At this moment, 150 years ago...

[Oberon]

You know, I do ponder, if the likes of Lee or Jackson could have seen what their names have been put through by those of 'The Lost Cause' brigade in the years since their defeat, perhaps they (well, Lee since Jackson was killed) would have surrendered earlier.

Then again, I could say the same about many historical figures whose names have been used as weapons by the ignorant and foolish. How little we learn.

[Bubblehead1980]

Originally Posted by Oberon

You know, I do ponder, if the likes of Lee or Jackson could have seen what their names have been put through by those of 'The Lost Cause' brigade in the years since their defeat, perhaps they (well, Lee since Jackson was killed) would have surrendered earlier.

Then again, I could say the same about many historical figures whose names have been used as weapons by the ignorant and foolish. How little we learn.

Ignorant and foolish describes people who celebrate a man who launched a war that left 800,000 people dead, millions more wounded physically, emotionally for life.A man who launched an unjust war(slavery was on it's way out anyways) that left millions impoverished and wrecked the culture of a beautiful part of our country, which still suffers today in many ways thanks to northern aggression.Even more ignorant is many believe it was to end the stain of slavery when in fact it was about northern industrialists and money using government tyranny to further their interests.How the brave people of the south who stood up, refused to allow their rights to be violated , did their best to stop such actions.

Ignorant and foolish are those who call Lincoln a great a man when he was nothing more than a tyrant who suspended habeas corpus jailed those who dared criticize him.Facts are stubborn things, it happened.

Sorry, this was not a great man, he was a tyrant and should be remembered as such.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Bubblehead1980

Ignorant and foolish describes people who celebrate a man who launched a war that left 800,000 people dead, millions more wounded physically, emotionally for life.

We've had this conversation before, and you conveniently forget. It was the South that fired the opening shots.

Even more ignorant is many believe it was to end the stain of slavery when in fact it was about northern industrialists and money using government tyranny to further their interests.How the brave people of the south who stood up, refused to allow their rights to be violated , did their best to stop such actions.

You might want to reread the reasons why the southern states seceded in the first place. Not the reasons they've come up with since, but the reasons they themselves gave at the time.
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/show...9&postcount=44

Ignorant and foolish are those who call Lincoln a great a man when he was nothing more than a tyrant who suspended habeas corpus jailed those who dared criticize him.Facts are stubborn things, it happened.

You've said that before. Opinion is nice, but you have yet to prove your case. Or even really try.

I've pointed out before that Lincoln was the product of the generation who wrote the Constitution. The Founders were forced to compromise over the question of slave importation and Southern States' representation. They believed that the country could not survive unless all 13 states were united, and Lincoln firmly believed the same. If you don't look at it within that context then your beliefs about him and his reasons are heavily biased.

[Aktungbby]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

I've pointed out before that Lincoln was the product of the generation who wrote the Constitution. The Founders were forced to compromise over the question of slave importation and Southern States' representation. They believed that the country could not survive unless all 13 states were united, and Lincoln firmly believed the same. If you don't look at it within that context then your beliefs about him and his reasons are heavily biased.

But your leaving out your argument's big gun! Lincoln, ever the consummate lawyer, acted on 'precedent' as stare dicicis is always best in weighty matters. Andrew Jackson: Southern slaveowner, victorious general, Indian fighter and duelist-married to a divorcee! established Lincoln's precedent with the South Carolina Nullification Crises which challenged Federal power. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nullification_Crisis Among his memorable quotes on the matter: " Yes I have(studied the matter); please give my compliments to my friends in your State and say to them, that if a single drop of blood shall be shed there in opposition to the laws of the United States, I will hang the first man I can lay my hand on engaged in such treasonable conduct, upon the first tree I can reach."..."The attempt will be made to surprise the Forts and garrisons by the militia, and must be guarded against with vestal vigilance and any attempt by force repelled with prompt and exemplary punishment."..."I consider, then, the power to annul a law of the United States, assumed by one State, incompatible with the existence of the Union, contradicted expressly by the letter of the Constitution, unauthorized by its spirit, inconsistent with every principle on which It was founded, and destructive of the great object for which it was formed....Should the exigency arise rendering the execution of the existing laws impracticable from any cause what ever, prompt notice of it will be given to Congress, with a suggestion of such views and measures as may be deemed necessary to meet it." One thing about Andrew Jackson was known given...he didn't bluff. Throw in the crushing of Shay's Rebellion in Massachusetts and the Whiskey Rebellion in Pennsylvania in support of Federal taxation by militia in which all were pardoned and Lincoln is seen following precedent to the letter with his post-war policy to "let 'em up easy" after four years of bloodshed which unfortunately was 'radicalized' by his assassination. His addition to precedent: the Emancipation Proclamation actually a partial war measure (Antietam-1862) to keep Britain or France out of the war on the Confederate side, does not hang in all Federal buildings for nothing...

