Charlottesville riots

[Bisonfanatical]

First off ... the USA recognized the CSA

Second off ... Wars take money, I guarantee there was funding for both sides to some extent from some countries who recognized them both.

The USA and the CSA were in the same position as far as being credit risks



Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

No, the US didn't trade ambassadors with the CSA because they didn't recognize them as a separate country. Yes, wars take money, and the CSA didn't have a lot of money because no one recognized them.
And no, the USA was always the heavy favorite to win the war (money, manufacturing, people, cause, etc) so they were always the better credit risk. The South had cotton. The world already had a lot of cotton. I.E. bigger risk.

And seriously, your contention that the war was because of Ft. Sumter may be the single biggest, non-JSO related dumb post I've ever seen on this board. We need that meme from "Billy Madison" since it's highly appropriate given the lack of intelligence in that argument.

Google it or don't ... facts are facts ... people like you believe what they want to ... your business.

And save your insults for someone who values your opinion?




Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[CID1990]

I think the average soldier in the south fought for all kinds of reasons, but primarily-

- the vast majority of men of fighting age where I come from were yeoman farmers. They were also ornery Scots Irish who don't need much goading to go off and fight someone... my folks have been fighting since Ulster in the 1500s and haven't missed an opportunity to shoot people ever since. The Scots Irish have been disproportionately over represented in every American war since the very first one

So in that respect, there was a sense of duty, and a willingness to fight early in the war due to a successful media and political campaign to paint a picture of northern invasion and destruction of property that was going to happen if men didn't sign up

But for many if these people there was also status - I think a lot of these guys knew that they were the bottom of the ladder. The only people below them in status were black slaves. I don't think they wanted to slip down a rung. That's an inconvenient reality, but one that I think does apply, and in many cases, at least to me, makes the argument of "my great great grandpappy didn't own slaves, he was a dirt farmer and he fought for his home" ring a little hollow. There certainly were dirt farmers who fought to preserve the status quo

Finally, in most states in the south, definitely in NC, there was conscription. And dodging the draft meant you had to face the Home Guard. The movie Cold Mountain is not inaccurate... especially in the western counties of NC - they would hang you from a tree. There is a very good book about the mini war that was fought during the civil war in the mountains of NC called "The War in the Mountains" by the UNC-CH press- it is a good read and goes a long way to explaining why many men fought- towards the end of the war it really wasn't a choice

In my family people run the gamut from lost causers to full on antifa- but all of those stances are just different reactions to the same thing- at least a deep down acknowledgment that "the cause" needs varying amounts of tweaking to get it right in your head or your conscience, and everybody does it differently

But to answer the specific question- I am fairly certain that Lee would not have accepted command of the Union armies under any circumstances, but if VA had not seceded I think he would have resigned and sat the whole thing out

Thanks, don't disagree with any of that. Interesting on Lee. I had always heard that he would have accepted but a lot of what I have always heard has been wrong. Family lore had my father's side of the family as full on Irish Catholic potato blighters immigrating in the 1840s. Father researched and found out that we were scotch irish who landed in Charleston Harbor in the 1760s and yes, in the vain spoken about the scotch irish, My ancestors fought on both sides of the Civil War.

Lee had an elevated, almost egotistical sense of duty. That is the side of him that would have felt compelled to accept the offer.

But Lee was also a southerner. He was ultimately against secession, but he also sympathized with the states that left the union.

He talked about not raising his sword against his native state, but based on what I know about him through his own letters and statements - he recognized that a civil war over secession would necessarily involve an invasion of the south to compel those states to return to the union. I am certain he would not have participated in that, slavery or not.

[Jjoey52]

The thing is that people assume if you're white and from the south, your family owned slaves. That's patently false in either side of my parent's lineage and I'll bet 90%+ of the men who fought for the south didn't own slaves either. It's been called the rich man's war and a poor man's fight. Most of the soldiers weren't told they were fighting to preserve the institution of slavery, but rather to fight for state sovereignty and to protect their families and possessions from invaders from the north.

So like basically every war ever?

