View Poll Results: Who was right: North or South?

Voters
67. You may not vote on this poll
  • North

    39 58.21%
  • South

    21 31.34%
  • Neither

    7 10.45%
Page 3 of 37 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 367

Thread: The Civil War

  1. #21
    King Of The Dog Pound
    Black Dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    South Florida
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    34,492

    Re: The Civil War

    PS The North won either way. So...

    My eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord!
    They kicked the **** out of the South and left it burned and very scorched.
    So death to all those slave holding states and to The North they swore!
    Blackdogs truth is marching on!

    Glory! Glory Chocolate Thun-der!
    Spud who always lives Down un-der!
    Goshin who's always speaks and plunder!
    Blackdogs truth is marching on!
    Quote Originally Posted by Moot View Post
    Benjii likes the protests...he'd be largely irrelevant without them. So he needs to speak where he knows there will be protests against him and that makes him responsible for the protests.
    Quote Originally Posted by Absentglare View Post
    You can successfully wipe your ass with toilet paper, that doesn't mean that you should.

  2. #22
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 03:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    60,458

    Re: The Civil War

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    What property did the north gain from the war? Certainly nowhere near enough to justify the costs of the war.
    You have to ask them why they attacked forts in the south when they left the nation.

  3. #23
    Global Moderator
    Rage More!
    Your Star's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    26,359

    Re: The Civil War

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    The war was never about slaves. Ask the north why they attacked, property, ask the south why they defended themselves, property and the right to leave the nation.

    Why they left the nation is a completely different debate, but people like you decide to blend it together as if its the same. Its not.
    The south seceded, the north had every right to attack the treasonous rebellion.
    Eat me, drink me, love me;
    Laura make much of me

  4. #24
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: The Civil War

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    You have to ask them why they attacked forts in the south when they left the nation.
    Oh come on. The value of those forts was minimal compared to the cost of the war, especially considering that the north itself was more than willing to shell them and/or burn them down once they were in Confederate hands. If their casus belli was protecting their own property (i.e. the forts), they would have taken more care to not destroy it.

    Ultimately there wasn't enough property at stake, from the north's perspective, for them to have cared about going to war. The primary reason was genuine revulsion at slavery.
    Last edited by Kandahar; 06-11-11 at 06:30 PM.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  5. #25
    Devourer of Poor Children
    DrunkenAsparagus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    DC
    Last Seen
    01-20-16 @ 04:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    4,496

    Re: The Civil War

    Personally, I think that slavery would have died before 1900 if not much sooner. During the Civil War, Great Britain greatly increased its cotton imports from India and Egypt. The North's blockade no doubt played a large role in this, but the trend was inevitable, especially after the Suez Canal was built. However, the Civil War was not all about slavery. The South felt threatened by abolition; the Wealthy were afraid of its damage to their profits, and the working class Whites were afraid of having to compete with freed Blacks and having them on a similar social standing as them. Slavery was holding back the Southern economy, but many did not feel that way. As the saying went, "Cotton is King."

    However, the North was much more interested in preserving the Union. I'm a pretty strong Unionist, and the South's seizure of Federal property without compensation would be reason enough for my support of the North. I also see this as a separate issue from the American War of Independence, where we used violence to secede from Britain, because the South had ample representation in Congress unlike the 13 Colonies in Parliament.
    "Doubleplusungood"

    George Orwell

  6. #26
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 03:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    60,458

    Re: The Civil War

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    Oh come on. The value of those forts was minimal compared to the cost of the war, especially considering that the north itself was more than willing to shell them and/or burn them down once they were in Confederate hands.

    To answer your question, why did they attack the forts: Umm, because they were at war?
    They were not at war. War was started by the attack on the forts. The only way to regain the fort and the states, is to attack them. The north damn well knew this, and they are the ones that started the war by those acts.
    Last edited by Henrin; 06-11-11 at 06:31 PM.

  7. #27
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 03:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    60,458

    Re: The Civil War

    Quote Originally Posted by DrunkenAsparagus View Post
    I'm a pretty strong Unionist, and the South's seizure of Federal property without compensation would be reason enough for my support of the North.
    The union is made up of willing members and the idea that forts were federal property that would call for a war that killed thousands seems odd to me. The fort is just a building, the property that is on it is the important thing to consider. Still, I'm not going to support going war over something like this. To small and useless.
    Last edited by Henrin; 06-11-11 at 06:43 PM.

  8. #28
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: The Civil War

    Let's try an analogy:

    If Rick Perry turned Texas into his personal fiefdom and started gunning down his political opponents, would the president be justified in sending in the military to provide for the common defense and guarantee a republican form of government, as per the Constitution? I would hope that we would all agree that the answer is yes. What if Perry then responded by seceding from the United States (against the wishes of most of Texans)? Should the federal government just throw up its hands and bow to "states' rights"? Of course not.

    Is this hypothetical situation somehow different from the situation in the south during the Civil War?
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  9. #29
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: The Civil War

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    The union is made up of willing members and the idea that forts were federal property that would call for a war that killed thousands seems odd to me.
    It seems odd to me too, which is why I don't buy your theory. If the Union was that concerned about getting its property back, it wouldn't have destroyed the forts when it was more convenient to do so.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  10. #30
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 03:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    60,458

    Re: The Civil War

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    It seems odd to me too, which is why I don't buy your theory. If the Union was that concerned about getting its property back, it wouldn't have destroyed the forts when it was more convenient to do so.
    Its not a theory, its a fact that they argued that the forts were federal property, and they wanted them back.
    Last edited by Henrin; 06-11-11 at 07:05 PM.

Page 3 of 37 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •