• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

What do you think of the War of Northern Attrition?

1643324345687.webp 2020 Old Guy, No pain hanging around !
 
bdtex said:
Who is fighting? We're just honoring the soldiers and our ancestors, whether Confederate or Union. I have direct ancestors who served on both sides.
Click to expand...

The OP is still fighting the war, as are way too many other Southerners. Get over it. It was 150 years ago. You all LOST! Get over it.
 
Fledermaus said:
Why should they have?

And the South firing on federal shipping predated Lincoln taking office as well..
Click to expand...

But Lincoln was in charge for about a month before the firing on Fort Sumter, and that's what everyone here insists was the actual reason for commencing hostilities.
 
Atomic Kid said:
LOL! Calling that a sophomoric argument would actually confer upon it far more dignity than that answer deserves.
Click to expand...
I can't imagine anyone seeing you as the adjudicator of dignity, since you display nearly none.
 
Atomic Kid said:
Current views??? What the heck is that? It says it what it says.
Article III, Section 3, Clause 1:
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

Here's suggestion for you. Why don't you try actually reading the Constitution?
Click to expand...

Treason would only apply in the case of a perpetual union, which you have not and cannot demonstrate.
 
Atomic Kid said:
Actually it did, albeit in a rather unusual manner. Judge Anthony Scalia, who claimed to to interpret the law as the Founders had originally wrote it, had this to say about the subject of secession. It came in a reply to a letter by a screenwriter working on political farce that had Maine seceding from the US to join Canada sent to each of the Supreme Court Justices in 2006 on a lark;

"I’m a screenwriter in New York City, and am writing to see if you might be willing to assist me in a project that involves a unique constitutional issue.

My latest screenplay is a comedy about Maine seceding from the United States and joining Canada. There are parts of the story that deal with the legality of such an event and, of course, a big showdown in the Supreme Court is part of the story.

At the moment my story is a 12 page treatment. As an architect turned screenwriter, it is fair to say that I come up a bit short in the art of Supreme Court advocacy. If you could spare a few moments on a serious subject that is treated in a comedic way, I would greatly appreciate your thoughts. I’m sure you’ll find the story very entertaining."

Judge Scalia decided to actually reply to it and this is what he said;

"I am afraid I cannot be of much help with your problem, principally because I cannot imagine that such a question could ever reach the Supreme Court. To begin with, the answer is clear. If there was any constitutional issue resolved by the Civil War, it is that there is no right to secede. (Hence, in the Pledge of Allegiance, “one Nation, indivisible.”) Secondly, I find it difficult to envision who the parties to this lawsuit might be. Is the State suing the United States for a declaratory judgment? But the United States cannot be sued without its consent, and it has not consented to this sort of suit.

I am sure that poetic license can overcome all that — but you do not need legal advice for that. Good luck with your screenplay."
Click to expand...

You misread. Yes, the later Supreme Court CAN say whatever it pleases, but it MEANS nothing, and neither does Scalia's un-Constitutional argument.
 
Fledermaus said:
Provocation came when South Carolina fired on a federal chartered steamer supplying Ft Sumter before Lincoln was in office.
Click to expand...
Still wrong; the Sumter attack was in April and LIncoln was in charge in March.
 
Fledermaus said:
Every generation has a small but vocal bunch that want to resurrect the Confederacy, the NAZIs, Communism and any number of loser groups.

We can't kill them but we can hope to educate them.
Click to expand...
You have to show some knowledge to educate anyone, and you've utterly failed.
 
watsup said:
It’s been 150 years. The Confederacy LOST. Why on Earth are they still fighting the war? Makes no sense. “Don’t start what you can’t finish”.
Click to expand...
When a cause seems great and honorable to some, it is tougher to accept defeat if it's viewed as having occurred only due to the basest treachery. Hard to figure fighting to defend slavery as honorable, but when that motive warps into defending one's homeland from aggression, the myths of "The Lost Cause" appeared. The Germans moaned about the "stab in the back" at Versailles that cost them WW I. I imagine some Vietnam vets still feel we could have won that war they and their comrades sacrificed so much for. Some Trumpistas will carry his rigged election myth to the grave.
 
watsup said:
The OP is still fighting the war, as are way too many other Southerners. Get over it. It was 150 years ago. You all LOST! Get over it.
Click to expand...
I'm not fighting.
 
