Why Did Abe Lincoln Start The Civil War???

Click here to view our online shop!

Memberlist

Profile

The time now is Wed Dec 03, 2008 11:51 am
TheLiberalForums.com Forum Index

View unanswered posts

Liberal of the Month
Barack Obama

Sponsors

Submitted Articles
What is a Liberal? How Liberalism evolved?

Why Did Abe Lincoln Start The Civil War???
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3

TheLiberalForums.com Forum Index -> History

Author

Message

Pibber
Congressional Page

Joined: 22 Jul 2007
Posts: 27
Location: USA

Posted: Mon Jul 23, 2007 8:55 am Post subject:

And please remember, when you try to interpret history to fit a modern political agenda, you end up with nothing more than confused stable muck. Pop culture revisionist historians are so common these days.

deportliberals
Congressman

Joined: 26 Jan 2007
Posts: 704

Posted: Tue Jul 24, 2007 7:59 am Post subject:

Pibber wrote:

And please remember, when you try to interpret history to fit a modern political agenda, you end up with nothing more than confused stable muck. Pop culture revisionist historians are so common these days.

I have looked at all your posts and cannot find a single example of you presenting a single provable fact, source, direct quote, etc. Nothing but personal insults and name-calling...truly one ignorant lib.

I've presented a number of historical facts in this thread. When are you going to get up enough courage to dispute them with your facts and sources??

Pibber
Congressional Page

Joined: 22 Jul 2007
Posts: 27
Location: USA

Posted: Tue Jul 24, 2007 5:02 pm Post subject:

Personal insults is what you do. Your childish invective is all over this forum. I hope your behavior is not exemplary of the standard around here.

mykcob4
Mayor's Aide

Joined: 29 Sep 2007
Posts: 50
Location: dallas

Posted: Sat Sep 29, 2007 5:55 pm Post subject: Re: Why Did Abe Lincoln Start The Civil War???

deportliberals wrote:

Anybody here know the answer to this question???

Anybody here aware that the Civil War was singularly responsible for more american combat deaths than all the other american combat deaths combined in all the other wars we have fought???

Why did Lincoln invade the South??? Lincoln promised to never make war against the South during the 1860 presidential campaign...that's the only reason Lincoln(a nobody in the political arena) got himself elected president!!!

The promise NOT to make war against the South was Lincoln's ONLY ticket to the White House. It's the only reason the Republican Party backed him!!! He had to swear to the Republican leadership that he would not go to war with the South otherwise the Republican party would have nothing to do with him!!!

After winning the presidency, Lincoln turns around and invades the South causing almost 1 million war deaths...Why????

Again we have a conservative rewriting history for his own means. Lincoln did not invade the south. You cannot invade your own country. The south had no right to suceed, and had no right to defy the constitution or federal law. FYI the civil war WAS fought over slavery and nothing you can say can nullify that historical and true fact. I cite Article I section 10 of the Constitution of the United States of America, and the biography of Abe Lincoln 16th President of the United Sates of America, as evidence.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.table.html#articleiv

ARTICLE I

Section 10. No state shall enter into any treaty, alliance, or confederation; grant letters of marque and reprisal; coin money; emit bills of credit; make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts; pass any bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law impairing the obligation of contracts, or grant any title of nobility.

http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Abraham_Lincoln

mykcob4
Mayor's Aide

Joined: 29 Sep 2007
Posts: 50
Location: dallas

Posted: Sat Sep 29, 2007 6:06 pm Post subject:

deportliberals wrote:

O.K...since no one knows why Abe Lincoln invaded the South, maybe someone could tell us why the South seceded just days after Lincoln won the 1860 election?

Here...let me provide a few clues!

The republican party(Lincoln's party) was made up of powerful northern capitalists, northern shippers & northern indsutrialists. This political party made it no secret that they intended to tax the hell out of the South if they won the 1860 election. WHY...to finance all of the north's infrastructure & rail systems and ports facilities so these repbulican industrialists could build their empires.

How could the North get away with taxing only the South. First, there were no incomes taxes back in 1860 so the only way the U.S. Gov't could fill its coffers with tax monies was to levy tarriffs(taxes) on imported goods. Who were the major importers of goods from England, France, Spain, etc, THE SOUTH. As a matter of fact, four southern states alone accounted for more than 50% of all taxes paid to the northern U.S. Gov't.