Agree with this, it also needs to be noted that most of Southern army did not own slaves. They were fighting for their state and what they felt was the right to secede. The states joined voluntarily and they felt the states could leave the same way.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[OL FU]

Thanks, don't disagree with any of that. Interesting on Lee. I had always heard that he would have accepted but a lot of what I have always heard has been wrong. Family lore had my father's side of the family as full on Irish Catholic potato blighters immigrating in the 1840s. Father researched and found out that we were scotch irish who landed in Charleston Harbor in the 1760s and yes, in the vain spoken about the scotch irish, My ancestors fought on both sides of the Civil War.

Lee had an elevated, almost egotistical sense of duty. That is the side of him that would have felt compelled to accept the offer.

But Lee was also a southerner. He was ultimately against secession, but he also sympathized with the states that left the union.

He talked about not raising his sword against his native state, but based on what I know about him through his own letters and statements - he recognized that a civil war over secession would necessarily involve an invasion of the south to compel those states to return to the union. I am certain he would not have participated in that, slavery or not.

The main reason I ask is a possible quote from Lee to a friend where Lee said " IF Virginia sides with the old union, so will I". Or something to that respect. Now from my limited understanding, the quote is attributed to Lee by one of his friends. I don't think it has ever been directly attributed to anything verifiable. But as I mentioned, I will defer to your judgment. I don't consider my self any thing close to an expert.

[89Hen]

Flag burners... traitors Jon?

Free Speech is not open rebellion. It's a piece of cloth.

This sure looks like open rebellion.

[Pwns]

The Amerikkkan flag represents slavery, Indian genocide, segregation, Japenese interment, and gay marriage bans. The very display of the flag is offensive.

[Bisonfanatical]

Free Speech is not open rebellion. It's a piece of cloth.

This sure looks like open rebellion.

Wow .... what kind of people act like this?

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[Jjoey52]

Free Speech is not open rebellion. It's a piece of cloth.

This sure looks like open rebellion.

Those are the wonderful members of Antifa.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[BDKJMU]

This sure looks like open rebellion.

Wow .... what kind of people act like this?

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

"Boston Police Department tweeted shortly after that urine, rocks and bottles were being thrown at officers and were asking people to refrain from doing so."
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/ ... 9-13-02-35

So called counterprotestors are a bunch of animals. Trump is absolutely right.

[BDKJMU]

From the same AP link:
"...Black-clad counterprotesters also grabbed an American flag out of an elderly woman's hands, and she stumbled and fell to the ground.

Organizers of the "Free Speech Rally" have publicly distanced themselves from the neo-Nazis and white supremacists who fomented violence in Charlottesville on Aug. 12..."

Not White Nationalists/Neo Nazis in Boston at the free speech rally, yet the Antifa counter protestors and BLM thugs still showed up to attack innocent people..

[Pwns]

This is how you counter-protest white power groups.

https://twitter.com/sacca/status/899018561372409856

[JohnStOnge]

I listened to some of a Rush Limbaugh weekend replay show today. He said that the police in Virginia/Charlottesville were ordered to stand down so that there would be violence and the left could exploit that for political gain. Not a quote but that's the gist of what he said.

Of course if somebody really pushes he'll just say he likes to illustrate absurdity by being absurd.

[JohnStOnge]

So like basically every war ever?

The states joined voluntarily and they felt the states could leave the same way.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Well...not all of them exactly. Like for instance you had the Louisiana purchase where the United States purchased territory then it later became States. But Virginia, yes.

I also think that had the original 13 States been told that agreeing to ratify the Constitution meant they could not leave the Union if they wanted to they'd have refused to ratify the Constitution. I don't think a single one of them would've agreed to be part of the Union at that point if told that once they were part of it they couldn't leave if they wanted to.

[JohnStOnge]

Et tu, Thomas?

Napoleon decided to give up his plans for Louisiana, and offered a surprised Monroe and Livingston the entire territory of Louisiana for $15 million. Although this far exceeded their instructions from President Jefferson, they agreed.

