Have you ever heard or read the Gettysburg Address?

[jyerxa]

Why do we have the right to keep and bear arms?

I just figure a little history is good for that answer.

Gettysburg

Read More

 

[jyerxa]

I thought I would bring this up because the US of A has been under attack even by it's own.

Lately on the web I see things tearing down Abe Lincoln.

My thoughts.

Abe was a young man and a teenager who didn't know sh!t about this world. But he had to grow up and become a man.

The web lately is tearing him down for his mistakes in life. Don't we all do that when we are young?

Somewhere around the age of 50 we realize we are not as smart as that teenager we once were who know all the answers.

Abe Lincoln is being demonized on the web. The web fails to realize Abe was a man with a good heart able to see goodness and gain wisdom.

The web assaults Lincoln while he was yet to become wise.

Just a thought.

 

[giddyupgo55]

They taught this to us when I was in school. Shame they don't teach American History in school anymore.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

As a man whose entire family proudly served in the Southern cause, and believing that Constututionally we were on the right side, I don't think much of Mr Lincoln or literal rape he allowed to be done to the South after they were defeated

 

[ejmpnu92]

As a man whose entire family proudly served in the Southern cause, and believing that Constututionally we were on the right side, I don't think much of Mr Lincoln or literal rape he allowed to be done to the South after they were defeated

Lincoln was assasinated 5 days after Lee surrendered. Not much he could have done in those 5 days. Now, if you want to blame Grant and his bunch for the rape of the South, I would more than agree with you.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

Lincoln was assasinated 5 days after Lee surrendered. Not much he could have done in those 5 days. Now, if you want to blame Grant and his bunch for the rape of the South, I would more than agree with you.

OK. Who hired and empowered Grant?

 

[Kimber Custom]

I am not a huge student of the civil war but the little bit of research I have done leads me to believe one of the primary reasons the South lost the war was due to the manufacturing capabilities of the North. Isn't it funny that as a nation we have forgotten that and shipped all of our manufacturing off shore.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

I am not a huge student of the civil war but the little bit of research I have done leads me to believe one of the primary reasons the South lost the war was due to the manufacturing capabilities of the North. Isn't it funny that as a nation we have forgotten that and shipped all of our manufacturing off shore.

Excellent point. One of the main causal agents for the war was the Northern banksters and industrialists (who they had in their pockets) wanted the cheap labor of freed slaves to work in those factories, and they foresaw the possibility that the South could use said slaves to build up similar industry, cheaply. 1 Million Americans died for that

 

[saxon]

Mr Lincoln whom you think is so great,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
said the union and the idea of a more perfect union as stated in the constitution predates the constitution there for the south does not have the RIGHT to succeed
Note he said it was a right that's because a clause is in there that
It is our duty to get rid of totalitarian governments even if it is our own.

Also he believed in slavery as guarantied BY the constitution just read his inaugural address
Were he even states the runaway slaves need to be returned.
One of the reasons he threw slavery in the war was because in 1850
England outlawed slavery and about 1865 said they will do an embargo on any country that dealt in slavery
Guess were the USA got most of its good from and shipped to at that time?

Last point he also almost made it a law that the Quakers would either fight for the north
( they were objectors to any kind of wars) or they would be thrown in prison
Or shot

 

[MA Duce]

READ it? Yes. HEARD it?? I'm old...but not that old....

 

[Cougfan2]

READ it? Yes. HEARD it?? I'm old...but not that old....

 

[One-Eyed Ross]

back when I was in school, it was something we all memorized. That and the preamble to the constitution.... I'm guessing that you younger guys don't have to do that anymore?

 

[ejmpnu92]

OK. Who hired and empowered Grant?

Although Grant was hired to lead the army by Lincoln, it was actually Andrew Johnson who took over when Lincoln died.

