HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: robert@geoblue.gcn.uoknor.edu (Robert Lindsay)
Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa
Subject: Re: PC Games
Date: 6 Nov 92 16:32:53 GMT
Organization: Geosciences Computing Network, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK
Originator: usenet@midway.ecn.uoknor.edu

In article <1dbl2rINNri2@im4u.cs.utexas.edu> russw@cs.utexas.edu (Russ Williams) writes:
>In article <bjm1.720869705@Ra.MsState.Edu> bjm1@Ra.MsState.Edu (Bobbie J. Mann) writes:
>>Are these games available for the Macintosh, or just IBM and compatibles?
>
>I recommend looking through an issue of Computer Gaming World; there's lots
>of full page ads from mail order companies that have info on what games
>are available for what machines.  I know that some of SSG's games are
>available for Mac, but I'm not sure if Decisive Battles of the CW is.
>
>For folks interested in board wargames, I highly recommend GDW's
>A House Divided, a recognized classic and award winner; it's a strategic
>game of the CW with quite simple elegant rules and much replay value,
>a real gem.

I'd agree with the above, but I'd also say that the first edition of the game
is better than the second. the new "advanced" rules I don't like at all.
If you are intrested in individual battles try to find a copy of SPI's
Blue + Gray quad. four ACW battles, same four page rule sets, fast playing.
Out of print :(. Stay away from AH's Gettysburg game, and 1862 and 1863 by
SDI and GMT respectively.

>Russ
From: russw@cs.utexas.edu (Russ Williams)
Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa
Subject: Re: PC Games
Date: 5 Nov 1992 11:19:23 -0600
Organization: Great Northern Hotel
NNTP-Posting-Host: im4u.cs.utexas.edu

In article <bjm1.720869705@Ra.MsState.Edu> bjm1@Ra.MsState.Edu (Bobbie J. Mann) writes:
>Are these games available for the Macintosh, or just IBM and compatibles?

I recommend looking through an issue of Computer Gaming World; there's lots
of full page ads from mail order companies that have info on what games
are available for what machines.  I know that some of SSG's games are
available for Mac, but I'm not sure if Decisive Battles of the CW is.

For folks interested in board wargames, I highly recommend GDW's
A House Divided, a recognized classic and award winner; it's a strategic
game of the CW with quite simple elegant rules and much replay value,
a real gem.

Russ
From: mar@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Maryann Riggs)
Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa
Subject: Black Rose Brigade
Date: 13 Nov 1992 03:29:40 GMT
Organization: Computing Services Division, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4
Originator: mar@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
From: rick@crick.ssctr.bcm.tmc.edu (Richard H. Miller)
Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa
Subject: Re: Gore's victory speech.
Date: 13 Nov 1992 17:54:33 GMT
Organization: Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Tx
NNTP-Posting-Host: crick.ssctr.bcm.tmc.edu

In article <1dvmdiINN2q7@agate.berkeley.edu>, turrell@violet.berkeley.edu (David Turrell) writes:
> 
> We have had, since the CW, Andrew Johnson, Wilson, Lyndon Johnson, and
> Carter from the South. Truman and Eisenhower could be included,
> Truman's being from a slave state which was very nearly lost to the
> CSA, and Eisenhower's being born a Texan and having his boyhood home
> in Kansas, where the Civil War was precipitated. LBJ and Carter were
> from the deep south, not johnny-reb-come-lately states such as Ark.
> and Tenn. So, Clinton's election, even on an all bubba ticket, can't
> be considered epochal, except in the realm of political rhetoric.

Remember Texas is a unique case; the eastern part of Texas could certainly
be considered as deep south and it shared the characteristics of other southern
states; but LBJ came from the Texas hill country west of Austin which is a
unique place in Texas when LBJ was growing up. There were a large number of
Germans in this area of Texas and the last of the Indian raids had occurred in
this part of Texas. I would consider LBJ to be more of a Midwestern/western
person than someone from the deep south.

