[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

There hasn’T been ... a single updaTe To This siTe --- since I joined.

"This Is Not What Authoritarianism Looks Like"

America Erupts… ICE Raids Takeover The Streets

AC/DC- Riff Raff + Go Down [VH1 Uncut, July 5, 1996]

Why is Peter Schiff calling Bitcoin a ‘giant cult’ and how does this impact market sentiment?

Esso Your Butt Buddy Horseshit jacks off to that shit

"The Addled Activist Mind"

"Don’t Stop with Harvard"

"Does the Biden Cover-Up Have Two Layers?"

"Pete Rose, 'Shoeless' Joe Reinstated by MLB, Eligible for HOF"

"'Major Breakthrough': Here Are the Details on the China Trade Deal"

Freepers Still Love war

Parody ... Jump / Trump --- van Halen jump

"The Democrat Meltdown Continues"

"Yes, We Need Deportations Without Due Process"

"Trump's Tariff Play Smart, Strategic, Working"

"Leftists Make Desperate Attempt to Discredit Photo of Abrego Garcia's MS-13 Tattoos. Here Are Receipts"

"Trump Administration Freezes $2 Billion After Harvard Refuses to Meet Demands"on After Harvard Refuses to Meet Demands

"Doctors Committing Insurance Fraud to Conceal Trans Procedures, Texas Children’s Whistleblower Testifies"

"Left Using '8647' Symbol for Violence Against Trump, Musk"

KawasakiÂ’s new rideable robohorse is straight out of a sci-fi novel

"Trade should work for America, not rule it"

"The Stakes Couldn’t Be Higher in Wisconsin’s Supreme Court Race – What’s at Risk for the GOP"

"How Trump caught big-government fans in their own trap"

‘Are You Prepared for Violence?’

Greek Orthodox Archbishop gives President Trump a Cross, tells him "Make America Invincible"

"Trump signs executive order eliminating the Department of Education!!!"

"If AOC Is the Democratic Future, the Party Is Even Worse Off Than We Think"

"Ending EPA Overreach"

Closest Look Ever at How Pyramids Were Built

Moment the SpaceX crew Meets Stranded ISS Crew

The Exodus Pharaoh EXPLAINED!

Did the Israelites Really Cross the Red Sea? Stunning Evidence of the Location of Red Sea Crossing!

Are we experiencing a Triumph of Orthodoxy?

Judge Napolitano with Konstantin Malofeev (Moscow, Russia)

"Trump Administration Cancels Most USAID Programs, Folds Others into State Department"

Introducing Manus: The General AI Agent

"Chinese Spies in Our Military? Straight to Jail"

Any suggestion that the USA and NATO are "Helping" or have ever helped Ukraine needs to be shot down instantly

"Real problem with the Palestinians: Nobody wants them"

ACDC & The Rolling Stones - Rock Me Baby

Magnus Carlsen gives a London System lesson!

"The Democrats Are Suffering Through a Drought of Generational Talent"

7 Tactics Of The Enemy To Weaken Your Faith

Strange And Biblical Events Are Happening

Every year ... BusiesT casino gambling day -- in Las Vegas

Trump’s DOGE Plan Is Legally Untouchable—Elon Musk Holds the Scalpel

Palestinians: What do you think of the Trump plan for Gaza?

What Happens Inside Gaza’s Secret Tunnels? | Unpacked

Hamas Torture Bodycam Footage: "These Monsters Filmed it All" | IDF Warfighter Doron Keidar, Ep. 225


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

United States News
See other United States News Articles

Title: Goldi-Lox Explains the Civil War
Source: [None]
URL Source: http://69.164.197.124/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=287235&Disp=13#C13
Published: Apr 9, 2010
Author: Goldi-Lox
Post Date: 2010-04-09 19:08:35 by Skip Intro
Keywords: None
Views: 18282
Comments: 145

THAT is bullshit.

The civil war was all about MONEY.

The South wanted to sell their crops to Foreign Nations and use their own ports.

FEDGOV said NO. You have to ship them up North, and let our middlemen sell them to nations WE choose at prices we select.

The South was getting HOSED. One of the reasons they had slaves was due to the North imposing these rules on them. They couldn't afford to pay wages.

Now, some of them were very greedy, no doubt...and that is evidenced in the grand homes they built.

However, many southern farmers were barely breaking even and were sick and tired of it. They wanted to use the ports in SC and GA to ship their products and wanted to sell to France and others at better prices than they were getting.

FEDGOV imposed rules on them....so they seceded in order to run their own farms.

However, once fighting broke out, and a civil war was in place Lincoln decided to break the backs of the South, by freeing the slaves who he hoped would fight them in their own towns and plantations. That didn't happen.

