The Civil War

schmidlap

Platinum Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2020
Messages
2,516
Reaction score
1,597
Points
893
The states consented to a Perpetual Union. Individuals who found they could not live in or change their government were free to leave. Trying to over throw the government was sedition. States were not free to leave the Union without the consent of the rest of the Union, meaning a change to the Constitution and ending the Perpetual Union. Trying to secede was oath breaking treason.
It should also be remembered that the extremist special interests who were hellbent upon keeping our fellow humans in bondage and extending the vile practice to new territories were attempting to deprive all Americans in the states they caused to rebel of their citizenship.
 

kaz

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2010
Messages
64,529
Reaction score
13,358
Points
2,190
Location
Kazmania
...Here's the difference between us. I consider the United States to refer to the people, you consider it to mean the government
It's both, you idiot.

"That this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom – and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the Earth.”
That was Lincoln, not the founding fathers. And he used that line to justify conquering half the country against their will. This shows how circular your argument is.

So your argument now is that the Federal government is the people, and that justifies the government conquering the people. Wow
That had to be a joke. It was the confederates who were trying to implement government by the people. It certainly wasn't Lincoln who was trying to impose union rule on the south.
Yes, Lincoln quoting government of the people, by the people and four the people was the reason for government conquering the people was a bad joke
 

kaz

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2010
Messages
64,529
Reaction score
13,358
Points
2,190
Location
Kazmania
You mean you object to people not answering your questions?

Really?
Unkotare didn't know what his own question was. He doesn't know the difference between the American government and the American people.

He wanted me to answer his question without him even knowing what he asked me. Pass
You mean “duck.”
No idea what that means. ...

You’re embracing your stupidity.
You're arguing that you know what consent of the governed is and conquering half the country and forcing them to stay in the country doesn't violate consent of the governed and you're worried about me looking stupid. That's classic.

Let's start your education all over again free from government. Think about the words, "consent of the governed" ...
 

kaz

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2010
Messages
64,529
Reaction score
13,358
Points
2,190
Location
Kazmania
Back to the playground for the schmucks. When we said your party is Nazi, you heard we said we were. From the mind of any eight year old. Low intelligence is certainly a big reason you Nazis also go to violence. You aren't smart enough and your ideas are bad and don't work. So get out the sticks and let us know what happens when we don't support Democrats.

You did that all summer. Yet we're still not calling for violence, we're calling for people to look at what you are and reject it

Bull shit. Democrats are very much going to destroying people's lives and violence for standing up to them. Being a kid or an old man don't even protect you if you're wearing a red hat. Now you're just flagrantly stealing elections. You are Nazis, no doubt about it
You hyper-partisan paranoia is unfortunate, and does not relate to Lincoln's protecting, defending, and preserving the United States.


Decent Americans - Democrats, Republicans, and Independents alike - loathe Cry Baby Loser's nazis, q-anon, proud boys, oath keepers, three percenters, white supremacists, etc.

Mark Twain: Patriotism is usually the refuge of the scoundrel. He is the man who talks the loudest

You fly the flag while you support fascists who steal elections and destroy all opposition. Twain nailed you.

And again with QAnon, showing again you're a demagogue. You know nothing about them just like I know shit about them, they are a leftist justification for your violence against dissenters from the Democrat party.

QAnon is just a talking point pulled out by Democrat fascists
 

kaz

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2010
Messages
64,529
Reaction score
13,358
Points
2,190
Location
Kazmania
You didn't answer the question, you ignorant coward.
You mean you object to people not answering your questions?

Really?
Unkotare didn't know what his own question was. He doesn't know the difference between the American government and the American people.

He wanted me to answer his question without him even knowing what he asked me. Pass

Dat Boy is confused about a lot of things. With only only having a Jr High School History text knowledge of the Civil War, written by the winners, he doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground about what he is talking about.

He needs to do the homework assignment that I gave him. That way he won't look like a fool when he post his uneducated dribble.