(If anyone is really interested in LBJ, I would stronly recommend Carro's
two books on LBJ; one of which is "Means of Ascent" {I think} and covers
LBJ's background and ealy career through his first run for the Senate in 1941)

-- 
Richard H. Miller                 Email: rick@bcm.tmc.edu
Asst. Dir. for Technical Support  Voice: (713)798-3532
Baylor College of Medicine        US Mail: One Baylor Plaza, 302H
                                           Houston, Texas 77030
Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa
From: pdunn@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Patrick L Dunn)
Subject: A Civil War Poem for Veterans' Day
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 05:06:11 GMT


The Dying Soldier's Lament on the Battlefield

     My day of life is over,
     And here I lay me down,
     In the hot, red field of battle,
     In the arms of high renown.

     By the shaft of death I'm stricken
     In my upward flight to fame,
     And I give my life to nothingness
     To win a warrior's name.

--Written by Col. John W. Lowe, 12th Ohio Vol. Infantry, shortly before his 
death at the Battle of Carnifex Ferry, (W.)Va., 1861.

PDunn
From: russw@cs.utexas.edu (Russ Williams)
Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa
Subject: Re: PC Games
Date: 8 Nov 1992 13:25:10 -0600
Organization: Great Northern Hotel

In article <1992Nov6.163253.26307@constellation.ecn.uoknor.edu> robert@geoblue.gcn.uoknor.edu (Robert Lindsay) writes:
>In article <1dbl2rINNri2@im4u.cs.utexas.edu> russw@cs.utexas.edu (Russ Williams) writes:
>>For folks interested in board wargames, I highly recommend GDW's
>>A House Divided, a recognized classic and award winner; it's a strategic
>>game of the CW with quite simple elegant rules and much replay value,
>>a real gem.
>
>I'd agree with the above, but I'd also say that the first edition of the game
>is better than the second. the new "advanced" rules I don't like at all.

I've never used the advanced rules; I've heard they're clunky, and they
look it.  The basic game is remarkably rich as is.  They did change one
or 2 things in the basic game in the 2nd edition, but they were improvements,
I believe.  The main change is cavalry only controlling enemy areas as
long as they occupy them, rather than permanently.

>If you are intrested in individual battles try to find a copy of SPI's
>Blue + Gray quad. four ACW battles, same four page rule sets, fast playing.

Brings back memories... the first S&T issue I got and played was
Road To Richmond!  (Not a great game, but I have a soft spot for it
and actually replayed it a few months ago with a friend.)

Russ

Xref: sparky alt.war.civil.usa:1459 soc.history:9284 rec.org.sca:15637
From: caina@merrimack.edu
Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa,soc.history,rec.org.sca
Subject: Rev. War Reenactment unit Being Raised in Mass.
Date: 10 Nov 92 09:33:08 GMT
Organization: Merrimack College, No. Andover, MA, USA


   I am currently raising a Revolutionary War Reenactment Unit out of North 
Eastern Massachusetts (To be more specific, the Lawrence/Lowell area).  The 
unit is Col. Greaton's 3d Massachusetts Regimentand and if anyone  from the 
Northern Mass./Southern N.H. is interested  in joining this unit (or just
receive some info), feel free to contact me (via e-mail) at:
caina@merrimack.edu.
  We are shooting for an August, 1993 "debut" and are hoping to apply
to the Continental Line for membership about the same time.

Thank You,

Alex Cain
  
Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa
From: cjt1@ellis.uchicago.edu (Charles Ten Brink)
Subject: Re: What if...
Reply-To: cjt1@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 23:33:43 GMT

In article <1992Nov11.211119.9707@Princeton.EDU> glhewitt@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Gary Livingston Hewitt) writes:
>Things have been slow, so let's try a hypothetical "big-issue" question:
>What if Fort Sumter doesn't happen?  (Either Lincoln doesn't attempt to
>resupply it, or the CSA doesn't bother bombing it and works on a
>diplomatic solution).
I suppose the cheap answer is that something else would have happened:
a blow-up over disposition of the western territories, or failure to
compensate the Federal government for appropriation of its property.
But it is more interesting to consider, as you do below, what would
have happened if the North had simply "let its wayward sisters depart
in peace."

>I'm thinking of a whole variety of results:  What happens to the CSA
>(which is only at this point, Fla, Ala., Ga., SC, Miss, La. and Tx.)?
>What happens to the Union slave states?  Is political stability within
>either the Confederacy or the still divided Union possible?  Disposition
>of western lands?  Future of slavery in upper south?  In lower south?
>Et cetera.

