Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
July 23, 2014, 03:04:42 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Black Woman attacked for Carrying Confederate Flag.  (Read 4171 times)
AVBG
Guest
« Reply #125 on: February 01, 2013, 08:36:06 PM »

Even Vince gets in on the act! Yeeehhaaa!


* image.jpg (53.62 KB, 640x480 - viewed 109 times.)
Report to moderator   Logged
daddy8ball
Getbig III
***
Posts: 933


Violence is not the answer. It is the question.


View Profile
« Reply #126 on: February 01, 2013, 08:39:18 PM »


 
Quote
As for how the whole "affair" started.. Lincoln instigated the war.. The southern states seceded legally.. Northern fortifications were only fired on after they were given deadlines together out of various southern states.. Lincoln choose to keep the there to initiate the motive for war.. It was a calculated move that killed more than half a million men.. At this time the south was the "money maker" for the nation in cotton exports ect.. Lincolncould not lose that revenue.. It was not a holy war to save the union.. It was a war to subjugate the states to make the nation more money..

Legally leaving the Union and firing shots on U.S. troops are two different things. When armed hostilities commenced, Lincoln was fully justifed in taking any steps necessary.
 
   
   
Quote
I could go on about Lincoln and the slavery myth ..but the only thing needed is his quote of " if I could preserve the union by getting rid of slavery I would do it.. If I could preserve the union by keeping slavery I would do that too.." As late as 1864 he was talking to confederate representatives about letting them keep their slaves if they would come back into the union under his rule.. He also had plans in place to ship all blacks back to colonize places in Africa.. Again, well documented but never brought up to protect his legacy..

Which goes to show Lincoln wasn't a bloodthirsty tyrant out for war. He didn't want war..at all. He wanted to preserve the United States.
Report to moderator   Logged

The answer is "yes".
The True Adonis
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 40962


"We Will Correct All This."


View Profile
« Reply #127 on: February 01, 2013, 08:44:17 PM »

How about that Income Tax and Internal Revenue Service Lincoln set up. Great Wartime Measure.  Roll Eyes
Report to moderator   Logged

E
daddy8ball
Getbig III
***
Posts: 933


Violence is not the answer. It is the question.


View Profile
« Reply #128 on: February 01, 2013, 08:46:58 PM »

How about that Income Tax and Internal Revenue Service Lincoln set up. Great Wartime Measure.  Roll Eyes

Maybe it was. Maybe is wasn't.

He went into office with states leaving the fucking Union. Riots/death everywhere. Here in his own country. He had to fund a war. What solutions do you propose in that situation? I don't understand the  chronic crucifying of the man.
Report to moderator   Logged

The answer is "yes".
leadhead
Getbig III
***
Posts: 732


View Profile
« Reply #129 on: February 01, 2013, 08:48:17 PM »

Your logic is flawed beyond belief and the facts certainly are not on your side.  You can call me whatever name you wish as it will not change the course of history one iota, nor will you ever be correct.  When North Carolina drafted their Ordinance of Secession, Slavery was not even considered an issue.  The same applies to Four other states, including mighty Virginia.  

If this is the best of the California Public School system, where I presume you learned such incorrect drivel, I am not impressed one bit and they have failed you and you have failed yourself.

Afterall, California has moved to teach "Gay History" now in Schools which is the most absurd thing I have ever heard in my life.  As if anyone did anything in History because they were motivated by the cock.  Roll Eyes

Perhaps you can be the first in the History books there, my dear TDongz.

The winner of the civil war gets to write the history books, you know that TA. They don't mention ANY of the other issues of succession from the north but slavery in history books even in our southern schools. The union loved to demonize the confederacy.
Report to moderator   Logged
The True Adonis
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 40962


"We Will Correct All This."


View Profile
« Reply #130 on: February 01, 2013, 08:48:22 PM »

 
Legally leaving the Union and firing shots on U.S. troops are two different things. When armed hostilities commenced, Lincoln was fully justifed in taking any steps necessary.
 
   
   
Which goes to show Lincoln wasn't a bloodthirsty tyrant out for war. He didn't want war..at all. He wanted to preserve the United States.
He wanted to preserve the United States via War.  You don`t just call for 75,000 troops because you want to make point.  
Report to moderator   Logged

E
daddy8ball
Getbig III
***
Posts: 933


Violence is not the answer. It is the question.


