK army is put down opposing them? I think not.

Same is true for Tallern. How many of you Americans get offended every time you see a Tallern mini?

Back on topic, this is a really cool, unique army. I'd be happy to play against this regardless of the connotations of the army's theme.

For all those that want to point to history and make up a bunch of crap about how it wasn't about slavery and it was this and it was that go ahead but the stars and bar in Today's context is a symbol of racism bottom line.

The Death Korps aren't exactly sporting swastikas. I did see a WW2 German themed Imperial Guard army with the straight-armed Iron Cross that raised a big commotion.

So people honestly think that a war between two different political/geographical entities was a civil war?

What?

civil war 
–noun
a war between political factions or regions within the same country.

The CSA seceeded from the Union, as was their legal and political right, and established a seperate soverign nation.

Therefore, it violates the definition of "civil war," as it is no longer between two "political factions," within the same country.

Two seperate governments, geographical regions, countries, societies with vast differences, ect. however you spin it =/= civil war.

How the heck is that apparently hard to understand?

And for the goof who said history is written by the victors, and therefore true.... wtf?

Now that aside....

Much of the military and political establishment of the southern states realized that slavery was an institution that could not continue to propogate itself.

Many of the military and political leaders knew they had to eventually work slavery out of the economic and social framework, albeit slowly; since to do it in a quick and violent fashion would do more to destabalize the region and cause backlash that could have lasting ramifications, as it did.

We're all apparently ignoring the fact that the abolition of slavery also had ulterior motives. Northerners were just as racist as southerners.

When they did forced bussing, northern parents would throw bricks at school busses carrying black children. My father remembers it and told me about it.

Using everyone's amazing logic on here, we should not allow the American flag to be flown either for that and all the other crap perpetrated under its watch.

/thread

WaaaaghLord wrote:1) To say that someone is wrong for making an army based around this theme is a hairs breadth away from claiming it didn't even happen at all.

2) There are plenty of references to major forces in world history in Warhammer 40k, for example, the Death Korps Of Kreig. Are you telling me a Jewish gamer should get offended every time a DKOK army is put down opposing them? I think not.

1) not. even. close. it's not even the same solar system let alone ballpark. saying that it may lead to trouble by memorializing an army for a scifi universe that (among other things) stood for the protection of the institution of slavery is NOT even remotely close to saying the war didn't happen. hyperbole much?

2) plenty of german jews served in the kaiser's armed forces in WWI which is what the DKOK is based on. you're off by about 25 years and one world war.

Well, you made a couple of errors in your post.

First, the definition of civil war you quoted used the word country, not sovereign state. Since virtually all civil wars are fought over who is the sovereign of a territory, simply because one side declared independence doesn't change the nature of the war.

I think you're confusing insurrection, or insurgency with civil war. Virtually all wars called civil wars have featured more than one government. They were still fought over control over the territory of a single state.

Since, more than anything, the war was fought over whether or not a state can succeed, and the war pretty much determined that they could not, it's hard to call it a political and legal right. SCOTUS held that secession was illegal as well, and the Articles of Confederation explicitly forbade secession.

If you prefer to call it a rebellion, I'd be fine with it. I think you'd be hard pressed to find anybody in International law that wouldn't allow a State to reclaim territory it had once held after a secession.

I feel bad for the poor guy who started the thread. And I contributed to it as well, damn sorry man.

That aside, could you post more pictures? The idea is unique and your paint job isn't half bad either.

It's a shame that ideas like that wouldn't occur at a similar frequency here in America because people have their heads shoved up themselves, and are incapable of ignoring and letting things go.

Kudos to you for not being one of those, coming up with an idea, and running with it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Polonius wrote:
First, the definition of civil war you quoted used the word country, not sovereign state. Since virtually all civil wars are fought over who is the sovereign of a territory, simply because one side declared independence doesn't change the nature of the war.

I think you're confusing insurrection, or insurgency with civil war. Virtually all wars called civil wars have featured more than one government. They were still fought over control over the territory of a single state.