I would see slavery dying out in the upper south, which was happening 
before the crisis anyway.  The slaves would probably be sold south,
which is how the North got rid of its slaves in the first half of the 
century.  Assuming that a peaceful parting of the ways includes free
navigation of the Mississippi, the incentive for the western states to 
strike out on their own is minimized, and the North and West proceed
pretty much on their post-War path.

With slavery isolated in a constricted Confederacy, the slave population
would outnumber the free population.  The legal system would become
increasingly brutal in attempting to avert "servile insurrection", and
the passing of another generation would result in the Confederacy's being 
viewed as a pariah by other nations.  (Remember England had only banned
slavery in its colonies in the 1830's, which is one of the reasons why
it was still conceivable that it would support the Confederacy in the
1860's; I can't see that happening in the 1890's.)  I think the Confederacy
would eventually give it up.  Or be utterly destroyed in a massive
uprising of the slaves.

And on that cheery note, I think I will go home.
--Chuck


-- 
D'Angelo Law Library         "The dogmas of the quiet past are
cjt1@midway.uchicago.edu      inadequate to the stormy present. . .
uclcjt1@uchimvs1              We must disenthrall ourselves. . ."
Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa
From: glhewitt@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Gary Livingston Hewitt)
Subject: What if...
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 21:11:19 GMT

Things have been slow, so let's try a hypothetical "big-issue" question:
What if Fort Sumter doesn't happen?  (Either Lincoln doesn't attempt to
resupply it, or the CSA doesn't bother bombing it and works on a
diplomatic solution).

I'm thinking of a whole variety of results:  What happens to the CSA
(which is only at this point, Fla, Ala., Ga., SC, Miss, La. and Tx.)?
What happens to the Union slave states?  Is political stability within
either the Confederacy or the still divided Union possible?  Disposition
of western lands?  Future of slavery in upper south?  In lower south?
Et cetera.

Gary
-- 
  ++====+========+==========+=======+===++
  ||    |    Gary| L. Hewitt|       |   ||  HELP!  I've been imprisoned
  || glh|ewitt@ph|oenix.prin|ceton.e|du ||  by my .signature!  HELP!
  ++====+========+==========+=======+===++
Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa
From: rburr@mages.lkg.dec.com (Rod Burr)
Subject: Re: PC Games
Reply-To: rburr@mages.lkg.dec.com (Rod Burr)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 20:38:10 GMT


I strongly recommend NO GREATER GLORY as a good strategic level simulation
of the American Civil War.

I have  the  PC  version,  and a review I've seen also mentioned one for the
Macintosh.   The game puts you in the position of commander in chief as well
as the political head of the nation.  You are essentially in the position of
Lincoln  or Davis in making strategic decisions to control the war, with the
computer  playing  the  opposing  side.   Areas  in  which  you need to make
decisions  include  cabinet  and diplomatic appointments, tax level and bond
rates,  policy  on  slavery  and  foreign intervention, mobilization levels,
strategic  troop  movements,  and  assign  of commanders and campaign plans.
While  doing this you need to balance party support (radicals vs moderates),
regional  loyalties, commanders prestige ratings, and troop quality, as well
as  figuring  out  how  to  achieve a military victory.  So far the game has
given  a quite plausible feel.  I've achieved decisive Union and Confederate
victories  so  far.   Most required a number of restarts from save positions
after  some  disastrous campaigns or unfortunate diplomatic and/or political
choices.  The one that didn't was a game where I managed to keep Virginia
in the Union due to the right political choices and good luck. I definitely
have   not  found  any  "solutions"  to  the  game.   Playing  with  limited
intelligence  and  random  commander  abilities  makes the game exceptionally
challenging.  Each side has significantly different problems and allows many
possible approached to be utilized.

I'm both  a gamer and interested in the Civil War as history.  The UI for the
game can be somewhat awkward, especially without a mouse. The graphics are 
fairly basic, so it's not a flashy game. None the less, I've found the
game quite challenging and enjoyable, as well as feeling like a good simu-
lation of the decisions that were required at the level of Lincoln or
Davis. Juggling as many variables as the game requires is difficult. The game
was definitely on the slow side on my VAXmate (AT clone) with a slow 20 MB 
winchester. It does fine on my current 486/33 system, I suspect, mostly due to
the faster disk. I recommend the game if you're seriously 
interested in the subject, even if you have to put up with a little slowness
on a low end system. The AI in the game is quite strong, and combined with 
the number of decisions that need to be made can get the upper hand quickly
if your political support crumbles. One remedy I found for the problem of 
loosing in a few turns due to my support collapsing, after putting in hours of
playing is in judicious choices of saved games that I've resumed and been
able to alter what proved to have been unfortunate choices.

