The Civil War

[Unkotare]

It was U.S. Federal Territory, and Lincoln defended it rightly on that basis. To think otherwise is to dismiss Federal authority altogether (which may be what you want to do).

Lincoln deployed U.S. troops on U.S. soil to suppress a regional rebellion, in strict compliance with his Oath of Office.

No nation on earth ever recognized a sovereign nation calling itself "The Confederate States of America."

^^^^^^^^

 

[Unkotare]

The Civil War was all about slavery, OK? It wasn't the War of Northern Aggression or the War Between the States. That's bullshit. It was a Civil War, and it was about slavery. Denying that is like denying that the Nazis murdered millions of Jews in concentration camps... oh, wait, you deny that, too?

The end of slavery was one of the eventual outcomes of the war. Odd that every other country that had slaves was able to ban slavery without killing a million of its own citizens...UK and France for example.

No you silly person; the Civil War was about $....as usual.

Make no mistake; that slavery was ended was a good thing and overdue. You must also be aware that the North DESTROYED the South's ECONOMY. No money for reparations.

Greg

The North destroyed the South's economy because the South made war upon the North. Remember Fort Sumpter?

Nope. Lincoln made war on the South. Ft Sumter was SC territory.

Complete and total lie.

Did Lincoln invade Virginia?

Why yes he did.

Absolutely and positively not. You cannot invade your own country. The criminal scum who tried to destroy our nation were eventually given a tiny fraction of what they deserve the punishment. You are a similar kind of scumbag ******* worthless dog and you deserve much worse, but again we will show forbearance.

 

[Unkotare]

The Civil War was all about slavery, OK? It wasn't the War of Northern Aggression or the War Between the States. That's bullshit. It was a Civil War, and it was about slavery. Denying that is like denying that the Nazis murdered millions of Jews in concentration camps... oh, wait, you deny that, too?

The end of slavery was one of the eventual outcomes of the war. Odd that every other country that had slaves was able to ban slavery without killing a million of its own citizens...UK and France for example.

No you silly person; the Civil War was about $....as usual.

Make no mistake; that slavery was ended was a good thing and overdue. You must also be aware that the North DESTROYED the South's ECONOMY. No money for reparations.

Greg

The North destroyed the South's economy because the South made war upon the North. Remember Fort Sumpter?

Nope. Lincoln made war on the South. Ft Sumter was SC territory.

Complete and total lie.

Did Lincoln invade Virginia?

...

You can't "invade" your own territory, idiot.

 

[bripat9643]

...
I've aleady [sic] explained my positiion [sic] of the court. .......

What are your qualifications in Constitutional Law? We know you can barely string together a sentence in English.

Appeal to authority.

Next!

You should learn what that means before repeating it again, dumbass.

How am I misusing it?

You clearly don't understand what it means. Why don't you Google, or Wiki, or whatever you ignorant fools do when you're confused?

You claim I don't understand what it means? Prove it. Otherwise, shut your ******* yap.

 

[Unkotare]

The Civil War was all about slavery, OK? It wasn't the War of Northern Aggression or the War Between the States. That's bullshit. It was a Civil War, and it was about slavery. Denying that is like denying that the Nazis murdered millions of Jews in concentration camps... oh, wait, you deny that, too?

The end of slavery was one of the eventual outcomes of the war. Odd that every other country that had slaves was able to ban slavery without killing a million of its own citizens...UK and France for example.

No you silly person; the Civil War was about $....as usual.

Make no mistake; that slavery was ended was a good thing and overdue. You must also be aware that the North DESTROYED the South's ECONOMY. No money for reparations.

Greg

The North destroyed the South's economy because the South made war upon the North. Remember Fort Sumpter?

Nope. Lincoln made war on the South. Ft Sumter was SC territory.

Complete and total lie.

Did Lincoln invade Virginia?

Why yes he did.

Absolutely and positively not. You cannot invade your own country. The criminal scum who tried to destroy our nation were eventually given a tiny fraction of what they deserve the punishment. You are a similar kind of scumbag ******* worthless dog and you deserve much worse, but again we will show forbearance.

It wasn't Lincoln's country, nimrod. Lincoln, Grant and Sherman all deserved to be tried as war criminals.

It was and is the United States of America.

 

[bripat9643]

It wasn't the War of Northern Aggression or the War Between the States.

It wasn't a war between the states?

View attachment 462175
They've been lying to us in school all those years.

A civil war is defined as "a war between citizens of the same country." Seems plain enough.

Southerners were not citizens of the Unites States after they seceded.

Yes they were. The so-called secession was illegitimate, illegal, and recognized by exactly 0 nations on this planet earth.

You keep saying that, and you keep failing to prove it. As I've already proven, all that's required is for other nations to recognize you after you've won your battle against the oppressors.