View Profile
« Reply #131 on: February 01, 2013, 08:50:19 PM »

He wanted to preserve the United States via War.  You don`t just call for 75,000 troops because you want to make point.  

So take the attack on a U.S. military fort lying down? What point would that make? Do nothing?

I ask: What would you do if you were President, TA?
Report to moderator   Logged

The answer is "yes".
The True Adonis
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 40962


"We Will Correct All This."


View Profile
« Reply #132 on: February 01, 2013, 08:52:03 PM »

Maybe it was. Maybe is wasn't.

He went into office with states leaving the fucking Union. Riots/death everywhere. Here in his own country. He had to fund a war. What solutions do you propose in that situation? I don't understand the  chronic crucifying of the man.
He didn`t have to wage a war.  Diplomacy wasn`t even considered.  The only diplomatic measure that Lincoln considered prior to the Civil Was was the Permanent Slavery Act in the United States which was passed by a Northern Congress mind you, not the Confederate States, in hopes to lure them back in the Union.  Old Dot Goodwin doesn`t like that inconvenient fact.
Report to moderator   Logged

E
daddy8ball
Getbig III
***
Posts: 933


Violence is not the answer. It is the question.


View Profile
« Reply #133 on: February 01, 2013, 08:55:04 PM »

He didn`t have to wage a war.  Diplomacy wasn`t even considered.  The only diplomatic measure that Lincoln considered prior to the Civil Was was the Permanent Slavery Act in the United States which was passed by a Northern Congress mind you, not the Confederate States, in hopes to lure them back in the Union.  Old Dot Goodwin doesn`t like that inconvenient fact.

Permenant slavery in STATES THAT EXIST. Not new states. Why do you always leave that out/fail to mention it? Everyone knows, it's well known, that Lincoln was fully supportive in leaving slavery in the states that it already existed INTACT because that's how the U.S. Constitution at the time framed it. But you continue, always belaboring this  fact in false context. What' s the motivation?
Report to moderator   Logged

The answer is "yes".
LATS
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 1160


View Profile
« Reply #134 on: February 01, 2013, 08:55:40 PM »

Kinda missing the point.. He wanted the action.. He wanted the south to instigate it by not removing troops from the southern states.. So yes,he knew what he was doing.. When the deadlines were given he could have removed them to avoid hostilities..

 To your point of him not wanting war.. That is silly.. Basically what Lincoln said is come back and be under my leadership or we will continue the hostilities.. So yes, he either wanted them to submit to his rule or fight.. Pretty damn simple..
Report to moderator   Logged
daddy8ball
Getbig III
***
Posts: 933


Violence is not the answer. It is the question.


View Profile
« Reply #135 on: February 01, 2013, 08:56:55 PM »

To your point of him not wanting war.. That is silly.. Basically what Lincoln said is come back and be under my leadership or we will continue the hostilities.. So yes, he either wanted them to submit to his rule or fight.. Pretty damn simple..

He's President of the United States..what do you think he should have done?
Report to moderator   Logged

The answer is "yes".
MB_722
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 11126


RIP Keith


View Profile
« Reply #136 on: February 01, 2013, 08:58:43 PM »

only looked @ first page. not looking through the rest shame on you's for not having Chappelle on the first page !
Report to moderator   Logged
The True Adonis
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 40962


"We Will Correct All This."


View Profile
« Reply #137 on: February 01, 2013, 09:03:37 PM »

So take the attack on a U.S. military fort lying down? What point would that make? Do nothing?

I ask: What would you do if you were President, TA?
I would have acted sooner in getting the Federal Troops out of there and let the States Secede.  

South Carolina seceded legally and their government repeatedly asked them to leave.  Instead, they tried to move their garrison in secret and resupply.  President Buchanan was totally unaware that the garrison moved to Sumter and was completely unaware of any authorization to do so.

Report to moderator   Logged

E
The True Adonis
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 40962


"We Will Correct All This."