I thought he said one time that he was a teacher. If he was telling the truth then he should know the value of learning something about a topic before opening his mouth. I gave him an assignment to read up on the topic but like all idiot Libtards he is doesn't want to learn.
If Unkotare would just say he knows what consent of the governed means, he just doesn't believe in it, then we all could just all say we disagree on that, live and go on.

But he keeps arguing that government conquering half it's own country doesn't violate consent of the governed, which is just stupid.

He also keeps arguing that southerners were evil salvers (they were), but that somehow justifies him conquering them and forcing them to stay in his country, which is just bizarre
In addition, he like so many duped Americans with only a government school understanding of the war, doesn’t know that the war was not a civil war. The South had no intentions of conquering or controlling the North. The definition of a civil war requires that both parties are fighting for control of the entire nation.

It was the War of Northern Aggression.

No one disputes that slavery was evil and needed terminating. However, the Lincoln Cult needs to accept what Dishonest Abe did was illegal and caused unbelievable harm to not only the South, but the entire nation.
Lincoln may have used extra-Constitutional measures to save the Union, but that hardly compares to the extra-Constitutional attempt of the south to destroy that Union. If anything, Lincoln's excesses were made necessary by the situation imposed upon the nation by those seeking to sabotage it.
The South wanted to "leave" the Union, not "destroy" it. Your stupid shit they wanted to "destroy" it doesn't even make sense. Why was it their job to stay somewhere because the people remaining considered them leaving to destroy it? That's just a stupid argument, the north wanted them to stay because they couldn't destroy their union simply by leaving.

And again the United States was FORMED on the basis of CONSTENT OF THE GOVERNED. How is conquering half the country "consent?"

Think about what it's doing to us today. The Federal government considers the Constitution road kill because they have no fear of the people since anyone who objects can simply be conquered. That is the problem with what Lincoln did
 
Last edited:

kaz

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2010
Messages
64,529
Reaction score
13,358
Points
2,190
Location
Kazmania
You idiots are hilarious.
Yes, intelligent people such as yourself know that consent is something government has because if we try not giving it they will simply conquer us.

You're a government teacher, you know, that makes total sense to you ...
 

gipper

Libertarian/Anarchist
Joined
Jan 8, 2011
Messages
40,671
Reaction score
12,326
Points
2,250
You didn't answer the question, you ignorant coward.
You mean you object to people not answering your questions?

Really?
Unkotare didn't know what his own question was. He doesn't know the difference between the American government and the American people.

He wanted me to answer his question without him even knowing what he asked me. Pass

Dat Boy is confused about a lot of things. With only only having a Jr High School History text knowledge of the Civil War, written by the winners, he doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground about what he is talking about.

He needs to do the homework assignment that I gave him. That way he won't look like a fool when he post his uneducated dribble.

I thought he said one time that he was a teacher. If he was telling the truth then he should know the value of learning something about a topic before opening his mouth. I gave him an assignment to read up on the topic but like all idiot Libtards he is doesn't want to learn.
If Unkotare would just say he knows what consent of the governed means, he just doesn't believe in it, then we all could just all say we disagree on that, live and go on.

But he keeps arguing that government conquering half it's own country doesn't violate consent of the governed, which is just stupid.

He also keeps arguing that southerners were evil salvers (they were), but that somehow justifies him conquering them and forcing them to stay in his country, which is just bizarre
In addition, he like so many duped Americans with only a government school understanding of the war, doesn’t know that the war was not a civil war. The South had no intentions of conquering or controlling the North. The definition of a civil war requires that both parties are fighting for control of the entire nation.

It was the War of Northern Aggression.

No one disputes that slavery was evil and needed terminating. However, the Lincoln Cult needs to accept what Dishonest Abe did was illegal and caused unbelievable harm to not only the South, but the entire nation.
Lincoln may have used extra-Constitutional measures to save the Union, but that hardly compares to the extra-Constitutional attempt of the south to destroy that Union. If anything, Lincoln's excesses were made necessary by the situation imposed upon the nation by those seeking to sabotage it.
If nations were perpetual, we’d be living under the Sumerians. No nation is perpetual. Nowhere in the Constitution does it state the Union is perpetual. Nowhere does it state any State or region who wishes to leave, should be militarily destroyed.