"Following the assassination of President Abraham Lincoln, Johnson presided over the Reconstruction era of the United States in the four years after the American Civil War. His tenure was controversial as his positions favoring the white South came under heavy political attack from Republicans." (wiki)

"As president, he took charge of Presidential Reconstruction — the first phase of Reconstruction — which lasted until the Radical Republicans gained control of Congress in the 1866 elections. His conciliatory policies towards the South, his hurry to reincorporate the former Confederate states back into the union, and his vetoes of civil rights bills embroiled him in a bitter dispute with Radical Republicans.[3] The Radicals in the House of Representatives impeached him in 1868, charging him with violating the Tenure of Office Act, but he was acquitted by a single vote in the Senate" (wiki)

Grant became president after Johnson. Ultimately, Johnson empowered Grant by failing.

Don't get me wrong, not defending Lincoln or villifying him.

" At the close of the war, Lincoln held a moderate view of Reconstruction, seeking to speedily reunite the nation through a policy of generous reconciliation in the face of lingering and bitter divisiveness."
He never got the chance put his plan into action, although, it appears that Johnson tried and failed. Thus opening the door for Grant.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

Gotcha.. military historian here. Yes, Grant was a drunk and a skunk and the resulting abuse and intentional neglect of the South not only caused lasting bitterness in the South but led to the rise of the white protection society known as the KKK because the freed slaves and assorted criminals had no law whatsoever to answer to, and Southerners were fair game. Lots of hard feelings still down there.. a very nasty piece of our history, indeed

BTW the KKK lynched a lot more white criminals than black.. about 60/40 %

 

[trainsktg]

I'm torn on the issue. I believe that the Southern States had a definite and legal right to secede from the Union. The fear that allowing this to happen would quickly result in the two new countries continuing to dissolve back into individual pre-1787 states is also valid, and I can see why the Federal Government wanted to prevent this. In the long run, maintaining the Union was probably for the best, as it allowed a united America to successfully engage the Japanese and Germans in WWII, to the betterment of the world. It also unfortunately affirmed the indomitable power of the Federal Government over all of the States.

Keith

 

[Blitzkrieg]

I'm torn on the issue. I believe that the Southern States had a definite and legal right to secede from the Union. The fear that allowing this to happen would quickly result in the two new countries continuing to dissolve back into individual pre-1787 states is also valid, and I can see why the Federal Government wanted to prevent this. In the long run, maintaining the Union was probably for the best, as it allowed a united America to successfully engage the Japanese and Germans in WWII, to the betterment of the world. It also unfortunately affirmed the indomitable power of the Federal Government over all of the States.

Keith

Thing is IF slavery were the issue then all the North would have had to do is buy the slaves at the going rate and repatriate them to Africa, with future slavery banned and no lives lost at a lower cost than the war. I wasn't there either, but it always boggles me how men can mass murder each other over such issues instead of finding simple solutions. Oh well I'm not that much of an idealist, anyway.. here in the real world. people do stupid and evil things, that's just the way it is

 

[trainsktg]

Purchasing the slaves and returning them to Africa is an interesting idea, most likely cheaper in monetary costs and definitely cheaper in human lives. Was this an idea discussed at the time? I hadn't heard of this before.

Slavery was an issue leading up to the war, but not THE issue. Slavery was on the outs in the South before the war, and would have been gone entirely by 1900 at the latest. Importation of new slaves had already been banned by Congress in 1807/1808, it was only a matter of time. The war was indeed one of our nation's darkest times.

And because I am well-known for my semi-random segues, I must add that despite the loss of the South, Robert E. Lee is still one of Americas most loved and respected Generals.

Keith

 

[Blitzkrieg]

Purchasing the slaves and returning them to Africa is an interesting idea, most likely cheaper in monetary costs and definitely cheaper in human lives. Was this an idea discussed at the time? I hadn't heard of this before.

Slavery was an issue leading up to the war, but not THE issue. Slavery was on the outs in the South before the war, and would have been gone entirely by 1900 at the latest. Importation of new slaves had already been banned by Congress in 1807/1808, it was only a matter of time. The war was indeed one of our nation's darkest times.