Lincoln used Slavery as an excuse for a lot of the actions he engaged in. He was as bad as Obastard...he imprisoned the entire Maryland Assembly (Govt) including the Governor, so they could not vote to seceed. He kept them imprisoned in Fort McHenry for MONTHS. He committed a lot of atrocities. He is no hero. He was a jerk - and an abuser of our Constitution. In fact, read the words of the state song "Maryland my Maryland" - where it says "The tyrants food is on our shores/neck"...that tyrant was Lincoln.

Most blacks who were slaves were well treated, and did not want to leave their homes...and most didn't. Those who were mistreated did, and flooded the cities in the north...from which they have never recovered.

But few slaves - or freedmen - were engaged in the fighting.

Booth was a hero to the South. And still is today.

Goldi-Lox posted on 2010-04-09 18:57:04 ET Reply Trace

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Comments (1-104) not displayed.
      .
      .
      .

#105. To: war (#103) (Edited)

I posted the statements of seccession...given that they clearly state that SLAVERY IS THE MAIN REASON FOR THEIR SECCESSION it's insane to believe otherwise.

Cleary that is what was stated, and that was the reaction due to outsiders telling them how to run their business. Go read Forrest's speech to the Polebearers again, and remember it was from a former slave trader.

OBAMA HAS SPENT MORE MONEY THAN ANY OTHER PERSON IN THE HISTORY OF MANKIND.

GarySpFC  posted on  2010-04-12   10:36:06 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#106. To: GarySpFC (#105)

You want me to accept the statement of one person as being above the statements of a body of people?

You have the Calhoun problem too, you know...

#67. To: war (#48) Keep hiding behind the bozo, bozo. (laughing) You've always been a world class pussy. Badeye posted on 2010-01-14 16:12:48 ET Reply Trace

war  posted on  2010-04-12   10:39:11 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#107. To: sneakypete (#99)

Oh,well. That makes all the difference in the world,doesn't it?

Tell me,is a horse in NY still a horse in Florida? And the day I start to worry about what a cretin like you thinks of my credibility is the day I hang myself.

Only if you are interested in accuracy.

Name calling..... such a lefty tactic.... too bad you used to be better than that. And yes you started it. Now you appear only interested in thinking you are right. Facts seem to not matter at all.

To compare those VPs as being similiar was to insult and minimize the role of the VP of the CSA.

It's the war, stupid.

mininggold  posted on  2010-04-12   10:53:38 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#108. To: war (#106) (Edited)

You want me to accept the statement of one person as being above the statements of a body of people?

You have the Calhoun problem too, you know...

There have been so many lies told about Forrest, with a goal of maintaining victim status, that I simply do not see your side as moving one iota from your position regardless of the evidence. Hate is a important motivator from your side's POV, and he is the example.

OBAMA HAS SPENT MORE MONEY THAN ANY OTHER PERSON IN THE HISTORY OF MANKIND.

GarySpFC  posted on  2010-04-12   11:00:12 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#109. To: GarySpFC (#102)

Sorry, but those 'aristocrats' codified it in the CSA Constitution, as a post way up above quoted exactly.

I understand the 'Southern psyche' quite well. I also know today its based on the Lost Cause bullshit thats been utterly discredited by historians from both Northern and Southern perspectives.

The South today likes to either pretend it 'wasn't about slavery' or pretends the war never happened (See Atlanta - who's historical time line ends in the 1850's and picks back up in the 1870's).

Your statement is further 'gutted' by the simple fact that the notion of arming 'blacks' in the South to bolster the vastly outnumbered CSA forces was considered by a vast majority within the legislature to be 'treason'. Or suicidal, take your pick.

And tell me, if they had decided it was 'morally wrong' and only resisted because 'they wouldn't allow it to be pushed down their throats'....ah, morally wrong is MORALLY WRONG.

What you state here is something I noted way up above, the South - like the British Empire of that ear, would rather 'lose the war than admit the mistake'.

They could have won. The decision to codify Slavery in their Constitution was in the end the deciding factor. It prevented any possibility of the worlds great powers from siding with the CSA. It gave Lincoln a huge advantage in the North to 'define' the war as it was taking place, not only taking and holding the 'moral highground' of the era, but to this day. Not saying he was fighting the war over slavery, thats simply not true as his own words up until his assasination clearly demonstrate.

But the fact is the CSA died of a theory. The theory was they could suceed from the Union AND keep a Institution (Slavery) without repercussions that doomed it to failure.