[Bubblehead1980]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

We've had this conversation before, and you conveniently forget. It was the South that fired the opening shots.

You might want to reread the reasons why the southern states seceded in the first place. Not the reasons they've come up with since, but the reasons they themselves gave at the time.
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/show...9&postcount=44

You've said that before. Opinion is nice, but you have yet to prove your case. Or even really try.

I've pointed out before that Lincoln was the product of the generation who wrote the Constitution. The Founders were forced to compromise over the question of slave importation and Southern States' representation. They believed that the country could not survive unless all 13 states were united, and Lincoln firmly believed the same. If you don't look at it within that context then your beliefs about him and his reasons are heavily biased.

Steve, it's not an opinion, ever hear of ex parte merryman? Exactly.Lincoln acted unconstitutionally and thus as a tyrant.Lincoln jailed many of his critics.Actually, I recall he jailed those who published the book by one of his political prisoners once he was freed.Some hero, some president, no he acted as a tyrant would, therefore he was a tyrant.Facts are stubborn things.Call it an opinion, but documented facts of his actions show who he was .While the mindless sheep see him as some hero.Lincoln was a terrible tyrant, the end.

Lincoln was not alive during the revolution nor was he an adult, he was child in rural podunk IL that had no clue.Sure, he made something of himself but he was not the benevolent man.I swear the way some people are about Lincoln is same way many Germans would be about Hitler if war had ended differently for them.The blind would think he was still some great figure, SMH.


I will clarify my argument about the cause of the war.Sure, south fired first but Lincoln CHOSE to launch a massive, bloody war after tying the souths hands of the south.Increased tariffs on cotton etc. Why were these tariffs passed(albeit morrill tariff came about under previous admin, it was increased under Lincoln) was because his industrial masters in the north wanted this Basically, Lincoln forced the hand of the south, and reacted as a tyrant once they answered his provocation.

The war was not directly about slavery, it was about not having a centralized power in a whole other part of the country tell them how to live.Yes, at the time slavery was part of southern society and held dear as it was imperative to the economy.Slavery was on the way out, it's a fact.Sure, it would have been around a bit longer but it would have died out.The was of northern aggression was unnecessary and nothing more than Lincoln's lust for power and dominance of a part of the country that refused to suddenly give up their way of life.No man has the right to do that, something mos tof us agree on.

I love our country and what it was meant to be but it's garbage now because of some things that have happened in last century, but fully understand why the south wanted out, I wish we could get out now, it just is not worth it anymore for most of us.Too many people, too much centralized power.We should go our ways, stay friendly and all but go different ways so we have a real right to self determination .Much like a bad relationship, time comes to cut ties.Sadly we have tyrants in waiting who would go Lincoln's route so we are stuck with what is the equivalent of a fat, lazy, haggy wife we are miserable with.

The south was no different than the founders, they wanted to be free from abusive, centralized power who was threatening their way of life.The northern industrialists pushed the war, Lincoln used the moral cause of abolishing slavery as his cause to get many to join the fighter.The tactic of getting humans to not think with logic or rationality but emotion is not a new one, sadly it still works.

I will close by saying one good thing about Lincoln was he did not favor the abuse and revenge of reconstruction, he wanted a post civil war america to reunite and move on.Even Hitler had some admirable qualities I suppose.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Bubblehead1980

Steve, it's not an opinion, ever hear of ex parte merryman?

Yes.

Exactly.Lincoln acted unconstitutionally and thus as a tyrant.

Historians and Judges are still debating today whether the President has the power to suspend Habeas Corpus. When Lincoln did so, was it to further his own personal power or, as he saw it, to "get the job done"? Everything Lincoln did was bound within the same goal - to keep the Union together.

Lincoln jailed many of his critics.

Yes he did. What you consistently miss is the mindset. I'll address that in a minute.

Facts are stubborn things.

Quoting John Adams is a cute trick, but nothing more.

Call it an opinion, but documented facts of his actions show who he was .While the mindless sheep see him as some hero.Lincoln was a terrible tyrant, the end.

No, not the end. You saying it doesn't make it so, nor does it make you right. It's still just your opinion.