Hence the reason why I made the mention of cultural and economic differences. The differences between the two reason (ignoring right and wrong) were vast enough to throw the definition of "Civil War," out the window.

Polonius wrote:

Since, more than anything, the war was fought over whether or not a state can succeed, and the war pretty much determined that they could not, it's hard to call it a political and legal right. SCOTUS held that secession was illegal as well, and the Articles of Confederation explicitly forbade secession.

It does not mention anywhere in the Constitution that the Union of the States must be permanent. New York, Virginia, and other states reserved the right to regain the governmental powers granted to the United States before they would even ratify it.

"It is safe to say that there was not a man in the country, from Washington and Hamilton to Clinton and Mason, who did not regard the new system as an experiment from which each and every State had a right to peaceably withdraw." - Henry Cabot Lodge

"The secession of a State depends on the will of the people of such a State." - A View of the Constitution, written by Judge William Rawle

If it was an illegal act, then why was no Confederate tried for treason?

Polonius wrote:
If you prefer to call it a rebellion, I'd be fine with it. I think you'd be hard pressed to find anybody in International law that wouldn't allow a State to reclaim territory it had once held after a secession.

That's fine with me.

But heres some copypasta for you.

Actually America has never had a "civil war." A civil war is defined as a struggle between two or more factions for control of a central government. Since the Southern states seceded legally under the constitution as it existed at that time (a point upheld later by Lincoln's own Supreme Court Chief Justice Salmon Chase, who said "Secession was legal." and the reason None of the Confederate leaders were ever tried for treason) there were two separate and functioning governments on the North American Continent. The United States of America and the Confederate States of America. You will note that all Military correspondence during the war in the "War of the Rebellion" records refer to the Confederate States as a separate entity. The Southern states never voiced any desire to rule in "Washington" and take over the entire country, their wish was merely to be able to leave and be left alone. So the correct term (and others are just fanciful) would be, as it was for the Colonists in 1776, the "War for Southern Independence."

That actually fits in with your rebellion suggestion so it seems we have... reached consensus.

People on the internet are such outspoken moralists. In real life, they don't say anything.

Here's what I don't get:

Actual Swastika clad SS Panzer army for Flames of War: ok.

SS themed army for 40K: EVIL!

Actual Confederate army for [Insert Civil War Game Title Here]: ok

Confederate themed army for 40K: EVIL!

I DO NOT LIKE DUMBNESS. MAKE IT STOP BEING.

warboss wrote:

cadbren wrote:only thing is, is that the army looks like it might be from Texas and the Lee is probably from Georgia.

he's from virginia. you're off by 650 miles or so.

Thanks, but I was referring to the car not the man. The 'Dukes of Hazzard' tv series is considered to be set in Georgia.

cadbren wrote:

warboss wrote:

cadbren wrote:only thing is, is that the army looks like it might be from Texas and the Lee is probably from Georgia.

he's from virginia. you're off by 650 miles or so.

Thanks, but I was referring to the car not the man. The 'Dukes of Hazzard' tv series is considered to be set in Georgia.

my mistake. i thought you were talking about the general. yeah, the show is supposed to be set in georgia.

Phryxis wrote:People on the internet are such outspoken moralists. In real life, they don't say anything.

Here's what I don't get:

Actual Swastika clad SS Panzer army for Flames of War: ok.

SS themed army for 40K: EVIL!

Actual Confederate army for [Insert Civil War Game Title Here]: ok

Confederate themed army for 40K: EVIL!

I DO NOT LIKE DUMBNESS. MAKE IT STOP BEING.

I had an online argument once about violent toys. These people thought the idea of toys armed with modern guns was too violent, but the same toys armed with swords and axes was fine - simply because they thought of swords etc as belonging to the romantic past without thinking about the reality. Lots of people don't think through their prejudices and some hate being challenged on them. Note the above people who have threatened physical violence and destruction of property because they view the other side as being prejudiced and/or ignorant!



