Jump to content

Robert e Lee should have been hung


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, XavierOnassis said:

That was what the  Fugitive Slave Act and the Dred Scott Decision was all about.

You might try reading an actual book.

 

I won't defend slavery in any way; it was reprehensible in practice, to say nothing of hypocritical in the extreme for our nation to have been founded on personal liberty and the idea that ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL yet to allow men to be held in bondage for so long.

 

That said, your claim that "The South was trying to force slavery on the entire country" is not accurate.  The Southern states believed that any state that WANTED to have slavery as a practice should be allowed to, and they felt the Union government was actively oppressing them.  They believed that the Federal government had too much power, and that remaining in the Union was now detrimental to them; hence secession.

 

At the time, most people identified themselves as citizens of their state first, and as Americans second.  Robert E. Lee did not support slavery himself, but he felt compelled to defend his home state of Virginia.  Most people today forget that our nation is a REPUBLIC of separate and independent states - NOT a contiguous nation - and in the mid-1800's Lee would have been seen as a traitor more for abandoning Virginia than the U.S.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 137
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Then we should have hung everybody in Chaz/Chop.

That's what we do with traitors

Along with the other Confederate generals

5 minutes ago, Mirabeau said:

Not true, you IGNORANT old shrew!

 

If the South was trying to FORCE SLAVERY ON THE ENTIRE COUNTRY, why did the Southern states SECEDE FROM THE UNION?

Because the people of the North refused to obey the Fugitive Slave Act. The Kansas Nebraska Act was supposed to end up with Kansas a Slave State and Nebraska  free state, but the abolitionists refused to allow this happen.

 

How were they going to force slavery on a UNION THAT THEY NO LONGER BELONGED TO?

The attempt to force slavery on the North failed, and the abolitionists  were making slavery in the South difficult.

 

(Remember, folks, that the IGNORANT ms. onASSis claimed on this board that the Confederate States of America DECLARED WAR on the USA. 

The Southerners fired the first shot on Ft Sumter.
Mirabeau, WHO WAS A PROFESSOR OF HISTORY, repeatedly demanded that ms. onASSis provide the TEXT OF THAT CONFEDERATE DECLARATION OF WAR.  ms. onASSis COULD NEVER DO SO because THERE WAS NO SUCH DECLARATION OF WAR.  Her IGNORANCE is ABYSMAL.)

Mirabeau was a SHITTY professor of PHONY history.

I am not a woman, idiot!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Spartan said:

 

I won't defend slavery in any way; it was reprehensible in practice, to say nothing of hypocritical in the extreme for our nation to have been founded on personal liberty and the idea that ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL yet to allow men to be held in bondage for so long.

 

That said, your claim that "The South was trying to force slavery on the entire country" is not accurate.  The Southern states believed that any state that WANTED to have slavery as a practice should be allowed to, and they felt the Union government was actively oppressing them.  They believed that the Federal government had too much power, and that remaining in the Union was now detrimental to them; hence secession.

 

At the time, most people identified themselves as citizens of their state first, and as Americans second.  Robert E. Lee did not support slavery himself, but he felt compelled to defend his home state of Virginia.  Most people today forget that our nation is a REPUBLIC of separate and independent states - NOT a contiguous nation - and in the mid-1800's Lee would have been seen as a traitor more for abandoning Virginia than the U.S.

Robert E. Lee owned slaves, and, in fact, petitioned the Virginia government to be allowed to keep slaves his wife had inherited that were supposed to have been freed five years after her father's death.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, XavierOnassis said:

 

FAIL!

 

Each and every post  ms. onASSis made is FALSE.

 

Now, ms. onASSis:  About that Confederate Declaration of War that you repeatedly stated existed.

 

PLEASE PROVIDE US WITH A LINK TO THAT DOCUMENT.

 

DO IT, NOW!

 

(Watch this, folks!)

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, benson13 said:

Lincoln fucked up....he should have given the south to Mexico

 

Think of the Trillions we would have saved

The third-world nation of Mexico would be a much better place for Benson the Negro than the ghetto he lives in today.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Mirabeau said:

Robert E. Lee owned slaves, and, in fact, petitioned the Virginia government to be allowed to keep slaves his wife had inherited that were supposed to have been freed five years after her father's death.

 

I freely admit there's a lot of contradictory documentation of Lee's positions on slavery.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/18/us/robert-e-lee-slaves.html

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, benson13 said:

Lincoln fucked up....he should have given the south to the Slaves, or Mexico

 

Think of the Trillions we would have saved

Ya than we wouldn't have library's like you

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Spartan said:

 

I won't defend slavery in any way; it was reprehensible in practice, to say nothing of hypocritical in the extreme for our nation to have been founded on personal liberty and the idea that ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL yet to allow men to be held in bondage for so long.

 

That said, your claim that "The South was trying to force slavery on the entire country" is not accurate.  The Southern states believed that any state that WANTED to have slavery as a practice should be allowed to, and they felt the Union government was actively oppressing them.  They believed that the Federal government had too much power, and that remaining in the Union was now detrimental to them; hence secession.

