I would pay the same prices for unpainted, unassembled FFG ships if it meant they were produced/shipped in the US.

Nope not me. I wouldn't have gotten them in the first place.

I would pay the same prices for unpainted, unassembled FFG ships if it meant they were produced/shipped in the US.

Remember... red painted TIEs do not go fasta!

If they are TIE Interceptors they do.

Ya know... the more I think about it, the whole union dock fiasco and it's affect on the miniature gaming world would make a great plot for a Big Bang Theory episode...

Wait, there's such a thing as a good Big Bang Theory episode?

You shut yer mouth when you're talking to me!!!

This is the greatest thread ever. It wins the internet. So much interesting in depth debate.

A pragmatic suggestion - route the shipments to ports on the gulf coast. The opportunity cost savings from many, many customers eagerly waiting to empty their wallets has to be greater than the additional shipping cost. X-wing is one of the hottest games, yet the shelves are bare. It is time to take action on a workaround to the problem.

Might the ships not be committed to docking at their original destinations by now? I can imagine it being very hard to change your destination dock when you've already arrived at one.

They should build a big railway! Don't Russia and Alaska get quite close together? Build a bridge or tunnel at the Bering Straight!

Anyone know how much freight travels from China to Europe by train, compared to by boat?

Yeah, let's leave the Civil War oit of this. Punning Pundit is right, the reason the South left was becuase of Slave Owning Rights that they felt were going to be taken away through legislation. It was a fiscal decision disguised as State's Rights and it was one of the first things mentioned in the Articles of Secession and is the only State's Rights mentioned in the doccument as being infringed upon.

There was no other reason but Slavehood Rights and right after seceding the South mobilized an army and marched north to take more Territory to make a Slave Owning State.

There was no nobility in the Secession and it was all about Money and ownership of property (The property being other human beings.) The Right to Own Slaves is not a justifiable cuase to leave the Union. It would be like argueing ISIS has the right to start its own country and do with its people as they please becuase it is popular among the ISIS followers.

ISIS do, if the local population agree, have the right to form their own country - there's nothing inviolable about the currently defined countries. What they don't have the right to do is torture and kill people, or all the other horrible things (in my opinion) that they do. Similarly the South had the right to form their own country, they just didn't have the right to own slaves, or kill or torture people, etc. The North was right to stop them in this case, but just because the South's reason to leave was a terrible one doesn't mean they don't have a right to leave when they want to.

Don't be cuaght on the wrong side of history becuase of Idealism. You will not like yourself for it.

Yeah, let's leave the Civil War oit of this. Punning Pundit is right, the reason the South left was becuase of Slave Owning Rights that they felt were going to be taken away through legislation. It was a fiscal decision disguised as State's Rights and it was one of the first things mentioned in the Articles of Secession and is the only State's Rights mentioned in the doccument as being infringed upon.

There was no other reason but Slavehood Rights and right after seceding the South mobilized an army and marched north to take more Territory to make a Slave Owning State.

There was no nobility in the Secession and it was all about Money and ownership of property (The property being other human beings.) The Right to Own Slaves is not a justifiable cuase to leave the Union. It would be like argueing ISIS has the right to start its own country and do with its people as they please becuase it is popular among the ISIS followers.

The South was expected to pay to produce and ship raw goods that the north who would the refine those materials the produce goods which the south had to pay the return shipping cost thus getting it both way. When the south tried building its on refining mills the North States would like ram thru Federal Laws making it all but impossible to do. This is where the State Right issue came from. The right of the state to ignore Federal Laws designed to enslave it to the industrial north.

Yeah, that's why there were all those famous debates and border wars in Kansas and Missouri over all that northern imperialism.

While reading up and trying to find anything on the mills issue, stumbled upon this great quote about the Confederacy.

"To the old Union they had said that the Federal power had no authority to interfere with slavery issues in a state. To their new nation they would declare that the state had no power to interfere with a federal protection of slavery. Of the many testimonials to the fact that slavery, and not states rights, really lay at the heart of their movement, this was the most eloquent of all."

And it's a very great point. The Confederate constitution expressly forbade states from forcing a slave owner to free his slaves. If the Georgia legislature were to have a change of heart and pass a law to free slaves in their state, such an action would have been found unconstitutional.