The simple fact of this matter is the Union, despite all of its advantages in manpower, and manufacturing, couldn't get out of its own way til Grant was promoted to command of ALL Union forces, in both theaters. The war shouldn't have lasted more than 18 months, tops, given the disparity in military and economic forces. It was only due to Union incompetence the war lasted four years in my view.

my anti groupie can't get through life without me.

Badeye  posted on  2010-04-12   11:05:12 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#110. To: Badeye (#109)

Sorry, but those 'aristocrats' codified it in the CSA Constitution, as a post way up above quoted exactly.

Codification seems to not matter here. And if you are from the south you are entitled to read into it what you want.

It's the war, stupid.

mininggold  posted on  2010-04-12   11:08:33 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#111. To: GarySpFC (#108)

I don't hate anyone. And BFD is he gave a speech.

NO SLAVERY = NO WAR.

Period...

#67. To: war (#48) Keep hiding behind the bozo, bozo. (laughing) You've always been a world class pussy. Badeye posted on 2010-01-14 16:12:48 ET Reply Trace

war  posted on  2010-04-12   11:21:25 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#112. To: Boofer (#109)

It was only due to Union incompetence the war lasted four years in my view.

And everyone else's, Boof. (eyes rolling)

#67. To: war (#48) Keep hiding behind the bozo, bozo. (laughing) You've always been a world class pussy. Badeye posted on 2010-01-14 16:12:48 ET Reply Trace

war  posted on  2010-04-12   11:24:35 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#113. To: war, GaryspFC (#111)

I don't hate anyone. And BFD is he gave a speech.

NO SLAVERY = NO WAR.

Period...

Evidently Gary is saying you can't believe those who made the military their career, even when it was put on the record. Maybe he is right... he ought to know.

It's the war, stupid.

mininggold  posted on  2010-04-12   11:35:01 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#114. To: Badeye (#109)

Have you considered what percentage of Southerners owned slaves?

OBAMA HAS SPENT MORE MONEY THAN ANY OTHER PERSON IN THE HISTORY OF MANKIND.

GarySpFC  posted on  2010-04-12   12:10:37 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#115. To: GarySpFC (#114)

Have you considered what percentage of Southerners owned slaves?

Yep. Which is why your comment about 'artistocrats' previously simply doesn't hold water.

It wasn't the vast majority of Southerners that fought and died in that war that 'codified Slavery' in the CSA Constitution.

The average Southerner didn't own slaves. They were sold on supporting the war as a 'states rights' issue, and it was adroitly played by that aristocratic class as a 'matter of honor' to the hilt.

But it doesn't change the facts as written by the CSA's own hand in its Constitution. Yep, States Rights was a central, key theme. But the next question after that acknowledgement is 'States Rights to do WHAT?'

And the answer cannot be denied. 'To maintain the Institution of Slavery'.

The Federal Government was doing what it does to this day, taxing unfairly. No dispute. But there is a way to deal with that, via the Constitution. If that was the only issue, there would never have been a Civil War in my view.

my anti groupie can't get through life without me.

Badeye  posted on  2010-04-12   12:29:23 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#116. To: GarySpFC (#114)

In that case...what's a little child molestation...packrat probably wouldn't mind....

#67. To: war (#48) Keep hiding behind the bozo, bozo. (laughing) You've always been a world class pussy. Badeye posted on 2010-01-14 16:12:48 ET Reply Trace

war  posted on  2010-04-12   12:30:25 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#117. To: Badeye (#115)

The average Southerner didn't own slaves. They were sold on supporting the war as a 'states rights' issue, and it was adroitly played by that aristocratic class as a 'matter of honor' to the hilt.
But it doesn't change the facts as written by the CSA's own hand in its Constitution. Yep, States Rights was a central, key theme. But the next question after that acknowledgement is 'States Rights to do WHAT?'
And the answer cannot be denied. 'To maintain the Institution of Slavery'.

Why? Once again, because outsiders were cramming their views down the Southerner's throats.

The Federal Government was doing what it does to this day, taxing unfairly. No dispute. But there is a way to deal with that, via the Constitution. If that was the only issue, there would never have been a Civil War in my view.

Let's take a look at something interesting.'

In 1703, 42 percent of New York's households had slaves; the only city with more was Charleston, South Carolina. By 1775, in New York there were 3,100 slaves, accounting for 30 percent to 40 percent of the city's workforce.
Slavery was part of every American colony until Vermont got rid of it in 1777; emancipation "came grudgingly and not completely" in New York until 1827."
http://www.newyorkology.com/archives/2005/10/slavery_in...

The point being the South knew slavery was a dying institution. Yes, they codified it in their Constitution, and that due to hostility from the North. Likewise, prior to the Civil Rights movement I frequently heard many declare segregation was wrong. However, the CRM set progress back 30-40 years. Older Southern blacks will admit this as being true.

