SOMETHING MORE ABOUT THE FLAG FEATURED ABOVE.
Posted on 11/08/2015 9:36:32 AM PST by yoe
Lincoln didn't start the war. Davis did.
“Just because O.J. wasn’t convicted of murder doesn’t mean he didn’t do it.”
O.J. was tried and found not guilty. Davis was arrested for treason but never tried. Federal officials concluded their case was weak and charges were dropped. However, the suggestion that treason by Southerners was at play does help to justify Lincoln’s decision to start a war that killed 600,000.
“Lincoln didn’t start the war. Davis did.”
Stop it! You’re killing me; my sides are splitting.
Don’t give him too much credit
It’ll go to his head
I've gotten a few chuckles from your posts too.
I believe they definitely will cave. They already caved with Cochran.
Which I guess is proof positive that he didn't do it.
Federal officials concluded their case was weak and charges were dropped.
LOL. Of course they did.
However, the suggestion that treason by Southerners was at play does help to justify Lincoln’s decision to start a war that killed 600,000.
Lincoln didn't start the war. Davis did.
By this I guess you mean Davis’ actions in the Gulf of Tonkin incident . . . err, I mean the Fort Sumter incident.
I have some duct tape for ya...
he wasn’t dead on April 9th. or 10th.
You mean the bombardment of Fort Sumter never happened either? Wow! Who knew?
It's hard to organize and hold a treason trial in four or five days.
Lincoln didn’t want the Slavers war but when it came to him he didn’t shirk his responsibilities. After the war was won he didn’t want lingering animosities - he wished to bind the wounds and go back to being Americans. He had no fire in the belly to pursue treason charges against southerners - even those who had acted in truly treasonous ways.
After his assassination there were those who sought revenge but Andrew Johnson devised a reconstruction plan that largely honored Lincoln’s wishes. His primary goal was to wrest control in the south from the slaver aristocracy to the people. The republicans in congress found ways to circumvent those changes in their continuing efforts to punish the south for its rebellion. And the southern slaver aristocrats found ways to circumvent THOSE changes by imposing Jim Crow laws.
He could have asked the attorney General to issue warrants for their arrest. He could have done that at anytime during the war.
I'm sure it was on his to-do list.
“Within the laws and customs of war’’. Oh, yes the argument Southerners have used to escape what Lees troops did.”
Lee was an honorable man, a condition with which some may be unfamiliar. What his troops did was in no way comparable to what Sherman did. The late Senator Moynihan reminded us that while a person might be entitled to his opinion, none of us is entitled to his own facts, and that—combined with what should be an embarrassing dearth of facts—seems to be what we have going on here.
“And just what are those ‘’laws and customs’’ by the way?”
You’ve managed to remain willfully ignorant thus far, and you want me to take on the task of educating you?
Do it yourself. It’s all public record.
“It was treason.”
In no way.
“It was the taking up of arms against the duly elected government.”
Loyalty is owed in the United States not to the government, but to the Constitution. Failure to take up arms against a government to prevent it traducing the Constitution is treason. Are you even an American, that you would think opposition to a government is necessarily treason?
“And to say the South would have ended slavery if it had won is ridiculous.”
Howls, Bruce. Howls of derisive laughter. No other nation on the face of the earth had to kill 600,000 men in a civil war to end slavery, but they all got it ended (except for the mooselimbs and their Satanic blood cult). Slavery-based agriculture was already on the way out in 1861, and absent the real causes of the War of Northern Aggression, would have ended in a decade or so for economic reasons.
Oh, how can you say slavery should have persisted for another decade? Well, how can you say 600,000 men needed to die?
“It could have done that anytime before April 9,1861.”
Before the WNA, people said “The United States are...” It was only after the WNA that people began to say “The United States is...” Thinking of the southern states as an “it” betrays a distorted perspective that precludes productive thought.
“The fact of the matter is the North went to war to preserve the union and won.”
The North went to war to deny the South their right to self-government, and won.
“The South went to war to preserve slavery”
You haven’t even learned better than that? We like to say that everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but that isn’t really true. Below a certain level of knowledge of a subject, a person really has no right to swan about annoying the adults.
“and no amount of revisionism and romancing treasonous, slave owning paltroons will change that.”
Why is it that ignorance and malice are so often seen together?
Here’s a hint: there’s more accurate history in Gone With the Wind than in every history of the WNA you’ve ever read.
I’m not sure this war will ever end.
“I remember researching this once upon a time. The Brits were the big dealers and slave importation on American flagged ships was like 8-10%.”
Thanks for the information.
When did we lose the ability to say that a thing was exactly as bad as it was, and no worse?
***It was the taking up of arms against a duly elected government***
Duly elected government? HA! Lincoln was not on the ballot in some states!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1860
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.