So the idea that slavery was not the cause of the Civil War, but it was actually States' Rights in the face of an interfering federal government, is rather ridiculous on the face of it. There's your attempt to rewrite history.

Why the hell are we talking about the civil war, guys? Talk about a derailed thread!

Why the hell are we talking about the civil war, guys? Talk about a derailed thread!

Because we needed something else to occupy ourselves until the ports and longshoreman can unload our boat.

^{ITT: People still think the Civil War was fought over slavery and that Abraham Lincoln, the guy that first suspended habeus corpus, was the all-American Hero of Freedom.}

Dem boats, though, for real, I'm jonesing for some Wave 6 action. Vassal doesn't count!

Ya know... the more I think about it, the whole union dock fiasco and it's affect on the miniature gaming world would make a great plot for a Big Bang Theory episode...

Wait, there's such a thing as a good Big Bang Theory episode?

You shut yer mouth when you're talking to me!!!

But it's like a minstrel show with nerds instead of blackface. They're laughing at, not with, basically allowing people to feel like they're in with the smart crowd while at the same time be smugly superior. The way they represent women is pretty lousy too.

Yeah, let's leave the Civil War oit of this. Punning Pundit is right, the reason the South left was becuase of Slave Owning Rights that they felt were going to be taken away through legislation. It was a fiscal decision disguised as State's Rights and it was one of the first things mentioned in the Articles of Secession and is the only State's Rights mentioned in the doccument as being infringed upon.

There was no other reason but Slavehood Rights and right after seceding the South mobilized an army and marched north to take more Territory to make a Slave Owning State.

There was no nobility in the Secession and it was all about Money and ownership of property (The property being other human beings.) The Right to Own Slaves is not a justifiable cuase to leave the Union. It would be like argueing ISIS has the right to start its own country and do with its people as they please becuase it is popular among the ISIS followers.

Nice to see how completely history has been rewritten. You got one point right though. The American Civil War was fought over profit. Slavery is the strawman used to justify the war and villify the south. The true cause was the Industrial North keeping a strangle hold on the Agraian South economy.

The South was expected to pay to produce and ship raw goods that the north who would the refine those materials the produce goods which the south had to pay the return shipping cost thus getting it both way. When the south tried building its on refining mills the North States would like ram thru Federal Laws making it all but impossible to do. This is where the State Right issue came from. The right of the state to ignore Federal Laws designed to enslave it to the industrial north.

Read the Articles Of Secession writen by the Souther Governent. The First Thing Mentioned Was About Slavehood. Period! No if ands or buts! End of story.

It was sold to the Southern public as a break from the oppersive Feds but that was to sell it to the general public that the Southern Goverment had been using and manipulating for years becuase most of the public did not own slaves. So if you look at it from how the Southern Goverment sold the propaganda then yes, the common soldier was fighting to be free of the oppressive Feds. But when you look at the documents that the Southern Government was writing it was 80% about slavey rights. But only the rich could afford slaves and they never carried a gun on the front lines so you need to get the poor man to fight for you. But he doesn't care about slaves becuase he doesn't own one. But the wreck that was happening in the Southern economy that was a fault of both Northern and Southern reliance on the textile industry to support our country was made the scapegoat of the South.

Read the History Books.

The Civil War was not about Slavery. It was not about State's Rights. It was not about Northern majorities rigging the economic game against the South.

The Civil War was about Slavery, State's Rights, and the Northern legislative majorities rigging the economic game against the South.

Another thing the Civil War was not about was "West coast port issues," which is the topic at hand for this thread.

Yeah, let's leave the Civil War oit of this. Punning Pundit is right, the reason the South left was becuase of Slave Owning Rights that they felt were going to be taken away through legislation. It was a fiscal decision disguised as State's Rights and it was one of the first things mentioned in the Articles of Secession and is the only State's Rights mentioned in the doccument as being infringed upon.

There was no other reason but Slavehood Rights and right after seceding the South mobilized an army and marched north to take more Territory to make a Slave Owning State.

There was no nobility in the Secession and it was all about Money and ownership of property (The property being other human beings.) The Right to Own Slaves is not a justifiable cuase to leave the Union. It would be like argueing ISIS has the right to start its own country and do with its people as they please becuase it is popular among the ISIS followers.