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Re the flag thing, the confederate flag is part of the Georgia State Flag, something to bear in mind.

Nice looking army. I'd say the only thing I don't like much is that the Confederate flag is so small. Needs to take up the whole front see? Nice themed army you've got there.

I have nothing against using a 40k army made up as confederates - I would look twice at the owner, because it's a bit unusual to shoehorn that historical look into 40k, but if I think he's not a rascist, then the army doesn't bother me.

What bothers me is all the Americans from the South, telling everyone who'll listen that it was about states rights and defending a way of life. Polonius definitely had the best and calmest summing-up so far: it was about those things, and others, but slavery was the central issue.

All the faffery about civil war or rebellion ar war between two seperate nations is pretty irrelevant. I'm done with this discussion, good luck to all the posters (who I note are all from somewhere in the southern USA) who want to regard the conflict as a noble cause fought for right and freedom.

Interesting thread, this army would get a lot of negative attention if you rolled it out in the US, over here people are more likely to go:

'Ooh, Dukes of Hazzard, cool, where does Boss Hog sit?'

Recreating any historical army is potentially contentious as an army by definition was used to kill someone elses ancestors. The more important the war the more coverage it gets in schools (I'm guessing here that the American Civil War is taught to death in their schools) and therefore a greater proportion of people will have enough knowledge to posit an opinion.

Also Americans are far more patriotic than us Brits, if someone burnt a Union Jack (interestingly, many people here associate our flag and the George Cross with right wing/racist groups) we'd probably be more concerned over the washing we'd just hung out to dry rather than try to lock him up. So, an army themed to one side of their 'Civil War' (or whatever you care to call it) is always going to create contention. It's also a lot more recent than any other similar conflict, WW2 is a bit of a different case as we've seen so much footage, so many films that we're almost de-sensitized.

Gotta say, OP, love the army idea. That's really one of the great things about the Guard, with a bit of ingenuity if there's an historical army you think looks kinda cool you can do it. I'd really like to see some more pics, especially of the rank and file.

Don't mind the flame police action, it's a nifty idea you had.

Yup, and thanks to Mordian for an exciting thread too.

Could you post some close ups of your troops to see how you've done them. I can see that many are from the Mordian range (funny that) but the details are hard to see.

Thank you, let's get back to the Painting and Modelling, eh?

Not that I don't love all the WARRGHRBL!!!!!!!

Because that's how we welcome newbies with interesting looking army ideas. With page after page after page of idiocy. Emperor be praised, I love the Internet.

Mods, if you cut out every post that's not actually about the damned army (including this one), you get a cookie. In fact, if this thing gets any stupider, I would be willing to grab a box of Chips Ahoy! and hit the post office.



"Sir, mind if I ask why you're express posting cookies to people you've never met."

"Stupid Internet crap. Now gimme them stamps."

Yes, but this is four pages of civil and polite WARRGHRBL, the best kind.

My biggest issue, as I said before, is nothing regarding the army itself, rather OP's misconception of Americans... that honestly bothers me a little. Saying all Americans are Confederates is more than a little ignorant, if you ask me... that'd be like me saying that all Brits have ridiculous facial hair, bad teeth, and have tea with the Queen while say, "Jolly good, chap, let's go colonise some brown people, mate, wot wot!"

See how ridiculous that sounds? Even though I spelled "colonise" with an S for accuracy?

Similar.

I don't know how it is over there, but most Americans realize that English folk are just regular people like us.

I don't have an issue with the confederate flag if done in a civil war game but it just really doesn't fit in with a 40K army. It just feels kind of wonky but the rest of the army looks good.

If you don't have an issue with the stars and bars I would suggest that you do a little more research in to it's current context. Confederate flag, a long-time symbol of racial hatred.

Those who object because the rebel flag is "part of their heritage?" So is Willie Horton. The hoop skirts and plantations are completely dependent on the slave trade and Jim Crow, nostalgia for racial inequity. Shame.