OBAMA HAS SPENT MORE MONEY THAN ANY OTHER PERSON IN THE HISTORY OF MANKIND.

GarySpFC  posted on  2010-04-12   13:57:47 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#118. To: GarySpFC (#117)

Okay...they 'knew' and did it anyway. And that act ensured they'd never get any support, or recognition, as a seperate nation when they suceeded.

Any way you cut it, they FUCKED UP on that one issue, and it doomed them.

As I noted, Lincoln didn't set out to 'free the slaves'. He took that tac when he needed to. I'm aware that slavery existed in the North and that the change came slowly.

Still doesn't contradict my noting Slavery as a codified institution doomed the CSA from day one.

my anti groupie can't get through life without me.

Badeye  posted on  2010-04-12   14:10:35 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#119. To: GarySpFC (#117) (Edited)

However, the CRM set progress back 30-40 years. Older Southern blacks will admit this as being true.

You - and the unnamed "they" - are out of your minds...

#67. To: war (#48) Keep hiding behind the bozo, bozo. (laughing) You've always been a world class pussy. Badeye posted on 2010-01-14 16:12:48 ET Reply Trace

war  posted on  2010-04-12   14:10:52 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#120. To: Badeye (#118)

Still doesn't contradict my noting Slavery as a codified institution doomed the CSA from day one.

I don't doubt that. However, once again, slavery was not the root cause of the CW. In fact many of the Founding Fathers were slave holders, and were still respected even though deceased prior to the breakout of the CW.

BTW, I live close to where John Brown lived and started his killing. The man was not respected in the area.

OBAMA HAS SPENT MORE MONEY THAN ANY OTHER PERSON IN THE HISTORY OF MANKIND.

GarySpFC  posted on  2010-04-12   14:30:44 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#121. To: GarySpFC (#120)

slavery was not the root cause of the CW

NO SLAVERY = NO WAR

#67. To: war (#48) Keep hiding behind the bozo, bozo. (laughing) You've always been a world class pussy. Badeye posted on 2010-01-14 16:12:48 ET Reply Trace

war  posted on  2010-04-12   14:31:25 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#122. To: GarySpFC (#120)

To: Badeye

Still doesn't contradict my noting Slavery as a codified institution doomed the CSA from day one.

I don't doubt that. However, once again, slavery was not the root cause of the CW. In fact many of the Founding Fathers were slave holders, and were still respected even though deceased prior to the breakout of the CW.

Damn you are a good spinmeister.

What's a code in black and white good for when one can make up authorities out of thin air, most who would have been born a hundred years later or more than a hundred years before?

It's the war, stupid.

mininggold  posted on  2010-04-12   15:03:42 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#123. To: mininggold (#122)

Anyone claiming that slavery was not the root cause of the Civil War is out of their goddam minds...

#67. To: war (#48) Keep hiding behind the bozo, bozo. (laughing) You've always been a world class pussy. Badeye posted on 2010-01-14 16:12:48 ET Reply Trace

war  posted on  2010-04-12   15:09:02 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#124. To: war (#123)

Anyone claiming that slavery was not the root cause of the Civil War is out of their goddam minds...

I'm tired of the same types saying that our constitution is cut in stone while other constitutions are open for interpretation citing nameless figments.

It's the war, stupid.

mininggold  posted on  2010-04-12   15:16:11 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#125. To: GarySpFC (#120)

BTW, I live close to where John Brown lived and started his killing. The man was not respected in the area.

(chuckle) Most nutcases aren't respected. ONe of my favorite ironies is that it was then Lt Colonel Robert E Lee, along with some captain named JEB Stewart that captured John Brown at Harpers Ferry.

my anti groupie can't get through life without me.

Badeye  posted on  2010-04-12   15:32:48 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#126. To: mininggold (#122) (Edited)

Damn you are a good spinmeister.

What you don't know is my family lived, suffered, and died beause of the CW. They were never slave owners, but saw slavery as evil. My great-great grandfather was killed at Sharpsburg, leaving my great-great grandmother as a widow with two young children, and one died shortly thereafter. My great- grandfather died shortly after I was born, and my grandmother's Mom died at an early age. My family lost everything they had, and moved from S.C. to Alabama in a covered wagon. I listened for years as my family and others passed down this information.

BTW, my mother is 92, aunt 94, and my uncle just passed away last month at 88. Numerous relatives are still alive closing in on 100.

What's a code in black and white good for when one can make up authorities out of thin air, most who would have been born a hundred years later or more than a hundred years before?

Who is denying there was a constitution? I've seen a copy in the first capital at Montgomery. I simply disagree as to the cause of the war.