						Rod

Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa
From: zursch@whizkid.wpd.sgi.com (Jeffrey B. Zurschmeide)
Subject: Re: Gore's victory speech.
Reply-To: zursch@whizkid.wpd.sgi.com (Jeffrey B. Zurschmeide)
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 19:27:44 GMT


There was a letter to the editor in "The American Rifleman" (member's magazine of the
NRA) last month where the writer extolled the Southern cause as "the right
cause" and went on about how that spirit still lives in the South. 

I think Gore might have meant that there's no real issue for people outside 
the south electing southerners now.....with the implication that such people
as the one who wrote the letter the the Rifleman are thoroughly marginalized. 

JZ
Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa
From: robert@geoblue.gcn.uoknor.edu (Robert Lindsay)
Subject: Re: PC Games
Originator: usenet@midway.ecn.uoknor.edu
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 16:22:03 GMT
Organization: Geosciences Computing Network, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK

In article <bjm1.720869705@Ra.MsState.Edu> bjm1@Ra.MsState.Edu (Bobbie J. Mann) writes:
>Are these games available for the Macintosh, or just IBM and compatibles?

The SSG games should be availible for the mac and amiga RSN if not already.
the SSI game No Greater Glory is only for IBM now. There is a amiga port in the
works, but I don't know about mac.

>Roland
>
>
From: COWAN@ssrl01.slac.stanford.edu (Paul L. Cowan)
Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa
Subject: Gore's victory speech.
Date: 9 Nov 1992 15:14:31 GMT
Organization: Pacific-Plate Residents (Motto: 54-40 or Bust!)
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: ssrl01.slac.stanford.edu
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.24

I don't know how many people in the east stayed up long enough to hear
VP (elect) Gore's victory speech after Clinton's, but he stated (in a clear 
reference to the ACW) that with two Southerners elected as Pres. and VP 
the division of the country was clearly ended. There was some discussion
on this group last summer of whether the country was still divided or 
not, and I am curious to hear the reaction (mainly of Southerners) to 
what VP Gore had to say. (It is my sincere hope that this will not create 
any accrimony).

- Paul 


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
P. L. Cowan     Please send replies, comments etc. (no flames thank you) to 
COWAN@ANL.GOV
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: turrell@violet.berkeley.edu (David Turrell)
Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa
Subject: Re: Gore's victory speech.
Date: 13 Nov 1992 07:44:50 GMT
Organization: Cobol Pacific University
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: violet.berkeley.edu

I missed Gore's victory speech. I thought that I could run some
errands during the last part of Clinton's and get back in time, but I
was caught in the traffic jams caused by job hungry democrats headed
to the airport for flights to Little Rock.

I think Clinton/Gore is only the second all southern ticket ever
elected, the other being Jackson/Calhoun in 1828. An aversion to an
all southern ticket has been with us since the beginning.

The Clinton victory seems related to CW presidential elections in a
couple of ways, to "No Mandate" Lincoln's victory of 1860, and "Weak
Candidate" Lincoln's of 1864.

I didn't check to see how many all northern tickets were elected, if
any, after the civil war, when concern for southern sensibilities
might have been at a low ebb; but Lincoln's picking a vp from a
seceded state indicates that north-south balance was always a strong
determinant.

We have had, since the CW, Andrew Johnson, Wilson, Lyndon Johnson, and
Carter from the South. Truman and Eisenhower could be included,
Truman's being from a slave state which was very nearly lost to the
CSA, and Eisenhower's being born a Texan and having his boyhood home
in Kansas, where the Civil War was precipitated. LBJ and Carter were
from the deep south, not johnny-reb-come-lately states such as Ark.
and Tenn. So, Clinton's election, even on an all bubba ticket, can't
be considered epochal, except in the realm of political rhetoric.

