https://youtube.com/watch?v=aDyQxtg0V2w
Re-upload
Top Poster of the Day:
911roofer
Current Registered Users: 28,684
rDrama's premiere hole for discussion and ideas around Television & Film
Rules
Women are the antithesis of kino
Absolutely no discord faggotry
Disagreeing with a janny is a bannable offence
Shit taste is allowed, but prepare to be bullied
Hole pins for 1k DC sent to
@KinoBushido
/h/kino SETTINGS /h/kino LOG /h/kino MODS /h/kino EXILEES /h/kino FOLLOWERS /h/kino BLOCKERS
Current software version: 4a17930
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Next generation of disaster movies. It has every hallmark. Family thats trying to survive. Outsider who is observing whats happening. President. DC landmarks get blown up. And ofc its writen by idiots who didnt even stuty US civil war. So what if "rebels" from south capture DC. What is value of DC? It has little economic value. It has small population. Its just adminastrional center. You can move that away wuite quickly.
Its same situation as in civil war. So what if Lee won gettysburg. He takes DC. Then what? Becouse what matters lies behind DC. Big and rich cities and important states lies north of DC. Yet this trailer frames it like final stand in this civil war.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
It's a morale victory/defeat, even if not a significant material one
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Its just symbol. But moral deffeat like that can go really really badly. If Lee had taken DC. All we know, north gets really angry and desite to punish south. Hey do shermans march earlier. And this time they want blood. North had material advanges and population advanges.
This movie sake. It should have been new york. You get same symbolism. Bad guys blowing up statue of libery would hammer point home.
You can point how DC has fallen and goverment moved to new york. And if "rebels" manage to take new york. Its over.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Boston and Philadelphia are less rich and smaller than Washington DC. There's only one city north of Washington DC that fits your description.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I did not know Chicago was south of dc.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
the absolutely massive symbolic value of it being the fricking united states capital?
are you actually genuinely r-slurred or something
then the rest of the world acknowledges the confederate states as a legitimate real country and not a collection of rebellious states.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
They still lost vicksburg and control over Mississippi. Lee would have been stuck in north. What could he have done? March deeper in north? Take city that had actually value other then symbolic? With what manpower?
And rest of the world? British? Yes. French? Maybe. Nobody else would have thrown their lot in with slave state. And british wouldnt have increased material support more they had. DC is just one small city in middle of swamp. You really think people would have just laid down arms becouse rebels took it? Grant would just turn back go home. Sure it would have hurt. It would bummed them out. Been bad for moral. But it would have made north angry.
Vigsburg had more value then dc.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
the confederates controlling DC and getting outside help could have completely flipped the war. the blockade gets broke by the british, so they can get their cotton. the confederates get war materiel. the british send troops over because frick the US those turncoats! the french get involved. things could have went in a very different way. the confderates getting recognized as a real country puts a lot of pressure on the US.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
There is no indication British would have used their navy or send troops. Internally british were having trouble over us civil war. Plebs supported north. Elite supported south. Becouse war fricked up US as whole. But for general population. There was no doubt. Slavery bad. British saw textile industry strikes over us civil war. Even when cotton that kept their jobs alive was coming from south.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
This is what it looks like smartly written.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Lord Mountbatten was a massive p-dophile who was righteously slaughtered by the IRA
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
Washington DC is the fourth largest city in the United States by Metro. I think you might be r-slurred
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
No its not. If you wanna argue. At least be accurate.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
If Lee had won Gettysburg and threatened D.C. its very likely that Lincoln would have faced more political pressure and could have lost his reelection which would result in McClellan getting elected and pursuing peace with the South.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Or people get angry and vote who ever promise them souther blood. They still took vicksburg and were piling up victories in west. And after gettysburg. Lee was mangled. Even if he had won it. His army wouldnt be in shape to do anything. South didnt have manpower or material support push further. For north. Population. Industry and farmland was north of dc.
Its really really hard to break peoples spirits. First they get angry and vengful. Then you have to beat them up quite bit more. Only then they get broken. There was nothing indicating taking dc would break north.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context