Lincoln was not alive during the revolution nor was he an adult, he was child in rural podunk IL that had no clue.

I didn't say he was. I said he was a product of the previous generation, the generation who fought the Revolution and wrote the Constitution. The thing that terrified them most was any split between the States. Lincoln, like them, was convinced the Country could not survive if it were not whole. Everything he did must be considered in that context to be understood. At the time of his inauguration Washington D.C. was under attack. The first chapter of Battles and Leaders of the Civil War is a personal recounting of the danger the President and the city were in from attack, and the efforts to contain those plots. As I said earlier, you can't consider someone's actions without first considering their mindset.

Sure, he made something of himself but he was not the benevolent man.I swear the way some people are about Lincoln is same way many Germans would be about Hitler if war had ended differently for them.The blind would think he was still some great figure, SMH.

Insulting people who disagree with you doesn't make them look bad, only you.

I will clarify my argument about the cause of the war.Sure, south fired first but Lincoln CHOSE to launch a massive, bloody war after tying the souths hands of the south.

How so? Lincoln did everything he could to prevent that. He closed his first inaugural with these words: " In your hands, my dissatisfied fellow-countrymen, and not in mine, is the momentous issue of civil war. The Government will not assail you. You can have no conflict without being yourselves the aggressors. You have no oath registered in heaven to destroy the Government, while I shall have the most solemn one to "preserve, protect, and defend it.""

Increased tariffs on cotton etc.

Please elaborate.

Why were these tariffs passed(albeit morrill tariff came about under previous admin, it was increased under Lincoln)

Yes and no. The tariffs of 1846 and 1857 were of greatest benefit to the South. The North wanted to increase the tariffs. the South did not. Lincoln's part was that without support for Morrill he and his party had no chance of winning the election. In 1859 Morrill was first presented. It passed the House but failed in the Senate. In 1860 the Republicans' support for Morrill helped get backing from industrialists, and with their vote Lincoln won the White House. Of course the fact that the Democrats were split into several factions didn't hurt.

Once the election was decided the Southern States immediately started seceding. I will repeat that while the Morrill Tariff is cited by Southern Apologists to this day, the Documents of Secession almost unilaterally cite slavery as their main cause for leaving the Union.

Once the Southern States had seceded there was no way to prevent Morrill from passing. If they had stayed in place they likely would have won that fight.

Contrary to opinion you seem to hold, Morrill was not about keeping the South down, but about Trade Protection. After Secession was fact and the War started, Morrill authored two more Tariff Acts, both in an effort to raise money for the war. Since the South had already seceded, these raises affected only the North.

was because his industrial masters in the north wanted this Basically, Lincoln forced the hand of the south, and reacted as a tyrant once they answered his provocation.

Yes he did force their hand. That doesn't change the fact that they started the war, not him. If they had refused to fire on Fort Sumter, what could he have done? Any direct action would have made him the monster you claim him to be.

The war was not directly about slavery, it was about not having a centralized power in a whole other part of the country tell them how to live.

It was about the survival of the country. Lincoln believed the country could not survive as two separate entities. It was about secession, and the Southern States seceded over slavery. As you said, end of story.

Yes, at the time slavery was part of southern society and held dear as it was imperative to the economy.

Only because they made it so. The roots of the Civil War begin with the Constitutional Debates, specifically Slave State representation and the 3/5ths Rule.

Slavery was on the way out, it's a fact.Sure, it would have been around a bit longer but it would have died out.

Easy to say in hindsight. Not so easy from the things they wrote at the time. That "stubborn fact" makes it once again your opinion.

The was of northern aggression was unnecessary and nothing more than Lincoln's lust for power and dominance of a part of the country that refused to suddenly give up their way of life.No man has the right to do that, something mos tof us agree on.

Given what he said in his Inaugural Address and the timing of the Secession, this is again only your opinion. That you state it as fact shows nothing more than extreme bias.

I love our country and what it was meant to be but it's garbage now because of some things that have happened in last century, but fully understand why the south wanted out, I wish we could get out now, it just is not worth it anymore for most of us.

I understand why the South wanted out too, though I don't think we see the same reason and cause.

The south was no different than the founders, they wanted to be free from abusive, centralized power who was threatening their way of life.

Actually the Founders didn't want to be free. They wanted to be good Englishmen. Despite everything that happened they were still struggling to be just that right up until the day that British troops were sent to confiscate their cannons. Only after the shooting started did they actually begin discussing Independence.

The South, on the other hand, acted preemptively. They didn't even give Lincoln a chance. As soon as he was elected they assumed the worst. There is not real basis for comparison between the two.