 

[bripat9643]

The Civil War was all about slavery, OK? It wasn't the War of Northern Aggression or the War Between the States. That's bullshit. It was a Civil War, and it was about slavery. Denying that is like denying that the Nazis murdered millions of Jews in concentration camps... oh, wait, you deny that, too?

The end of slavery was one of the eventual outcomes of the war. Odd that every other country that had slaves was able to ban slavery without killing a million of its own citizens...UK and France for example.

No you silly person; the Civil War was about $....as usual.

Make no mistake; that slavery was ended was a good thing and overdue. You must also be aware that the North DESTROYED the South's ECONOMY. No money for reparations.

Greg

The North destroyed the South's economy because the South made war upon the North. Remember Fort Sumpter?

Nope. Lincoln made war on the South. Ft Sumter was SC territory.

Complete and total lie.

Did Lincoln invade Virginia?

Why yes he did.

Absolutely and positively not. You cannot invade your own country. The criminal scum who tried to destroy our nation were eventually given a tiny fraction of what they deserve the punishment. You are a similar kind of scumbag ******* worthless dog and you deserve much worse, but again we will show forbearance.

It wasn't Lincoln's country, nimrod. Lincoln, Grant and Sherman all deserved to be tried as war criminals.

It was and is the United States of America.

Virginia wasn't part of the USA, nimrod.

 

[bripat9643]

The Civil War was all about slavery, OK? It wasn't the War of Northern Aggression or the War Between the States. That's bullshit. It was a Civil War, and it was about slavery. Denying that is like denying that the Nazis murdered millions of Jews in concentration camps... oh, wait, you deny that, too?

The end of slavery was one of the eventual outcomes of the war. Odd that every other country that had slaves was able to ban slavery without killing a million of its own citizens...UK and France for example.

No you silly person; the Civil War was about $....as usual.

Make no mistake; that slavery was ended was a good thing and overdue. You must also be aware that the North DESTROYED the South's ECONOMY. No money for reparations.

Greg

The North destroyed the South's economy because the South made war upon the North. Remember Fort Sumpter?

Nope. Lincoln made war on the South. Ft Sumter was SC territory.

Complete and total lie.

Did Lincoln invade Virginia?

...

You can't "invade" your own territory, idiot.

It wasn't his territory, moron.

You keep making this claim and then run away when I ask you to prove. That's because you know it isn't true.

 

[Unkotare]

...
I've aleady [sic] explained my positiion [sic] of the court. .......

What are your qualifications in Constitutional Law? We know you can barely string together a sentence in English.

Appeal to authority.

Next!

You should learn what that means before repeating it again, dumbass.

How am I misusing it?

You clearly don't understand what it means. Why don't you Google, or Wiki, or whatever you ignorant fools do when you're confused?

You claim I don't understand what it means? Prove it. Otherwise, shut your ******* yap.

You can't even understand the Wiki page about it? That's pretty ******* sad.

Referring to an authority on a subject is not a fallacy, idiot. Referring to an authority on one subject to 'prove' something about an unrelated subject is a fallacy, idiot. Referring to an authority that does not address the specific issue at hand can be a fallacy, idiot. Referring to a very elite authority on a very specific topic in regards to that specific topic is not a fallacy, idiot.


Have you ever studied logic at any level?

 

[Unkotare]

The Civil War was all about slavery, OK? It wasn't the War of Northern Aggression or the War Between the States. That's bullshit. It was a Civil War, and it was about slavery. Denying that is like denying that the Nazis murdered millions of Jews in concentration camps... oh, wait, you deny that, too?

The end of slavery was one of the eventual outcomes of the war. Odd that every other country that had slaves was able to ban slavery without killing a million of its own citizens...UK and France for example.

No you silly person; the Civil War was about $....as usual.

Make no mistake; that slavery was ended was a good thing and overdue. You must also be aware that the North DESTROYED the South's ECONOMY. No money for reparations.

Greg

The North destroyed the South's economy because the South made war upon the North. Remember Fort Sumpter?

Nope. Lincoln made war on the South. Ft Sumter was SC territory.

Complete and total lie.

Did Lincoln invade Virginia?

Why yes he did.

Absolutely and positively not. You cannot invade your own country. The criminal scum who tried to destroy our nation were eventually given a tiny fraction of what they deserve the punishment. You are a similar kind of scumbag ******* worthless dog and you deserve much worse, but again we will show forbearance.

It wasn't Lincoln's country, nimrod. Lincoln, Grant and Sherman all deserved to be tried as war criminals.

It was and is the United States of America.

Virginia wasn't part of the USA, nimrod.

Of course it was. No one but the criminals trying to harm my country has ever claimed otherwise. Since the establishment of the Republic, no nation on earth has ever recognized Virginia as anything other than part of the UNITED States of America.