OBAMA HAS SPENT MORE MONEY THAN ANY OTHER PERSON IN THE HISTORY OF MANKIND.

GarySpFC  posted on  2010-04-12   15:47:05 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#127. To: Badeye (#125)

Grant's total war policy makes Iraq and Vietnam look like cake bakes. He would be condemned by both conservatives and liberals today.

OBAMA HAS SPENT MORE MONEY THAN ANY OTHER PERSON IN THE HISTORY OF MANKIND.

GarySpFC  posted on  2010-04-12   16:23:57 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#128. To: GarySpFC (#127)

No more than Truman for nuking.

Lincoln would have been condemed for appointing each of the Generals that proceeded Grant, for not removing Halleck and Stanton, and for not replacing the head of procurement for the Army of the Potomac.

my anti groupie can't get through life without me.

Badeye  posted on  2010-04-12   16:27:30 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#129. To: Badeye (#128) (Edited)

Grant's total war policy makes Iraq and Vietnam look like cake bakes. He would be condemned by both conservatives and liberals today.

No more than Truman for nuking.

Hiroshima and Nagasaki were military targets, with civilians in the area. Grant not onlyi targeted supplies the Confederates could use, which I understand, but he also took or destroyed anything women, children, and the aged could eat. He also destroyed their homes.

OBAMA HAS SPENT MORE MONEY THAN ANY OTHER PERSON IN THE HISTORY OF MANKIND.

GarySpFC  posted on  2010-04-12   17:01:26 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#130. To: Badeye (#100)

Sorry, sneaky, but the fact is the South wanted slavery to continue.

Yes,they did. So did many in the north. It still doesn't matter because slavery was NOT the centerpiece of the war from the point of view of the aggressive forces of the north.

Hell,the north practically enslaved immigrant Irish males right off the boat at Ellis Island,and swore them into the union army on the spot.

"I adore John McCain, support him 100 percent and will do everything I can to support his reelection. As everyone knows, I was honored and proud to run with him. And Todd and I were with him in D.C. just a week ago." (Sarah Palin,Dec 2009) ************************************ DID Palin say or write these things or not? (Me) I don't know or F ing care. (Mad Dog posted on 2009-12-26 16:36:33 ET,post # 105 http://libertysflame.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=5510&Disp=114#C114)

sneakypete  posted on  2010-04-12   20:54:57 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#131. To: GarySpFC, Badeye (#102)

Sorry Badeye, but you are dead wrong. You simply do not understand the Southern psyche. Southerners are a very proud group, and the aristrocrats by the time of the CW had already decided slavery was morally wrong, but in spite of that they were not about to allow outsiders to push something down their throats.

Don't forget that the vast majority of the citizens of the south didn't own slaves,and many were against slavery.

They weren't fighting for slavery. They were fighting for their homes and for self-rule.

I can't remember the name now,but one Yankee officer is said to have asked a CSA enlisted man why he was fighting when it was obvious he couldn't afford to own slaves,and the man replied "Because you are here."

Which also explains why we will never run out of enemies as long as we are a occupying force in the Middle East.

"I adore John McCain, support him 100 percent and will do everything I can to support his reelection. As everyone knows, I was honored and proud to run with him. And Todd and I were with him in D.C. just a week ago." (Sarah Palin,Dec 2009) ************************************ DID Palin say or write these things or not? (Me) I don't know or F ing care. (Mad Dog posted on 2009-12-26 16:36:33 ET,post # 105 http://libertysflame.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=5510&Disp=114#C114)

sneakypete  posted on  2010-04-12   21:04:25 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#132. To: mininggold (#107)

To compare those VPs as being similiar ......

Yeah,for one thing,if you combined the IQ's of Biden and Goober it wouldn't match the IQ of the typical rabid rat.

Besides,we all know a VP isn't really a VP,right?

"I adore John McCain, support him 100 percent and will do everything I can to support his reelection. As everyone knows, I was honored and proud to run with him. And Todd and I were with him in D.C. just a week ago." (Sarah Palin,Dec 2009) ************************************ DID Palin say or write these things or not? (Me) I don't know or F ing care. (Mad Dog posted on 2009-12-26 16:36:33 ET,post # 105 http://libertysflame.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=5510&Disp=114#C114)

sneakypete  posted on  2010-04-12   21:13:12 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#133. To: sneakypete, GarySpFC, Badeye (#131)

Don't forget that the vast majority of the citizens of the south didn't own slaves,and many were against slavery.

They weren't fighting for slavery. They were fighting for their homes and for self-rule.

Revisionist history at its finest there Sneaky.....

