War Crimes During the Civil War

[Procrustes Stretched]

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.

Actually the south was fighting to separate from the U.S. government.

and the perpetual union survived that outrageous proposition.

thank gawd. God Bless the United States of America

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

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.

Actually the south was fighting to separate from the U.S. government.

At least one historian analyzed how brutal slave owners were by how many slaves were within each state as compared to whites; others describe the war as an industrial/rural conflict. Many angles to be debated.

angles, but the war was fought over the right of Southerners (from their viewpoint) to keep slavery and the slave trade for economic reasons as well as reasons of culture.

The war was fought from view of the Northern side to destroy the slave trade and to keep the Union whole. God Bless the United States of America

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

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.

Actually the south was fighting to separate from the U.S. government.

and the perpetual union survived that outrageous proposition.

thank gawd. God Bless the United States of America

Yeah, I've always thought it was a shame that the perpetual union between the colonies and crown couldn't survive the outrageous proposition of self-government. Damn uppity colonists.

God save the King...

 

[Douger]

Fuck the inbred eurotrash and their personal conflicts.
How about the "Red" man ? murkas Palestinians.
No Gomer. That's why used them thar kwotashin markers. NOT the chewbakky.........

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Actually the south was fighting to separate from the U.S. government.

and the perpetual union survived that outrageous proposition.

thank gawd. God Bless the United States of America

Yeah, I've always thought it was a shame that the perpetual union between the colonies and crown couldn't survive the outrageous proposition of self-government. Damn uppity colonists.

God save the King...

Like I've told a few people, Good thing for the Confederacy Lincoln was a Republican and not a Democrat.

 

[Peach]

Actually the south was fighting to separate from the U.S. government.

At least one historian analyzed how brutal slave owners were by how many slaves were within each state as compared to whites; others describe the war as an industrial/rural conflict. Many angles to be debated.

angles, but the war was fought over the right of Southerners (from their viewpoint) to keep slavery and the slave trade for economic reasons as well as reasons of culture.

The war was fought from view of the Northern side to destroy the slave trade and to keep the Union whole. God Bless the United States of America

And one historian's viewpoint that the greater the number of slaves within an area, the more brutal the slave owners were is debatable also. (I never bought the symbolic killing of Washington, Adams, et. al.)

 

[Katzndogz]

The prohibition against slavery was added as a reason, the civil war was fought over the economy. Lincoln wanted to punish the South so he took away the means of maintaining industry. If it was today, and obama was warring against the people he would prohibit the use of harvesters, plows and combines.

Oh yes, he did, when the EPA identified dust as a pollutant.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

The prohibition against slavery was added as a reason, the civil war was fought over the economy. Lincoln wanted to punish the South so he took away the means of maintaining industry. If it was today, and obama was warring against the people he would prohibit the use of harvesters, plows and combines.

Oh yes, he did, when the EPA identified dust as a pollutant.

Do you often have things backwards?

 

[Katzndogz]

The prohibition against slavery was added as a reason, the civil war was fought over the economy. Lincoln wanted to punish the South so he took away the means of maintaining industry. If it was today, and obama was warring against the people he would prohibit the use of harvesters, plows and combines.

Oh yes, he did, when the EPA identified dust as a pollutant.

Do you often have things backwards?

Do you only accept leftist history revision?

 

[Unkotare]

The causes of the American Civil War were many and complex, but to deny the centrality of slavery to the conflict is to be ignorant of American history on a large scale.

 

[Katzndogz]

Is it your position that the South was willing to accept the crushing economic pressure that the mills in the North were placing on the cotton plantations of the South and it was only the issue of slavery that put the states over the edge? The Emancipation Proclaimation came during the third year of the Civil War. Meaning that Lincoln was willing to accept slavery in slave owning states prior to that? New states coming in had to come in as free states, but that left intact slave owning states until the North needed the issue.

The issues that started the Civil War were not the same issues at its end.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Is it your position that the South was willing to accept the crushing economic pressure that the mills in the North were placing on the cotton plantations of the South and it was only the issue of slavery that put the states over the edge? The Emancipation Proclaimation came during the third year of the Civil War. Meaning that Lincoln was willing to accept slavery in slave owning states prior to that? New states coming in had to come in as free states, but that left intact slave owning states until the North needed the issue.

The issues that started the Civil War were not the same issues at its end.

Not to mention how the Emancipation Proclamation allowed 5 Union states to keep slavery, along with any Confederate territories under Union occupation like New Orleans.

