- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: 155 Years Ago Today Confederate Forces Opened Fire on Fort Sumter
Posted on 4/12/16 at 8:42 am to Darth_Vader
Posted on 4/12/16 at 8:42 am to Darth_Vader
The confederate traitors still haven't recovered from the arse whipping applied by the Union.
1
Posted on 4/12/16 at 8:42 am to NYNolaguy1
quote:
Tell me where in the constitution as written in 1861 says one person can't own another
Your reading and reasoning skills are NOT your long suit. Son.
Posted on 4/12/16 at 8:44 am to Darth_Vader
quote:That is a pretty illogical argument for it being a "War of Northern Aggression"
What you've got to understand is history is oftentimes a matter of perspective. From the Southern point of view the war was one of Northern aggression due to the fact the north refused to retreat from what the South considered now sovereign territory of the Confederate States of America. As I said above, Lincoln could have ordered Anderson to leave Sumter, as Union forces had done at several other Federal installations already. However, instead he chose to hold onto Sumter knowing this move would lead to war. This is where the perspective of the war being one of "Northern Aggression" come from. This point of view was further driven home due to the fact that from the onset it was the Union that invaded the Confederacy starting only a few months after the fall of Fort Sumter.
Secession was treason
Posted on 4/12/16 at 8:44 am to Rickety Cricket
quote:
The confederate traitors still haven't recovered from the arse whipping applied by the Union.
But their message of states being able to govern their own affairs is very much alive in the South today. It also still draws scorn from Washington and the national media.
Posted on 4/12/16 at 8:46 am to LCA131
quote:
Your reading and reasoning skills are NOT your long suit. Son.
So you can't rebut simple pesky facts that get in the way of your narrative. Then you go for ad hominims to buttress your sore little feelings. I am not the one who can't address the facts presented. Do you normally pivot like that when you can't win?This post was edited on 4/12/16 at 8:48 am
Posted on 4/12/16 at 8:47 am to Hog on the Hill
quote:
Secession was treason
Meh. If the people of a state want the state to leave the US, I see no issue with that. They have the right to self-determination.
ETA: But with that said, a majority of citizens in 1860/1861 did not have the same ability to be involved in political affairs like you see today.
This post was edited on 4/12/16 at 8:59 am
Posted on 4/12/16 at 8:47 am to LCA131
quote:
The Constitution of the Confederacy and the US Constitution were substantially identical EXCEPT for the pesky thing about owning another person.
Look it up, Son
At the time we're talking about (namely 1861) there was nothing in the US Constitution stating one person could not own another. In fact, even after the start of the Civil War, several "Union" states still had slavery. Furthermore, even when Lincoln made his "Emancipation Proclamation" in 1863 it did not free even one slave in any of those Union States. All his proclamation did was "free" the slaves in states that were in a state of "rebellion" against the US. Well, seeing how those states now considered themselves to be part of a separate and independent country from the US, none of them paid the least bit of attention to Lincoln's word. The truth of the "Emancipation Proclamation" is that it was a purely political and symbolic gesture that did absolutely nothing.
Posted on 4/12/16 at 8:48 am to NYNolaguy1
quote:
But their message of states being able to govern their own affairs is very much alive in the South today.
Well let's be honest - minimum wage and the right to own another man are two totally different animals.
Posted on 4/12/16 at 8:49 am to Hoyt
quote:
In defense of States' Rights
Lol.
Yeah. Let's go with that.
Posted on 4/12/16 at 8:50 am to Darth_Vader
quote:
What you've got to understand is history is oftentimes a matter of perspective. From the Southern point of view the war was one of Northern aggression due to the fact the north refused to retreat from what the South considered now sovereign territory of the Confederate States of America. As I said above, Lincoln could have ordered Anderson to leave Sumter, as Union forces had done at several other Federal installations already. However, instead he chose to hold onto Sumter knowing this move would lead to war. This is where the perspective of the war being one of "Northern Aggression" come from. This point of view was further driven home due to the fact that from the onset it was the Union that invaded the Confederacy starting only a few months after the fall of Fort Sumter.
you are your wife own a house together. Yall are going through some things. She says "look it would better if we broke up, ill take the kitchen and you get the garage." Are you really the aggressor when you want the kitchen back?
This post was edited on 4/12/16 at 8:52 am
Posted on 4/12/16 at 8:50 am to Darth_Vader
quote:
At the time we're talking about (namely 1861) there was nothing in the US Constitution stating one person could not own another. In fact, even after the start of the Civil War, several "Union" states still had slavery. Furthermore, even when Lincoln made his "Emancipation Proclamation" in 1863 it did not free even one slave in any of those Union States. All his proclamation did was "free" the slaves in states that were in a state of "rebellion" against the US. Well, seeing how those states now considered themselves to be part of a separate and independent country from the US, none of them paid the least bit of attention to Lincoln's word. The truth of the "Emancipation Proclamation" is that it was a purely political and symbolic gesture that did absolutely nothing.
Even after the civil war, slavery was legal in the union. It wasn't until the 13th amendment passed that slavery became outlawed in the union- after the civil war ended.
If always cracks me up when someone tries to argue that the war was fought over slavery, yet slavery still existed in the union during and after the civil war.
.Posted on 4/12/16 at 8:51 am to Darth_Vader
quote:
155 Years Ago Today Confederate Forces Opened Fire on Fort Sumter
The 2nd dumbest military decision in history.
Posted on 4/12/16 at 8:52 am to slackster
quote:
Well let's be honest - minimum wage and the right to own another man are two totally different animals.
That, and the "religious liberties" bills, the recent neutral gender bathroom bills that NC just signed, gay marriage, abortion... It's not just minimum wage.
Posted on 4/12/16 at 8:53 am to NYNolaguy1
quote:
If always cracks me up when someone tries to argue that the war was fought over slavery, yet slavery still existed in the union during and after the civil war. .
They're not mutually exclusive. It takes quite a leap of logic to argue that slavery was not the root cause of the war. Just because a state had slaves and stayed in the Union doesn't mean that slavery wasn't the underlying issue with the secession and eventual war.
Posted on 4/12/16 at 8:54 am to Darth_Vader
That was a poor choice.
Posted on 4/12/16 at 8:54 am to Hog on the Hill
quote:
That is a pretty illogical argument for it being a "War of Northern Aggression"
I'm just explaining where the idea came from.
quote:
Secession was treason
Really? Then way was no Confederate ever tried for Treason? Even Jeff Davis himself (was was accused of treason btw) never faced trial for the crime of treason. But I guess you know more about mid-19th century US law than everyone who was actually alive at that time.
Posted on 4/12/16 at 8:55 am to NYNolaguy1
quote:
It's not just minimum wage.
Well of course it isn't just minimum wage, but I picked one to point out how owning another person is a much different argument. All state's rights arguments pale in comparison to the ownership of another human.
At some point we have to draw the line and that seems like a pretty good spot.
Posted on 4/12/16 at 8:56 am to slackster
quote:
They're not mutually exclusive
he also ignores how amazingly difficult it is to pass an amendment
Posted on 4/12/16 at 8:56 am to GreatLakesTiger24
quote:
That was a poor choice.
In hindsight, yes, yes it was. It was a slight miscalculation.
Posted on 4/12/16 at 8:57 am to WeeWee
quote:
The 2nd dumbest military decision in history.
If we're isolating this to American military decisions only, I'll allow it.
Page 2 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News