------

Confederate Vice President Alexander H. Stephens. March 26, 1861

The prevailing ideas entertained by … most of the leading statesmen at the time of the formation of the old Constitution were, that the enslavement of the African was in violation of the laws of nature; that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally, and politically. It was an evil they knew not well how to deal with; but the general opinion of the men of that day was, that, somehow or other, in the order of Providence, the institution would be evanescent and pass away. … Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of the races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the idea of a government built upon it — "When the storm came and the wind blew, it fell."

Our new government is built upon exactly the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and moral condition. This, our new Government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth.

Being a Republican means you get to choose your own reality.

go65  posted on  2010-04-13   8:58:32 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#134. To: go65 (#133)

If you think the Northeners, in general, had any different opinion of Negros, you are delusional.

no gnu taxes  posted on  2010-04-13   9:01:06 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#135. To: GarySpFC (#129)

You are confusing Grant with Sherman here. In effect, two very different theaters of operation. Grant had a magnificent supply base, the largest ever created in the history of warfare up to that time, located at City Point. Shipping came directly from the Atlantic to the docks there. Trains had access as well. Grants 'supply line' was measured in YARDS more or less, from the point supplies were embarked upon the docks, or train yards.

Sherman's supply lines were more or less none existent once past Kennesaw Mountain, and measured in hundreds of miles. To execute the 'March to the Sea' from Atlanta, his only option was to 'live off the land'. Yes, it was his intention to 'make Georgia/south Carolina howl' and he did. Most don't realize the deep South was in fact vitually 'untouched' by the affects of the war on the front lines. Mary Chestnut's diaries make it very clear, once she left Richmond in that final eight months. The Union controlled New Orleans, but not the countryside around it. The Union blockaded Charleston, but never controlled it throughout most of the war. Same for every other Atlantic port, til Sherman took them from LANDWARD.

As for taking from the population...see Lee's second invasion of the North, see Jubal Early's late foray into the Washington DC vicinity near the end of the war. They did the same thing, more or less. Though they didn't burn to the ground storage facilities, rail yards, etc.

You bet Sherman burnt to the ground the Aristocrats gigantic homes when he came upon them. As we discussed earlier, it was they that insisted on codifying slavery in the CSA Constitution. It was they that benefited from it the most.

my anti groupie can't get through life without me.

Badeye  posted on  2010-04-13   10:32:08 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#136. To: sneakypete (#130)

It still doesn't matter because slavery was NOT the centerpiece of the war from the point of view of the aggressive forces of the north.

Actually, thats simply not true, as diaries, journals, statements from the administration, statements from the Brits and French demonstrate conclusively.

From their point of view, it was about Slavery in one key aspect or another, depending on which of the above you wish to discuss.

Brits wouldn't intervene because of it. Nor would the French, but they were more circumspect due to their own interests in taking over Mexico at that time. Look it up, 'Frances mad emperor' of the time frame.

Even Jefferson Davis worried what they would have to do about the French AFTER the war was won, as did Judah Benjamin, his Secretary of State.

Yes, the North did strongly encourage immigrants - from Ireland, Germany, France, various colonies throughout Africa, to enlist and thereby gain citizenship upon completion of service, along with a pension btw.

Its worth noting those immigrants couldn't fathom fighting for a nation that would, in REALITY, enslave THEM if given half a chance. They were fleeing Europe where they lived in similiar conditions. See 1860 Liverpool England for a good example.

Lincoln was about 'preserving the Union' at all costs.

The CSA was about 'preserving the Antebellum Southern way of Life'. That 'life' could not be realized without the institution of Slavery, or so they thought at the moment they signed the CSA Constitution. Thats why it codified slavery.

Had they given more thought, they would have realized 'share cropping' provided the same thing, more or less, without the worldwide STIGMA.

And maybe won the war. JMHO.

my anti groupie can't get through life without me.

Badeye  posted on  2010-04-13   10:42:08 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#137. To: sneakypete (#131)

They weren't fighting for slavery. They were fighting for their homes and for self-rule.

I can't remember the name now,but one Yankee officer is said to have asked a CSA enlisted man why he was fighting when it was obvious he couldn't afford to own slaves,and the man replied "Because you are here."

Its true, the vast majority of those in the CSA armies were not slave owners. But lets not forget they almost to a man believed blacks were in fact 'sub human' or the more enlightened, like Robert E Lee believed 'they are not ready for full citizenship due to their stage of development'.

The quote you are talking about is found in Shelby Foote's triology 'The Civil War' btw.

The irony is found in the fact the Union army wouldn't have 'been there' had the hotheads of the South not voted for a sucession that was doomed to failure based upon a Constitution that carried the seeds of its own defeat because it went so far in favor of 'States Rights' that in the end it couldn't defend itself fully.

