Leave Confederate Soldier Statues Alone

[WinterBorn]

This is about which side the soldiers fought for. YOu cannot separate the two. The soldiers were paid in confederate money. They have uniforms and equipment purchased by the confederate states of America. It is most certainly about nations and national policies.

The people who did not believe in the cause of the confederacy could have done like Winston County Alabama did and secede from the confederacy.

NO, it is NOT about "which side the soldiers fought for" You have a habit of changing subjects in mid-thread.

This is about what the OP stated it is about. Honoring or dishonoring SOLDIERS.

As for the cause (another subject) >> for mist Confederate soldiers it was a self-defense war against armies coming down into their home areas and attacking them.. I've lost count how many times I've said this already in this thread. Are you reading the thread ?

I am not changing the subject. I am correcting you that they were not part of the military of the USA.

And if, as you claim, it was two armies from the same country, how can you claim they were invading? You can't have it both ways.

 

[koshergrl]

If by "American" you mean on the North or South American continent, then you are correct. But that means Canadians and Mexicans are Americans too. But if you mean part of the United States of America, you are absolutely wrong. They denied their American citizenship.

Confederate States of America. And this isn't about nations or national policies. It's about SOLDIERS.

By this logic you should be yammering about statues of Uruguyan soldiers and Brazilian soldiers and, of course not to forget, Nicaraguan Sandinistas, Ché Guevara et al.. They too were in "America".

Logical fallacy 101. Way to blather irrelevancies.

 

[WinterBorn]

THey don't have to . They joined an army of a nation that was NOT the United States of America and invaded US property when they took over various forts.

FALSE! They were of an army that WAS of the USA (then and now), and it was the North who did the invading, with almost the entire war fought in the South. The Southerners were the DEFENDERS. North was the ATTACKERS.

I have 2 minutes left on this library computer. I'm finished with this discussion for today.

Maybe you can address this tomorrow.

If these ANTIFA assholes arm up and take over a US military installation, are they "American soldiers"? Actually, the ANTIFA assholes have not disavowed their US citizenship. But the confederate soldiers did. And then they invaded and took over forts belonging to the US Military. The US soldiers that were there were either murdered or imprisoned. THAT is what started the war. And that is certainly not "defensive".

 

[Pogo]

If by "American" you mean on the North or South American continent, then you are correct. But that means Canadians and Mexicans are Americans too. But if you mean part of the United States of America, you are absolutely wrong. They denied their American citizenship.

Confederate States of America. And this isn't about nations or national policies. It's about SOLDIERS.

By this logic you should be yammering about statues of Uruguyan soldiers and Brazilian soldiers and, of course not to forget, Nicaraguan Sandinistas, Ché Guevara et al.. They too were in "America".

Logical fallacy 101. Way to blather irrelevancies.

Hey, I'm just taking the OP's logic to its logical conclusion. So sue me.

What continent is Brazil part of? Say it for us.

 

[paperview]

The soldiers were part of the confederacy. That makes them the same.

FALSE! Maybe you don't know what a soldier is. They follow orders, not make policy. They were not part of policy-making.

The soldiers were part of the only voting population, free white males -- who numbered just a bit over a million, and who voted for representatives that sought to maintain, preserve, protect and expand slavery. Overwhelmingly.

Eat that bit of south'n grit.

 

[Pogo]

The soldiers were part of the confederacy. That makes them the same.

FALSE! Maybe you don't know what a soldier is. They follow orders, not make policy. They were not part of policy-making.

The soldiers were part of the only voting population, free white males -- who numbered just a bit over a million, and who voted for representatives that sought to maintain, preserve, protect and expand slavery. Overwhelmingly.

Eat that bit of south'n grit.

Again no, not "overwhelmingly" at all.

Narrates Wiki: >> Indeed, voting in the South was not as monolithic as the Electoral College map would make it seem. Economically, culturally, and politically, the South was made up of three regions. In the states of the “Upper” South, later known as the “Border States” (Delaware, Maryland, Kentucky, and Missouri along with the Kansas territories), unionist popular votes were scattered among Lincoln, Douglas, and Bell, to form a majority in all four. In the “Middle” South states, there was a unionist majority divided between Douglas and Bell in Virginia and Tennessee; in North Carolina and Arkansas, the unionist (Bell and Douglas) vote approached a majority. Texas was the only Middle South state that Breckinridge carried convincingly. In three of the six “Deep” South, unionists (Bell and Douglas) won divided majorities in Georgia and Louisiana or neared it in Alabama. Breckinridge convincingly carried only three of the six states of the Deep South (South Carolina, Florida, and Mississippi).[17] These three Deep South states were all among the four Southern states with the lowest white populations; together, they held only nine-percent of Southern whites.[18]

