Long after death, Confederate spy honored in Ark.

[Dissent]

The north started the aggression with its plan to tax the south into submission.

Already blown that one out of the water.

In your own mind ya did.

 

[Dissent]

Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power,
have the right to rise up
and shake off the existing government
and form a new one that suits them better.
This is a most valuable—a most sacred right—
a right, which we hope and believe, is to liberate the world.
Nor is this right confined to cases in which
the whole people of an existing government
may choose to exercise it.
Any portion of such people that can, may revolutionize
and make their own so much of the territory as they inhabit.
More than this, a majority of any portion of such people
may revolutionize, putting down a minority,
intermingled with or near about them,
who may oppose their movement.
Such minority was precisely the case
of the Tories of our own revolution.
It is a quality of revolutions not to go
by old lines or old laws,
but to break up both and make new ones.


I will give ya 1 guess as to who said that...

 

[occupied]

Lincoln Provoked the War

Good article.

Hogwash, Sumter was besieged and practically out of food when fired upon.

 

[Dissent]

How Lincoln Could Have Prevented Civil War by Sanderson Beck

 

[Dissent]

Early in his presidency Lincoln rejected the option of letting the southern states withdraw peacefully. He took the position that secession is illegal and that the use of force against the Federal Government was rebellion and treason against the United States. He refused to recognize the Confederate States as legal entities and would not let anyone in his administration negotiate with their representatives. He also rejected an offer of mediation by Napoleon III of France. In March 1861 Jefferson Davis sent peace commissioners to Washington with an offer to pay for all Federal property in the South and to take on the southern portion of the national debt. However, Lincoln refused even to acknowledge them, thus blocking any attempt to resolve the conflicts by peaceful means. He took the hard line that the southern states must return to the Union. Unless they did so, or unless he relinquished the forts and tariffs, it became inevitable that the two sides would fight. His position has been compared to that of the British empire, which demanded that their American colonists pay their taxes.

Lincoln was careful to avoid beginning the war with an attack. However, he managed to instigate an attack on Fort Sumter by refusing to negotiate with South Carolina or to withdraw Federal forces from there. He informed the government of South Carolina that he was sending in supplies to his besieged men with the warning that he would retaliate against an attack. President Jefferson Davis and his cabinet authorized the attack by the forces of South Carolina that began the fighting. Lincoln had provoked it by insisting on keeping control over Federal forts in their territory. He took the position that a minority who lost an election should not be allowed to withdraw from the nation, and he jumped to the erroneous conclusion that to do so would destroy democracy. Yet from the other point of view, he was denying democracy to the seceding states. If he had recognized their right to be independent states, surely both nations could have co-existed as republics. I do not believe that we should be blind to these democratic rights, as he was, simply because we believe that slavery is wrong or because we have a desire that the Union should be perpetual. Clearly the main motive for the South’s withdrawal from the Union was a bad one, but that does not mean that they did not have sovereign rights as states.

 

[OKTexas]

I'll answer that right after I hear some answers on whether the Declaration of Independence justifies a slave rebellion.

Considering none of my comments have had anything to do with the DOI, I should ignore you, however the short answer is YES. The DOI basically says that when the government is governing in a way that free men can no longer tollerate, they have a right to sever their ties to that government.

That was a different time and trying to judge them by todays standards is crazy. They did nothing illegal, except try to extracate themselves from a government that by their standards had exceeded its Constitutional authority. Remeber the 10th amendment, it plainly states that there are no implied authorities in the Constitution, the federal government only had the specifically enumerated authorities.

When the federal government started expanding its reach and they had enough, they cancelled the contract that they had entered into. As free soverign states, they had that right, show me in the Constitution where it prohibits a state from succeeding.

Now, answer my question.

The Supremacy Clause of the Constitution made secession illegal, and the restoration of the Union justifiable.

Your full of crap, let's see if you can come up with a rational justification for that assertion. I'll bet you can't.

 

[occupied]

The north started the aggression with its plan to tax the south into submission.

Already blown that one out of the water.

In your own mind ya did.

You challenged me to a history lesson here but so far you are just posting stupid links and showing yourself to be not nearly knowledgeable enough to debate this topic.

 

[Cowman]

 

[Dissent]

http://www.americancivilwarforum.com/150th-of-fort-sumter-and-an-historic-fraud-313.html

 

[OKTexas]

I'll answer that right after I hear some answers on whether the Declaration of Independence justifies a slave rebellion.

Considering none of my comments have had anything to do with the DOI, I should ignore you, however the short answer is YES. The DOI basically says that when the government is governing in a way that free men can no longer tollerate, they have a right to sever their ties to that government.

That was a different time and trying to judge them by todays standards is crazy. They did nothing illegal, except try to extracate themselves from a government that by their standards had exceeded its Constitutional authority. Remeber the 10th amendment, it plainly states that there are no implied authorities in the Constitution, the federal government only had the specifically enumerated authorities.

When the federal government started expanding its reach and they had enough, they cancelled the contract that they had entered into. As free soverign states, they had that right, show me in the Constitution where it prohibits a state from succeeding.

