- 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 11:53 am to WeeWee
Posted on 4/12/16 at 11:53 am to WeeWee
quote:
So 44,000+ slaves in Maryland is almost dead to you?
Yes. When you consider that every other union state besides Missouri (hotly contested state re: slavery) and Delaware (had less than 2k slaves) had zero slaves in 1860, I don't think the notion that slavery was all but dead in the north isn't far fetched at all.
1
Posted on 4/12/16 at 11:53 am to ballscaster
quote:
That's your opinion, but that the US was superior to the militia is incontrovertible true.
You do realize that the Union army was rather small, and that Lincoln had to call up the state militias don't you? Lincoln sent a letter to governor of Virginia asking for the Virginia militia to be used to subdue South Carolina, and that forced Virginia, Arkansas, North Carolina, and Tennessee off of the fence and into the CSA. Lincoln feared that the other slave states would soon join them so he declared marshall law, and shutdown the state legislatures in Missouri, Kentucky, and Marylant (all of which was illegal BTW).
Posted on 4/12/16 at 11:56 am to WeeWee
TLDR. Fort Sumter was and is federal property. It was owned by the US. A militia took it, and they got their asses handed to them in the end.
Posted on 4/12/16 at 11:58 am to Darth_Vader
quote:It means exactly what it looks like it means. The US was superior to those who took arms against it.
Superior to the "militia"? What does that even mean?
Posted on 4/12/16 at 11:59 am to WeeWee
quote:Result: decisive victory for the US over the inferiors.
You do realize that the Union army was rather small, and that Lincoln had to call up the state militias don't you? Lincoln sent a letter to governor of Virginia asking for the Virginia militia to be used to subdue South Carolina, and that forced Virginia, Arkansas, North Carolina, and Tennessee off of the fence and into the CSA. Lincoln feared that the other slave states would soon join them so he declared marshall law, and shutdown the state legislatures in Missouri, Kentucky, and Marylant (all of which was illegal BTW).
Posted on 4/12/16 at 11:59 am to ballscaster
quote:
TLDR. Fort Sumter was and is federal property. It was owned by the US. A militia took it, and they got their asses handed to them in the end.
Again with the "militia" angle. Why?
Posted on 4/12/16 at 12:01 pm to lsu2006
quote:
Yes. When you consider that every other union state besides Missouri (hotly contested state re: slavery) and Delaware (had less than 2k slaves) had zero slaves in 1860, I don't think the notion that slavery was all but dead in the north isn't far fetched at all.
All except for the 44,000 in Maryland, 1790 in Delaware, 225,000 in Kentucky, the 114,000 in Missouri, and the 2 in Kansas. You do realize that is over 10% of the entire enslaved population in 1860 don't you? LINK
Being better by comparison does not make you all but dead.
Posted on 4/12/16 at 12:02 pm to ballscaster
quote:
Superior to the "militia"? What does that even mean?
It means exactly what it looks like it means. The US was superior to those who took arms against it.
And what sort of force do you believe the US used to win this war?
Posted on 4/12/16 at 12:07 pm to ballscaster
quote:
TLDR. Fort Sumter was and is federal property. It was owned by the US.
So you are admitting that you are an ignorant dumbass? Thanks for the confirmation.
ETA: The militia as you call them killed over 200,000 more yankees than the north killed of them. So who got their arse kicked all depends on which angle you look at it from. I look at it from the angle of you be a dumbass.
This post was edited on 4/12/16 at 12:14 pm
Posted on 4/12/16 at 12:13 pm 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.
Say what you want about of DV, but he knows his Civil War history.
Posted on 4/12/16 at 12:15 pm to AlxTgr
Go read the declarations of secession from the individual states.
Then remind me: at that time, what else was the Union doing to offend the southern states? Were they blocking our ports? Forcing us to let queers get married? Making us teach about dinosaurs on the ark?
Then remind me: at that time, what else was the Union doing to offend the southern states? Were they blocking our ports? Forcing us to let queers get married? Making us teach about dinosaurs on the ark?
Posted on 4/12/16 at 12:26 pm to Mung
quote:
Go read the declarations of secession from the individual states.
Then remind me: at that time, what else was the Union doing to offend the southern states? Were they blocking our ports? Forcing us to let queers get married? Making us teach about dinosaurs on the ark?
1. Yes, slavery was the main root issue that lead the south to leave the Union.
2. The issue of keeping Slavery was not the only reason for the South to leave the Union, and in fact was but a symptom of another reason the South broke away from the Union.
3. This reason was (as I've spelled out multiple times in this thread) the growing power of the federal government, the north's growing hold on power over the federal government, and the north's diametrically opposite economic interests (mainly taxes and tariffs) that could lead to economic ruin and subservience of the South to the North. It basically boiled down to the fact the south felt the system was evolving into one in which the north held all the political power and their only recourse at that point was to dissolve the Union.
Posted on 4/12/16 at 12:47 pm to Master of Sinanju
quote:
However, it was the biggest issue, and without slavery there probably would have been no war
But you are looking only at one thing, and missing the other key component; why did Lincoln not let the Confederacy alone?
The answer is because he wanted to preserve the union. The answer isn't to free the slaves or to retaliate for Fort Sumpter.
So while you can argue a cause for the war was state's rights and the right to own slaves; you can't ignore the other equally important reason, to preserve the union.
Posted on 4/12/16 at 1:09 pm to Mung
quote:I over estimated your intellect, and for that, I apologize. Continue on with your simplistic view of life.
Then remind me: at that time, what else was the Union doing to offend the southern states? Were they blocking our ports? Forcing us to let queers get married? Making us teach about dinosaurs on the ark?
Posted on 4/12/16 at 3:49 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:Historical accuracy.
Again with the "militia" angle. Why?
Posted on 4/12/16 at 3:50 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:(One word can mean two things.)
And what sort of force do you believe the US used to win this war?
Posted on 4/12/16 at 3:50 pm to WeeWee
quote:Meltdown: Day infinity
So you are admitting that you are an ignorant dumbass? Thanks for the confirmation.
This post was edited on 4/12/16 at 3:53 pm
Posted on 4/12/16 at 3:52 pm to AlxTgr
quote:^^^ It's real.
I over estimated your intellect, and for that, I apologize. Continue on with your simplistic view of life
Posted on 4/12/16 at 3:59 pm to ballscaster
Well this was an interesting thread until Ballcaster kept ruining it.
Posted on 4/12/16 at 4:04 pm to EvrybodysAllAmerican
Page 8 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News