Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Washington shot in back

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Washington shot in back

    Who was the man that would'nt shoot Washinton in the back becuse it wasn't right and what year?
    "The people never have the power, only the illusion of it. And here is the real secret: they don't want it. The responsibility is too great to bear. It's why they are so quick to fall in line as soon as someone else takes charge."
    "

  • #2
    Originally posted by ace View Post
    Who was the man that would'nt shoot Washinton in the back becuse it wasn't right and what year?
    Perhaps you are thinking of Patrick Ferguson at the Battle of Brandywine in 1777.
    "Profanity is but a linguistic crutch for illiterate motherbleepers"

    Comment


    • #3
      Possibly you refer to Thomas Hickey 1776 altho the Mayor and Governor of NY were also plotters.
      He was hung for an attempted kidnap and murder of GW.

      best
      CV
      Last edited by Centrix Vigilis; 16 Nov 07, 07:49.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by johnbryan View Post
        Perhaps you are thinking of Patrick Ferguson at the Battle of Brandywine in 1777.
        Ferguson had Washington dead in his patented "Ferguson Rifle" Sights and all that was needed was for him to "drop the hammer" and the Revolution would have gone into the trash heap of history.
        "Profanity is but a linguistic crutch for illiterate motherbleepers"

        Comment


        • #5
          You know, I find that so intresting that alot of people have the enemy commander in thier sights during battles, but can't bring themselves to shoot them.
          History of War Podcast

          Episode 1: Why Study Military History?

          Comment


          • #6
            I have heard this story several times but what was the reason he dident do it? Respect? Morals (not shooting a man in the back or because he was a fellow gentleman), or was Ferguson just not able to pull the trigger?

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by ChrisF1987 View Post
              I have heard this story several times but what was the reason he dident do it? Respect? Morals (not shooting a man in the back or because he was a fellow gentleman), or was Ferguson just not able to pull the trigger?
              I heard it was Morals
              "The people never have the power, only the illusion of it. And here is the real secret: they don't want it. The responsibility is too great to bear. It's why they are so quick to fall in line as soon as someone else takes charge."
              "

              Comment


              • #8
                I agree, thank god for the British morals

                Then again, I really dont think it would have been a total death blow to the Revolution like people think. We still could have fought on guerrilla style and their were other good generals like Wayne, Morgan, etc.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by ace View Post
                  I heard it was Morals
                  Because Gentlemen don't shoot other Gentlemen who are directing their Army.
                  "Profanity is but a linguistic crutch for illiterate motherbleepers"

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Washington and the Hessian who trained his army at Valley Forge (i know his name, i just can't spell it) were on recon (or something like that) and Ferguson caught Washington in his sights. The Hessian General warned Washington of Ferguson's presence and they turned around and galloped back to camp. Ferguson couldn't bear himself to shoot him because he wuldn't shoot an unarmed man. He was also impressed by his coolness in the situation. If he had known it was the hope of the Revolution on that horse he would have pulled the trigger.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Fredrick Von Stuben.
                      Delegate, MN GOP.

                      PATRIA SI, COMUNISMO NO

                      http://www.facebook.com/home.php#!/p...?id=1156276727

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Conlin View Post
                        Washington and the Hessian who trained his army at Valley Forge (i know his name, i just can't spell it) were on recon (or something like that) and Ferguson caught Washington in his sights. The Hessian General warned Washington of Ferguson's presence and they turned around and galloped back to camp. Ferguson couldn't bear himself to shoot him because he wuldn't shoot an unarmed man. He was also impressed by his coolness in the situation. If he had known it was the hope of the Revolution on that horse he would have pulled the trigger.
                        I think that you're thinking of Von Steuben and I believe that he was Prussian.
                        "Profanity is but a linguistic crutch for illiterate motherbleepers"

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by johnbryan View Post
                          I think that you're thinking of Von Steuben and I believe that he was Prussian.
                          Yes him!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by johnbryan View Post
                            Because Gentlemen don't shoot other Gentlemen who are directing their Army.
                            i guess all those notions of chivalry and honor code went out the door in the 20th century.

                            i agree with one of the posters above that the Americans would have won the war without Washington, but it would have took longer, reason being the Americans outnumbered the British close to 3:1, fought in a Fabian style strategy, and could maneuver inland to nullify the naval advantage the enemy had.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by perplexed_one View Post
                              i guess all those notions of chivalry and honor code went out the door in the 20th century.

                              i agree with one of the posters above that the Americans would have won the war without Washington, but it would have took longer, reason being the Americans outnumbered the British close to 3:1, fought in a Fabian style strategy, and could maneuver inland to nullify the naval advantage the enemy had.
                              Yup, you've got it!~
                              "Profanity is but a linguistic crutch for illiterate motherbleepers"

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              • Karri
                                Prawn heads
                                by Karri
                                How do you cook them? How do you eat them?

                                So far I've always just twisted them off, and discarded it along with the shells and such, only...
                                Today, 11:40
                              • Jose50
                                Thoughts on the US abandoning NATO
                                by Jose50
                                Now may be a good time for the NATO countries to start beefing up their materiel, personnel and alliances. There is a decided wave here in the US that...
                                Today, 08:41
                              • Von Richter
                                Sagittarius Rising...
                                by Von Richter
                                Just having a re-read of this book after it's stood for donkey's years on the bookshelf. Once again, within the first couple of pages, I'm transported...
                                Today, 01:19
                              Working...
                              X