- Joined
- Jun 23, 2009
- Messages
- 133,631
- Reaction score
- 30,937
- Location
- Bagdad, La.
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
Better than being a slave. Of course you don't care because of political reasons. Makes perfect sense to me. :roll:
I know it was not, but I don't care. Slavery is abhorrent and cannot be justified for any reason in a so called civilized nation.
So again I say **** the south and all who supported it.
Just one question: Do you play war simulation games? COD, Starcraft, etc....?
Oh, and by the way, when I meant pro government and anti-tax, I meant regulations upon companies such as emissions, borrowing, and everything but taxes. The world doesn't have to be black and white you know. In fact, you're the only person who complained of it
I bet before now, all of the, "I da South", crowd didn't even know that there were any free blacks living within the Confederacy.
Kinda blows the, "it was all about owning black people", revisionist history out of the water. Eh?
**** the north too right?
They owned slaves in the north DURING the civil war.
:roll:
Just not in the amount that was necessary in the south to run their agriculture based economy.
Just because I'm informed enough to not believe in the revisionist version of history, doesn't mean I condone slavery. That's a cheap shot.
That is stupid, of course people new that. Why would you assume such an asinine thing? Not exactly a secret.
You didn't know it! :rofl
So what? The North eventually freed the black man while the South wanted to keep him subjugated. So no, **** the South.
The slaves in the north were never freed by the emancipation proclamation.... just the slaves in the south....
So.... technically..... you are wrong.....
Even if the south was under no obligation to follow any proclamation made by a foreign country.
Face it, Slavery had absolutely nothing to do with "da black man". If Indian (dot) or Chinese or South American Slaves were cheap as dirt in the 1500s and 1600s.... they would be the ones that are crying about their great great great great gramma being a slave. And YOU kind sir, would still be in Africa kicking rocks and trying to grow yams.
Had you been a slave, you would not have that that repugnant attitude..Slavery would've died out, eventually, anyway. Even Brazil gave it up, late in the 19th Century.
Just wow.
Care to tell me how that was wrong? If black slaves weren't cheaper, then they wouldn't have been used.
They WERE cheaper, and thus they WERE used.
It has absolutely nothing to do with race. Do you honestly think a businessman would spend hundreds (alot back then) more for a black slave than a chinese slave because, "I don't much like me none o dem dere black savages" No. He wouldn't. He'd buy the cheaper slaves and keep more profits.
Strategy is used to fight a collection of battle...a campaign. Tactics are used to fight battle one at a time. Redress nailed it.Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy
No, Redress. Strategy can be both of an overall campaign sense or a battle sense. Remember... battles are not fought as one singular event. With armies the size of these, a strategy must be prepared to fight a battle, too.
Neither. I would have been a draft dodger. The Civil War was a complete waste and simply should never have been fought. It's a gross oversimplification to say things like "the North was fighting to free slaves" or "the South was fighting for states rights." The causes of the war were too numerous and complex to be reduced to one or two major issues. None of the issues were worth the deaths of hundreds of thousands of men on both sides of the conflict, in my opinion. The South would have eventually had to change its plantation-based economic system; it simply was unsustainable. The Southern states should not have broken away from the Union, but the North should not have resorted to force to keep them from seceding.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?