Nice to see how completely history has been rewritten. You got one point right though. The American Civil War was fought over profit. Slavery is the strawman used to justify the war and villify the south. The true cause was the Industrial North keeping a strangle hold on the Agraian South economy.

The South was expected to pay to produce and ship raw goods that the north who would the refine those materials the produce goods which the south had to pay the return shipping cost thus getting it both way. When the south tried building its on refining mills the North States would like ram thru Federal Laws making it all but impossible to do. This is where the State Right issue came from. The right of the state to ignore Federal Laws designed to enslave it to the industrial north.

When South Carolina seceded from the Union after Lincoln was elected, but before his taking office, they declared their reasons in a document known as (sorry) "South Carolina Declaration of Causes of Secession".

This document lays out their version of the history of the US, and leads to the conclusion that if they have a grievance, South Carolina can leave. Then they spell out that grievance:

The Constitution of the United States, in its 4th Article, "provides as follows:

'No person held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up, on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due.'"

http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/document/south-carolina-declaration-of-causes-of-secession/

The Dunning School of history was able to re-write the memory of the antebellum period so that people think the war was over... Something else. But nope. Listen to the words the people themselves said at the time. Slavery. They were afraid slavery would be taken from them. So they left.

The Civil War was not about Slavery. It was not about State's Rights. It was not about Northern majorities rigging the economic game against the South.

The Civil War was about Slavery, State's Rights, and the Northern legislative majorities rigging the economic game against the South.

Another thing the Civil War was not about was "West coast port issues," which is the topic at hand for this thread.

I chortled...you made me laugh!!

Wonderfully put back on topic :-)

Yeah, let's leave the Civil War oit of this. Punning Pundit is right, the reason the South left was becuase of Slave Owning Rights that they felt were going to be taken away through legislation. It was a fiscal decision disguised as State's Rights and it was one of the first things mentioned in the Articles of Secession and is the only State's Rights mentioned in the doccument as being infringed upon.

There was no other reason but Slavehood Rights and right after seceding the South mobilized an army and marched north to take more Territory to make a Slave Owning State.

There was no nobility in the Secession and it was all about Money and ownership of property (The property being other human beings.) The Right to Own Slaves is not a justifiable cuase to leave the Union. It would be like argueing ISIS has the right to start its own country and do with its people as they please becuase it is popular among the ISIS followers.

Nice to see how completely history has been rewritten. You got one point right though. The American Civil War was fought over profit. Slavery is the strawman used to justify the war and villify the south. The true cause was the Industrial North keeping a strangle hold on the Agraian South economy.

The South was expected to pay to produce and ship raw goods that the north who would the refine those materials the produce goods which the south had to pay the return shipping cost thus getting it both way. When the south tried building its on refining mills the North States would like ram thru Federal Laws making it all but impossible to do. This is where the State Right issue came from. The right of the state to ignore Federal Laws designed to enslave it to the industrial north.

I'd prefer not to get draw into this type of topic in this forum, but you may wish to read a few of the various articles of secession before you say someone else is rewriting history. A very blunt one is Mississippi's.

Otherwise if we are not rewriting history can we talk about X-Wing?

Yeah, let's leave the Civil War oit of this. Punning Pundit is right, the reason the South left was becuase of Slave Owning Rights that they felt were going to be taken away through legislation. It was a fiscal decision disguised as State's Rights and it was one of the first things mentioned in the Articles of Secession and is the only State's Rights mentioned in the doccument as being infringed upon.

There was no other reason but Slavehood Rights and right after seceding the South mobilized an army and marched north to take more Territory to make a Slave Owning State.

There was no nobility in the Secession and it was all about Money and ownership of property (The property being other human beings.) The Right to Own Slaves is not a justifiable cuase to leave the Union. It would be like argueing ISIS has the right to start its own country and do with its people as they please becuase it is popular among the ISIS followers.

Nice to see how completely history has been rewritten. You got one point right though. The American Civil War was fought over profit. Slavery is the strawman used to justify the war and villify the south. The true cause was the Industrial North keeping a strangle hold on the Agraian South economy.