Mass murdering Americans to force them to stay in the Union, is ignorance. Lincoln lacked the intelligence to avoid war. It could be wanted war.

The harm Lincoln did to American liberty can’t be understated. We suffer under a tyrannical government today, in part thanks to Dishonest Abe.
 

Flash

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2014
Messages
42,069
Reaction score
21,317
Points
2,645
Location
Florida
You didn't answer the question, you ignorant coward.
You mean you object to people not answering your questions?

Really?
Unkotare didn't know what his own question was. He doesn't know the difference between the American government and the American people.

He wanted me to answer his question without him even knowing what he asked me. Pass

Dat Boy is confused about a lot of things. With only only having a Jr High School History text knowledge of the Civil War, written by the winners, he doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground about what he is talking about.

He needs to do the homework assignment that I gave him. That way he won't look like a fool when he post his uneducated dribble.

I thought he said one time that he was a teacher. If he was telling the truth then he should know the value of learning something about a topic before opening his mouth. I gave him an assignment to read up on the topic but like all idiot Libtards he is doesn't want to learn.
If Unkotare would just say he knows what consent of the governed means, he just doesn't believe in it, then we all could just all say we disagree on that, live and go on.

But he keeps arguing that government conquering half it's own country doesn't violate consent of the governed, which is just stupid.

He also keeps arguing that southerners were evil salvers (they were), but that somehow justifies him conquering them and forcing them to stay in his country, which is just bizarre
In addition, he like so many duped Americans with only a government school understanding of the war, doesn’t know that the war was not a civil war. The South had no intentions of conquering or controlling the North. The definition of a civil war requires that both parties are fighting for control of the entire nation.

It was the War of Northern Aggression.

No one disputes that slavery was evil and needed terminating. However, the Lincoln Cult needs to accept what Dishonest Abe did was illegal and caused unbelievable harm to not only the South, but the entire nation.
Lincoln may have used extra-Constitutional measures to save the Union, but that hardly compares to the extra-Constitutional attempt of the south to destroy that Union. If anything, Lincoln's excesses were made necessary by the situation imposed upon the nation by those seeking to sabotage it.
The South wanted to "leave" the Union, not "destroy" it. That doesn't even make sense. Why was it their job to stay somewhere because the people remaining considered them leaving to destroy it? That's just a stupid argument, the north wanted them to stay because they couldn't destroy their union simply by leaving.

And again the United States was FORMED on the basis of CONSTENT OF THE GOVERNED. How is conquering half the country "consent?"

Think about what it's doing to us today. The Federal government considers the Constitution road kill because he has no fear of the people since anyone who objects can simply be conquered? That is the problem with what Lincoln did

The point you are making is something these stupid uneducated Moon Bats have a very difficult time understanding.

Secession was a political issue, not a declaration of war.

Lincoln made it a war the day he sent that filthy Union army across the Potomac River to kill Americans instead of doing the right thing and trying to settle the issue by real political compromise and diplomacy. Lincoln was an asshole.

Tyrants settle political issues by force and that is why we always consider them to be assholes.

The real issue of the secession was the same problem we are facing today. The majority using the power of government to steal from the minority.

The discussion on slavery had nothing to do with the legality of slavery. It was legal in the US under federal law. It was prior to the Civil War, during the Civil War and for almost a year after the Civil War. It had to do with the expansion into the new western states. If a state was to be non slave it would be dominated by Republicans, who would have more power in Congress. If it was to be slave then it would be dominated by Democrats, who would pick up seats in congress.

The Southerners saw what happen when the North had the seats in Congress. The Yankee shitheads raided cash from the South when they had an economic slowdown. Who in the hell wants to put up with shit like that?

These things are never covered in the jr High School history textbooks that the stupid uneducated Moon Bats rely on. That is why I handed out a reading assignment.
 

Unkotare

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2011
Messages
99,333
Reaction score
12,461
Points
2,180
Ah, so those cannonballs fired at Fort Sumter were just “political.”