 

At the time, most people identified themselves as citizens of their state first, and as Americans second.  Robert E. Lee did not support slavery himself, but he felt compelled to defend his home state of Virginia.  Most people today forget that our nation is a REPUBLIC of separate and independent states - NOT a contiguous nation - and in the mid-1800's Lee would have been seen as a traitor more for abandoning Virginia than the U.S.

Are the negroes in the USA who are the descendants of slaves better off today than the descendants of African negroes who WEREN'T slaves and who have remained in Africa to this day?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, XavierOnassis said:

The main reason for the Civil War  was SLAVERY.

The South was trying to force slavery on the entire country.

No ... go back and take a history class  ... then talk about it

... Agriculture verses Industry ----difference in economics and the politics that goes with it.

... At the beginning of the Civil war The Republican's were against the Westward expansion of slave states. The South wanted one slave State added for every Free State (keeping the balance of power)

... The South wanted to assert States Right's over Nation Right's (more power to the States)

... The election of a Republican Lincoln without receiving 1 Southern Electoral Vote sealed the deal -- the South had lost all influence. 

... The South having no political influence felt they only had one alternative, SUCCESSION...  

 

Yes there were a few Northerners who wanted to abolish slavery completely -- but not all that many that is was a issue at the start of the civil ware.  No one was seriously considering abolishing slavery completely at the start of the war.

Lincoln didn't eve issue the Emancipation Proclamation until 2-3 years after the start of the civil ware and hi only freed the slaves in the Southern States who were in open conflict... Slaves in the North remained slaves. 

 

Abolishing slavery became a major issue towards the end of the war ...  

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Abolishing slavery became a major issue towards the end of the war ... "

 

 

 

WRONG.....it became a Political Issue in the North in 1863....but it was the underlying Issue of why the slave states declared War on the North in 1861

 
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, benson13 said:

"Abolishing slavery became a major issue towards the end of the war ... "

 

 

 

WRONG.....it became a Political Issue in the North in 1863....but it was the underlying Issue of why the slave states declared War on the North in 1861

 

Prove it you fucking retard

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, slideman said:

CMV: Lee and Davis should have been hung for treason  Jefferson Davis and Robert E. Lee, Lee especially, were directly responsible for the single worst crisis in U.S. history and for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Americans. While it helped the nation heal to offer amnesty to the bulk of Confederate soldiers and collaborators, it sent exactly the wrong message to allow the leaders to escape unscathed. Lee's betrayal was the worst, because it was exactly his military expertise that allowed the Confederacy to survive so long. If he'd fought for the Union, the war would have been over much sooner. All his previous service to the country means nothing in the face of such a betrayal. To say that they would have been idolized as martyrs misses the fact that they are still idolized today even though they lived out their lives.

 

https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/29zcw4/cmv_lee_and_davis_should_have_been_hung_for/

 

 

 

grant was  kindhearted and he undid a lot of damage done by andrew johnson.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, XavierOnassis said:

The main reason for the Civil War  was SLAVERY.

The South was trying to force slavery on the entire country.

No, sir.

The main reason was Individual States-Rights.

The Southern states did not want to be bossed around by a bunch of Damn Yankees.

Slavery was just one subset of that fierce argument.                                                         🥃

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, slideman said:

Along with the other Confederate generals

 

If Texas flies the Confederate Flag from every house & every building.......will you and your BLM homy's

promise to stay north of the Red River and never again trespass on Texas soil ??

 

Maybe that Flag still has some value left, after all.                                        🤠..🥃

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Taipan said:

No, sir.

The main reason was Individual States-Rights.

The Southern states did not want to be bossed around by a bunch of Damn Yankees.

Slavery was just one subset of that fierce argument.                                                         🥃

 

 

it was all about slavery and nothing  but slavery.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Taipan said:

No, sir.

The main reason was Individual States-Rights.

The Southern states did not want to be bossed around by a bunch of Damn Yankees.

Slavery was just one subset of that fierce argument.                                                         🥃

 The Southern states were not any sort of democracies. With few exceptions, they were totally dominated by the slave plantation owners. Most of the White population were illiterate peasants.

Nearly all the wealth belonged to a tiny aristocracy of planters.

All you have to do is read the constitutions of the Southern states.

Slavery was the reason the South seceded. That is the reason given by every secessionist. This "States Rights" crap was what the segregationists  and other advocates of Jim Crow used to justify the myth of "The Lost Cause" after Reconstruction.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jerra- said:

 

 

it was all about slavery and nothing  but slavery.

 

Would you mind if the South seceded one more time.......this time

with Bibles & Ballots........and not rifles.?

Dem families to the North.

GOP families to the South.

No fuss--No muss.

And then we all go home happy.

 

Can I put you down for a "yes" vote ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a losers' flag, and most Texans would REFUSE to fly it. Texas is very close to being as blue a state as the bluebonnets. Black Texans reject the Confederacy and its loser flag, and Chicanos want no part of it. And most educated Texans reject this segregationist crap as well/.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Taipan said:

 

Would you mind if the South seceded one more time.......this time

with Bibles & Ballots........and not rifles.?

Dem families to the North.

GOP families to the South.

No fuss--No muss.

And then we all go home happy.

 

Can I put you down for a "yes" vote ?

That is a very, very stupid proposal.  You  are full of stupid proposals. Americans are not going to move from  one state to another over this. You are on the LOSER's side.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...