[Forster]

I'm watching this movie and I've heard plenty of rumors about it being mostly hollywood, but I would like to know if Santa Anna really said, "If we are not successful, our grandchildren and their grandchildren...will beg for crumbs from the Americans!"

[Rajin Cajun]

Pffh Mexicans are not begging for crumbs they are getting free fuckin handouts from the Government.

[Nattering Nabob]

Mexicans are not begging for crumbs they are getting free fuckin handouts from the Government.

...aw come on...they get free head start classes for the kiddies...they get free medical care when they have to go to the emergency room...(I'm guessing we're talking about illegals)...but that is about it...illegals don't get welfare or food stamps...(whether or not they drive Cadillacs is a matter for debate I suppose )...

[Rajin Cajun]

Not if they get Amnesty natural born citizens will become second class citizens compared to all the illegal benefits.

[Nattering Nabob]

Not if they get Amnesty natural born citizens will become second class citizens compared to all the illegal benefits.

...38Give, and it will be given to you. A good measure, pressed down, shaken together and running over, will be poured into your lap. For with the measure you use, it will be measured to you." Luke 6


...I really believe that...

[Truthseeker]

The "fight to the last man" at the Alamo is a myth. The Alamo was taken quickly and many defenders were taken prisoner including Davy Crocket who Santa Anna executed.

It's completely the work of American propaganda. Damn effective too.

[Squidyak]

The "fight to the last man" at the Alamo is a myth. The Alamo was taken quickly and many defenders were taken prisoner including Davy Crocket who Santa Anna executed.

It's completely the work of American propaganda. Damn effective too.

the siege lasted 13 days and there is no real evidence that crocket was among the handful of men executed by santa ana.

[Red Rebel]

"If we are not successful, our grandchildren and their grandchildren...will beg for crumbs from the Americans!"

I highly doubt that. Mexico was favorite among Europeans because they had more land and a larger army.

[Truthseeker]

the siege lasted 13 days

And fell in the first assault.

here is no real evidence that crocket was among the handful of men executed by santa ana.

doesn't José Enrique de la Peña's detail such an occurance? isn't that "evidence"?

[Squidyak]

And fell in the first assault.

after a 13 day siege. i wouldn't call that falling quickly.

doesn't José Enrique de la Peña's detail such an occurance? isn't that "evidence"?

not really.

That doesn't settle the question of Davy Crockett's death, though. Just because de la Peña's diary is likely authentic doesn't necessarily make it accurate. Even if de la Peña really did see Santa Anna order the execution of some captured Texans, how could he be sure one of them was Crockett? He'd never seen the man before, and his account gives no indication of any attempt to identify the prisoners at the time. De la Peña may have heard later (he actually wrote the diary several months after the battle) that one of the men had been Crockett, but that hardly proves anything – other witnesses claimed they'd seen the body on the battlefield.

http://www.straightdope.com/columns/040514.html

keep in mind the mexican army also claimed to have killed 600 defenders, which we know isn't anywhere near accurate. is it possible crocket was executed, yes. is it a known fact? no. just another example of modern revisionist history, like removing slavery from the equation in the civil war.[/quote]

[Rajin Cajun]

Slavery had nothing to do with the Civil War.

[Truthseeker]

after a 13 day siege. i wouldn't call that falling quickly.

If they besieged them for 1000 years there is no victory without an assault, you must measure not just days passed but assaults repulsed, one is not very many. It means the first chance the defenders had to be beaten they were.

not really.

the mexican army also claimed

Armies engage in propaganda, diaries only tend to eagerate the acts of the author and are otherwise reliable except for when they don't have complete information.

[Squidyak]

If they besieged them for 1000 years there is no victory without an assault, you must measure not just days passed but assaults repulsed, one is not very many. It means the first chance the defenders had to be beaten they were.

so a successful attack after a year long siege would be a quick victory? that's a ridiculous argument. the facts are that the mexican army was held off for 13 days and we don't know for sure the identities of the men executed by santa ana. to claim you can glean the truth from such limited information points to an agenda.

[Rajin Cajun]

Who says they were even held off? DO you even know how you conduct a siege? You sit around having cut off their supplies and watch them panic most sieges last more then 13 days which means they probably cut off the Alamo before a Supply group could reach them. So theoretically they were probably had no food or water and might have been low on powder and ball so taking it in Thirteen days would be a huge accomplishment.

[Squidyak]

Who says they were even held off? DO you even know how you conduct a siege? You sit around having cut off their supplies and watch them panic most sieges last more then 13 days which means they probably cut off the Alamo before a Supply group could reach them. So theoretically they were probably had no food or water and might have been low on powder and ball so taking it in Thirteen days would be a huge accomplishment.

they were held off for 13 days. do you think santa ana wanted to sit around? was he on vacation? no. he had to wait until he felt he had enough of an advantage to attack. it took 13 days for him to feel confident enough. if he thought he could he would have tried to take it the first day.

[motojackal]

they were held off for 13 days. do you think santa ana wanted to sit around? was he on vacation? no. he had to wait until he felt he had enough of an advantage to attack. it took 13 days for him to feel confident enough. if he thought he could he would have tried to take it the first day.

Santa Ana would only have made an assault on the first day if there was an overwhelming strategic need for a quick victory.
Why would he try to take it on the first day against fresh defenders ? He would have been stupid to try, it would have caused uneccessary casualities in his own army. Much cheaper and easier to take it after the defenders were demorolised by lack of supplies, food and powder.
There is no doubt that the "Hollywood Alamo" bore little resemblance to the real battle and the "fight to the last man" is propaganda.

[Truthseeker]

13 days for him to feel confident enough. if he thought he could he would have tried to take it the first day.

But they weren't "held off" which would imply they were actually trying to come in!

[Rajin Cajun]

Thank you for proving Squidy you have no idea what the fuck you are talking about.

[Squidyak]

Thank you for proving Squidy you have no idea what the fuck you are talking about.

how so? the argument that the alamo fell quickly doesn't hold up because it took them 13 days to take it. the fact that the assault took only one makes no difference. the argument that davy crockett was executed by santa ana doesn't hold up because the only source is a questionable journal. anyone who can't see these two facts has serious logic issues.

[Truthseeker]

the argument that the alamo fell quickly doesn't hold up because it took them 13 days to take it. the fact that the assault took only one makes no difference.

Even if you were right about that (you aren't), it still means it fell EASILY.

the only source is a questionable journal.

It's authentic and has no reason to falsify the issue, there is also little or no contradictory evidence.

And what is the indisputably reliable source of your account?