:lol:

You wannabe rebs are getting more and more desperate.
 

gipper

Libertarian/Anarchist
Joined
Jan 8, 2011
Messages
40,671
Reaction score
12,326
Points
2,250
The states consented to a Perpetual Union. Individuals who found they could not live in or change their government were free to leave. Trying to over throw the government was sedition. States were not free to leave the Union without the consent of the rest of the Union, meaning a change to the Constitution and ending the Perpetual Union. Trying to secede was oath breaking treason.
It should also be remembered that the extremist special interests who were hellbent upon keeping our fellow humans in bondage and extending the vile practice to new territories were attempting to deprive all Americans in the states they caused to rebel of their citizenship.
You seem to think warring on the South to end slavery was necessary and morally right. You’re wrong. The rest the the western world ended slavery without violence. Why have you failed to consider that? Are you an extremist happy that southerns were killed?

If Abe wasn’t such a dumb bumpkin he would have sought a solution other than war, as all other western nations did.
 
Last edited:

gipper

Libertarian/Anarchist
Joined
Jan 8, 2011
Messages
40,671
Reaction score
12,326
Points
2,250
Ah, so those cannonballs fired at Fort Sumter were just “political.”

:lol:

You wannabe rebs are getting more and more desperate.
Dumb as usual.

You’re so dumb you think an attack that killed no one, warrants a war that kills 850,000 Americans and destroys half the nation.

You know nothing about anything.
 

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
137,543
Reaction score
28,767
Points
2,180
Back to the playground for the schmucks. When we said your party is Nazi, you heard we said we were. From the mind of any eight year old. Low intelligence is certainly a big reason you Nazis also go to violence. You aren't smart enough and your ideas are bad and don't work. So get out the sticks and let us know what happens when we don't support Democrats.

You did that all summer. Yet we're still not calling for violence, we're calling for people to look at what you are and reject it

Bull shit. Democrats are very much going to destroying people's lives and violence for standing up to them. Being a kid or an old man don't even protect you if you're wearing a red hat. Now you're just flagrantly stealing elections. You are Nazis, no doubt about it
You hyper-partisan paranoia is unfortunate, and does not relate to Lincoln's protecting, defending, and preserving the United States.


Decent Americans - Democrats, Republicans, and Independents alike - loathe Cry Baby Loser's nazis, q-anon, proud boys, oath keepers, three percenters, white supremacists, etc.

How does invading a state "protect" it or "defend" it?
 

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
137,543
Reaction score
28,767
Points
2,180
The states consented to a Perpetual Union. Individuals who found they could not live in or change their government were free to leave. Trying to over throw the government was sedition. States were not free to leave the Union without the consent of the rest of the Union, meaning a change to the Constitution and ending the Perpetual Union. Trying to secede was oath breaking treason.
It should also be remembered that the extremist special interests who were hellbent upon keeping our fellow humans in bondage and extending the vile practice to new territories were attempting to deprive all Americans in the states they caused to rebel of their citizenship.
You seem to think warring on the South to end slavery was necessary and morally right. You’re wrong. The rest the the western world ended slavery without violence. Why have you failed to consider that? Are you an extremist happy that southerns were killed?

If Abe wasn’t such a dumb bumpkin he would has sought a solution other than war, as all other western nations did.
It's hilarious to watch how flabbergasted they get when you reject the notion that Lincoln was obligated to coerce confederate states back into the union.
 

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
137,543
Reaction score
28,767
Points
2,180
You didn't answer the question, you ignorant coward.
You mean you object to people not answering your questions?

Really?
Unkotare didn't know what his own question was. He doesn't know the difference between the American government and the American people.

He wanted me to answer his question without him even knowing what he asked me. Pass

Dat Boy is confused about a lot of things. With only only having a Jr High School History text knowledge of the Civil War, written by the winners, he doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground about what he is talking about.

He needs to do the homework assignment that I gave him. That way he won't look like a fool when he post his uneducated dribble.

