Posted on 07/05/2016 5:09:09 AM PDT by Kaslin
“The Great Raid” is very important. Saw it on Netflix or Amazon a few years ago. Wouldn’t have even known about that WWII operation if not for the movie.
Would also like to add “American Sniper” to the list.
The first time I realized the CW was not all about Slavery was from an old 1950 movie STAGE TO TUSCON in which two men get in an argument about the coming break up of the union.
***
Man 1: Are you an Abolitionist?
Man 2: I don’t have no SLAVES!
Man 1: Well what about all those WAGE SLAVES and TARIFFS in the North!
***
Wage slaves? Tariffs? I thought the war was to “free the slaves” in the South as that is what I had always been taught in History class!
No. I'm saying 3/4ths of that money came from slavery in the states where it still existed. New England was making profits from Slavery in the Southern and border states.
Band of Brothers
Apollo 13
The Right Stuff
Something I have just recently realized is that the morally motivated abolitionist were an extreme minority in the North. *MOST* of the people who were opposed to slavery did not oppose it out of concern for slaves. They opposed it because they saw it as an unfair threat to their own labor and wages, and because of resentment that wealthy people would get rich from slave labor.
Basically the same attitudes that are prominent in the Unionized areas of the USA nowadays.
thanks for the info, the best book to read on the Civil War is “Battles and Leaders of the Civil War” a 4 volume set about 800 pages each book. It is comprised of articles written after the war by the very people who were in the various battles on both sides. It is considered to be the foremost work on the subject IMHO and others.
After looking at my response, I realized I probably didn't explain it clearly enough.
3/4ths of the value of all US exports in 1860 came from Southern agriculture products, meaning Cotton, Tobacco, Molasses, etc. Most of the value of these products was created by slave labor.
The returning import trade from Europe was mostly paid for by the value extracted from those US exports to Europe. The curious thing is why it mostly came back through New York rather than returning to the ports from whence it's value originated, meaning Southern ports.
That is an interesting story in and of itself, and I will explain it as best I can to anyone who wants to hear it, but the fact remains that most of that money coming into New York was the result of slave labor from slave states.
Yes, the US government (which ran on that tariff money) was mostly funded by slave labor in the slave states.
I don't have that much info regarding the battles. I think that by the time those started, all the politics of the situation had solidified, and the reasons why it started were no longer significant to the outcome.
Once enough blood had been shed, the war took on a life of it's own, and regardless of why it started, it was going to keep grinding out till it's bloody end.
It may have began over the loss of money, but by the time it was over, it was fueled by a desire for revenge.
Don’t care much for PC Liberal take on history,
Band of Brothers is the only one you need to see.
I saw 2 of them. Lincoln which was boring. The good one was lone survivor which I saw twice. Can’t imagine watching it on 4th of July. Who has time for watching a movie with BBQ, beer, guests and then fireworks. No thanks.
If your going full Tom hanks then Forrest Gump must be added. Nothing more American then Forrest Gump.
Aye. Me as well. Watched it on a little black and white TV. Still get goose bumps
Why not? You don't think it was an important event?
You think that Hollywood covered it correctly and HONESTLY?
No way.
If tariffs are the metric you use to measure economies then you need to remember that tariffs are collected on imports not on exports. Imports were mostly from Europe and therefore not products of slavery.
Most of the agricultural exports from slave states were done through southern ports like Baltimore, Charleston, Savannah, Mobile and New Orleans.
I honestly don't know. But the subject matter is interesting enough for anyone who believes in Unalienable rights.
I don't dispute that, but even though it wasn't most of their commerce, the European trade was still very significant to New England. Significant enough to start a fight over it.
Prior to the building of the Erie Canal, New York City was a comparatively minor port. New York was an important port because of its proximity to Europe and to the Hudson River.
Geography was very kind to New York. It is the primary reason for it's wealth. The same is true of San Francisco and Chicago too.
If tariffs are the metric you use to measure economies then you need to remember that tariffs are collected on imports not on exports. Imports were mostly from Europe and therefore not products of slavery.
You cannot have imports without balancing exports, else you run what is called a "trade deficit."
The normal and usual condition is that export value is offset by import value, the two being approximately equal with only minor variations over time.
Therefore, the imports from Europe *WERE* products of slavery. That European trade and currency was recompense for products sent to Europe which were produced by slavery.
Most of the agricultural exports from slave states were done through southern ports like Baltimore, Charleston, Savannah, Mobile and New Orleans.
Yes they were, but almost all of the returning money and imports came back through New York.
Now how do you suppose such a thing as that happens?
The description states”Luttrell and his fellow officers”. Lutrell was not an officer, neither were 2 of his 3 squad mates.
Vote for Hillary, she’s as honest as the typical Hollywood screenplay regarding race or politics.
No thanks. Speak for yourself.
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.