I wrote, "IIRC his men hung a justice of the Georgia Supreme Court in an attempt to learn the location of his 'gold' (this after taking over $10,000 in cash from him)." IIRC = If I remember correctly. All I have to do is take a trip to the library to find the account again. For clarification, I did not state that the justice was killed, only that he was hung in an attempt to force him to divulge the location.
Implying slavery had nothing to do with secession.
Nonsense. Where is that implied? There were many factors.
Implying blacks were in full support of secession.
Nonsense. Where is that implied? I posted an article about Mr. Winbush, and the fact that his grandfather for the Confederacy - a position Mr. Winbush stated he would take as well.
Saying Sherman commited war crimes when about every general in war understands that it's the army's job to disrupt the enemy's war supply.
Not at that time - until then modern wars were much more "gentlemanly". Sherman instituted the policy of waging war on innocent civilians, to make Georgia "howl". That is, the defenseless old men, women and children. His army could beat them. But please see post 72 - the US Supreme Court ruled on this issue before and after the war. Civilian property could not be seized/destroyed without compensation.
Claiming that Lincoln only fought for money.
By Lincoln's own admission, he was perfectly content for the seceded states to be left alone [''beyond what may be necessary for these objects, there will be no invasion, no using of force against or among the people anywhere], as long as he could 'collect the duties and imposts'. A demand for tribute.
See, that's what I mean. An accusation of murder should have some evidence or logic behind it. Wild accusations of murder qualify for tinfoil. I wouldn't dream of accusing Lee of murder unless I had a link ready. I think that's what separates those who recognize reality from those of you living in the past who accept any kind of wild revisionism as long as it demonizes those you consider the enemy.
Nonsense. Where is that implied? There were many factors.
When you said that those who recognize that slavery was the reason for secession were not recognizing facts. It's it the South's own words in their Declarations. You Spent a whole thread talking about about a black southerner fighting for the Confederacy acting as if he was the norm. I can take you to an Underground Railroad station right here near my house to show you that many blacks did not support the Confederacy.
Nonsense. Where is that implied? I posted an article about Mr. Winbush, and the fact that his grandfather for the Confederacy - a position Mr. Winbush stated he would take as well.
Again, you said that Winbush proves yankees had their facts wrong. That implies black supported slavery.
Not at that time - until then modern wars were much more "gentlemanly".
War was gentlemanly?! Read about the English versus the Highlanders! Read about the Alpiners versus the Saxons! I'd say burned houses and supply barns isn't near as bad as what the Highlanders and the Saxons went through!
Sherman instituted the policy of waging war on innocent civilians, to make Georgia "howl". That is, the defenseless old men, women and children.
And it's what Ike, Truman, Patton, Doolittle, all of them did. It's how wars are won, you destroy the opposing army's supply. Southerners had it easy compared to Tokyoans, Germans who were firebombed, Hiroshimians, Nagaskians, etc. Hundreds of thousands were killed. All the South lost were inanimate objects.
His army could beat them. But please see post 72 - the US Supreme Court ruled on this issue before and after the war. Civilian property could not be seized/destroyed without compensation.
It was rebellion.
By Lincoln's own admission, he was perfectly content for the seceded states to be left alone [''beyond what may be necessary for these objects, there will be no invasion, no using of force against or among the people anywhere], as long as he could 'collect the duties and imposts'. A demand for tribute.
Yeah right, that's beyond the pale. Like I said, tinfoil.
He went on to say "Where hostility to the United States in any interior locality shall be so great and universal as to prevent competent resident citizens from holding the Federal offices, there will be no attempt to force obnoxious strangers among the people for that object...The mails, unless repelled, will continue to be furnished in all parts of the Union. So far as possible the people everywhere shall have that sense of perfect security which is most favorable to calm thought and reflection."
So maybe all Lincoln wanted was to make sure that Davis got the birthday card he sent?