I thought he said one time that he was a teacher. If he was telling the truth then he should know the value of learning something about a topic before opening his mouth. I gave him an assignment to read up on the topic but like all idiot Libtards he is doesn't want to learn.
If Unkotare would just say he knows what consent of the governed means, he just doesn't believe in it, then we all could just all say we disagree on that, live and go on.

But he keeps arguing that government conquering half it's own country doesn't violate consent of the governed, which is just stupid.

He also keeps arguing that southerners were evil salvers (they were), but that somehow justifies him conquering them and forcing them to stay in his country, which is just bizarre
In addition, he like so many duped Americans with only a government school understanding of the war, doesn’t know that the war was not a civil war. The South had no intentions of conquering or controlling the North. The definition of a civil war requires that both parties are fighting for control of the entire nation.

It was the War of Northern Aggression.

No one disputes that slavery was evil and needed terminating. However, the Lincoln Cult needs to accept what Dishonest Abe did was illegal and caused unbelievable harm to not only the South, but the entire nation.
Lincoln may have used extra-Constitutional measures to save the Union, but that hardly compares to the extra-Constitutional attempt of the south to destroy that Union. If anything, Lincoln's excesses were made necessary by the situation imposed upon the nation by those seeking to sabotage it.
How is secession "extra constitutional?" Is abortion "extra constitutional?"
 
  • Thanks
Reactions: kaz

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
137,543
Reaction score
28,767
Points
2,180
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?
Only it wasn't.
If Lincoln had stated that he was going to ban slavery and emancipate the slaves and the South refused. Then you could say it was fought over slavery but that never happened. Lincoln had no intention of banning slavery. It was just that as Sherman had pushed deep into Georgia it was a smart military tactic to cause maximum disruption.

And I'm as left-wing as you can get.
There would never have been a Civil War if the south had not had slavery.
And pigs could fly if they had wings. The North had slavery also, douchebag.
 
  • Thanks
Reactions: kaz

kaz

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2010
Messages
64,529
Reaction score
13,358
Points
2,190
Location
Kazmania
Ah, so those cannonballs fired at Fort Sumter were just “political.”

:lol:

You wannabe rebs are getting more and more desperate.
Fort Sumter, SOUTH CAROLINA which was then occupied by a foreign power, the United States government
 

Unkotare

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2011
Messages
99,333
Reaction score
12,461
Points
2,180
Back to the playground for the schmucks. When we said your party is Nazi, you heard we said we were. From the mind of any eight year old. Low intelligence is certainly a big reason you Nazis also go to violence. You aren't smart enough and your ideas are bad and don't work. So get out the sticks and let us know what happens when we don't support Democrats.

You did that all summer. Yet we're still not calling for violence, we're calling for people to look at what you are and reject it

Bull shit. Democrats are very much going to destroying people's lives and violence for standing up to them. Being a kid or an old man don't even protect you if you're wearing a red hat. Now you're just flagrantly stealing elections. You are Nazis, no doubt about it
You hyper-partisan paranoia is unfortunate, and does not relate to Lincoln's protecting, defending, and preserving the United States.


Decent Americans - Democrats, Republicans, and Independents alike - loathe Cry Baby Loser's nazis, q-anon, proud boys, oath keepers, three percenters, white supremacists, etc.

How does invading a state "protect" it or "defend" it?
The use of such words as “invade,” “conquer,” and “murder” is, of course, deliberately dishonest. Another sign of desperation from these ^^^^^^^ semi-literate simpletons.
 

Concerned American

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2020
Messages
4,950
Reaction score
5,132
Points
1,893
Location
In your head
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?
Only it wasn't.
If Lincoln had stated that he was going to ban slavery and emancipate the slaves and the South refused. Then you could say it was fought over slavery but that never happened. Lincoln had no intention of banning slavery. It was just that as Sherman had pushed deep into Georgia it was a smart military tactic to cause maximum disruption.

And I'm as left-wing as you can get.
Indeed, Lincoln used emancipation as a stick to get the south to refrain from their rebellion. The emancipation proclamation was not written until 9/22/1862 and did not go into effect until 1/1/1863, nearly two years after the start of the civil war.
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top