Ringel05
Diamond Member
- Aug 5, 2009
- 63,167
- 20,710
Then Ringle, maybe you can explain the flaw in the logic here. Paperview has not, despite her blindingly awesome internet credentials that prove nothing in and of themselves.
Lincoln orders troops raised to invade the Deep South, then four more states rebel as well.
Lincoln invades them also, declaring his intent to restore the Union.
The South fights back, thus the war is afoot.
THREE YEARS LATER, when he thinks it wont hurt the primary cause, restoring the union, he risks the Emancipation Proclamation.
So since Lincoln invaded the South and thus was the direct cause of the war, wouldn't his motivations speak for the underlying cause of the war?
Since he did not emancipate the slaves would that not suggest that freeing the slaves was a low priority for him?
If the sole reason the South left the union was due to slavery, then why didn't the Corwin Amendment placate them? Why did Virginia, Tennessee, Arkansas and North Carolina only leave the union after Lincoln ordered them to raise troops for an invasion of the deep South?
You see I know this, that there are different types of causes for things; catalytic causes, instigating causes, necessary causes, sufficient causes, contributory causes and more.
Causality - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
But when IU see hysterians saying that SLAVERY WAS THE SOLE CAUSE OF THE CIVIL WAR it should make any critically thinking person stop and test the waters abit, as something is very fishy with such simplistic jingoistic views of complex historical causal environments in the modern world.
Ya feel me bro?
And when folks like your self make an appeal to authority as you appeared to do, it is simply mind boggling for any self respecting person to accept at face value. That is one of the very first fallacies I was taught in the various sundry critical thinking and analysis classes I have had.
Your cavalier attitude with the objective Truth is disconcerting to say the least.
lol, I doubt you will actually answer my post with any sort of seriousness, but hey, why the hell not ask anyway?
roflmao
Apparently in your attempt to win this argument you cherry pick facts while completely ignoring any others that don't validate your position,
Unwarranted assertion.
Unwarranted assertion.
Ad hominem, and some studies have shown Wikipedia to be more reliable than the old Encyclopedia Britanica, but whatever, this is not a documented research paper.
Forcing a foreign nations ships to pull over and pay another nation a tariff is an act of war. I am not sure if it had happened up to that moment that the shots were fired but Lincoln said they would still collect the tariffs and was sending reinforcements to do just that. So, one might validly assert that Lincoln made the firs THREATS of war.
Well, Precious, why not share them with me as well? That is the oldest dodge in the book, and if you are so well versed you could spit the nullifying reasons out fairly easily.
'Lynchpin' is a weasel term that really has no specific meaning. Lincoln's actions and stated reason for them would suggest your have your pin in the wrong place.
That was only part of it, and the alienation of a vast number of Northerners who were adamantly opposed to making the Civil War a war of Abolition was another. It wasn't all about Southerners just loving to whip their darkies!
When people appeal to knowledge and understanding they use FACTS not referencing people supposed credentials. You would know that if you had any real training as an historian.
Again, you're so locked into your paradigm, you've blinded yourself to anything you PERCEIVE contradicts your position.
No, I am blinded to unwarranted assertions and people making claims of truth based on their authority supposedly proven by their credentials, especially internet credentials.
Now you can continue to be a prick about this or you can discuss it with an open mind, I'll be happy to respond in any way you wish.
Whether I am a prick or not, I don't give a fuck.
Either you can debate with FACTS and REASON or you cannot.
Man up and put your game face on or go away patting yourself on the back that you are so much smarter than me. I don't care.
But don't blame me for you not making your own case for your claims.
That is being a real loser.
Dayam, one could cut the irony with a chainsaw.
I've been debating with facts and reason. To find out who hasn't all you have to do is look in a mirror..... Can you say loser? Oh yeah, ya just did.
Oh yeah, It's painfully obvious I'm not only smarter than you, I'm more enlightened than you. Now go ahead and fall back on your dismissive political attack and accuse me of being some liberal scum....... It's your stock in trade...... Not very bright.
Oh and I am much smarter than you, it's painfully obvious.