- 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: On this day 159 years ago, Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation
Posted on 1/2/22 at 3:51 pm to Buck_Rogers
Posted on 1/2/22 at 3:51 pm to Buck_Rogers
quote:
And the north were not the good guys.
That is evident with Sherman and his ‘tactics’ and also, the incident at Ebenezer Creek
1
Posted on 1/2/22 at 3:59 pm to RollTide1987
More feel good Northern propaganda. It didn't actually do anything.
Posted on 1/2/22 at 4:08 pm to GreenRockTiger
quote:
That is evident with Sherman and his ‘tactics’ and also, the incident at Ebenezer Creek
Ebenezer Creek looks terrible on paper but from a military view, it makes absolute sense. There were 1,000 freedmen who were following the advance as refugees. At the time, Sherman's forces were going through an area with precious little food. They didn't have enough to feed themselves and the freedmen without compromising their mobility and their fighting strength. They were being slowed up and Confederate cavalry under Joe Wheeler were beginning to harass their rear.
What do you do when you're cut off from your base of supply, Confederate forces are chipping into your rear, and you're still miles away from the ultimate objective of capturing Savannah? Unfortunately...you do the only thing that makes sense. You cut off the dead weight.
Also...what Jefferson C. Davis did at Ebenezer Creek is nothing compared to what Nathan Bedford Forrest did at Fort Pillow.
This post was edited on 1/2/22 at 4:11 pm
Posted on 1/2/22 at 4:13 pm to Twenty 49
quote:
They are still pissed about even the symbolic freeing of slaves, as evidenced by the bitching about Lincoln in every such thread. It really gets under their skin.
You might want to go read up on old Abe. He was no abolitionist and saw slavery as bad for the white working man. Every slave meant one less job for a white man. But you can't point any of this out today because we always retcon history to fit the post hoc moral order.
The Civil War was fought to free the slaves!
World War II was fought to save the Jews from the holocaust!
Complete falsities meant to put a nice veneer of contemporary values upon two wars that were originally nationalistic in nature, not morally progressive.
Posted on 1/2/22 at 4:17 pm to BestBanker
quote:
Eta from the 2 current downvotes, there are either 2 idiots or 2 kkk members. Wait...
I didn't up or down vote you.. And if you don't believe me just tell me and I will give you a vote either way because I really don't pay attention to the up and downvotes..
But yes everyone knows Lincoln was Republican, however; the Republican party 159 years ago isn't today's Republican party. Political Parties evolve. A lot of Southern Republicans today would have been a Democrat before the 1960s.. Actually, even more later than that.
I ran for a city council position in 2003. At the time the district I would have represented was almost 90% white people the a medium age of.. I either upper 40s or lower 50s. And over 75% of the people were registered as Democrats. But I went back and looked at past election results and for at least the past decade, at that point, the district voted Republican by a pretty big percentage.
You could see the switch. But then even after that, I know union people who were 100% democrat. Their union would even send them a copy of the ballot with who they suggest they vote for highlighted and everything.. In 2008, when Obama was the candidate.. All of a sudden all of those die hard democrats suddenly were anti-Obama and then from that point on you could swear they been Republican all of their life.
Posted on 1/2/22 at 4:21 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
Jefferson C. Davis did at Ebenezer Creek
What happened at Ebenezer Creek doesn’t fit the narrative that the Union was the good guys is all I’m saying. People love to hate on the confederacy and how evil they were - but no one brings up the fact that the Union soldiers (and many of its citizens) couldn’t give a rats arse about the slaves.
How many people up north opened their houses to the newly freed slaves?
Plus was Forrest did at Ft Pillow was between soldiers, even if it was racially motivated.
Posted on 1/2/22 at 4:24 pm to GreenRockTiger
quote:
What happened at Ebenezer Creek doesn’t fit the narrative that the Union was the good guys is all I’m saying.
Bad shite happens on both sides during a conflict. War brings out the absolute worst in people. U.S. soldiers were responsible for a number of massacres of Japanese, German, and Italian prisoners in World War II and there isn't a single person in America who disagrees with the notion that we were the good guys in that conflict.
