Posted on 04/28/2016 8:03:06 AM PDT by C19fan
A few paces west of the public beach in Yorktown, Virginia, is a little cave looking out toward the water. We all know Yorktown from history class. This is where, in October 1781, the British army commanded by Lord Cornwallis surrendered to the Americans under General George Washington and the French under the Comte de Rochambeau.
It’s not much of a cave, really, but tourists by the thousands stop to peep into it, as they have for more than two centuries. It is known to this day as “Cornwallis’s Cave,” and for most of our history visitors have been told that this is where the British general took refuge during the last days of the siege. He hid there, guides said, and visitors nodded knowingly. That is because, as we all know, Cornwallis was a coward, and it was just like him to find such a fittingly ignominious hole wherein to snivel and whimper while, in the defenses around the town, his troops were destroyed.
(Excerpt) Read more at theamericanconservative.com ...
True. Cornwallis is considered to be one of their best generals.
Patton would not enter a medical tent for medical help until all GIs had been treated.
I don’t remember the Southern States not having any representation in Congress.
‘Nice’ generals don’t win battles.
"Those people" is how Gen. R.E. Lee referred to the Yankees.
What does that have to do with anything? When someone wishes to leave, they have a right to leave.
Second, yes, if that is true, the South should have let her slaves go, but fought a war to keep them.
ungrateful and false
In World War One more than 8 million Frenchmen were called up. There were 4.2 million casualties,, with 1.3 million of them fatalities.
Their reasons do not matter. They espoused a Natural Law right to leave if they wished, and that is exactly what the colonists did.
Second, yes, if that is true, the South should have let her slaves go, but fought a war to keep them.
In 1776, all the states were slave states. Apparently the founders didn't regard the right to leave as being contingent upon whether or not they owned slaves.
Thomas Jefferson owned 80 slaves when he wrote the declaration of independence.
So the point remains. If the 13 slave owning colonies had a right to leave, why didn't the 11 slave owning states have a right to leave? Why did the Union tolerate five slave owning states continuing to own slaves during the war?
Apparently the Union didn't have a problem with slavery. Again, they had five Union states which continued to own slaves during the war. Apparently the only thing the Union had a problem with was people trying to get away from that North Eastern Power Cabal centered in New York which seems to be more or less the same problem we are facing today.
We are talking about the slaves themselves, who the Southerner's would not allow to leave, but they wanted the same right to do so?
As I said, the American colonists had a right to leave the British empire because they had no representation in Parliament.
The South could not claim this, since they had representation and were in open rebellion.
Slavery was constitutional so it couldn't be eliminated until there was a constitutional amendment, which the North passed, despite the fact that some of their States still had slaves.
And I'm 100% certain that they would disagree. And now you're in the position of telling someone that their definition of freedom is wrong and yours is right, an opinion you enforce with paid soldiers.
They held that the Negro was an inferior being and should be kept in slavery.
So, the real persons who had a right to revolt were the slaves, not the slave owners.
Yes, I am definitely saying that Islamic supremacists are wrong and I am right.
I’m sure they fought it bravely, but thankfully the British public quickly got tired of the engagement.
13 Slave owning States demonstrates that the standard required to leave the larger Union was not contingent upon whether or not they owned slaves. They did.
We are talking about the slaves themselves, who the Southerner's would not allow to leave, but they wanted the same right to do so?
If you are going to focus on Hypocrisy, you need to focus on the Hypocrisy of slave owning Jefferson, and the Hypocrisy of slavery tolerating Lincoln.
Whether or not people are hypocrites has nothing to do with the fact that they had just as much right to leave the Union as the 13 colonies had the right to leave the British Union.
You are trying to make slavery an issue in one event, but refusing to recognize it was the exact same case in the other.
As I said, the American colonists had a right to leave the British empire because they had no representation in Parliament.
No, they had a right to leave for any D@mn reason they so pleased. The Declaration, (which you have seemingly named yourself for) specifies only that:
That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
.
.
.
Slavery was constitutional so it couldn't be eliminated until there was a constitutional amendment, which the North passed, despite the fact that some of their States still had slaves.
Well then if you think the war was about slavery, then perhaps you can explain why the Union forces didn't attack Maryland? The supply lines would have been a lot shorter. It was right there in front of their nose. They could have stopped slavery right there instead of marching hundreds of miles further south to do it.
One might say that judging by their actions, and their rhetoric, it didn't seem to be their primary goal. What did seem to be their primary goal was to insure that Washington D.C. could continue to clamp their claws around other people's necks.
Oh, and if it was constitutional, then what were they fighting that war for? It must have been for some other reason than to free the slaves, because as you said, they couldn't do that until they passed an amendment or something.
[PAUSE]
The Settlers say that they can wear anything they want and shoot from behind rocks and bushes and everywhere;
The British must wear red and march in a straight line.
The Coin Toss
Bill Cosby
The Declaration of Independence makes it clear that the only reason a People can disband their government is when the government becomes destructive to the life, liberty and pursuit of happiness of the individual.
That was not the case for the South, who had no just reason to leave the Union.
I don’t think too many British have been disparaged other than Banastre Tarleton.
The Declaration of Independence does not defend the right to disband governments for any reason.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.