- 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
1
Posted on 1/29/19 at 10:35 am to Cump11b
quote:
but all the North had to do was allow us to peaceably exit the Union
Negative... there was no breaking up the Union.
you thought your argument was so good yet you failed in the first sentence. It was completely legal what SC did. imagine if you were abiding all laws and you get arrested........how would you feel. This post was edited on 1/29/19 at 10:36 am
Posted on 1/29/19 at 10:37 am to The Torch
Still hard to believe that's a real song
Posted on 1/29/19 at 10:39 am to JETigER
quote:
the states have no rights to legalize marijuana because the north won the war. if the south won the war then the states would have the right to legalize marijuana.
The South would still be run by paternalistic social elites with an elevated sense of moral superiority to be dictated upon the common masses. I highly doubt MJ would be legal in CSA especially since AAs like it so much.
This post was edited on 1/29/19 at 10:39 am
Posted on 1/29/19 at 10:40 am to Cump11b
quote:
What???? Yes they were. What, are you trying to say they were fighting for "state's rights"? The "states rights" idea is completely wrong.
quote:no it wasnt. you sound really uneducated.
The states rights argument is centered around the state's right to choose to have slavery.
quote:are you joking? Plantations that had slaves were the richest of the rich.
Many plantations couldn't afford to pay workers to perform the work needed to harvest the product and maintain anywhere near the same profit level.
Posted on 1/29/19 at 10:44 am to Johnny Roastbeef
quote:i know the single slave my g-g-g-grand father owned fought in the texas revolution at his side and earned his freedom.
Actually few thousand blacks did fight for the Confederacy. Now a majority of them were there serving their masters but they were also on the frontlines with rifles in hand fighting back
Posted on 1/29/19 at 10:46 am to TigerFanInSouthland
quote:
Well until that Fort Sumter thing.
quote:
I don’t think you understand that the Southerners tried to get the Northerners to leave that post. They wouldn’t, and as it was on South Carolina property, and of the South, Beauregard was left with not many options as to expelling them.
It was federal property. Maybe SC should have offered to buy the installation instead of firing on it. Buchanan was still President and may have gone along with it.
This post was edited on 1/29/19 at 10:51 am
Posted on 1/29/19 at 10:52 am to Tigeralum2008
quote:
The South would still be run by paternalistic social elites with an elevated sense of moral superiority to be dictated upon the common masses. I
just like the north..... and every state in the nation right now. Posted on 1/29/19 at 10:52 am to GetCocky11
quote:
It was federal property.
Posted on 1/29/19 at 10:54 am to Nutriaitch
quote:
Well until that Fort Sumter thing.
they were trespassing
That's not really how it works.
If Germany wanted us to relinquish our bases there, and attacked us if we didn't, how would you frame that action? Surely you'd consider it an attack on the US, no?
Posted on 1/29/19 at 10:58 am to slackster
quote:
If Germany wanted us to relinquish our bases there, and attacked us if we didn't, how would you frame that action? Surely you'd consider it an attack on the US, no?
If Germany asked us to leave their land and did so peacefully, multiple times, I’d say we have the attack coming. That’s their country, their land, and if they don’t want us there, then so be it.
Posted on 1/29/19 at 10:59 am to CarRamrod
quote:
quote:
It was federal property.
quote:
Resolution of the State Legislature, passed Dec. 21, 1836:
"Resolved, That this State do cede to the United States, all the right title and claim of South Carolina to the site of Fort Sumter and the requisite quantity of adjacent territory"
LINK
Posted on 1/29/19 at 11:06 am to Tigeralum2008
Pretty well put except for failing to add anything about the North’s draconian demands on the South.
Posted on 1/29/19 at 11:06 am to GetCocky11
quote:
I don’t think you understand that the Southerners tried to get the Northerners to leave that post. They wouldn’t, and as it was on South Carolina property, and of the South, Beauregard was left with not many options as to expelling them.
It was federal property. Maybe SC should have offered to buy the installation instead of firing on it. Buchanan was still President and may have gone along with it.
I guess the Cubans have the same argument as SC in regards to Guantanimo Bay. Ole Fidel would have been perfectly justified in shelling the marines stationed there.
Posted on 1/29/19 at 11:10 am to Havoc
quote:
Pretty well put except for failing to add anything about the North’s draconian demands on the South.
I fully concede the North stoked the fires of war just as much as the South.
Posted on 1/29/19 at 11:14 am to CarRamrod
quote:
no it wasn't. you sound really uneducated.
English baw... learn how to use conjunctions before calling someone uneducated. Furthermore, this notion of slavery not contributing to the civil war is completely asinine. You are in denial.
quote:
are you joking? Plantations that had slaves were the richest of the rich.
They didn't pay them a working wage... they purchased them and fed them... that's completely different than hiring them and paying them a working wage. On the big plantations, half were basically starved.
Additionally, the plantations considered to be the "richest of the rich" were the big ones (100 or more slaves). The plantations who had < 25 slaves (some could argue that number could be 50) would be considered middle class and not in the same class of the rest of the aristocratic south.
Posted on 1/29/19 at 11:15 am to Tigeralum2008
quote:
since AAs like it so much.
And not our sons at tha universitay in Ahxfurd, Athuns, or Tuscaloooosa.
Posted on 1/29/19 at 11:17 am to JETigER
quote:
the states have no rights to legalize marijuana because the north won the war. if the south won the war then the states would have the right to legalize marijuana.
Well this is completely unrelated and is a stretch if I ever saw one.
Posted on 1/29/19 at 11:18 am to Cump11b
quote:
the states have no rights to legalize marijuana because the north won the war. if the south won the war then the states would have the right to legalize marijuana.
Well this is completely unrelated and is a stretch if I ever saw one.
It's the eptiome of a Red Herring argumentative fallacy
Posted on 1/29/19 at 11:20 am to Cdawg
I see the direction your jabbing in, but swing and a miss CDawg
Page 5 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News