Two things can be true at the same time: the Union were the good guys and what the Union did at Ebenezer Creek was a bad thing.
You want to know why I can't label the Confederates as the good guys? Because the Confederates invaded Pennsylvania in 1863 and kidnapped freed blacks from their homes and took them back to Virginia to be auctioned off as slaves. Not only was Robert E. Lee aware of this, he personally sanctioned it.
This post was edited on 1/2/22 at 4:26 pm
Posted on 1/2/22 at 4:27 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
the Union were the good guys
They are only viewed as such because they won the war
And you know why I can’t label the confederates bad guys - bc most of the soldiers were too poor to pay the $200-$300 fee not to fight
My ancestors fought for the confederacy - never owned slaves - and then had to pick up and move somewhere else bc black labor was cheaper than white labor bc their poor, white ignorant asses were cotton pickers too
This post was edited on 1/2/22 at 4:32 pm
Posted on 1/2/22 at 4:30 pm to GreenRockTiger
There were slave owners in the north well after it was abolished (but I don't remember the date it was abolished in the north and then how long people owned slaves after).
Slavery in the US started before there was even "the south".
Don't get me wrong, I obviously don't support slavery. No man should be considered property and owned by another man, but yeah.. It wasn't as simple as Abraham Lincoln and the north hated slavery so a war was fought to free the slaves.
Slavery in the US started before there was even "the south".
Don't get me wrong, I obviously don't support slavery. No man should be considered property and owned by another man, but yeah.. It wasn't as simple as Abraham Lincoln and the north hated slavery so a war was fought to free the slaves.
Posted on 1/2/22 at 4:34 pm to OweO
quote:
There were slave owners in the north well after it was abolished (but I don't remember the date it was abolished in the north and then how long people owned slaves after).
There was no slavery in Pennsylvania and there hadn't been since 1780. Confederate soldiers were given orders by their government to hunt down freed blacks, capture them, and "return" them to slavery. We have documented evidence of every single infantry and cavalry corps of Lee's army participating in this endeavor while on the march in Pennsylvania.
This post was edited on 1/2/22 at 4:35 pm
Posted on 1/2/22 at 6:38 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
Confederate soldiers were given orders by their government to hunt down freed blacks, capture them, and "return" them to slavery.
I highly doubt that most men that fought for the confederacy left their families and put their lives in danger just to go reclaim someone else's property that they were too poor to ever own themselves.
This post was edited on 1/2/22 at 6:39 pm
Posted on 1/2/22 at 7:16 pm to Buck_Rogers
The Union held the field after Antietam, but Lee was heading back to Virginia anyway, having called off his first invasion of the north. The battle itself was a stalemate, with both sides suffering tremendous casualties. McClellan, with his cautiousness, failed to trap Lee even though he had a superior force of roughly twice as many men. Lincoln relieved him from command shortly thereafter.
The holding actions at the South Mountain passes allowed Lee time to combine his divided forces and put up an effective fight in Antietam.
Antietam is a beautiful battlefield, if you are ever in the area.
The holding actions at the South Mountain passes allowed Lee time to combine his divided forces and put up an effective fight in Antietam.
Antietam is a beautiful battlefield, if you are ever in the area.
Posted on 1/2/22 at 8:51 pm to RollTide1987
The biggest bunch of nonsense ever celebrated as if it actually freed one single slave, and yet it didn’t free even one. No, not even one.
Congratulations on FINALLY finding a war aim. It only took 3 years.
Congratulations on FINALLY finding a war aim. It only took 3 years.
Posted on 1/5/22 at 5:57 am to Buck_Rogers
quote:
I highly doubt that most men that fought for the confederacy left their families and put their lives in danger just to go reclaim someone else's property that they were too poor to ever own themselves.
Sure. However, that doesn't change the fact that Confederate soldiers did in fact round up freed blacks in Pennsylvania and marched them back South where they were auctioned off as slaves.
Posted on 1/5/22 at 5:59 am to SpotCheckBilly
quote:
The Union held the field after Antietam, but Lee was heading back to Virginia anyway, having called off his first invasion of the north.