 

[Katzndogz]

The states rights that were the basis of the Civil War, wasn't the right of states to keep slavery legal, it was the right of the states to seceed! At one point to avoid secession, Lincoln offered the south the right to be permanent slave owning states. It didn't work.

Slave owning was on its way out everywhere in the world. Most countries in Europe had already done away with slavery as not being cost effective. The Industrial Revolution was going to kill slavery no matter what.

Interestingly enough, it took all this time and liberals, to bring slavery back as an issue and call it illegal immigrant rights. The same US govermment that fought (eventually) against slavery now fights FOR the mexican cartels ability to engage in human trafficking.

 

[Unkotare]

Is it your position that the South was willing to accept the crushing economic pressure that the mills in the North were placing on the cotton plantations of the South and it was only the issue of slavery that put the states over the edge? The Emancipation Proclaimation came during the third year of the Civil War. Meaning that Lincoln was willing to accept slavery in slave owning states prior to that? New states coming in had to come in as free states, but that left intact slave owning states until the North needed the issue.

The issues that started the Civil War were not the same issues at its end.

You need to go back and study US History again.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

The states rights that were the basis of the Civil War, wasn't the right of states to keep slavery legal, it was the right of the states to seceed! At one point to avoid secession, Lincoln offered the south the right to be permanent slave owning states. It didn't work.

Slave owning was on its way out everywhere in the world. Most countries in Europe had already done away with slavery as not being cost effective. The Industrial Revolution was going to kill slavery no matter what.

Interestingly enough, it took all this time and liberals, to bring slavery back as an issue and call it illegal immigrant rights. The same US govermment that fought (eventually) against slavery now fights FOR the mexican cartels ability to engage in human trafficking.

revisionism

 

[Unkotare]

Is it your position that the South was willing to accept the crushing economic pressure that the mills in the North were placing on the cotton plantations of the South and it was only the issue of slavery that put the states over the edge? The Emancipation Proclaimation came during the third year of the Civil War. Meaning that Lincoln was willing to accept slavery in slave owning states prior to that? New states coming in had to come in as free states, but that left intact slave owning states until the North needed the issue.

The issues that started the Civil War were not the same issues at its end.

Not to mention how the Emancipation Proclamation allowed 5 Union states to keep slavery, along with any Confederate territories under Union occupation like New Orleans.

The EP did not "allow" those states to "keep slavery," Lincoln had no authority to simply declare the abolishment of slavery anywhere but in those states in open rebellion. That's why we needed the 13th Amendment.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Is it your position that the South was willing to accept the crushing economic pressure that the mills in the North were placing on the cotton plantations of the South and it was only the issue of slavery that put the states over the edge? The Emancipation Proclaimation came during the third year of the Civil War. Meaning that Lincoln was willing to accept slavery in slave owning states prior to that? New states coming in had to come in as free states, but that left intact slave owning states until the North needed the issue.

The issues that started the Civil War were not the same issues at its end.

Not to mention how the Emancipation Proclamation allowed 5 Union states to keep slavery, along with any Confederate territories under Union occupation like New Orleans.

The EP did not "allow" those states to "keep slavery," Lincoln had no authority to simply declare the abolishment of slavery anywhere but in those states in open rebellion. That's why we needed the 13th Amendment.

Umm... He had no authority to declare the abolishment of slavery anywhere period. Not to mention any of the other things he did not have the authority to do that he did regardless, such as suspending habeas corpus. If you think that's what stopped him from abolishing slavery in the border states then you're delusional. The Emancipation Proclamation was no grand crusade against slavery, nor was the Civil War in general, it was merely a war measure designed to hurt the Confederacy. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[Unkotare]

Not to mention how the Emancipation Proclamation allowed 5 Union states to keep slavery, along with any Confederate territories under Union occupation like New Orleans.

The EP did not "allow" those states to "keep slavery," Lincoln had no authority to simply declare the abolishment of slavery anywhere but in those states in open rebellion. That's why we needed the 13th Amendment.

Umm... He had no authority to declare the abolishment of slavery anywhere period..

Yes he did. He was Commander-in-Chief during a time of war.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

The prohibition against slavery was added as a reason, the civil war was fought over the economy. Lincoln wanted to punish the South so he took away the means of maintaining industry. If it was today, and obama was warring against the people he would prohibit the use of harvesters, plows and combines.

Oh yes, he did, when the EPA identified dust as a pollutant.

Do you often have things backwards?

Do you only accept leftist history revision?

not leftist. sorry

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

The causes of the American Civil War were many and complex, but to deny the centrality of slavery to the conflict is to be ignorant of American history on a large scale.

thank you