in the US civil war

[Zincwarrior]

he is a coward that won't admit that he supports slavery.

 

[Quantrill]

Ok, so only JW Booth stated he supports the CSA at this point. Quantrill has not opined.

That's a lie and you know it due to my many replies to your posts. See also, post #(20), (29).

Quantrill

 

[Quantrill]

he is a coward that won't admit that he supports slavery.

Let's see I replied to your post in my post #(70), to which you didn't respond. Kind of loose with that term 'coward' I believe.

Quantrill

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Let's see I replied to your post in my post #(70), to which you didn't respond. Kind of loose with that term 'coward' I believe.

Quantrill

did you vote? I did.

 

[Zincwarrior]

That's a lie and you know it due to my many replies to your posts. See also, post #(20), (29).

Quantrill

You did not vote. *****.

 

[Quantrill]

did you vote? I did.

Good for you.

Quantrill

 

[Quantrill]

You did not vote. *****.

I don't need to. Neither does anyone else.

All who voted for the North, haven't showed me much when it comes time to discuss and debate. Which means to me theirs is a vote of ignorance or bias which is 'wilfull ignorance'.

Casting a silly vote for something you don't know what your're talking about, is pretty stupid.

My opinion.

Quantrill

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I don't need to. Neither does anyone else.

All who voted for the North, haven't showed me much when it comes time to discuss and debate. Which means to me theirs is a vote of ignorance or bias which is 'wilfull ignorance'.

Casting a silly vote for something you don't know what your're talking about, is pretty stupid.

My opinion.

Quantrill

The South rebelled over slavery and attacked the North before the North did anything to them for their rebellion. Lincoln did not call up troops until after the south attacked.

 

[Zincwarrior]

Good for you.

Quantrill

You didn't vote. *****

 

[Zincwarrior]

I don't need to. Neither does anyone else.

All who voted for the North, haven't showed me much when it comes time to discuss and debate. Which means to me theirs is a vote of ignorance or bias which is 'wilfull ignorance'.

Casting a silly vote for something you don't know what your're talking about, is pretty stupid.

My opinion.

Quantrill

Coward. Worm.less than nothing! Klan sucking slavery lover!

 

[Quantrill]

The South rebelled over slavery and attacked the North before the North did anything to them for their rebellion. Lincoln did not call up troops until after the south attacked.

Nice speech, but not true. The South rebelled because, concerning slavery, the North refused the South it's Constitutional protections as slavery was protected by the Constitiiution.

Troops were sent under Buchanan in the Star of the West to reinforce Sumter. And, troops were later sent under Lincoln to reinforce Sumter. Both were acts of war. And long before that, Anderson moved his troops from Moultrie to Sumter which was an act of war.

The North was attacking the South using Sumter. The North provoked the War. Lincoln provoked the War. Lincoln's purpose was war.

Quantrill

 

[Quantrill]

Coward. Worm.less than nothing! Klan sucking slavery lover!

As I said, casting a silly vote for something you don't know what you're talking about is pretty stupid.

And your latest posts reveal you know nothing about the subject at hand.

Name calling is an indicator that your depth of knowldege has been plummed. And...it didn't go too deep.

Quantrill

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Nice speech, but not true. The South rebelled because, concerning slavery, the North refused the South it's Constitutional protections as slavery was protected by the Constitiiution.

Troops were sent under Buchanan in the Star of the West to reinforce Sumter. And, troops were later sent under Lincoln to reinforce Sumter. Both were acts of war. And long before that, Anderson moved his troops from Moultrie to Sumter which was an act of war.

The North was attacking the South using Sumter. The North provoked the War. Lincoln provoked the War. Lincoln's purpose was war.

Quantrill

wrong the fort was US property ceded years before the hostilities. And the US took no action against slavery so the south had no reason to leave. good to know you support slavery though and think owning people is ok.

 

[bdtex]

would you support the North or the South..?

i would support the North

My family is from Texas, Alabama and Florida. Most likely I would have been a Confederate soldier.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I am from Washington State and out west I would have joined the North if I fought at all. Besides slavery issue trumps it all I am usually for the underdog but supporting slavery would be a no go for me.

 

[Quantrill]

wrong the fort was US property ceded years before the hostilities. And the US took no action against slavery so the south had no reason to leave. good to know you support slavery though and think owning people is ok.

As long as South Carolina was in the Union the forts were U.S. property. Once South Carolina seceded, the forts are South Carolina property.

The U.S. had been taking action against Southern slavry for years. All the compromises, the illegal railroad, the refusing to return the runaway slaves, the murder of slave sympathizers in Kansas, Harpers Ferry, etc, etc. etc.

The South had nothing but good reason to leave. The North refused to treat the South as equals under the Constitution.

I think the South was doing nothing wrong in owning slaves. It was protected by the Constitution. The North was in the wrong in attacking the South for having slavery. The 'righteous' north was the traitor.

Quantrill

 

[AZrailwhale]

As long as South Carolina was in the Union the forts were U.S. property. Once South Carolina seceded, the forts are South Carolina property.

The U.S. had been taking action against Southern slavry for years. All the compromises, the illegal railroad, the refusing to return the runaway slaves, the murder of slave sympathizers in Kansas, Harpers Ferry, etc, etc. etc.

The South had nothing but good reason to leave. The North refused to treat the South as equals under the Constitution.

I think the South was doing nothing wrong in owning slaves. It was protected by the Constitution. The North was in the wrong in attacking the South for having slavery. The 'righteous' north was the traitor.

Quantrill

The USA wasn't taking actions. Individual CITIZENS of the USA were taking action against slavery in violation of American law. For the first time since 1776, the slave states WERE being treated as equals with the non-slave states and didn't like it at all.

 

[fncceo]

would you support the North or the South..?

It all depends on who invites me to the picnic ...

 

[Zebra]

now ....

North 11
South 2

 

[Quantrill]

The USA wasn't taking actions. Individual CITIZENS of the USA were taking action against slavery in violation of American law. For the first time since 1776, the slave states WERE being treated as equals with the non-slave states and didn't like it at all.

You say 'Citizens of the USA were taking action against slavery in violation of American Law'. What Law? And where were 'Citizens' doing this?

You say the 'slave states 'Were' treated as equals with the non-slave states'. How? Show me where that was true.

Quantrill