View Profile
« Reply #138 on: February 01, 2013, 09:06:55 PM »

Permenant slavery in STATES THAT EXIST. Not new states. Why do you always leave that out/fail to mention it? Everyone knows, it's well known, that Lincoln was fully supportive in leaving slavery in the states that it already existed INTACT because that's how the U.S. Constitution at the time framed it. But you continue, always belaboring this  fact in false context. What' s the motivation?
Motivation is simple.  To demonstrate that the Civil War was not fought because of slavery as Lincoln, and the Northern Congress, had no qualms about letting slavery continue as they approved the Permanent Slavery Act by 66 Percent margin on March 2nd, 1861.

Report to moderator   Logged

E
daddy8ball
Getbig III
***
Posts: 933


Violence is not the answer. It is the question.


View Profile
« Reply #139 on: February 01, 2013, 09:07:19 PM »

I would have acted sooner in getting the Federal Troops out of there and let the States Secede.  

South Carolina seceded legally and their government repeatedly asked them to leave.  Instead, they tried to move their garrison in secret and resupply.  President Buchanan was totally unaware that the garrison moved to Sumter and was completely unaware of any authorization to do so.



I agree with this. But in 1860's info wasn't being twittered. Also, Lincoln was still President - elect and couldn't do much but wait. I argue that Lincoln did a kick ass job in the situation he was handed. He had A LOT of complex political issues to deal with. We can second guess him all day long, but at the end of the day, we have 50 states.
Report to moderator   Logged

The answer is "yes".
daddy8ball
Getbig III
***
Posts: 933


Violence is not the answer. It is the question.


View Profile
« Reply #140 on: February 01, 2013, 09:08:33 PM »

Motivation is simple.  To demonstrate that the Civil War was not fought because of slavery as Lincoln, and the Northern Congress, had no qualms about letting slavery continue as they approved the Permanent Slavery Act by 66 Percent margin on March 2nd, 1861.



Did they approve this pre-hostilities?
Report to moderator   Logged

The answer is "yes".
LATS
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 1160


View Profile
« Reply #141 on: February 01, 2013, 09:10:08 PM »

Daddy.. You are a smart man.. Surely you can read between the lines with what Lincoln was trying to do.. He can not attack the confederacy based on their secededing.. So he needs a angles.. He is given ample time to remove troops from federal forts.. He does not.. He know that they will eventually be attacked.. If he wanted to avoid the hostilities he wold have removed them from the forts.. Hedid not.. He put federals soldiers in harms way.. Period.. He knew they would be forceably removed ...He wanted the action so he could initiate war..or they would not have stayed passed the deadline.. He even tried to get more supplies and munitions to fort sumpter even after the confederacy said they needed to be removed..

 
Report to moderator   Logged
LATS
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 1160


View Profile
« Reply #142 on: February 01, 2013, 09:12:54 PM »

Daddy basing your admiration for Lincoln inthe fact that we " now have 50 states" belies the fact that he acquired that by waging a war on fellow Americans when he had the ability to avoid all hostilities and not have 600000 causalties..
Report to moderator   Logged
daddy8ball
Getbig III
***
Posts: 933


Violence is not the answer. It is the question.


View Profile
« Reply #143 on: February 01, 2013, 09:14:11 PM »

Daddy.. You are a smart man.. Surely you can read between the lines with what Lincoln was trying to do.. He can not attack the confederacy based on their secededing.. So he needs a angles.. He is given ample time to remove troops from federal forts.. He does not.. He know that they will eventually be attacked.. If he wanted to avoid the hostilities he wold have removed them from the forts.. Hedid not.. He put federals soldiers in harms way.. Period.. He knew they would be forceably removed ...He wanted the action so he could initiate war..or they would not have stayed passed the deadline.. He even tried to get more supplies and munitions to fort sumpter even after the confederacy said they needed to be removed..

 

I agree with you to the point where you say Lincoln wanted to "initate war". No evidence/records ANYWHERE support this. But, as hostilities commenced, he had to act as CIC. Sucky time in our history, but you have to admit..Lincoln pulled it out and we're a 50 state country.
Report to moderator   Logged

The answer is "yes".
daddy8ball
Getbig III
***
Posts: 933


Violence is not the answer. It is the question.