When news of the sale reached the United States, the West was elated. President Jefferson, however, was in a quandary. He had always advocated strict adherence to the letter of the Constitution, yet there was no provision empowering him to purchase territory. Given the public support for the purchase and the obvious value of Louisiana to the future growth of the United States, however, Jefferson decided to ignore the legalistic interpretation of the Constitution and forgo the passage of a Constitutional amendment to validate the purchase. This decision contributed to the principle of implied powers of the federal government.

From https://history.state.gov/milestones/18 ... a-purchase

[CID1990]

Lee had an elevated, almost egotistical sense of duty. That is the side of him that would have felt compelled to accept the offer.

But Lee was also a southerner. He was ultimately against secession, but he also sympathized with the states that left the union.

He talked about not raising his sword against his native state, but based on what I know about him through his own letters and statements - he recognized that a civil war over secession would necessarily involve an invasion of the south to compel those states to return to the union. I am certain he would not have participated in that, slavery or not.

The main reason I ask is a possible quote from Lee to a friend where Lee said " IF Virginia sides with the old union, so will I". Or something to that respect. Now from my limited understanding, the quote is attributed to Lee by one of his friends. I don't think it has ever been directly attributed to anything verifiable. But as I mentioned, I will defer to your judgment. I don't consider my self any thing close to an expert.

I have always assumed that attribution was correct because it dovetails with several other things Lee said on the matter.

Virginia's position on the matter was certainly a major factor in Lee's decision making process- it was probably a controlling factor. It is also well documented that the decision to resign from the army was agonizing for Lee. But his decision to fight was in the interest of protecting Virginia more than it was about insuring Confederate independence.Nobody really knows for sure, but it is my own opinion that if Virginia had not seceded, Lee would have remained in the army in the capacity of an engineer- But if he had been asked to conduct an invasion of the confederate states I am convinced he would have resigned and sat out the war.

[Pwns]

I listened to some of a Rush Limbaugh weekend replay show today. He said that the police in Virginia/Charlottesville were ordered to stand down so that there would be violence and the left could exploit that for political gain. Not a quote but that's the gist of what he said.

Of course if somebody really pushes he'll just say he likes to illustrate absurdity by being absurd.

JSO, even the ACLU has taken note at how lax the security was in Charlottesville. Why when they've got the freakin' National Guard there they can't do a better job of keeping the protestors and counter protestors separate?

I'm not a Rush fan, but he's not Alex Jones.

[Skjellyfetti]

I have always assumed that attribution was correct because it dovetails with several other things Lee said on the matter.

Virginia's position on the matter was certainly a major factor in Lee's decision making process- it was probably a controlling factor. It is also well documented that the decision to resign from the army was agonizing for Lee. But his decision to fight was in the interest of protecting Virginia more than it was about insuring Confederate independence.Nobody really knows for sure, but it is my own opinion that if Virginia had not seceded, Lee would have remained in the army in the capacity of an engineer- But if he had been asked to conduct an invasion of the confederate states I am convinced he would have resigned and sat out the war.

Well, it's academic... but, if Virginia didn't secede... I don't think there would have been much of a war at all.

[JohnStOnge]

I listened to some of a Rush Limbaugh weekend replay show today. He said that the police in Virginia/Charlottesville were ordered to stand down so that there would be violence and the left could exploit that for political gain. Not a quote but that's the gist of what he said.

Of course if somebody really pushes he'll just say he likes to illustrate absurdity by being absurd.

JSO, even the ACLU has taken note at how lax the security was in Charlottesville. Why when they've got the freakin' National Guard there they can't do a better job of keeping the protestors and counter protestors separate?

I'm not a Rush fan, but he's not Alex Jones.

It's fine to say the situation wasn't handled well. But to say that someone told the police to stand down so that violence would result and that would work to the political advantage of Democrats is a bit much.

[CID1990]

I have always assumed that attribution was correct because it dovetails with several other things Lee said on the matter.