Among the slave states, the three states with the highest voter turnouts voted the most one-sided. Texas, with five percent of the total wartime South’s population, voted 75 percent Breckinridge. Kentucky and Missouri, with one-fourth the total population, voted 73 percent pro-union Bell, Douglas and Lincoln. In comparison, the six states of the Deep South making up one-fourth the Confederate voting population, split 57 percent Breckinridge versus 43 percent for the two pro-union candidates.[nb 1] The four states that were admitted to the Confederacy after Fort Sumter held almost half its population, and voted a narrow combined majority of 53 percent for the pro-union candidates. <<​

A map from the same page shows the diversity:

The yellow area is Bell, the Constitutional Union Party candy, and the green is the secessionist Breckinridge.
South Carolina is in grey because it had no popular vote.​

And as previously pointed out, the area where I'm sitting, when put to a referendum on secession, voted "no", and stayed loyal to the Union.

Meanwhile in the same election, one of the states ran a referendum on whether it should allow universal suffrage to black people. The measure was decisively defeated, 64% "no" over 36% "yes". The state was .... New York. Moreover Lincoln's Republican Party 1860 platform had taken the position not to interfere with the institution of slavery in those states where it was still going on.

The moral is that all of this is not so black and white, pun intended, as we may reduce it to.

 

[paperview]

It is not all...black and white, Pogo, I agree --

But generally speaking, I was referring to the votes for decades and decades and decades that kept in slave proponents as reps, both locally and federally.

 

[Synthaholic]

Keep your revisionist history from the statues and graves of brave men who fell in battle with honor.

There is no honor in treason.

 

[Bush92]

Keep your revisionist history from the statues and graves of brave men who fell in battle with honor.

There is no honor in treason.

It was not treason. It was patriotism in their eyes. Civil War was fought over unresolved issues at Convention of 1787.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

The Confederate statues will go. It's sad to see our history ripped out but no use to deny it's happening. The entire civil war will be removed. This allows the history to be replaced. The war will have become all about slavery and the real economic reasons erased .

 

[protectionist]

They were fighting against treason

One could just as easily say it was the North that was treasonous.

 

[protectionist]

The Confederate statues will go. It's sad to see our history ripped out but no use to deny it's happening. The entire civil war will be removed. This allows the history to be replaced. The war will have become all about slavery and the real economic reasons erased .

This thread is not about what the war was about.

 

[protectionist]

"It is candidate"?
Whelp --that's kinda what I asked. If Rump is from the South, why does he claim to be from Noo Yawk?

Good thing he took that Hunter Pence guy to get votes from that great Southern state of uh, Indiana.

It's candidate because the southern states (Virginia only exception) all went for Trump. Got it ?

 

[protectionist]

By this logic you should be yammering about statues of Uruguyan soldiers and Brazilian soldiers and, of course not to forget, Nicaraguan Sandinistas, Ché Guevara et al.. They too were in "America".

Nice try. Obviously, we're talking about what is the 50 states of 2017 USA. You're having a bad day.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

The Confederate statues will go. It's sad to see our history ripped out but no use to deny it's happening. The entire civil war will be removed. This allows the history to be replaced. The war will have become all about slavery and the real economic reasons erased .

This thread is not about what the war was about.

No. It's about removing history in order to rewrite it.

 

[protectionist]

I am not changing the subject. I am correcting you that they were not part of the military of the USA.

And if, as you claim, it was two armies from the same country, how can you claim they were invading? You can't have it both ways.

1. And I am correcting you that they were, and also of the militaries of their respective states. In the case of the legislation cited in the OP, they are soldiers of the STATE of Florida.

2. It was one section of the country invading another. But you knew that, didn't you ?

 

[protectionist]

Maybe you can address this tomorrow. If these ANTIFA assholes arm up and take over a US military installation, are they "American soldiers"? Actually, the ANTIFA assholes have not disavowed their US citizenship. But the confederate soldiers did. And then they invaded and took over forts belonging to the US Military. The US soldiers that were there were either murdered or imprisoned. THAT is what started the war. And that is certainly not "defensive".

To say that the South invaded the North is either lying, or gross stupidity.

 

[protectionist]

Hey, I'm just taking the OP's logic to its logical conclusion. So sue me.

What continent is Brazil part of? Say it for us.

The OP is not about a continent, Mr Deflection.

 

[protectionist]

The soldiers were part of the only voting population, free white males -- who numbered just a bit over a million, and who voted for representatives that sought to maintain, preserve, protect and expand slavery. Overwhelmingly.
.

I repeat. Soldiers don't make policy. They just follow orders. Got it now ?

 

[protectionist]

There is no honor in treason.

Soldiers don't commit treason. Politicians do. You're not even close.