And because I am well-known for my semi-random segues, I must add that despite the loss of the South, Robert E. Lee is still one of Americas most loved and respected Generals.

Keith

Segues can be good..

It was only an economic issue for most of the nation, all agitating by a few individuals aside. Lincoln himself said flatly that blacks and whites could never live under the same government and needed to separate. It's even chiseled on his monument in DC, a fact conveniently omitted by today's PC media

Payment for freed slaves was already an accomplished fact in Britian, it worked there, why not in the States? I lay that at the feet of the banksters and their Northern industrialist accomplices. Money talks. They did not care about the fate of the freed slaves, many of whom lived out their lives in grinding poverty, wishing for the plantations again and saying so, publicly

You can take my Robert E Lee coffee cup from my cold dead hands

 

[MarkAd]

As usual this thread like many is going away from the question from the OP. While the comments are valueable for an expansion of historical knowledge and thought provoking I thought this would bring us back to point.
Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.

"Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.

But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate -- we can not consecrate -- we can not hallow -- this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us -- that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion -- that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain -- that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom -- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth."

 

[MikeE]

Thing is IF slavery were the issue then all the North would have had to do is buy the slaves at the going rate and repatriate them to Africa, with future slavery banned and no lives lost at a lower cost than the war. I wasn't there either, but it always boggles me how men can mass murder each other over such issues instead of finding simple solutions. Oh well I'm not that much of an idealist, anyway.. here in the real world. people do stupid and evil things, that's just the way it is

The Rebels attacked Ft Sumpter in South Carolina - they assaulted the US Army, committing treason. That's why the war was on. Lincoln up to that point, had been doing everything he could think of to avoid war, even as the states left the union. Remember, the Republicans were not even allowed to campaign in the South during the 1860 election that Lincoln won in a three way contest. Republicans were attacked lynch mob-style when they tried to campaign. Lincoln had to enter Washington DC in disguise for his own inauguration, as pro-slavery mobs in Maryland attacked trains coming into DC in an effort to kill him. Pinkerton was his sole body guard at the time. Pro-slavery politicians had, for years been maneuvering a great portion of existing of US military infrastructure into Dixie. The best officers in 1861 were also from the South, having been trained on the Federal dollar. The North was very unprepared for war. At the outbreak, there were no Federal troops to defend Washington DC. People who call this the War of Northern Aggression are either liars, or ignorant of their own history.

Anyone who doubts that the war was about slavery should try to explain that to the ancestors of the 200, 000 African American troops who fought in the war and were crucial to the Union's victory. Watch the movie Glory, or go to the Boston Commons and visit the memorial to the Massachusetts 54th Regiment.

The so-called 'rape of the South' after the war? Giving African Americans the vote and expanding public education for all - some rape. Poor whites and regular Confederate vets voted along with newly enfranchised blacks in many states during reconstruction - until Klan terrorism destroyed Southern democracy for a whole century.

To talk about a solution like 'buying slaves and sending them back to Africa' is just racist. Folks who had been in this land for hundreds of years were just as American as Robert f-ing Lee. Lincoln broached this 'idea' to Frederick Douglass, the great African American abolitionist - incidentally the first time any black American had met with a US President as an equal and not a servant. Douglass politely told the President where he could put that notion.

Douglass, by the way - a life-long Republican - was a true founding father. Born a slave, he learned to read when he found a copy of the US Constitution while working as a slave on the docks in Baltimore. Because it was then illegal in Maryland to teach black folks to read, he basically tricked the white workers on the docks into helping him make out spelling and vocabulary. Later, he kicked his 'Master's' *** when he was threatened with a whipping. He escaped to the North, and rose to be the leading anti-slavery voice of his time. HIS interpretation of the Constitution was that it was a weapon in the hands of the oppressed. Read: My Life, by Frederick Douglass.