The northern industrialists pushed the war

Please elaborate.

Lincoln used the moral cause of abolishing slavery as his cause to get many to join the fighter.

Not really. Abolishing slavery really didn't come into play until the Emancipation Proclamation, and that didn't come until the North finally managed to win a major battle, and then the main purpose was to show a moral high ground that would keep England and France from recognizing the Confederacy. It was politics, sure, but it was good politics.

The tactic of getting humans to not think with logic or rationality but emotion is not a new one, sadly it still works.

I'm sorry, but I take you as a prime example of that syndrome.

I will close by saying one good thing about Lincoln was he did not favor the abuse and revenge of reconstruction, he wanted a post civil war america to reunite and move on.Even Hitler had some admirable qualities I suppose.

Comparing the two is understandable, but only from the point of an already established hatred. What you do with your last sentence is not to compare the two, but to try to bolster your argument with more hatred. You might as well say "Even the Devil has his good points." I could just as easily counter with "Even Bubblehead1980 has his good points."

That kind of statement is not debate, it's not argument and it's not logic. It's hatred, mingled with the misplaced confidence of one's own rightness, and it has no part in so-called "reasonable" debate.

[Oberon]

Originally Posted by Bubblehead1980

Ignorant and foolish describes people who celebrate a man who launched a war that left 800,000 people dead, millions more wounded physically, emotionally for life.

You could say that for any man who started any war, the people behind the American revolution for one. Besides, as Steve has already pointed out, the Confederate forces fired the first shots.
And war was inevitable, between two great forces of movement, if it had not taken place under Lincoln, it would have under someone else.

A man who launched an unjust war(slavery was on it's way out anyways) that left millions impoverished and wrecked the culture of a beautiful part of our country, which still suffers today in many ways thanks to northern aggression.

The south only suffers because it refuses to acknowledge its defeat. There are people so stuck to 'The Lost Cause' that they have kept open the wounds of a war that ended 150 years ago. For goodness sake, World War One ended a hundred years ago and we've long since forgiven each other, only the shells of war remain to blight the landscape. The English Civil War has long since faded into memory and although its after-effects still echo within the British governmental system, there are not bands of parliamentarians or monarchists arguing at each other on the internet, or if there are they are few and far between.
For the love of God, let it go already.

Ignorant and foolish are those who call Lincoln a great a man when he was nothing more than a tyrant who suspended habeas corpus jailed those who dared criticize him.Facts are stubborn things, it happened.

Sorry, this was not a great man, he was a tyrant and should be remembered as such.

It was a civil war, they are rarely civil.

In short, this comes across as little more than butthurt over a war that you, your parents or your parents parents never fought in, if I, a Brit, can forgive Germany for the Second World War, if I can make friends with people of a country who killed one of my great-grandfathers and severely wounded the other, then you can certainly pull your head out of your backside and let the events of a war that took place over a hundred years ago be consigned where they belong.
The past.

Oh, and I need to end this with a Lincoln pic:

[Betonov]

Originally Posted by Oberon

In short, this comes across as little more than butthurt over a war that you, your parents or your parents parents never fought in, if I, a Brit, can forgive Germany for the Second World War, if I can make friends with people of a country who killed one of my great-grandfathers and severely wounded the other, then you can certainly pull your head out of your backside and let the events of a war that took place over a hundred years ago be consigned where they belong.
The past.

True. Last year 4 Brits and an Aussie had an Austro-Hungarian among them on English soil
And the A-H descendant survived

[Oberon]

Originally Posted by Betonov

True. Last year 4 Brits and an Aussie had an Austro-Hungarian among them on English soil
And the A-H descendant survived

That's because there wasn't any Serbs around.

[Betonov]

Originally Posted by Oberon

That's because there wasn't any Serbs around.

Well, you need a Serb that would spit in my face, I'd start kicking him when a Russian would start kicking me and then a German would start kicking me and a Frechman would come in with a riot shield and the German would smack a Belgian to the ground to get around that shield and then a Brit would start kicking the German.

[Schroeder]

Originally Posted by Betonov

Well, you need a Serb that would spit in my face, I'd start kicking him when a Russian would start kicking me and then a German would start kicking me and a Frechman would come in with a riot shield and the German would smack a Belgian to the ground to get around that shield and then a Brit would start kicking the German.