 

[Unkotare]

It was U.S. Federal Territory, and Lincoln defended it rightly on that basis. To think otherwise is to dismiss Federal authority altogether (which may be what you want to do).

Lincoln deployed U.S. troops on U.S. soil to suppress a regional rebellion, in strict compliance with his Oath of Office.

No nation on earth ever recognized a sovereign nation calling itself "The Confederate States of America."

It wasn't U.S. soil, nimrod.

By every legal and historical measure it was, douche.

 

[Unkotare]

The Civil War was all about slavery, OK? It wasn't the War of Northern Aggression or the War Between the States. That's bullshit. It was a Civil War, and it was about slavery. Denying that is like denying that the Nazis murdered millions of Jews in concentration camps... oh, wait, you deny that, too?

The end of slavery was one of the eventual outcomes of the war. Odd that every other country that had slaves was able to ban slavery without killing a million of its own citizens...UK and France for example.

No you silly person; the Civil War was about $....as usual.

Make no mistake; that slavery was ended was a good thing and overdue. You must also be aware that the North DESTROYED the South's ECONOMY. No money for reparations.

Greg

The North destroyed the South's economy because the South made war upon the North. Remember Fort Sumpter?

Nope. Lincoln made war on the South. Ft Sumter was SC territory.

Complete and total lie.

Did Lincoln invade Virginia?

Why yes he did.

Absolutely and positively not. You cannot invade your own country. The criminal scum who tried to destroy our nation were eventually given a tiny fraction of what they deserve the punishment. You are a similar kind of scumbag ******* worthless dog and you deserve much worse, but again we will show forbearance.

It wasn't Lincoln's country, nimrod. Lincoln, Grant and Sherman all deserved to be tried as war criminals.

It was and is the United States of America.

 

[Unkotare]

It wasn't the War of Northern Aggression or the War Between the States.

It wasn't a war between the states?

View attachment 462175
They've been lying to us in school all those years.

A civil war is defined as "a war between citizens of the same country." Seems plain enough.

Southerners were not citizens of the Unites States after they seceded.

Yes they were. The so-called secession was illegitimate, illegal, and recognized by exactly 0 nations on this planet earth.

Prove it.

It has been proven and demonstrated and documented over and over and over and over and over on this very side, you stupid piece of shit.

You haven't proved jack shit.

Study history, you brainless douche.

I have, especially the history of the Civil War.

Clearly you have not, you ignorant douche.

Clearly I have.....

Despite zero evidence of any education training or experience in the area. You’re just another idiot with one of those things that everybody has.

 

[Unkotare]

The traitorous rebels were illegal and illegitimate in every way. They were punished to a tiny fraction of what they deserved, just as assholes today who take up their evil cause will be let off the hook for far too easily.

^^^^^^^

 

[bripat9643]

...
I've aleady [sic] explained my positiion [sic] of the court. .......

What are your qualifications in Constitutional Law? We know you can barely string together a sentence in English.

Appeal to authority.

Next!

You should learn what that means before repeating it again, dumbass.

How am I misusing it?

You clearly don't understand what it means. Why don't you Google, or Wiki, or whatever you ignorant fools do when you're confused?

You claim I don't understand what it means? Prove it. Otherwise, shut your ******* yap.

You can't even understand the Wiki page about it? That's pretty ******* sad.

Referring to an authority on a subject is not a fallacy, idiot. Referring to an authority on one subject to 'prove' something about an unrelated subject is a fallacy, idiot. Referring to an authority that does not address the specific issue at hand can be a fallacy, idiot. Referring to a very elite authority on a very specific topic in regards to that specific topic is not a fallacy, idiot.


Have you ever studied logic at any level?

If you claim that 'A' is true because authority 'B' says it's true, then you have committed a fallacy. It doesn't matter how relevant his experience is. Authorities are often wrong. All the current physics authorities said Einstein's theory was wrong. All geologists once believed that the continents didn't move. They were all wrong.

You just proved you don't know the meaning of the term "appeal to authority." Every leftwing dumbass I've ever met believes there are "legitimate" authorities.

 

[Unkotare]

Note the lack of consent to enslavement from the human beings kept in bondage and forced labor by those criminals who wanted to destroy our Union.

 

[Unkotare]

...
I've aleady [sic] explained my positiion [sic] of the court. .......

What are your qualifications in Constitutional Law? We know you can barely string together a sentence in English.

Appeal to authority.

Next!

You should learn what that means before repeating it again, dumbass.

How am I misusing it?

You clearly don't understand what it means. Why don't you Google, or Wiki, or whatever you ignorant fools do when you're confused?

You claim I don't understand what it means? Prove it. Otherwise, shut your ******* yap.

