Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: DoughtyOne

“What Civil War? What do you mean Whites fought to free
Black slaves. No they didn’t

Yes but Not Stonewall Jackson. He fought for the exact opposite.


8 posted on 12/07/2020 4:26:11 PM PST by ifinnegan (Democrats kill babies and harvest their organs to sell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]


To: ifinnegan
Yes but Not Stonewall Jackson. He fought for the exact opposite.

The North was not fighting to free slaves, they were fighting to make slaves of the Southern states. The South wasn't fighting to keep slaves, they already had the legal right to keep slaves under USA law. The South was fighting for independence from the Washington Deep State corruptocracy that we are all fighting against now.

15 posted on 12/07/2020 4:38:06 PM PST by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: ifinnegan

No Jackson did not either.


29 posted on 12/07/2020 5:04:50 PM PST by carton253 (Jesus is everything.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: ifinnegan

He fought for States rights.The Civil War should have been fought politically.
Nevertheless, I don’t think our leaders are preparing to win the next war.


57 posted on 12/07/2020 5:40:44 PM PST by KDF48 (Redeemed by Christ.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: ifinnegan

“Yes but Not Stonewall Jackson. He fought for the exact opposite.”

You need to read some history. Jackson did NOT fight for slavery, he fought because his home state seceded and was deemed an enemy of the U.S., and was thus threatened by the latter. Back in those days loyalty to one’s state was generally superior to loyalty to a Union. Like it or not, as seen from a 21st century mindset, that was the norm back in the 19th century.

Jackson established a school for black children, the offspring of slaves and freemen, which at the time was considered in some instances a criminal act. But Jackson said he did it because it was the right thing to do. He was DEEPLY religious, and personally thought slavery was a social evil, but that since it had existed from time immemorial it was because God allowed it.

Jackson was also a brilliant military tactician, and a fierce warrior who placed duty and honor above any personal ambition (of which he had next to none). It is my opinion that Lee lost at Gettysburg because he fought the battle as he’d have fought it had he still had Jackson. That is where Lee erred, and fatally. Ewell replaced Jackson after Chancellorsville, but Jackson almost certainly would have taken Cemetery Hill and Culp’s Hill on the first day at Gettysburg — where Ewell hesitated and made only a half-assed attempt — which would have made all the difference. In my humble opinion. This is one of the reasons I love history so much: It is full of “what-if’s” that make for fun discussions.


59 posted on 12/07/2020 5:42:48 PM PST by ought-six (Multiculturalism is national suicide, and political correctness is the cyanide capsule. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson