Nathan Bedford Forrest statue causing controversy

[bripat9643]

No, SC did not secede legally.

Show me where the states had the right to secede. You can't.

You have already admitted that it was not illegal. Therefore it was legal.

 

[bripat9643]

Was Frederick Douglass or George Washington Carver a terrorist who killed American citizens?

Forrest fought for his country the same as Grant or Sherman.

both Grant and sherman would tell you that if they were alive today.

I think you are confused, during the years of 1861 and 1865, Forrest fought AGAINST Grant and Sherman and THEIR country.

Yep, and Forrest's country wasn't Grant's country.

 

[GuyPinestra]

Just putting the REAL history, and information on the primary sources that back it up, out here for comparison with your uninformed and historically INACCURATE propaganda drivel. I want to be sure everyone can see which is which. It happens that while I did not major in history, I took a number of post-graduate courses on the history of the period in question, so, you, junior, are playing way, WAY, out of your league. I've studied this era extensively, I know the primary source materials well, and I know how to do the research, as more than one self-styled "historical expert" on a number of boards has learned by getting thoroughly embarrassed at having his ignorance exposed.

Guy, I'm sure you are one of these weird assholes who gets out and dresses like a confederate for re-enactments or whatever... and I simply don't care.

The Civil War was fought because a few rich assholes wanted to keep owning slaves when that sort of thing was going out of style in the world. Period. And the funny thing is, they thought they could win or get England to intervene on their side.

Fact is, they fought a pointless war for an evil reason, and a lot of them died.

And the fact that some people would still try to rationalize their actions amazes me...

That post has 'post-graduate degree' written ALL OVER IT! Just what I'd expect from someone who 'had a degree in history'...

You are such an idiot...LOL!!

 

[bripat9643]

Show where SC had the right to secede in federal law.

Where do you have the right to scratch your ass under federal law?

 

[bripat9643]

No, they wouldn't. Sherman would have hung Forrest if he had been authorized to do so.

Sherman would have hanged his own mother if he had been authorized to do so.

 

[Unkotare]

As for as I'm concerned, your goddamn Bluebellies were the original NAZIS! You Yankees remain a nation of liars, oppressors, occupiers and war criminals, and if you are Yankee trash living in Virginia, then you pollute the air of the South by breathing it, and dirty Southern soil be treading upon it. Go back to where you came from, Carpetbagger! (It is not our fault that you marginally civilized debris can't learn not to shit where you sleep, so go back to that filthy, decaying Rustbelt you and your kind built, and stay there, because we do not want or need you down here!) I've got more common cause with, and affection and respect for, Black Southerners, than I do for ANY Yankee!

Why don't you put on your reenactment gear, take up your rifle and show the courage of your convictions by fighting or getting the hell out of my country, you cowardly psycho. If you're seriously this worked up over a war that ended over 150 years ago, you are hopelessly nuts. Don't pretend you represent your good neighbors in the South or anywhere else with all this nonsense. Get help, get to fighting, or get out of my ONE nation.

 

[JakeStarkey]

bripat, you are so silly. You are why you can be taken seriously on most important issues. You are a libertarian loon, whose looniness becomes more apparent every day in every way.

 

[JoeB131]

For someone with a 'degree in history', you're pretty stupid. Or willfully ignorant. If the War between the States was just about slavery, why did Lincoln wait until 1863 to issue the Emancipation Proclamation? Why did it only free the slaves in the states 'still in rebellion'? Why did it NOT apply to Delaware, Kentucky, Maryland, and Missouri?

Why is any of that even relevent?

Why is the fact that Lincoln didn't free a single slave during the war relevant to your claim that ending slavery was the reason Lincoln started the war? It takes a special kind of stupid no to understand that.

Lincoln didn't start the war, the South did.

Wrong, Lincoln committed the first act of war.

Beacuse they knew Lincoln was an abolitionist.

Lincoln was no abolitionist, moron.

No, the South started the war. They seceded, they attacked Fort Sumpter.

Again, why are you defending this? They fought a war to keep slaves. That's kind of stupid.

 

[JakeStarkey]

No, they wouldn't. Sherman would have hung Forrest if he had been authorized to do so.

Sherman would have hanged his own mother if he had been authorized to do so.

My point is proved: you are certifiably loony.

 

[bripat9643]

The FACT remains that SC LEGALLY seceded from the Union in January 1861. At that moment Fort Sumter became the property of the State, REGARDLESS of who paid for it.

There was a reason there were no trials after the War, the SCOTUS would have ruled the secession Constitutional and the actions of the North UNconstitutional.

Or that people were just trying to put the war behind them...

Wrong. The Yankees knew they would lose in court and undo everything the war was fought for. It was Ulysses S. Grant who said of bringing Jeff Davis to trial, “we will lose in court what we have won on the battlefield.”

 

[squeeze berry]

When SC fired on Ft Sumter, it acted as a gangster organization. States are not equal to the national government. Go read your Constitution.

See, you can never win on this.

Doesn't say so in the Constitution and the south lost by force of arms. Show me where the Constitutions states states can secede or leave the union.

show us where the federal govt is permitted to invade states

tell us all how the US trops were going to get to SC without invading two other states.

Again, show us where the US has authority to take arms against their own citizens

 

[bripat9643]

And you dare call others ignorant of history?

Yes, he rightly calls you ignorant if history and a despicable piece of shit. Your carpet bagger version of history is nothing but the propaganda of a gang of greedy bloodthirsty whores.

Are you admitting to being as uninformed as he?

No. I'm admitting that you're an ignoramus and a despicable piece of shit.

 

[squeeze berry]

Why is any of that even relevent?

Why is the fact that Lincoln didn't free a single slave during the war relevant to your claim that ending slavery was the reason Lincoln started the war? It takes a special kind of stupid no to understand that.



Wrong, Lincoln committed the first act of war.

Beacuse they knew Lincoln was an abolitionist.

Lincoln was no abolitionist, moron.

No, the South started the war. They seceded, they attacked Fort Sumpter.

Again, why are you defending this? They fought a war to keep slaves. That's kind of stupid.

if the war was to end slavery then why didn't the US invade Africa b/c it sure as hell did not end there in 1865?

 

[JakeStarkey]

The SC confederate troops fired on federal property and personnel. \

The reaction of democrats in the North, who had been urging reconciliation on Lincoln, shows just how stupid your comment is, as the enemies of Lincoln urged him and joined him in war on southern vile traitors.

The FACT remains that SC LEGALLY seceded from the Union in January 1861. At that moment Fort Sumter became the property of the State, REGARDLESS of who paid for it.

There was a reason there were no trials after the War, the SCOTUS would have ruled the secession Constitutional and the actions of the North UNconstitutional.

Or that people were just trying to put the war behind them...

Wrong. The Yankees knew they would lose in court and undo everything the war was fought for. It was Ulysses S. Grant who said of bringing Jeff Davis to trial, “we will lose in court what we have won on the battlefield.”

 

[JakeStarkey]

Lincoln called out the militia of the various states, and the upper border states seceded, thus joining SC in its war against the Union. The federal government had every constitutional and moral obligation to smash the traitors.

It did.

When SC fired on Ft Sumter, it acted as a gangster organization. States are not equal to the national government. Go read your Constitution.

See, you can never win on this.

show us where the federal govt is permitted to invade states

tell us all how the US trops were going to get to SC without invading two other states.

Again, show us where the US has authority to take arms against their own citizens

 

[bodecea]

The FACT remains that SC LEGALLY seceded from the Union in January 1861. At that moment Fort Sumter became the property of the State, REGARDLESS of who paid for it.

There was a reason there were no trials after the War, the SCOTUS would have ruled the secession Constitutional and the actions of the North UNconstitutional.

Or that people were just trying to put the war behind them...

Wrong. The Yankees knew they would lose in court and undo everything the war was fought for. It was Ulysses S. Grant who said of bringing Jeff Davis to trial, “we will lose in court what we have won on the battlefield.”

Pretty stupid to start the war by firing on federal property then. I wonder if that's how Southerners got the reputation of being stupid.

 

[bodecea]

Why is the fact that Lincoln didn't free a single slave during the war relevant to your claim that ending slavery was the reason Lincoln started the war? It takes a special kind of stupid no to understand that.



Wrong, Lincoln committed the first act of war.



Lincoln was no abolitionist, moron.

No, the South started the war. They seceded, they attacked Fort Sumpter.

Again, why are you defending this? They fought a war to keep slaves. That's kind of stupid.

if the war was to end slavery then why didn't the US invade Africa b/c it sure as hell did not end there in 1865?

Because...unlike now, we stayed out of other countries' business unless we were attacked...like we were at Fort Sumter.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The war was to preserve the Union first, last, and always. When it became obvious that slavery was helping the South, Lincoln began the process of abolition, which lasted more than three years until the 13th Amendment was ratified.

Learn your history, please.

Who told you the war was about ending slavery?

Why is the fact that Lincoln didn't free a single slave during the war relevant to your claim that ending slavery was the reason Lincoln started the war? It takes a special kind of stupid no to understand that.



Wrong, Lincoln committed the first act of war.



Lincoln was no abolitionist, moron.

No, the South started the war. They seceded, they attacked Fort Sumpter.

Again, why are you defending this? They fought a war to keep slaves. That's kind of stupid.

if the war was to end slavery then why didn't the US invade Africa b/c it sure as hell did not end there in 1865?

 

[Unkotare]

Yes, he rightly calls you ignorant if history and a despicable piece of shit. Your carpet bagger version of history is nothing but the propaganda of a gang of greedy bloodthirsty whores.

Are you admitting to being as uninformed as he?

No. I'm admitting that you're an ignoramus and a despicable piece of shit.

Whether you admit it or not, you certainly seem as uninformed as he, and even more mentally and emotionally unstable (if that's possible).

 

[squeeze berry]

The war was to preserve the Union first, last, and always. When it became obvious that slavery was helping the South, Lincoln began the process of abolition, which lasted more than three years until the 13th Amendment was ratified.

Learn your history, please.

Who told you the war was about ending slavery?

No, the South started the war. They seceded, they attacked Fort Sumpter.

Again, why are you defending this? They fought a war to keep slaves. That's kind of stupid.

if the war was to end slavery then why didn't the US invade Africa b/c it sure as hell did not end there in 1865?

ummm

I was replying to Joe