Thats also found in Shelby Foote's triology, btw.

my anti groupie can't get through life without me.

Badeye  posted on  2010-04-13   10:46:34 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#138. To: no gnu taxes (#134)

Actually, there was a large minority that held it was a sin to enslave any human. If there wasn't, Lincoln never would have won the nomination in 1860, let alone the election itself.

He was very clear on his view of slavery as an evil institution throughout the proceeding decade, and throughout the Lincoln/Douglas debates.

His victory in the 1860 election cycle demonstrates how strong the feeling was when the votes were tallied.

Thats not to be confused with the populations view of blacks, overall, however.

my anti groupie can't get through life without me.

Badeye  posted on  2010-04-13   10:49:40 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#139. To: Badeye (#135)

You are confusing Grant with Sherman here. In effect, two very different theaters of operation. Grant had a magnificent supply base, the largest ever created in the history of warfare up to that time, located at City Point. Shipping came directly from the Atlantic to the docks there. Trains had access as well. Grants 'supply line' was measured in YARDS more or less, from the point supplies were embarked upon the docks, or train yards.

I am more than familiar with both, and either old age or my Parkinson's caused me to confuse the two. I have been a CW buff for years, with lots of books. My focus has been Forrest, and I have 9 of his biographies.

Sherman's supply lines were more or less none existent once past Kennesaw Mountain, and measured in hundreds of miles. To execute the 'March to the Sea' from Atlanta, his only option was to 'live off the land'. Yes, it was his intention to 'make Georgia/south Carolina howl' and he did. Most don't realize the deep South was in fact vitually 'untouched' by the affects of the war on the front lines. Mary Chestnut's diaries make it very clear, once she left Richmond in that final eight months. The Union controlled New Orleans, but not the countryside around it. The Union blockaded Charleston, but never controlled it throughout most of the war. Same for every other Atlantic port, til Sherman took them from LANDWARD.

I can appreciate Sherman destroying anything that could be construed as logistics for the CSA, and even the large homes. However, Sherman's army went much further and even took or destroyed the food Southern women, children and the aged needed to survive. Scarlet eating roots to survive was for real.

As for taking from the population...see Lee's second invasion of the North, see Jubal Early's late foray into the Washington DC vicinity near the end of the war. They did the same thing, more or less. Though they didn't burn to the ground storage facilities, rail yards, etc.

A forty mile swath? I don't think so.

You bet Sherman burnt to the ground the Aristocrats gigantic homes when he came upon them. As we discussed earlier, it was they that insisted on codifying slavery in the CSA Constitution. It was they that benefited from it the most.

I think you realize Sherman went much further.

"Maj. Gen. William T. Sherman, resting his troops in Savannah, declared, “When I go through South Carolina, it will be one of the most horrible things in the history of the world. The devil himself couldn’t restrain my men in that state.”

"Sherman’s cavalry commander, Brig. Gen. Hugh Judson Kilpatrick reportedly spent $5,000 in Savannah for matches for his troopers. Kilpatrick, better known as “Kill Cav” for his rashness in battle that got his own men killed, was obnoxious, boastful, and a notorious womanizer. At Savannah, he told his corps, “In after years when travelers passing through South Carolina shall see chimney stacks without houses, and the country desolate, and shall ask who did this? Some Yankee will answer: Kilpatrick’s Cavalry!” His men would soon leave a scorched swath across South Carolina burning homes, farms, mill, forests, and even churches.

OBAMA HAS SPENT MORE MONEY THAN ANY OTHER PERSON IN THE HISTORY OF MANKIND.

GarySpFC  posted on  2010-04-14   23:49:25 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#140. To: GarySpFC (#139)

1. Didn't claim Early created a '40 mile swath'. Said he and Lee both lived off the land. Thats accurate. We both know this.

2. Agree completely about Kilpatrick - apt nickname as we both know.

3. Sucession began in South Carolina. Given that, its amazing Sherman left ANYTHING standing after 600,000 dead, 1.2 million wounded.

4. Scarlet was a character created in a novel. Mary Chestnut was a real, living, Southern Belle of the aristocracy. Yes, there were hardships, horrific ones. But the poor in the South were the poor in the South BEFORE the war. And barely got by. Southern Aristocracy was hardly renowned for 'charity' prior to the war, as I'm pretty sure you realize. Far from it. It had more than a bit of 'let them eat cake' attitude.

By the fourth year of the war, it became crystal clear there was only one of two ways to bring it to an end. Take the Democrats platform of 1864 which called for a peace that allowed the CSA to become a seperate nation complete with the institution of Slavery. Or, gutted the South, bring the horror of war to those plantations in the Deep South that were virtually 'untouched' since the war began, and thereby end the cottage industry that was supporting the CSA war effort.