Beginning to get the picture!!! The North looked upon the South as its personal cash-cow to be gutted monetarily to finance northern industrial expansion.
Add to this fact, that Lincoln and the republican party platform called for increasing these import taxes from 18.84% to 40% if they won the 1860 election and you can see why the South said screw you...we're out of here.
The South would have been bankrupted if they submitted to such a taxing scheme by Lincoln and the Republican party.

So...does anyone have any idea why the South seceded????

Well that is a flat out lie. The north wanted to restrict trade by the south with foriegn nations, The soiuth was violating ArticleI section 10 of the Constitution. ref:
Section 10. No state shall enter into any treaty, alliance, or confederation; grant letters of marque and reprisal; coin money; emit bills of credit; make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts; pass any bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law impairing the obligation of contracts, or grant any title of nobility.

Taxes had absolutely nothing to do with it. The south want to trade with European countries exclussively as if they were their own country a constitutional violation. The south had raw material and the north had industry. The south didn't have to by law sell those materials to the north but they could not act as individual countries and make seperate treaties with other countries, BUT and this is a BIG BUT here, the south seceeded over SLAVERY! The south seceeded because Lincoln intended to abolish slavery. To the south that would have ended their economic structure at the time.

So you are WRONG "deportliberals"(that moniker is so rude and makes no sense). Lincoln was just for preserving the Union and abolishing slavery, and I shall not let you tell your tale of revissionist history!

mykcob4
Mayor's Aide

Joined: 29 Sep 2007
Posts: 50
Location: dallas

Posted: Sat Sep 29, 2007 6:10 pm Post subject:

deportliberals wrote:

BTW...if you don't know any of the accurate, historical facts I've listed above about Lincoln, his starting the war and the south's REAL reason for secession and you're a public high school graduate, then know that you were screwed by the politically correct public school system which has been turning out illiterates by the millions for the last 40 years while their unions insist that taxpayers fork over mo money to pay for increased salaries and pensions.

If you're a public/private college grads and you don't know any of the above history, you need to ask for your money back because you essentially paid some SOB to lie to you directly or by omission.

Paying $billions in taxes to our educational system to propagandize our children in leftist-hate-america poltics needs to be stopped. Like Reagan said, "it's time to defund the left in this country."

Deport liberals
Save America

Man you are stupid. First you revise history post it offer no evidence then start calling public education evil. What a complete moron you are! The only "hate-America" is by idiots like you that post propaganda and have no earthly idea what you are talking about on any level or any subject.

mykcob4
Mayor's Aide

Joined: 29 Sep 2007
Posts: 50
Location: dallas

Posted: Sat Sep 29, 2007 6:14 pm Post subject:

deportliberals wrote:

Chemist wrote:

I can tell you don't really lose debates do you? You don't win of course...but you don't lose either.

Oh...I very much do win my debates. I arm myself with facts, unlike the liberals I debate. Winning debates with liberals has almost become second-nature for me.

Quote:

Perhaps you wouldn't sound so...insane...if you considered the possibility that not every single liberal ever to breathe on this planet was a tax raising sissy.

Yes...I probably do sound insane when ramming facts & truth up the butt of modern liberalism. Today's liberalism is a world where facts and truth no longer exist...rumor, ineundo and just plain ole made up sh*t is the life blood of today's liberalism. So, when someone like me or some other conservative fractures the fake world of liberalism with hardcore facts their only defense is to call us insane...just like Joe Stalin, Nikita Kruschev and all the other communist butchers did when they sent folks like me to communist insane asylums because we would dare publicly expose the lies, falsehoods, victims & failures of communism.

See...you share an historic bond with the likes of Lenin, Stalin, Mao, etc...all believed that anyone who disagreed with communism(liberalism in your case) had to be insane. As you have so aptly demonstrated here today's liberals, likewise, look upon those who dare disagree with them to be insane.

Anymore questions???

You don't post facts you post lies and propaganda sprickled with just a few inconsequential facts. Atactic used by NAZIs and facist!

mykcob4
Mayor's Aide

Joined: 29 Sep 2007
Posts: 50
Location: dallas

Posted: Sat Sep 29, 2007 6:16 pm Post subject:

deportliberals wrote:

openly moderate wrote:

I am forwarding this to my kids. They work at that socialist bastion, the Univ of CA at Berkeley.

