- 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: Abraham Lincoln radically changed the nature of the Civil War on this day 161 years ago
Posted on 9/22/23 at 3:23 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
Posted on 9/22/23 at 3:23 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
People who shite on the Socratic Method have always amused me.
If he cared, he'd see that the information he seeks was posted in this thread already.
He isn't looking to have a legitimate argument.
2
Posted on 9/22/23 at 3:23 pm to CarRamrod
quote:
amazing you condemn slavery yet celebrate Sherman.
That's not a celebration of Sherman. Just recognition that he did what he had to do to hasten the end of the war.
Posted on 9/22/23 at 3:32 pm to GetCocky11
quote:asking ans answering questions? i dont think that means what you wanted it to mean.
People who shite on the Socratic Method have always amused me.
quote:i have read the thread since i replied to that... and you have still yet to being your information. just "uh read it bro!" Are you correct, maybe? but on the surface 50% of people own 1 slave isnt believable.
If he cared, he'd see that the information he seeks was posted in this thread already.
He isn't looking to have a legitimate argument.
Posted on 9/22/23 at 3:34 pm to CarRamrod
quote:
i dont think that means what you wanted it to mean.
I think you should spend more time reading and less time posting.
Posted on 9/22/23 at 3:35 pm to RollTide1987
Slavery ended in Latin America not long after our civil war not because their elite were "progressive," but because they found that it was cheaper and more efficient to use hired hands and seasonal free labor. With free labor the employer didn't have to provide food, shelter and medical care year round.
The Virginia convention considering secession had a majority opposed to it until Lincoln order the raising of 75,000 troops to suppress the rebellion.
The Virginia convention considering secession had a majority opposed to it until Lincoln order the raising of 75,000 troops to suppress the rebellion.
Posted on 9/22/23 at 3:43 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:and this still doesnt help your arguement...
I think you should spend more time reading and less time posting.
Posted on 9/22/23 at 3:53 pm to CarRamrod
quote:
but on the surface 50% of people own 1 slave isnt believable.
There were over 400,000 slaves in SC in 1860 vs a total free population of about 300,000. It really isn’t that far-fetched.
Edit: and it isn’t people, it’s 50% of family units
This post was edited on 9/22/23 at 3:58 pm
Posted on 9/22/23 at 3:56 pm to SouthernHog
quote:Not everyone. Mine were too busy fighting with 5 wives apiece and trying to grow shite in the desert to fight anyone else. Although, they almost went to war with the federal government themselves, in the years just prior to the Civil War. It was the outbreak of that war that caused the federal government to abandon their occupation of Utah.
We all had ancestors that fought for the South. But the North is not without sin.
Posted on 9/22/23 at 4:02 pm to CarRamrod
quote:
and this still doesnt help your arguement...
What's my argument?
Posted on 9/22/23 at 4:07 pm to McGruff21
quote:I enjoy these topics. Go start another Wegovy thread.
All your history threads absolutely suck. They should be downvoted into oblivion
Posted on 9/22/23 at 6:30 pm to northshorebamaman
I only wish Lincoln had lived long enough to follow through with his plans for colonization. Man what a different world we would be in today……
Posted on 9/22/23 at 8:02 pm to CarRamrod
quote:
Nope, they were handed a gun and told turn around and go fight.
As if.
There were maybe one or two generals in the entire Union army who were in favor of arming freed slaves with muskets and having them go off and fight. The vast majority of them were used as manual labor.
Posted on 9/22/23 at 8:05 pm to RollTide1987
The largest attempted seizure of private property without compensation in US history.
Blatantly unconstitutional.
How do we know?
Because if it had any legal effect, the 13th Amendment would not have been necessary.
Blatantly unconstitutional.
How do we know?
Because if it had any legal effect, the 13th Amendment would not have been necessary.
Posted on 9/22/23 at 8:06 pm to F1y0n7h3W4LL
quote:
A whopping 2 years after the Emancipation Proclamation. Sounds more like political pandering than anything.
No.
It's because he understood that post-war the Courts would absolutely destroy his Emancipation Proclamation. Lincoln himself even said that it was a war measure. He understood how fickle people were and that once the war was over, the Northern populace wouldn't care as much if slavery survived or died. He needed the Thirteenth Amendment passed and sent off to the states for ratification while the war was still going on. Otherwise, there was no guarantee that the practice would be finished in the United States forever.
Posted on 9/23/23 at 9:28 am to RollTide1987
quote:
quote:
Blatantly unconstitutional.
How do we know?
Because Lincoln even told his Cabinet as much:
YouTube
Lincoln wrought more damage and destruction to the US Constitution than the Confederacy ever dreamed of.
Posted on 9/23/23 at 9:41 am to udtiger
quote:
Lincoln wrought more damage and destruction to the US Constitution than the Confederacy ever dreamed of.
He definitely bent the rules to win the Civil War but I believe he felt that the Constitution and thus the nation would be indefensible if states could just leave the nation willy nilly.
Posted on 9/23/23 at 9:43 am to RollTide1987
quote:
He definitely bent the rules to win the Civil War but I believe he felt that the Constitution and thus the nation would be indefensible if states could just leave the nation willy nilly
So...he trashed to Constitution to prevent a legal and constitutional process.
Got it.
Posted on 9/23/23 at 9:47 am to 0x15E
quote:
He did. Ever heard of the Thirteenth Amendment?
quote:
Don’t you dare bring logic with legitimate proof into the conversation about souther oppression.
he was already dead when the 13th was ratified
Posted on 9/23/23 at 9:50 am to RollTide1987
quote:
He definitely bent the rules to win the Civil War but I believe he felt that the Constitution and thus the nation would be indefensible if states could just leave the nation willy nilly.
so a president can "bend the rules" if he feels like his stance is correct?
Page 6 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News