Atomic Kid said:
Only noteworthy in the respect that their tactics and strategy resulted in a resounding and very costly defeat.
Click to expand...
1) Chancellorsville "Lee's perfect battle' rated 8th of the top 'Tactical Feats' in all wartime.
It was one of the most lop-sided battles in the war, yet one of the most decisive. Union General Hooker brought an effective fighting force of 132,000 men onto the field, against Lees 57,000.
A brilliant example of how a commander, although outnumbered and outflanked defied military convention by dividing his forces twice, took the initiative and scored a memorable victory.

2) Brice's Crossroads rated 13th of the top 'Tactical Feats' in all wartime was the most classic battle of the Civil War. It demonstrated the innate military genius of Confederate general Nathan Bedford Forrest, who out-maneuvered a Union force three times the size of his own.

3) Jackson's Valley Campaign still studied to this day although not mention in the 25 most
tactical feats in all wartime. Utilizing unpredictable movements on interior lines, Jackson’s 17,000 men marched 646 miles in 48 days and won several minor battles as they successfully engaged three Union armies, preventing them from reinforcing the Union offensive against Richmond. The successful Confederate campaign resulted in 5,307 Union casualties and 2,677 Confederate.
watsup said:
Some are. The OP is. They need to get over it. They lost. How much of a sore loser do they have to be in order to still be whining about it 150 years later?
Click to expand...
watsup said:
Some are. The OP is. They need to get over it. They lost. How much of a sore loser do they have to be in order to still be whining about it 150 years later?
Click to expand...
Here we go again, the most unimportant of all civil war forum posters, a 'drive-by' shooter with no aim whatsoever.
 
Ouroboros said:
You have to show some knowledge to educate anyone, and you've utterly failed.
Click to expand...

You can't teach someone who refuses to learn.

Ouroboros said:
Still wrong; the Sumter attack was in April and LIncoln was in charge in March.
Click to expand...

Star of the West was fired upon by South Carloina shore batteries on January 9, 1861. January is before April is it not? Buchanan was still in office.

My statement "Provocation came when South Carolina fired on a federal chartered steamer supplying Ft Sumter before Lincoln was in office" is correct.

Learn history.

Ouroboros said:
Already answered. You still can't wear me down by pretending ignorance of all the previous posts.
Click to expand...

And you were already wrong.

South Carolina ceded Ft Sumter to the United States in 1805.

Learn history.
 
slick said:
1) Chancellorsville "Lee's perfect battle' rated 8th of the top 'Tactical Feats' in all wartime.
It was one of the most lop-sided battles in the war, yet one of the most decisive. Union General Hooker brought an effective fighting force of 132,000 men onto the field, against Lees 57,000.
A brilliant example of how a commander, although outnumbered and outflanked defied military convention by dividing his forces twice, took the initiative and scored a memorable victory.

2) Brice's Crossroads rated 13th of the top 'Tactical Feats' in all wartime was the most classic battle of the Civil War. It demonstrated the innate military genius of Confederate general Nathan Bedford Forrest, who out-maneuvered a Union force three times the size of his own.

3) Jackson's Valley Campaign still studied to this day although not mention in the 25 most
tactical feats in all wartime. Utilizing unpredictable movements on interior lines, Jackson’s 17,000 men marched 646 miles in 48 days and won several minor battles as they successfully engaged three Union armies, preventing them from reinforcing the Union offensive against Richmond. The successful Confederate campaign resulted in 5,307 Union casualties and 2,677 Confederate.
Click to expand...
.
Guess who won the war.
 
Ouroboros said:
Thanks for agreeing with my premise that Lincoln would indeed have attacked the South even if the South had not attacked Sumter.
Click to expand...
Thanks for agreeing that the south started the war and all fault for hostilities lay at their feet
 
bdtex said:
Who is fighting? We're just honoring the soldiers and our ancestors, whether Confederate or Union. I have direct ancestors who served on both sides.
Click to expand...
The Confederates were traitors
 
Ouroboros said:
Thanks for agreeing with my premise that Lincoln would indeed have attacked the South even if the South had not attacked Sumter.
Click to expand...

You are aware that even before Fort Sumter, the Confederates in Texas and New Mexico were already organizing and planning an invasion of California, right?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom