12-22-2019, 03:19 AM
(12-21-2019, 09:52 AM)BIAD Wrote: If I recall correctly, the British discovered that you 'didn't play by the rules' when they tried their oppressive campaigns.
But we're with you on this one, Keep it up!
Yeah, something like that. At Concord, the colonials had relocated their arms a week prior to the confiscation assault because of intelligence they had received regarding a potential confiscatory raid. So, in that case, not only did the assault force have their asses handed to them by a bunch of unwashed rebels, they left without the stuff they came to get to begin with, adding insult to injury. The rebellious loutish colonials spanked the force all the way back to Boston, and then blockaded Boston for added insult.
In other areas, at other times, the brutish colonials just would not play by the established rules of warfare. The militia in particular, due to their years of Indian fighting, actually hid behind trees and rocks to engage His Majesty's Forces when the rules were that each side lined up in orderly rows in the open and traded lead with one another until one side got tired of the entertainment and went home, ceding the field. Instead of following the civilized rules, the uncivilized colonials fought in the way they had learned to fight from their (probably less savage) Indian foes.
Us backwoods hill folk - you just can't teach us nothin'!
.
Diogenes was eating bread and lentils for supper. He was seen by the philosopher Aristippus, who lived comfortably by flattering the king.
Said Aristippus, ‘If you would learn to be subservient to the king you would not have to live on lentils.’ Said Diogenes, ‘Learn to live on lentils and you will not have to be subservient to the king.’
Said Aristippus, ‘If you would learn to be subservient to the king you would not have to live on lentils.’ Said Diogenes, ‘Learn to live on lentils and you will not have to be subservient to the king.’