He only called it off after the Battle of Antietam. What you wrote here is what Lee SHOULD have done instead of making a stand in Maryland. He lost 10,000 men needlessly in a battle that couldn't have possibly resulted in anything better for him than a stalemate. He had less than 40,000 men to contend with McClellan's 70,000.
Posted on 1/5/22 at 6:38 am to RollTide1987
Lee was fortunate to be going up against McClelland. A competent commander would have wiped out Lee with that type of advantage. It was not so much that Lee was so great, it was that most of his opponents should not have been in command of even a brigade.....until Grant came East.
As to slavery. It was the underlying reason for everything in the Civil War politically. The South wanted to continue the institution and even de facto expand it into the new territories ( Kansas was a prime example). The North did not want to be undercut with the free labor provided by slavery given the influx of immigrants coming in . Plus numerous Northern legislatures were pissed at the Federal government and the South over Fugitive Slave Laws. It gave bounty hunters free range to essentially kidnap citizens and in some cases kill them all in the name of retrieving personal property for Southern Planters. There were more issues that stemmed from slavery than anything else. States Rights was essentially about slavery. Tariff issues were only a big deal to some of the Planter class. Limiting their wealth which was predicated on the use of slaves was the main issue and any suggestion that it is not the underlying reason for the Civil War is fanciful thinking
As to slavery. It was the underlying reason for everything in the Civil War politically. The South wanted to continue the institution and even de facto expand it into the new territories ( Kansas was a prime example). The North did not want to be undercut with the free labor provided by slavery given the influx of immigrants coming in . Plus numerous Northern legislatures were pissed at the Federal government and the South over Fugitive Slave Laws. It gave bounty hunters free range to essentially kidnap citizens and in some cases kill them all in the name of retrieving personal property for Southern Planters. There were more issues that stemmed from slavery than anything else. States Rights was essentially about slavery. Tariff issues were only a big deal to some of the Planter class. Limiting their wealth which was predicated on the use of slaves was the main issue and any suggestion that it is not the underlying reason for the Civil War is fanciful thinking
Posted on 1/5/22 at 7:39 am to RollTide1987
Topple the statues:
Why are you downvoting your white supremacist hero?? I thought he was The Good Guy??
quote:
I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races … I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of Negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races from living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be a position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.”
Why are you downvoting your white supremacist hero?? I thought he was The Good Guy??
This post was edited on 1/5/22 at 1:07 pm
Posted on 1/5/22 at 8:55 am to RollTide1987
quote:
He only called it off after the Battle of Antietam. What you wrote here is what Lee SHOULD have done instead of making a stand in Maryland. He lost 10,000 men needlessly in a battle that couldn't have possibly resulted in anything better for him than a stalemate. He had less than 40,000 men to contend with McClellan's 70,000.
Lee invaded Maryland in hopes of bringing Maryland into the Confederacy. That didn’t play out.
He hoped to get his army out of Virginia where it could forage from untapped sources and that didn’t work.
The Union caught him with forces scattered about and that put him in a bind because his smaller army was even smaller.
Lee fought a hell of a defensive battle and held the field as reserves from Harpers Ferry bailed him out. But he was extremely lucky the Union attacks were so uncoordinated and lacking a top command.
Lee net none of his goals. The Union did stop Lee, but failed to deliver a crippling blow despite the opportunity. Lee couldn’t survive draws like this one.
Posted on 1/5/22 at 9:38 am to James11111
quote:
Four scores,..is all Bama could muster against a G-5 team.
Lame joke?...Yes, Incorrect historical references?...Yes.......
And wrong. Bama scored 5 times, 3 TDs and 2 FGs.
Posted on 1/5/22 at 10:08 am to RollTide1987
quote:
Battle of Antietam
Battle of Sharpsburg. Antietam Creek is about 42 miles long. The fighting took place near Sharpsburg.
The same applies to both the battles at Manassas Junction, which yankees call Bull Run.
Yankees can't seem to name a battle correctly.
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News