Now, answer my question.

The answer to your question is, I don't know, I have never read the agreements specific to the European Union's union.

Your nothing but a freaking coward, the EU is a federation similar to the US.

 

[Dissent]

They never mention the fact that the “Fox expedition” (the forces sent to “resupply” and “provision” Sumter) included the following:


The Steamship Baltic with 200 troops of the 2nd US Artillery


The sloop-of-war Pawnee with a crew of 181, and eight 9-inch Dahlgren guns and two 12 pounder guns


The sloop-of-war Powhaten* with a crew of 289 plus 300 additional sailors to be used as landing troops and reinforcements and one 11 in smoothbore gun. Ten 9in smoothbore guns Five 12-pounder guns


The armed screw steamer Pocahontas, crew of 180 and four 32-pounder guns, one 10-pounder gun and one 20-pounder rifle


The Revenue cutter, Harriet Lane, crew of 95 with one 4in gun, one 9in gun, two 8in guns and two 24 lb howitzers


In addition to the war ships and troop transport there were also 3 sea-going steam tugs included in the flotilla. (These were intended to be used to pull the deep draft war ships and transport over the bar and help transfer troops and munitions to shore) These tugs had their superstructures reinforced as protection against small arms fire and were also armed with boat howitzers

 

[Dissent]

The Confederate peace commissioners who had been sent to Washington had been assured by the Lincoln Administration that neither Fort Sumter nor Fort Pickens in Pensacola would be reinforced and that those posts would soon be evacuated. All the while said administration was busily preparing troops and ships to reinforce and hold both forts . The CS authorities in Charleston and the provisional CS capital in Montgomery were fully aware that the “Fox expedition” had sailed from New York and was apparently in route to make an attempt to reinforce and hold Sumter. This is why they opened fire on that Fort on April 12, 1861 just before the Fox expedition appeared off Charleston harbor. After the blatant and deliberate acts of war and cynical subterfuge of the Lincoln administration the Confederate authorities felt they had no choice but to reduce the fort, as Lincoln most assuredly knew they would. Governor Pickens of South Carolina had even told Lincoln’s emissary exactly what would happen if he made the attempt “Let your President attempt to reinforce Sumter, and the tocsin of war will be sounded from every hill-top and valley in the South.”


Yes Lincoln did provoke the war of northern aggression to have a more firm hand over a large government....the day is coming when the people will rise up and take back what is rightfully theirs.

 

[occupied]

You are pathetic on this subject, why even post it if you cannot argue it without google?

 

[Cowman]

They never mention the fact that the “Fox expedition” (the forces sent to “resupply” and “provision” Sumter) included the following:


The Steamship Baltic with 200 troops of the 2nd US Artillery


The sloop-of-war Pawnee with a crew of 181, and eight 9-inch Dahlgren guns and two 12 pounder guns


The sloop-of-war Powhaten* with a crew of 289 plus 300 additional sailors to be used as landing troops and reinforcements and one 11 in smoothbore gun. Ten 9in smoothbore guns Five 12-pounder guns


The armed screw steamer Pocahontas, crew of 180 and four 32-pounder guns, one 10-pounder gun and one 20-pounder rifle


The Revenue cutter, Harriet Lane, crew of 95 with one 4in gun, one 9in gun, two 8in guns and two 24 lb howitzers


In addition to the war ships and troop transport there were also 3 sea-going steam tugs included in the flotilla. (These were intended to be used to pull the deep draft war ships and transport over the bar and help transfer troops and munitions to shore) These tugs had their superstructures reinforced as protection against small arms fire and were also armed with boat howitzers

Why don't you talk about cool shit, like the story of the Planter where slaves stole the ship and sailed it out to a union ship. The dude to lead that, became a Congressman.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Planter_(1862)

 

[Dissent]

Get lost trash...you are nothing more than a pathetic public school reject.

 

[occupied]

Get lost trash...you are nothing more than a pathetic public school reject.

You talking to me? I think I have more that proven my superior knowledge on this subject. I enjoy history, I enjoy talking about it but you seem to know only enough to grind your states rights ax. I take that back you do not know enough to even make it feel like I have smacked down a worthy opponent.

 

[Cowman]

Get lost trash...you are nothing more than a pathetic public school reject.

Ohhh, do heroic slaves turned congressmen upset you?

Do strong black men triumphing over the racist pathetic south make you angry?

 

[Dissent]

Get lost trash...you are nothing more than a pathetic public school reject.

You talking to me? I think I have more that proven my superior knowledge on this subject. I enjoy history, I enjoy talking about it but you seem to know only enough to grind your states rights ax. I take that back you do not know enough to even make it feel like I have smacked down a worthy opponent.

No not you.

 

[Dissent]

Get lost trash...you are nothing more than a pathetic public school reject.

Ohhh, do heroic slaves turned congressmen upset you?

Do strong black men triumphing over the racist pathetic south make you angry?

You enjoy trolling ....pretty shitty attempt at it.

 

[Dissent]

Does that make the black slave masters racist for owning slaves? Or is that just for white slave owners? What about Indian slave owners? Hmmmmm