We can decry how it was done, the bringing about of the worst war in American history til the cows come home. But the ugly truth is that method worked, after four years of failed efforts. And as we both know, it became the model for 20th Century warfare around the world. Many of the same principals are still valid, and practiced today. With good reason.

It worked.

my anti groupie can't get through life without me.

Badeye  posted on  2010-04-15   9:50:53 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#141. To: Boofer (#140) (Edited)

Take the Democrats platform of 1864 which called for a peace that allowed the CSA to become a seperate nation complete with the institution of Slavery. Or

Here's the 1864 Democrat Party Platform, Boof. care to guess what's missing?

~~~~~~~~

Resolved, That in the future, as in the past, we will adhere with unswerving fidelity to the Union under the Constitution as the only solid foundation of our strength, security, and happiness as a people, and as a framework of government equally conducive to the welfare and prosperity of all the States, both Northern and Southern.

Resolved, That this convention does explicitly declare, as the sense of the American people, that after four years of failure to restore the Union by the experiment of war, during which, under the pretense of a military necessity of war-power higher than the Constitution, the Constitution itself has been disregarded in every part, and public liberty and private right alike trodden down, and the material prosperity of the country essentially impaired, justice, humanity, liberty, and the public welfare demand that immediate efforts be made for a cessation of hostilities, with a view of an ultimate convention of the States, or other peaceable means, to the end that, at the earliest practicable moment, peace may be restored on the basis of the Federal Union of the States.

Resolved, That the direct interference of the military authorities of the United States in the recent elections held in Kentucky, Maryland, Missouri, and Delaware was a shameful violation of the Constitution, and a repetition of such acts in the approaching election will be held as revolutionary, and resisted with all the means and power under our control.

Resolved, That the aim and object of the Democratic party is to preserve the Federal Union and the rights of the States unimpaired, and they hereby declare that they consider that the administrative usurpation of extraordinary and dangerous powers not granted by the Constitution — the subversion of the civil by military law in States not in insurrection; the arbitrary military arrest, imprisonment, trial, and sentence of American citizens in States where civil law exists in full force; the suppression of freedom of speech and of the press; the denial of the right of asylum; the open and avowed disregard of State rights; the employment of unusual test-oaths; and the interference with and denial of the right of the people to bear arms in their defense is calculated to prevent a restoration of the Union and the perpetuation of a Government deriving its just powers from the consent of the governed.

Resolved, That the shameful disregard of the Administration to its duty in respect to our fellow citizens who now are and long have been prisoners of war and in a suffering condition, deserves the severest reprobation on the score alike of public policy and common humanity.

Resolved, That the sympathy of the Democratic party is heartily and earnestly extended to the soldiery of our army and sailors of our navy, who are and have been in the field and on the sea under the flag of our country, and, in the events of its attaining power, they will receive all the care, protection, and regard that the brave soldiers and sailors of the republic have so nobly earned.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SOURCE: Reprinted in Donald Bruce Johnson, comp., National Party Platforms, vol. 1, 1840-1956, rev. ed. (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1978), pages 34-35.

#67. To: war (#48) Keep hiding behind the bozo, bozo. (laughing) You've always been a world class pussy. Badeye posted on 2010-01-14 16:12:48 ET Reply Trace

war  posted on  2010-04-15   10:00:27 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#142. To: war (#141)

Patriots have no use for facts.

Bartcoprules  posted on  2010-04-15   10:04:34 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#143. To: Bartcoprules (#142)

And rive by posters like yourself just take up bandwidth.

my anti groupie can't get through life without me.

Badeye  posted on  2010-04-15   10:07:28 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#144. To: Bopofer, Badrtcoprules (#143) (Edited)

And rive by posters

You're a "rive by poster"? Cool...do you have meetings and t-shirts and other cool things?

#67. To: war (#48) Keep hiding behind the bozo, bozo. (laughing) You've always been a world class pussy. Badeye posted on 2010-01-14 16:12:48 ET Reply Trace

war  posted on  2010-04-15   10:20:54 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#145. To: Bartcoprules (#142)

The "fact" is that when conjecture contemporary to the adoption of that platform interpreted the platform as impling what Boof is advocating, McClellan went public and repudiated that interpretation. He said that the war should continue on to a conclusion and slavery abolished.

#67. To: war (#48) Keep hiding behind the bozo, bozo. (laughing) You've always been a world class pussy. Badeye posted on 2010-01-14 16:12:48 ET Reply Trace

war  posted on  2010-04-15   10:23:33 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com