-David
Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa
From: whale@leland.Stanford.EDU (Stephen Schmidt)
Subject: Re: Gore's victory speech.
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 92 08:36:27 GMT

In article <1dvmdiINN2q7@agate.berkeley.edu> turrell@violet.berkeley.edu (David Turrell) writes:
>I didn't check to see how many all northern tickets were elected, if
>any, after the civil war, when concern for southern sensibilities
>might have been at a low ebb; but Lincoln's picking a vp from a
>seceded state indicates that north-south balance was always a strong
>determinant.
>
I think it's a little more complicated than that: Lincoln's choice of
Johnson was based not on the fact that he was a Southerner but that he
was a Unionist Southerner. In part Lincoln was trying to show that he
wanted to encourage the quick reunification of North and South, and in
part he was trying to encourage East Tennessee's pro-Union leanings,
and in part he was trying to reward someone who stood by the Union at
a time when most Southerners were deserting. There's a lot more to
understand about the choice of Johnson for VP than the simple North-
South ticket balance, although that was one part of it.
-- 
Steve Schmidt			<><		   whale@leland.stanford.edu
I can no longer sit back and allow Communist infiltration, Communist
indoctrination, Communist subversion, and the international Communist
conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids!
From: loosemore-sandra@cs.yale.edu (Sandra Loosemore)
Newsgroups: alt.war
Subject: Re: Women in Combat
Date: 13 Nov 1992 12:17:13 -0500
Organization: staff hacker @ Yale Haskell project
	<1992Nov11.205408.9168@news.columbia.edu>
	<1992Nov13.151432.16140@inel.gov>
NNTP-Posting-Host: functor.systemsz.cs.yale.edu
In-reply-to: dpe@inel.gov's message of Fri, 13 Nov 92 15:14:32 GMT

dpe@inel.gov (Don Palmrose) writes:

   3.  For women to serve on warships, major changes are required in
   delineating the normal day-to-day procedures, for making proper
   berthing arrangements, etc.  [...]  Also, special care must be
   taken that privacy can be enforced.  US Navy warships are not
   currently designed to keep someone walking down a passageway and
   not be able to look into a berthing compartment or shower area
   without seeing people in their birthday suits. [...]

Oh, horrors!  I'm sure that being seen in your "birthday suit" is a
fate worse than death.  :-)  

Seriously, I think *anybody* who joins the military has to be prepared
to deal with loss of privacy and individuality and less than ideal
living conditions.  I don't think that the gender of the persons 
involved necessarily has a major impact on this.

BTW, a couple of weeks ago I saw a show on TV about life on the Danish
merchant marine's training ship, the tall ship Danmark.  There
appeared to be absolutely no segregation of living quarters; they
showed both men and women clad in underwear climbing in and out of
their hammocks, all in the same crowded compartment.  Both the cadets
and the TV crew seemed to treat the living arrangements in a very
matter-of-fact manner.

-Sandra
Organization: Materials Science and Engineering, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: alt.war
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 11:01:00 -0500 
From: James William Stepanek <js43+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Powered Body Armor

There was an article in the latest Discover magazine on the subject of
powered suits for various uses. They mentioned that the armed forces
have been trying at this for ~30 yrs. They also say that there is still
interest in the field. There have been discussions of this subject in
.sci.military, but they tend to throw out anything remotely off what
they consider pure military science. I therefore think this could be a
good place for a discussion of the concepts , their
implementation,tactics and doctrine surrounding said devices. 
    I personally think the powere armor with strength augmentation would
have a few limitations in the present day but is not unworkable( then
again so does dod considering they are still researching it) and would
be best used in special forces type units. This would be justified on
the basis that these suits would cost a pretty penny, but then again so
does training for a SEAL/SAS/SF ect and the possibility of magnifying
the effectiveness on such soldiers could have great effect. Say you want
Noriega( old example , but what the hell), you drop a few of these into
Panama City into where he can be best localized, and then proceed to
scare people (considering strength augmentation scare should be a mild
word) into revealing his location. Also these would be great for hostage
rescue. Both the rescuers would be safe (within reason) and they could
possible interpose themselves as shield for the hostages. Also deep
strike penetration of fixed strategic assets would be greatly
facilitated by these devices. City fighting would also bee a good use,
considering that they would act as very small light tanks, and be
(hopefully) proof from sniper fire.
    I might consider going at the technology issues later(I'll bring in
the Discover issue) , but this is a start.
James Stepanek
esp
Newsgroups: alt.war