Ha,ha,ha,ha,ha...well...unfortunately....it's axiomatic that "thruth" and Berkely don't mix. Who knows...maybe some of these truths will set a few souls free out there. Smile

)

You call liberals illiterate and you can't even spell it. You don't know the truth! TRUTH you might want to try it just once. It will set you free!

mykcob4
Mayor's Aide

Joined: 29 Sep 2007
Posts: 50
Location: dallas

Posted: Sat Sep 29, 2007 6:22 pm Post subject: Re: The real reason

deportliberals wrote:

James Rottnek wrote:

They thought, because of the priorly mentioned mistake, that Lincoln would free all slaves. He did not do this. The Emancipation Proclomation did not free the slaves as is often beleived. It allegedly freed a few thousand in the CSA. However, they were not free as the CSA was not under the jurisdiction of the USA (and should have been recognised) and no Border State had to give it up.

First during the year(1860) that Lincoln was elected president there was plenty of slavery going on in the northern states. Three states that come to mind are New York, Delaware and Maryland. Also, there were BLACK slaveholders in the south in both Louisana and Charleston, South Carolina and elsewhere...as in black owning blacks for profits!!!!

Both the North and the South had legal slave trading going on before and during the civil war. U.S. slave trade was but a microcosism of the world slave trade industry. The entire frickin' world was doing it. You'd think from listening to idiot, uninformed liberals that the U.S. was the only nation practicing slavery. Hell, Britian didn't officially abolish slavery until the 1830s, just some 30 years before we did.

My point is that the war between the states was NOT fought over the issue of slavery. It was fought over the issues of high, punitive taxes on imports and states rights(amendment 10) to determine their own course as opposed to being oppressed again by a giant-out-of-control gov't. It had been just some 72 years earlier that we fought a bloody war to rid ourselves of the punitive taxes and oppresion from a large British gov't runned by King George III. The last thing many states wanted(particularly southern states) was another large tax-and-spend gov't that oppressed them culturally and ecomically.

You are an idiot. New York, Deleware and Maryland did not have slaves. Slavery was illegal in those states, you idiot! The only reason Maine became a state was because of the Missouri compromise. Man are you fucking stupid! Lie lie Lie is all you do. And you continually denegrate education because obviously you don't have one! Get a clue moron. Community college will let you in despite not qualifying for a REAL university!

mykcob4
Mayor's Aide

Joined: 29 Sep 2007
Posts: 50
Location: dallas

Posted: Sat Sep 29, 2007 6:24 pm Post subject:

James Rottnek wrote:

I agree on what the war was fought over. However, my reason was the main reason for the secession. I also never said that slavery was only practiced in the South, just that they were the only states that decided that Lincoln would outlaw it.

The war was fought over SLAVERY!!!!!

mykcob4
Mayor's Aide

Joined: 29 Sep 2007
Posts: 50
Location: dallas

Posted: Sat Sep 29, 2007 6:32 pm Post subject: Re: ...

Anonymous Mind wrote:

James Rottnek wrote:

I did.

I agree, though slavery was one of the isuess, for succesion, it was not the main one. the southern states were feeling cheated by the northern states which had all the infustrial power aswell as political influence.
The south was aware of the consequences of Lincoln's election. Knowing the outcome, it seceded from the union. Abolishingslavery would simply decrease production for the south.

Your mind is being corrupted by conservative revisionist propaganda. Here is a southerner, the most respected civil war historian that ever lived to read and research. Dr. Shelby Foote ref:http://www.olemiss.edu/depts/english/ms-writers/dir/foote_shelby/
He has passed but you can read books by this man that are factual and you won't have to rely on liars like "deportliberals" who lie about everything. If you took everything that "deportliberals" posted on this thread to all the history professors in this country they would all say he is out of his mind! He is a liar and is lying. Don't believe me? Just print off some of the garbage that he has posted and submit it to any credible history professor. BTW MY college professor was a republican and a conservative but he was honest(a rare thing) and he taught that the south seceeded because of the slavery issue. He also said that Lincoln was constitutionally justified to send troops to end the secession.

mykcob4
Mayor's Aide

Joined: 29 Sep 2007
Posts: 50
Location: dallas

Posted: Sun Sep 30, 2007 6:41 am Post subject:

openly moderate wrote:

I am forwarding this to my kids. They work at that socialist bastion, the Univ of CA at Berkeley.

Your own kids will laugh at you and wonder how they were able to get an education at a fine university as Cal Berkley when their parent is so damn stupid.

Display posts from previous:

	TheLiberalForums.com Forum Index -> History	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3
Page 3 of 3


	You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Sponsors

Political News