Jefferson Davis - He should've died in prison. He was responsible for so much death, destruction, misery.

[Zincwarrior]

What is this obession of yours with Kansas?

Up your Adderall.

Its flat. Plus Bleeding Kansas was a major focal point of slavery related violence before the war.

 

[Zincwarrior]

Ask them this. Should the war have caused the Democrats as a party to be banished?

No. There were northern Democrats as well.

 

[Zincwarrior]

What do you base that 'pipe dream' on?

Quantrill

Boredom mostly.

 

[martybegan]

Its flat. Plus Bleeding Kansas was a major focal point of slavery related violence before the war.

So ship every single white person in the South to Kansas?

Are you retarded?

 

[Zincwarrior]

So ship every single white person in the South to Kansas?

Are you retarded?

No of course not. Make them walk.

 

[martybegan]

No of course not. Make them walk.

There's stupid, retarded, then there is Zincwarrior.

You are in SHE WHO MUST NOT BE NAMED territory.

 

[Dante]

Really? Produce the pardon offered and accepted by Jeff Davis.

Quantrill

Restoration of Citizenship Rights to Jefferson F. Davis Statement on Signing S. J. Res. 16 into Law. | The American Presidency Project

www.presidency.ucsb.edu

Funnier still, is Robert E. Lee and the issues surrounding memorials to him.

Robert E. Lee, Confederate Memorials, and the Burden of the Past

Explore the complexities of Robert E. Lee and Confederate monuments, focusing on their legacy and public perception after recent events.

www.civilwarmonitor.com

 

[Dante]

The man actually guilty was shot to death in DC. (Abraham Lincoln)

What you are saying here is the General Goorge Washington was correct to wage war against the lawful government of the US and kill and maim thousands ....

But Jefferson Davis was wrong. You have one hell of a serious problem.

Here we go again with another of your inanities.

 

[jacksonlamb]

And the 50 year guerilla war that might have resulted?

The surrenders and terms given to the Confederate Armies met the requirements of the Union war aims, bring the country back together. So did the leniency shown to the civilian confederates.

The failure of Reconstruction is a different topic, and I blame JW Booth for most of that.

What guerilla war was possible? You sound buffoonish.

 

[Dante]

Your opening statement is strange. You cite your hatred for Jeff Davis. Yet you then produce the very reasons why he shouldn't be hated.

Quantrill

If you say so.

 

[Zincwarrior]

There's stupid, retarded, then there is Zincwarrior.

You are in SHE WHO MUST NOT BE NAMED territory.

Hey the Union shouldn't have had to pay to ship all those people.

 

[jacksonlamb]

100% false. We would today be a far less free and forgiving nation. The killings would have gone on for decades. We might not even be a single country today.

No, they would not. Take hostages and shoot them fifty to one. There would have no uprest after the first six months.

 

[Eman623]

No, they would not. Take hostages and shoot them fifty to one. There would have no uprest after the first six months.

Oh, so just pull random people out of their homes and shoot them? Maybe throw in a few women and kids to drive the point home. Yeah, no war crimes there.

I guess there wasn't enough killing for you during the shooting war.

 

[martybegan]

What guerilla war was possible? You sound buffoonish.

And you sound like you don't read.

 

[jacksonlamb]

Oh, so just pull random people out of their homes and shoot them? Maybe throw in a few women and kids to drive the point home. Yeah, no war crimes there.

I guess there wasn't enough killing for you during the shooting war.

It's the rule of martial law. When your army surrenders, you have many of your legal rights surrendered.

Shooting hostages for punishment of insurgent actions in order to maintain the peace is legal.

 

[jacksonlamb]

And you sound like you don't read.

Far more and far better than you.

The South no longer had the ability to maintain forces in the field, and the only "guerilla" action would have been by banditti calling themselves "guerillas."

 

[Eman623]

It's the rule of martial law. When your army surrenders, you have many of your legal rights surrendered.

Shooting hostages for punishment of insurgent actions in order to maintain the peace is legal.

No. It's not. Shooting non-combatants for any reason is a war crime. For that matter, so is taking hostages.

 

[Eman623]

Exactly. They would have been replaced by free slaves and hard working, loyal immigrants in a decade. Whats not to like?

LOL. We can call it the "final solution" to the Southerner Problem.

 

[jacksonlamb]

No. It's not. Shooting non-combatants for any reason is a war crime. For that matter, so is taking hostages.

You do not know what you are talking about. Sit down. Learn.

 

[Eman623]

You do not know what you are talking about. Sit down. Learn.

Uh huh. You're going to need a lot of bullets. And soldiers willing to commit mass murder. And a good lawyer for your trial on war crimes.

Happy hunting.