Good one. Not sure what message is wrt the false flag operation and trying to gulf-of-tonkin us into a war for the sake domestic politics, but it was seriously funny.
Opening shots in the Civil War were fired by a bunch of college kids from South Carolina. But hey, I guess letting a bunch of domestic terrorists have their way was a good thing in 1861.
Comrade, the experience of Virginia suggests that Mr. Lincoln wanted his war. The Virginia Secession Conference voted down secession by a vote of 88-45. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia_in_the_American_Civil_War#Secession_convention
The sense was that the other states had the right to secede but were foolish to do so, and that Virginia did not want to join them. Then "Honest Abe" tried to force the blockade at Sumter. Virginia (and North Carolina, Tennessee, and Arkansas) saw that as an act of war by the Federal government on the state of South Carolina.
There's a good deal of reason to think that the core Deep South Confederacy could not have made a go of it on their own and would have petitioned to rejoin the Union eventually. That would have saved a million lives. But Lincoln wanted his war, and got it. He also got very good Press after he was shot, which is why history of that period as taught today is retarded.
Thanks, Borepatch, for this post. I have tried at times to discuss with people how Honest Abe was not all that honest, but nobody wants to discuss truth, only their own version of lies. Nothing much has changed from 1865 until today, the winner always gets to write the history books.
Borepatch - If S. Carolina had already seceded from the Union, then it was an independent country, making war upon a military outpost of the United States. A blockade is, in fact, an act of war, even if it isn't terribly effective. And firing upon the fort was, by anyone's terms, a casus belli.
Virginia then decided to ally with a foreign power against the United States.
If South Carolina was an independent country, then America should have simply broken the blockade and forced them to stop all aggression against the U.S., and bid them goodbye and good luck. But we all know that Lincoln and the North didn't recognize them as an independent country, nor their right to secede from the union, although that should have been within their rights, since they freely entered into the nation, they should also have been able to freely withdraw from it. Of course, now it is a mute point, given the way that things have grown and advanced with our nation, the 9th and 10th amendments not withstanding.
That doesn't mean that I wish that the country would have separated, by any means. It does mean that I wish that the federal government would have been taught a lesson by the secession movement and their power been reigned in and kept in check. For we see what has happened since the Civil War, and it's aftermath, and the expansion of power in Washington. There was a loser in that war, for sure, but it was not the south. It was the American free citizens.
I think it was baked into the cake well before 1861. It would have been far better for the American people had, in 1794, Alexander Hamilton's (hawk ptooey) bullet-riddled corpse been dumped in the dead of night on the front steps of the Executive Residence in New York with a note pinned to it reading,
Of course, you have a very good point there. Many other acts of the federal government over the years could also have been seen as a watershed moment in history that started us on the path to serfdom. The statement that was supposedly made, A Republic, if you can keep it, was all too prescient. Keep it indeed, there really was never much of a chance.
10 comments:
The Planned unParenthood logo would be appropo also.
That could be a really big, group photo, because no "body" kills more of their own people than governments.
Good one. Not sure what message is wrt the false flag operation and trying to gulf-of-tonkin us into a war for the sake domestic politics, but it was seriously funny.
Opening shots in the Civil War were fired by a bunch of college kids from South Carolina. But hey, I guess letting a bunch of domestic terrorists have their way was a good thing in 1861.
Comrade, the experience of Virginia suggests that Mr. Lincoln wanted his war. The Virginia Secession Conference voted down secession by a vote of 88-45. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia_in_the_American_Civil_War#Secession_convention
The sense was that the other states had the right to secede but were foolish to do so, and that Virginia did not want to join them. Then "Honest Abe" tried to force the blockade at Sumter. Virginia (and North Carolina, Tennessee, and Arkansas) saw that as an act of war by the Federal government on the state of South Carolina.
There's a good deal of reason to think that the core Deep South Confederacy could not have made a go of it on their own and would have petitioned to rejoin the Union eventually. That would have saved a million lives. But Lincoln wanted his war, and got it. He also got very good Press after he was shot, which is why history of that period as taught today is retarded.
Thanks, Borepatch, for this post. I have tried at times to discuss with people how Honest Abe was not all that honest, but nobody wants to discuss truth, only their own version of lies. Nothing much has changed from 1865 until today, the winner always gets to write the history books.
Borepatch - If S. Carolina had already seceded from the Union, then it was an independent country, making war upon a military outpost of the United States. A blockade is, in fact, an act of war, even if it isn't terribly effective. And firing upon the fort was, by anyone's terms, a casus belli.
Virginia then decided to ally with a foreign power against the United States.
If South Carolina was an independent country, then America should have simply broken the blockade and forced them to stop all aggression against the U.S., and bid them goodbye and good luck. But we all know that Lincoln and the North didn't recognize them as an independent country, nor their right to secede from the union, although that should have been within their rights, since they freely entered into the nation, they should also have been able to freely withdraw from it. Of course, now it is a mute point, given the way that things have grown and advanced with our nation, the 9th and 10th amendments not withstanding.
That doesn't mean that I wish that the country would have separated, by any means. It does mean that I wish that the federal government would have been taught a lesson by the secession movement and their power been reigned in and kept in check. For we see what has happened since the Civil War, and it's aftermath, and the expansion of power in Washington. There was a loser in that war, for sure, but it was not the south. It was the American free citizens.
I think it was baked into the cake well before 1861. It would have been far better for the American people had, in 1794, Alexander Hamilton's (hawk ptooey) bullet-riddled corpse been dumped in the dead of night on the front steps of the Executive Residence in New York with a note pinned to it reading,
"Dear Gen'l Washington:
"Don't do that, sir."
Of course, you have a very good point there. Many other acts of the federal government over the years could also have been seen as a watershed moment in history that started us on the path to serfdom. The statement that was supposedly made, A Republic, if you can keep it, was all too prescient. Keep it indeed, there really was never much of a chance.
Post a Comment