War Crimes During the Civil War

Let's talk again after (if) you graduate from high school.

Well I'm currently a senior in college, so how about answering the question?


LOL! I knew it! You are a little school boy talking out your ass. STFU and hit the books kid. You might learn something after all.

Apparently you didn't know it, because you said I was in high school which was incorrect. It's funny that you have to try to dismiss this "little school boy" rather than being able to make a real argument against what I've said.
 
Well I'm currently a senior in college, so how about answering the question?


LOL! I knew it! You are a little school boy talking out your ass. STFU and hit the books kid. You might learn something after all.

Apparently you didn't know it, because you said I was in high school which was incorrect.


Nowadays it's about the same, as evidenced by your glaring ignorance. Go do your homework, kid.
 
Hitting the weed already, kid? A little early in the day, but I guess it doesn't matter for you. It's not like you were likely to learn anything anyway.
 
I took a class in economic history of North America in college, and my professor said that tariffs were a big reason for the Civil War. That was the first time I'd ever heard of another issue other than slavery being a cause of the war.

There were a lot of issues in play prior to the Civil War. The South had been threatening secession for a while over a variety of issues and the New England States nearly acted upon secession during the War of 1812. The South had threatened secession during the Amistad case and basically every other time that slavery as an issue came up. There was a mini civil war in Kansas over the Slave versus Free issue. There was open fighting on the floor of Congress over the slavery issue.

The easiest sum up for the Civil War is that the Northern and Southern states were just too different by any measure to co-exist in peace forever. The North was Industrial, the South was Agricultural. The North had a great deal of Class Mobility, the South had almost none. The North was Free, the South was Slave holding, etc.

Even if you toss out the slavery issue, which was definitely one of the central causes, there were a whole long list of other cultural, economic, and political issues that would have led to war.
 
If you’re asking which side had moral justification on their side, it was the south. If you’re pointing out war crimes to make the case, you needn’t be.

I've always believed that legally, secession was a viable route for any State that wanted to take that route. The New England states must have considered that a legitimate avenue of relief as they'd planned to secede near the end of the war of 1812.

Unfortunately while legally they had that option, morally they were undercut by their status as a slave holding Nation. Ultimately neither the North nor Europe would ever recognize their right to exist under such conditions. And without European support or the ability to negotiate an exit from the Union, they would be forced to prove their right to exist via force, a test they were ultimately doomed to fail.

It sounds heartless to say it, but ultimately your right to exist as a soverign nation comes down to your ability to defend yourself using military force or diplomacy. It's the reason the Indian nations are largely irrelevant, the reason Utah failed to break free and the reason the South failed. Until a group of states proves able to negotiate their release from the Union or have the military strength to fight free, we are all bound to the Federal Government.
 
Last edited:
A discussion I had earlier this morning prompted me to create this thread. During the War for Southern Independence Lincoln and his generals used the strategy of total war to fight the Confederacy. In other words, no southern civilian be they man, woman, or child or any southern slave was safe from northern aggression.



Targeting Civilians

and the South was fighting to keep it's niggars in chains. That would be a war crime today too.

Unleash the dogs of war and...

You sound like Adolph Hitler apologists who claim Hitler was only copying American practices when he sent the Jews to their deaths in camps. You blame Lincoln for targeting civilians? read history. Ever since the dawn of mankind Armies have slaughtered and pillaged civilian fortresses.

Lincoln allowed Southerners to live because it was a civil war. He did not order troops to slaughter all civilians and take any survivors in chains, though the last part might have been an appropriate sort of justice indeed.

If that were true then no one would have seceded after the passage of the Corwin Amendment.

The thirteenth amendment? :eusa_clap: How many states had seceded before Lincoln sent a letter about it to all the states for their consideration? Amending the Constitution has always been a long process with no guarantee of passage.

You are being purposefully disingenuous. You well know the slavery issue heated up over the laws and proposed laws governing expansion of slavery into news territories and states.
 

Forum List

Back
Top