View Profile
« Reply #144 on: February 01, 2013, 09:16:17 PM »

Daddy basing your admiration for Lincoln inthe fact that we " now have 50 states" belies the fact that he acquired that by waging a war on fellow Americans when he had the ability to avoid all hostilities and not have 600000 causalties..

Records are numerous as to the cause of the Civil War. Besides taking it right up the ass, there wasn't much else Lincoln could do. (Except: Approve of slavery and let it continue on...)
Report to moderator   Logged

The answer is "yes".
The True Adonis
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 40962


"We Will Correct All This."


View Profile
« Reply #145 on: February 01, 2013, 09:19:51 PM »

Did they approve this pre-hostilities?
Post-"Hostilities".

December 27, 1860, an assault force of 150 men seized the Union-occupied Castle Pinckney fortification, in the harbor close to downtown Charleston, capturing 24 guns and mortars without bloodshed.

On December 30, the Federal arsenal in Charleston was captured, resulting in the acquisition of more than 22,000 weapons by the militia.

January 9, 1861, Star of the West was fired upon by a battery on Morris Island.

March 2, 1861, The Permanent Slave Act was approved by both Houses of the Northern Congress.

So yes, approved post-"hostilities".
Report to moderator   Logged

E
LATS
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 1160


View Profile
« Reply #146 on: February 01, 2013, 09:20:52 PM »

Ok.. Lets just break it down.. 1) Lincoln could have avoided all hostilities.. He did not.. What he did cost 600000 lives.. 2) what was Lincoln's motivation for trying to preserve the union? They had the right to leave.. So was it economics? Yes.. The south had much of its revenue.. Like most wars this was motivated by money.. So one needs a excuse to wage war to bring them back to the fold.. That would be not removing troops.. Plain and simple.. War could have been averted..

 You state that he only reacted to aggression.. Really? You mean the one he had the ability to avoid?  Plus I don't get your reasonings about now having 50 states.. Hat does not mean what he did was just or right..
Report to moderator   Logged
daddy8ball
Getbig III
***
Posts: 933


Violence is not the answer. It is the question.


View Profile
« Reply #147 on: February 01, 2013, 09:21:12 PM »

Post-"Hostilities".

December 27, 1860, an assault force of 150 men seized the Union-occupied Castle Pinckney fortification, in the harbor close to downtown Charleston, capturing 24 guns and mortars without bloodshed.

On December 30, the Federal arsenal in Charleston was captured, resulting in the acquisition of more than 22,000 weapons by the militia.

January 9, 1861, Star of the West was fired upon by a battery on Morris Island.

March 2, 1861, The Permanent Slave Act was approved by both Houses of the Northern Congress.

So yes, approved post-"hostilities".

Once a shooting war commences, then all peace time proffers are off the table! C'mon man!
Report to moderator   Logged

The answer is "yes".
LATS
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 1160


View Profile
« Reply #148 on: February 01, 2013, 09:23:28 PM »

 You mean the one he could have easily avoided lol..
Report to moderator   Logged
daddy8ball
Getbig III
***
Posts: 933


Violence is not the answer. It is the question.


View Profile
« Reply #149 on: February 01, 2013, 09:23:57 PM »

Ok.. Lets just break it down.. 1) Lincoln could have avoided all hostilities.. He did not.. What he did cost 600000 lives.. 2) what was Lincoln's motivation for trying to preserve the union? They had the right to leave.. So was it economics? Yes.. The south had much of its revenue.. Like most wars this was motivated by money.. So one needs a excuse to wage war to bring them back to the fold.. That would be not removing troops.. Plain and simple.. War could have been averted..

 You state that he only reacted to aggression.. Really? You mean the one he had the ability to avoid?  Plus I don't get your reasonings about now having 50 states.. Hat does not mean what he did was just or right..

SLAVERY!!!

Your post suggests that you accept it. Lincoln did not. Lincoln could have easily avoided all war if he chose to accept slavery. Sure! Why even have a war?

Owning another man as "property" was disgusting for him. And worth the bloody war if it meant ending that institution in the U.S. forever.

Report to moderator   Logged

The answer is "yes".
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Theme created by Egad Community. Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!