Posted on 07/04/2019 7:04:21 AM PDT by Antoninus
Not duly elected by them. They lawfully seceded and were a separate country that was then attacked by the Lincoln administration without constitutional authority to do so.
Corruption in government and selling of influence? Yes, Modern Democrats, Civil War era Republicans.
Which taxed them at 12 times the rate of the North, and created laws to enrich New York at their expense.
And it was elected with absolutely zero support from any of the states that wanted to be disassociated from it.
Once again, big city Liberals imposed their Liberal candidate (Like Hitlery Clinton) on other people who did not want him, in an effort to further tax and spend the money produced by others for their own benefit.
The Founders left over much less.
Jmausa need remember the ‘United States’ in 1860 were more like ‘these united states’ - only 75 yrs old to the South, who’s families sometimes go back double that. And, we’re not interested in their farms simply a dot on a map in some war room in DC; where some criminal Senator (I repeat myself) wanted to steal the land to give to his brother in law in MA because he wanted a summer place or horse farm. Ridiculous? They were exactly right as that’s what the North did, as aptly put by Diogenes
Yeah. Splitting the nation in two and causing the deaths of some 600,000 Americans. Nice run.
More like 1861.
No they didn’t lawfully secede , they opened fire on Ft. Sumter.
Stop your lying. Slavery was already preserved, and Lincoln urged that it be even further preserved. This thing you just repeated is the biggest lie of the war.
Nobody in the North sent troops into the South to stop slavery. The South didn't have to do anything to preserve slavery other than remain in the Union, which in fact did keep slavery for 8 months longer than the South did.
This is propaganda to justify the murder and destruction from Big City Liberal Northerners who launched that nasty war against the South, not to free men, but to instead enslave men who defied their control.
They wanted control of that money stream, and virtually none of them gave a f*** about he slaves.
The North invaded them because they were an economic threat to the Robber Baron class that ran New York and Washington DC, and which still runs New York and Washington DC today.
Our enemies, the enemies of all conservatives are the big city tax and spend liberal who want us to pay the bills for their excessive government which does not benefit we taxpayers very much at all.
The South was fighting the same enemy then that we are fighting today, and it just took me many years to realize this.
Our nation is controlled by New York and Washington DC, and the news is liberal because this elects Liberal politicians which make sure all that big spending money funnels through all the right hands in New York City and Washington DC.
They are our rulers, and they fancy themselves our aristocrats, and they have fooled people like you.
I’m 61 and raised in the Deep South and was avid in history since third grade and coincidentally my grandfathers horse farm lay where Grant and Pemberton and Johnston and Sherman all dallied their Corps back and forth mostly over the Vicksburg campaign
Grant was never underestimated by the general culture where I lived and not was Shreman though Sherman certainly wasn’t popular
We all knew Grant and Sherman soldiered circles around Yankee born Pemberton and that Johnston had been indecisive and that Van Dorn was underutilized and Forrest none at all.
Lee lost the high ground end of the first day and was not on his game and lost the battle there....he should have moved his army then and looked for better ground but given their ability to overcome he I think grew overconfident maybe ...some say his angina pectoris was up
Who knows.....Longstreet was right but his actions after the war may have endeared him to the radical republicans and south bashers on this forum but it didn’t help him much down here
The movie Gettysburg and the rise of the Macpherson school and leftism in civil war history today has also bumped Pete.
I’ve got nothing against him...he was certainly able
Hood really got the worst of all of it....mangled despite his protestations at Gettysburg and then like Lee he too missed his chance at Spring Hill when Schofield got past him in the dark and then Hood in desperation slaughtered his forces within rifle shot of where I now type
Are you seeing a pattern here....we live surrounded by it....something you can’t explain to folks ata distance or newer immigrants
Such is war isn’t it...
why didn’t Napoleon keep Blucher from returning to Waterloo or why didn’t he stop Ney from committing troops and more importantly cavalry to action before he Napoleon was ready?
Why didn’t Beauregard stream into Washington after McDowell after the first Bull Run?
Why did Hitler sleep through the morning of D Day and why didn’t Von Rundstedt have him woken?
I tend to think Lee losing Jackson was damage beyond repair and Stuart’s error hurt....Jackson unlike Longstreet maybe could have had more impact on Lee regarding choice of ground etc
Oh shut up. For crying out loud, the war ended 154 freakin’ years ago. Your side lost. Get over it.
Yes they did lawfully secede. Lincoln invaded their territory with a heavily armed flotilla of warships.
Lincoln was supplying a federal installation in peacetime. Hey , let me ask you something Reb. Why are you still fighting the Civil War? It’s been over for 154 years and your side lost. You think by arguing over it is going to change anything? Do you not like living in The United States Of America? Do you want to see the country split in two again?
Lincoln sent a heavily armed fleet with a possible landing force of up to 500 troops into South Carolina's sovereign territory. Let me ask you something, why are you towing the PC Revisionist line here? I'm accurately reporting what happened. I can accept that there are two different views. That was the consensus from about 1900 until the 1980s when the PC Revisionists in Academia - hardcore Leftist products of the 60s ers came along and decided to push the "it was all about slavery" line and to demonize Southerners in order to further their Leftist agenda. ie the same exact thing they're starting on now with the Founding Fathers, the original stars and stripes flag, etc. We Southerners told everybody else this was coming since the early 90s. We told everybody this was never going to stop at Confederate/Southern leaders and symbols. But to Northerners, Midwesterners and Westerners - even those who are otherwise Conservative, it did not matter because hey, those were the South's symbols and leaders being run through the mud, not theirs. Well, now we're here. Now it is national symbols and leaders they're starting on just as we said. I prefer a much more decentralized system of government with much more limited power, smaller budgets, lower taxes and a non interventionist foreign policy that we had prior to the 1860s than what we have now. As for secession today, I'm in favor of it because as was entirely predictable, with all power centralized in Washington DC there is no scope for California to be California and for Alabama to be Alabama. So everything becomes a very nasty fight to see who gets to impose their worldview on the other side. The chance of another conflict is real. I'd rather see the Left Coast and the Northeast go their own way and leave the rest of us alone.
Longstreet’s view of Lee’s order to assault Cemetery Ridge
“General,(Lee) I have been a soldier all my life. I have been with soldiers engaged in fights by couples, by squads, companies, regiments, divisions, and armies, and should know as well as any one, what soldiers can do. It is my opinion that no fifteen thousand men ever arrayed for battle can take that position.”
I just recognize this war undermined many very important principles that were the bedrock foundation of the Government which the founders left us.
This current Federal monster is a direct consequence of that war.
I said "Nobody in the North sent troops into the South to stop slavery."
Whether abolitionists joined the Army because they thought this would end slavery is immaterial to the point that the LEADERSHIP of the Union forces did not send the armies into the South (at the beginning of the war) to free any slaves.
As a matter of fact, the Maximum Leader, Abraham Lincoln had earlier tried to get an amendment passed that further protected slavery in the South.
It not rational to believe that a government offering even stronger protection to the institution of slavery, is going to war to stamp out that very thing they had previously attempted to guarantee. They clearly went to war for some other reason.
The claim that the war was over slavery is clever propaganda, but it isn't even close to the truth. Unfortunately people have had that drilled into their heads, and it's difficult to get them to even look at facts that disprove this claim.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.