To be followed by a Turk kicking the Brit and an Italian who kicks the Austro Hungarian, a Japanese who kicks remote parts of the German (what ever that would be) and an American who is too late to get much of the party (would we actually have to make a distinction whether it's a northern or southern US boy as this seem to be two different countries in some people's eyes... maybe it was a self righteous Northerner riding on the back of a suppressed and exploited Southerner. ) . After a short pause everybody will be at it again for round two with a few people changing sides and some having difficulties to decide on which side to stay throughout the brawl.
Or in short: I hate you all!

[Bubblehead1980]

Originally Posted by Oberon

You could say that for any man who started any war, the people behind the American revolution for one. Besides, as Steve has already pointed out, the Confederate forces fired the first shots.
And war was inevitable, between two great forces of movement, if it had not taken place under Lincoln, it would have under someone else.


The south only suffers because it refuses to acknowledge its defeat. There are people so stuck to 'The Lost Cause' that they have kept open the wounds of a war that ended 150 years ago. For goodness sake, World War One ended a hundred years ago and we've long since forgiven each other, only the shells of war remain to blight the landscape. The English Civil War has long since faded into memory and although its after-effects still echo within the British governmental system, there are not bands of parliamentarians or monarchists arguing at each other on the internet, or if there are they are few and far between.
For the love of God, let it go already.



It was a civil war, they are rarely civil.

In short, this comes across as little more than butthurt over a war that you, your parents or your parents parents never fought in, if I, a Brit, can forgive Germany for the Second World War, if I can make friends with people of a country who killed one of my great-grandfathers and severely wounded the other, then you can certainly pull your head out of your backside and let the events of a war that took place over a hundred years ago be consigned where they belong.
The past.

Oh, and I need to end this with a Lincoln pic:

No, the founders were justified and sorry but the British tied their hands with their tyranny, much as Lincoln and the North did with the South.Rather arrogant to think people should just accept the status quo when it is unacceptable. Colonists had a right to self determination and not to be ruled, same for the south.

South has suffered and generations later still suffers due to Lincoln's War of Aggression.Many one affluent southerns lost everything and thus had nothing to pass on.Suddenly, generations of wealthy and even just normal people who had something in this world, were left destitute and it set in motion several genertions of poverty and all the ills that come along with it.Many were already poor and were made even more so.That along with the physical and emotional scars and the nearly one million dead on both sides, it really is one of the greatest crimes in history and he was punished for it.However, his legacy at the minumum should be questioned and not celebrated as it is.Very sad so many Presidents talk of their admiration of him, but then again most presidents we have had last 50 or so years have traits and tendencies of a tyrant, especially Bush and Obama.

I would not expect you to understand as you are not a southerner, you are from a people who still have a monarch(ceremonial) and have a much more subjugated mentality than we do.Thus why your nation is more of a police state and just accept things, which is sad because it is a lovely place overall.

Forgiving a foreign enemy is a bit easier than forgiving your supposed countryman.Especially when THE man responsible for so much misery and death is celebrated the way he is.An grandiose memorial, an aircraft carrier, countless fanbois and a populace who is ignorant of the terror and cruelty of this man.

Also, sure don't know anyone who was alive there, but stories run deep of how the events of that time caused much pain in the family.Also, we are now in a moment not unlike time prior to the civil war.We have a bloated, abusive centralized government who overtaxes us and condones the denigration and eradication of many cultural and social institutions.I understand how they felt and they were not wrong.Opinion aside, government does not have the right to treat us they way they do.

Sad fact is, we don't work as one country and will never work again, this country is a failure.We are too diverse, no uniting bonds.Sorry but I feel not bond or connection to someone from New York, New Jersey, etc I feel a bond with my southern brothers, that is it.Truth is, many in other parts feel the same.We want different things, different cultures etc, we would be better off to split and just stay friendly but the greed and thirst for power would never allow it.Best we can do right now is just not accept the tyranny and try to win elections but I fully understand how the southerners of that time felt and as said, they were not wrong.

[razark]

Originally Posted by Bubblehead1980

I would not expect you to understand as you are not a southerner...

As someone born and raised in the south, let me say "Shut up and stop making us look bad."

[Bubblehead1980]

Originally Posted by razark

As someone born and raised in the south, let me say "Shut up and stop making us look bad."

No, cowards like yourself make us look bad.The apologists and those who stay quiet and refuse to call out the worship of a tyrant.That was the point of the post, a tyrant fell 150 years ago last night.Never forgive and never forget.

[razark]

Originally Posted by Bubblehead1980

...cowards like yourself...

You mean people who disagree with you? Last time, you said that made me an idiot.

Make up your mind.