You can't even understand the Wiki page about it? That's pretty ******* sad.

Referring to an authority on a subject is not a fallacy, idiot. Referring to an authority on one subject to 'prove' something about an unrelated subject is a fallacy, idiot. Referring to an authority that does not address the specific issue at hand can be a fallacy, idiot. Referring to a very elite authority on a very specific topic in regards to that specific topic is not a fallacy, idiot.


Have you ever studied logic at any level?

If you claim that 'A' is true because authority 'B' says it's true, then you have committed a fallacy. It doesn't matter how relevant his experience is. .....

No, that is not what it means, idiot. You may really, really, really want it to, but it doesn't, idiot. This is what happens when you have a big mouth but no idea what you're talking about.

You have never studied logic, but you tried to shoot your mouth off about it.
You have never studied history, but you tried to shoot your mouth off about it.

 

[bripat9643]

It wasn't the War of Northern Aggression or the War Between the States.

It wasn't a war between the states?

View attachment 462175
They've been lying to us in school all those years.

A civil war is defined as "a war between citizens of the same country." Seems plain enough.

Southerners were not citizens of the Unites States after they seceded.

Yes they were. The so-called secession was illegitimate, illegal, and recognized by exactly 0 nations on this planet earth.

Prove it.

It has been proven and demonstrated and documented over and over and over and over and over on this very side, you stupid piece of shit.

You haven't proved jack shit.

Study history, you brainless douche.

I have, especially the history of the Civil War.

Clearly you have not, you ignorant douche.

Clearly I have.....

Despite zero evidence of any education training or experience in the area. You’re just another idiot with one of those things that everybody has.

Once again he doubles down on stupid.

 

[bripat9643]

...
I've aleady [sic] explained my positiion [sic] of the court. .......

What are your qualifications in Constitutional Law? We know you can barely string together a sentence in English.

Appeal to authority.

Next!

You should learn what that means before repeating it again, dumbass.

How am I misusing it?

You clearly don't understand what it means. Why don't you Google, or Wiki, or whatever you ignorant fools do when you're confused?

You claim I don't understand what it means? Prove it. Otherwise, shut your ******* yap.

You can't even understand the Wiki page about it? That's pretty ******* sad.

Referring to an authority on a subject is not a fallacy, idiot. Referring to an authority on one subject to 'prove' something about an unrelated subject is a fallacy, idiot. Referring to an authority that does not address the specific issue at hand can be a fallacy, idiot. Referring to a very elite authority on a very specific topic in regards to that specific topic is not a fallacy, idiot.


Have you ever studied logic at any level?

If you claim that 'A' is true because authority 'B' says it's true, then you have committed a fallacy. It doesn't matter how relevant his experience is. .....

No, that is not what it means, idiot. You may really, really, really want it to, but it doesn't, idiot. This is what happens when you have a big mouth but no idea what you're talking about.

You have never studied logic, but you tried to shoot your mouth off about it.
You have never studied history, but you tried to shoot your mouth off about it.

https://www.logicalfallacies.org/appeal-to-authority.html

​

The fallacy of appeal to authority makes the argument that if one credible source believes something that it must be true.​

​

Example of Appeal to Authority​

• If the Pope says that an aspect of doctrine is true, then it should be added to the creed, since he is infallible.
• The mayor said that the crime rate is down. The statistics claiming otherwise must be erroneous. Since the mayor is in charge of the city and supposedly aware of the goings on his statement should supersede statistical data.

 

[bripat9643]

...
I've aleady [sic] explained my positiion [sic] of the court. .......

What are your qualifications in Constitutional Law? We know you can barely string together a sentence in English.

Appeal to authority.

Next!

You should learn what that means before repeating it again, dumbass.

How am I misusing it?

You clearly don't understand what it means. Why don't you Google, or Wiki, or whatever you ignorant fools do when you're confused?

You claim I don't understand what it means? Prove it. Otherwise, shut your ******* yap.

You can't even understand the Wiki page about it? That's pretty ******* sad.

Referring to an authority on a subject is not a fallacy, idiot. Referring to an authority on one subject to 'prove' something about an unrelated subject is a fallacy, idiot. Referring to an authority that does not address the specific issue at hand can be a fallacy, idiot. Referring to a very elite authority on a very specific topic in regards to that specific topic is not a fallacy, idiot.


Have you ever studied logic at any level?

The WIki page is wrong. That's hardly surprising since leftists have taken over Wiki, and they often believe there is such a thing as a valid authority in logic.

Consider this fact of history: Alfred Wegener was the man who originally conceived the theory of continental drift. At the time, all the "experts" in geology said it couldn't possibly be correct. It turned out that all these experts were wrong and that Wegener was right.

Who was the "legitimate authority" on continental drift at the time?