- 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
Posted on 1/3/14 at 7:37 am to Scruffy
quote:
went with the much more peaceful act of forgiveness.
So reconstruction and the carpet baggers were sharing the north's forgiveness to the south?
Posted on 1/3/14 at 7:53 am to HailHailtoMichigan!
quote:
terrorist acts against america
Which were?
Posted on 1/3/14 at 8:03 am to CITWTT
Could have been much worse as was suggested by many in the North.
And the North did leave the south after the bargin of 1877 to mostly its own means.
And the North did leave the south after the bargin of 1877 to mostly its own means.
Posted on 1/3/14 at 8:15 am to goatmilker
quote:
Could have been much worse as was suggested by many in the North.
And the North did leave the south after the bargin of 1877 to mostly its own means.
Yeah but it had gotten pretty violent in the South way before 1877 because of Reconstruction policies. The damage had already been done by that point.
Posted on 1/3/14 at 8:47 am to thetempleowl
quote:
was Jefferson Davis guilty of treason?
Did the States have a CONSTITUTIONAL LEGAL RIGHT to secede?
Posted on 1/3/14 at 8:47 am to GetCocky11
It was horrible for the South many years after but we lost and there is a cost in losing wars.
Posted on 1/3/14 at 8:49 am to goatmilker
quote:not inaccurate, tho racism was I'm sure almost too-severe-to-be-understood-today everywhere at the time. The South just owned it with overt laws.
as the racist face of a bunch of slave holders.
Posted on 1/3/14 at 8:49 am to thetempleowl
quote:
was Jefferson Davis guilty of treason?
No clue, but Obama likely is.
Posted on 1/3/14 at 8:55 am to SG_Geaux
quote:
No clue, but Obama likely is.
All depends on what the meaning of the word 'is'...is. And the word 'treason'. And the Constitution and 'promote the common welfare'.
It is just flat out all in the eye of the individual beholder. Empirical Reality is, re Quantum Physics. I'm sure Saban would like to employ some Quantum principles in addressing his current empirical reality.
Posted on 1/3/14 at 10:58 am to Zach
quote:
Jefferson Davis went to Centenary College
Davis transferred from Transylvania College to West Point, the latter of which he was damn lucky not to have been expelled. He later studied Spanish at Centenary.
Posted on 1/3/14 at 11:01 am to thetempleowl
Jefferson Davis was guilty of treason - yes.
But for the record - so was John Adams.
But for the record - so was John Adams.
Posted on 1/3/14 at 11:19 am to SpidermanTUba
He was not a traitor. Neither was Lincoln-he WAS a war criminal.
Posted on 1/3/14 at 11:31 am to dwr353
quote:
Neither was Lincoln-he WAS a war criminal.
I dunno bout that but Sherman definitely was.
Posted on 1/3/14 at 11:50 am to SpidermanTUba
If you want to use todays standards both sides were filled to the brim with war criminals. And to only a slightly less standard of the time.
Acts against citizens and their property, soldiers and their all to often from the saddle executions and a whole gamut of behavior on both sides were in plentiful supply throughout the war.
Acts against citizens and their property, soldiers and their all to often from the saddle executions and a whole gamut of behavior on both sides were in plentiful supply throughout the war.
Posted on 1/3/14 at 11:57 am to FT
quote:
A traitor can be a hero.
As the saying goes,
One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.
Posted on 1/3/14 at 12:58 pm to TrueTiger
There's a lot of post-war revisionist thinking in this thread.
The Union held no moral high ground - not as we understand it today at least. Racism was endemic in the North and abolitionists were considered extremists. The Emancipation Proclamation was a military act, designed to reduce the manpower of the Confederacy. It did not free slaves in the Union. Most in the North considered free labor morally superior to the southern slave economy, but they made a distinction between the morality of free labor - and the worth of Blacks. They were no better than southerners in that regard and northerners worried that freeing the slaves would result in black immigration into the north. Lincoln himself proposed sending black Americans back to Africa.
The war itself was precipitated by Republican electioneering. National parties up to that point were crafted to draw broad support both north and south of the Mason Dixon line. The Republicans were not, they were a strictly sectional party drawing support from the Midwest and New England. Southerners were deeply worried by their election rhetoric and feared that Republicans would freeze them out of power. That was legitimate concern.
Finally, before the Civil War the states were considered fully sovereign entities that were in no way inferior to the federal government. Before the war writers used the expression "These united states." Only after the war did it become "The united states." The difference is important. Instead of coequal members, they became subordinate members of a permanent federal union.
The Union held no moral high ground - not as we understand it today at least. Racism was endemic in the North and abolitionists were considered extremists. The Emancipation Proclamation was a military act, designed to reduce the manpower of the Confederacy. It did not free slaves in the Union. Most in the North considered free labor morally superior to the southern slave economy, but they made a distinction between the morality of free labor - and the worth of Blacks. They were no better than southerners in that regard and northerners worried that freeing the slaves would result in black immigration into the north. Lincoln himself proposed sending black Americans back to Africa.
The war itself was precipitated by Republican electioneering. National parties up to that point were crafted to draw broad support both north and south of the Mason Dixon line. The Republicans were not, they were a strictly sectional party drawing support from the Midwest and New England. Southerners were deeply worried by their election rhetoric and feared that Republicans would freeze them out of power. That was legitimate concern.
Finally, before the Civil War the states were considered fully sovereign entities that were in no way inferior to the federal government. Before the war writers used the expression "These united states." Only after the war did it become "The united states." The difference is important. Instead of coequal members, they became subordinate members of a permanent federal union.
Posted on 1/3/14 at 1:18 pm to Lima Whiskey
Agree with most.
But...
cause (an event or situation, typically one that is bad or undesirable) to happen suddenly, unexpectedly, or prematurely.
There was much more over a much longer period that lead up to the war. The formation and election victories by the new Republican party were only rungs at the end of the ladder.
Any anti-slavery party was going to be sectional in nature. The South was not going to contribute to its own downfall.
Very true but nots its only purpose. Lincoln was very calculating on when to put this forth. He had to wait for better public sentiment and a perceived victory in the field for it to have a chance to be accepted. He knew it would change completly the reasons why the war must be fought and won. Its unpopularity at the time cannot be over looked.
But...
quote:
The war itself was precipitated by Republican electioneering
cause (an event or situation, typically one that is bad or undesirable) to happen suddenly, unexpectedly, or prematurely.
There was much more over a much longer period that lead up to the war. The formation and election victories by the new Republican party were only rungs at the end of the ladder.
Any anti-slavery party was going to be sectional in nature. The South was not going to contribute to its own downfall.
quote:
The Emancipation Proclamation was a military act,
Very true but nots its only purpose. Lincoln was very calculating on when to put this forth. He had to wait for better public sentiment and a perceived victory in the field for it to have a chance to be accepted. He knew it would change completly the reasons why the war must be fought and won. Its unpopularity at the time cannot be over looked.
Posted on 1/3/14 at 2:05 pm to goatmilker
Were our founding fathers guilty of treason?
Posted on 1/3/14 at 2:11 pm to Broke
Im sure he was to some, and to others he was a hero. Just like the Boy that resides in the Whitehouse is today.
This post was edited on 1/3/14 at 2:11 pm
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News