The South was expected to pay to produce and ship raw goods that the north who would the refine those materials the produce goods which the south had to pay the return shipping cost thus getting it both way. When the south tried building its on refining mills the North States would like ram thru Federal Laws making it all but impossible to do. This is where the State Right issue came from. The right of the state to ignore Federal Laws designed to enslave it to the industrial north.

When South Carolina seceded from the Union after Lincoln was elected, but before his taking office, they declared their reasons in a document known as (sorry) "South Carolina Declaration of Causes of Secession".

This document lays out their version of the history of the US, and leads to the conclusion that if they have a grievance, South Carolina can leave. Then they spell out that grievance:

The Constitution of the United States, in its 4th Article, "provides as follows:

'No person held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up, on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due.'"http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/document/south-carolina-declaration-of-causes-of-secession/

The Dunning School of history was able to re-write the memory of the antebellum period so that people think the war was over... Something else. But nope. Listen to the words the people themselves said at the time. Slavery. They were afraid slavery would be taken from them. So they left.

But otherwise yes, this is off topic and not the place for this.

The Bering Straight is 82 km if you are standing at its narrowist point in Russia. But if you are in Alaska it is only 51 miles! So it depends on your point of view.

Well it'll be a cool technological achievement either way you measure it! Get cracking you guys!

This point here is built too much on idealism and a belief that what the majority believes is always right. History has shown that this is a dangerous assumption that has lead to many genocides and other horrific atrocities that are not acknowledged until we look at it from an outside position. Up until recent times many crimes, like ****, child abuse and hate crimes, were seen as the fault of the victims until history proved them wrong.

Don't be cuaght on the wrong side of history becuase of Idealism. You will not like yourself for it.

There's no such as thing as "what's right", you can't have an assumption about it - what's right is only in the mind of the individual. Being in a majority or minority has nothing to do with it. In my opinion (and what's right can be nothing more than a person's opinion) forcing somebody to remain in a union they don't want to be in is wrong.

What do you mean it's built too much on idealism? What other basis is there for philosophical issues such as "what's right"?

"Don't be cuaght on the wrong side of history becuase of Idealism. You will not like yourself for it."

I honestly don't understand what point you're trying to make here. If right and wrong aren't matters of principle what do you think they are?

Why the hell are we talking about the civil war, guys? Talk about a derailed thread!

Because we needed something else to occupy ourselves until the ports and longshoreman can unload our boat.

Exactly, we'll talk about Star Wars again when they sell us some new toys!

The Civil War was actually started because of a secret deal between Abraham Lincoln and a turkey farmer who had nearly-crippling surpluses of turkey.

And thus, a bloody war took place among citizens and brothers in order for Thanksgiving to be created as a capitalistic ploy by good ol' Honest Abe to sell turkeys and give tax write offs to turkey farmers.

If we didnt have to spend so much money on Thanksgiving for traveling, feasting and overall time-wasting, the longshoremen would've had more time to work and be paid instead of feeling undervalued and underpaid.

If Thanksgiving didnt exist (which it really shouldn't) we'd have more productive and efficient ports running on a consistent schedule.

If the ports and those working there were on a more consistent schedule, S&V would've been in our hands by now for sure.

We'd also have more money to spend on FFG products because we wouldn't have wasted it all on Thanksgiving AND Christmas.

Hence, I have come to the conclusion that the back-alley deal between Abe Linc and that turkey farmer to start a war in order to increase the domestic market and demand for turkeys on an artificial national holiday is to blame for Soontir Fel sitting on the shelf, collecting dust because we do not have our Autothrusters yet.

Well you know what Tyrannosaurus Rex were Tanish Beige with a slight green under belly. So there.

I must admit that I love talking about the American Civil War. I did get a BA in History, focusing primarily on the ACW (American Civil War). I want to talk about it more, but don't want to derail this thread further off topic.

That is why I have created a BRAND NEW THREAD in the OFF TOPICS section to talk about it! I encourage all those that want to babble on about antebellum, slavery, economics, secessionist statements, and anything similar join me there.

http://community.fantasyflightgames.com/index.php?/topic/134670-polite-discussion-on-the-american-civil-war/

I only ask that you be polite to each other.

Wow! this is the most off topic thread I have ever read. Civil War! Big Bang Theory! good thing I didn't read all 10 pages.