Virginia's position on the matter was certainly a major factor in Lee's decision making process- it was probably a controlling factor. It is also well documented that the decision to resign from the army was agonizing for Lee. But his decision to fight was in the interest of protecting Virginia more than it was about insuring Confederate independence.Nobody really knows for sure, but it is my own opinion that if Virginia had not seceded, Lee would have remained in the army in the capacity of an engineer- But if he had been asked to conduct an invasion of the confederate states I am convinced he would have resigned and sat out the war.

Well, it's academic... but, if Virginia didn't secede... I don't think there would have been much of a war at all.

Maybe you should study up a little more on it

The only states that had not seceded when VA left were Arkansas and NC. NC's departure was a foregone conclusion by March of that year, and given that NC provided more soldiers to the war effort than any other I'd say there most certainly was going to be a war - just as bloody without VA as it was with VA

[Jjoey52]

We were back in NC on vacation a few years ago and read an article in the paper that Virginia and NC were debating which state had the most casualties. Seems like some folks still carry a torch.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[CID1990]

I listened to some of a Rush Limbaugh weekend replay show today. He said that the police in Virginia/Charlottesville were ordered to stand down so that there would be violence and the left could exploit that for political gain. Not a quote but that's the gist of what he said.

Of course if somebody really pushes he'll just say he likes to illustrate absurdity by being absurd.

JSO, even the ACLU has taken note at how lax the security was in Charlottesville. Why when they've got the freakin' National Guard there they can't do a better job of keeping the protestors and counter protestors separate?

I'm not a Rush fan, but he's not Alex Jones.

The ACLU does two things like clockwork -

They sue for everyone to be allowed to assemble

Then when municipalities play the "we won't protect group X if they march" game, the ACLU sues

We went through this with the klukkers in Charleston in the 1980s and 1990s frequently

What's funny is the Hollywood types who are coming out now saying they are reconsidering their support of the ACLU over their stance that Nazis should be allowed to demonstrate - I'm wondering where these worldly progressives have been over the last 50-60 years.... the ACLU has ALWAYS been about that

[kalm]

JSO, even the ACLU has taken note at how lax the security was in Charlottesville. Why when they've got the freakin' National Guard there they can't do a better job of keeping the protestors and counter protestors separate?

I'm not a Rush fan, but he's not Alex Jones.

The ACLU does two things like clockwork -

They sue for everyone to be allowed to assemble

Then when municipalities play the "we won't protect group X if they march" game, the ACLU sues

We went through this with the klukkers in Charleston in the 1980s and 1990s frequently

What's funny is the Hollywood types who are coming out now saying they are reconsidering their support of the ACLU over their stance that Nazis should be allowed to demonstrate - I'm wondering where these worldly progressives have been over the last 50-60 years.... the ACLU has ALWAYS been about that

Pissing off both sides of the aisle means the ACLU is probably in a good spot.

[Skjellyfetti]

Well, it's academic... but, if Virginia didn't secede... I don't think there would have been much of a war at all.

Maybe you should study up a little more on it

The only states that had not seceded when VA left were Arkansas and NC. NC's departure was a foregone conclusion by March of that year, and given that NC provided more soldiers to the war effort than any other I'd say there most certainly was going to be a war - just as bloody without VA as it was with VA

Why do you think it would be a foregone conclusion NC would have left? They were very divided and had already narrowly voted AGAINST secession. I think Virginia seceding pushed them over the line - being sandwiched between VA and SC. Don't think it was a foregone conclusion at all.

As I said, it's just speculation... I don't think there's a right or wrong answer.

[AZGrizFan]

Well, it's academic... but, if Virginia didn't secede... I don't think there would have been much of a war at all.

Maybe you should study up a little more on it

The only states that had not seceded when VA left were Arkansas and NC. NC's departure was a foregone conclusion by March of that year, and given that NC provided more soldiers to the war effort than any other I'd say there most certainly was going to be a war - just as bloody without VA as it was with VA

But would Lee have gone Union if VA had NOT seceded?

[Pwns]

Meanwhile, Mueller's investigation and the looming North Korea standoff have been pushed out of the news.

Getting people talking about confederate statues and "racism" is a great way to shorten the life of a DJT presidency.