American values

Forum rules
Here, you can discuss your Politics. Post political memes and quotations, and discuss your Political beliefs. If you don't want to see Politics being discussed, please respect the rights of the people here to do so in peace. We respect that right, that's why this forum was created. Discussion should always be respectful of the people here and thier beliefs. Discussions will be respectful. We recognize that political discussions can sometimes become incendiary and we will step in from time to time if it does in order to cool things down. Posts that use terms and descriptions of others such as "Wing Nuts", "Libtards", "Rethuglicans", DemocRATS", and others of a demeaning nature will be deleted. Keep discussions on point, centered on facts, and based on the principal that two individuals can come to different conclusions based on the same information and can disagree, but discuss those disagreements in an agreeable manner. Please contribute to the discussion, not try to tear down an individual because he disagrees with you. Make you comments be on the post, and not the person posting.
User avatar
Scott
Reactions:
Posts: 347
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2015 11:08 am
Location: Texas Lost Pines (just outside Wierd)
Hammock:
Tarp:
Suspension:
Insulation:

Re: American values

#16

Post by Scott » Sun May 28, 2017 9:15 am

I, like many, had family on both sides of the Civil War. It was a bloody, unfortunate mess. Removing statues is not going to change history.

I had a long reply typed out, but thought better of it. It rambled a bit, and would not have affected anyone's thought process.

Short version - until we get rid of, through natural societal evolution, groups promoting themselves, we will not come to an agreement on any of this. BROAD STROKES: People of color support their own group and whites are bad. Some whites are supremacists. Southerners appreciate the lives of confederates, others do not. Illegals are people too and deserve to do whatever they want. The comfort of gender confused out weigh the comfort of everyone else. Women are oppressed even through they are the majority of college students and hold prominent business and political office (listening to hillary or nancy complain of a glass ceiling hurts my ears). The common theme is how they contribute and no one recognizes them. I believe we should worry about what we accomplish as individuals, not as part of a special group. Until then, well, status quo. pulling down statues will do nothing but incite more division.


Texas sucede? Y'all are lucky we don't invade!

User avatar
sarge
Reactions:
Posts: 2066
Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2015 10:14 am
Location: Houston, TX
Hammock:
Tarp:
Suspension:
Insulation:
Contact:

Re: American values

#17

Post by sarge » Sun May 28, 2017 10:22 am

When being offended becomes the criteria, nothing is safe from censorship.

And when the government decides who is offended, that is dictatorship.
You can resolve to live your life with integrity. Let your credo be this: Let the lie come into the world, let it even triumph. But not through me. ― Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
My You Tube Channel

User avatar
Flatliner
Reactions:
Posts: 120
Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2016 2:45 pm
Hammock:
Tarp:
Suspension:
Insulation:

Re: American values

#18

Post by Flatliner » Sun May 28, 2017 11:33 am

I believe we will end up having to agree to disagree here but to me, opposing the removal of confederate monuments is every bit as intellectually illogical as opposing voter ID laws.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Train up a child in the way he should go, Even when he is old he will not depart from it.
Proverbs 22:6

Just a middle age guy who likes doing outdoor things with his great kids...

User avatar
Flatliner
Reactions:
Posts: 120
Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2016 2:45 pm
Hammock:
Tarp:
Suspension:
Insulation:

Re: American values

#19

Post by Flatliner » Sun May 28, 2017 11:34 am

With that said, I would like to say thank you to everyone participating in this thread. It is refreshing to have a good conversation with people who don't resort to name calling when they disagree [emoji1]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Train up a child in the way he should go, Even when he is old he will not depart from it.
Proverbs 22:6

Just a middle age guy who likes doing outdoor things with his great kids...

User avatar
sarge
Reactions:
Posts: 2066
Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2015 10:14 am
Location: Houston, TX
Hammock:
Tarp:
Suspension:
Insulation:
Contact:

Re: American values

#20

Post by sarge » Sun May 28, 2017 3:39 pm

Its easy for me. They are American soldiers, by birth and by an act of Congress.

The wounds of the Civil War ran deep and by the 1890s there was a recognition that if something wasn't done to bind the wounds, there was a good chance that it would happen again.

And now, here we are again---150 years later---opening those wounds one more time so that one political party can use that division to thier benefit.
You can resolve to live your life with integrity. Let your credo be this: Let the lie come into the world, let it even triumph. But not through me. ― Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
My You Tube Channel

User avatar
BillyBob66
Reactions:
Posts: 689
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2015 10:43 am
Location: Tupelo, MS
Hammock: Claytor/JRB/HH/SB
Tarp: JRB 11X10
Suspension: CinchBuckle/WS/TriG
Insulation: HHSS,P.Pod,MWUQ,Yeti

Re: American values

#21

Post by BillyBob66 » Sun May 28, 2017 5:30 pm

sarge wrote:Its easy for me. They are American soldiers, by birth and by an act of Congress.

The wounds of the Civil War ran deep and by the 1890s there was a recognition that if something wasn't done to bind the wounds, there was a good chance that it would happen again.

And now, here we are again---150 years later---opening those wounds one more time so that one political party can use that division to thier benefit.
Well said. And interesting, as I suppose - barring the act of congress thing of which I was not even aware- I had not thought of them as American soldiers. I thought of them as non-invading, primarily defensive soldiers of the the CSA which were attempting to leave the USA according to what the doctrines of the Declaration of Independence taught them. But maybe I should rethink that.

After all, they were still on the American soil of their sovereign states, land which they had civilized, NOT the Fed gov't or the other states. And they were defending against invasion by other sovereign states, a pretty American thing to do. In fact,it is pretty much the same thing that the Founding Fathers had done, except they had more right to do it. The founders were in colonies of Great Britain. Georgia was never a colony of either the USA or of New York, but like NY a fully sovereign state that only agreed to give up a part of it's sovereignty for it's own reasons, to it's benefit. If giving up those powers was no longer to their benefit, they had the right to take those powers back. The original colonies had no such sovereignty until they simply declared that they did.
Rom8:21the creation itself also will be set free from its slavery to corruption23..but..we ourselves, having the first fruits of the Spirit.. groan within ourselves, waiting eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our body

User avatar
sarge
Reactions:
Posts: 2066
Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2015 10:14 am
Location: Houston, TX
Hammock:
Tarp:
Suspension:
Insulation:
Contact:

Re: American values

#22

Post by sarge » Sun May 28, 2017 6:13 pm

Well said. And interesting, as I suppose - barring the act of congress thing of which I was not even aware-
At the end of the war Confederate soldiers had to swear an oath of allegiance to the United States and swear that they would not bear arms again. Although all Confederate enlisted soldiers could join the US Army after the war, General Officers could not. Many of those enlisted in the Army under assumed names. When war was declared against the Spanish in 1898, Congress granted pardons to all Confederate Civil War officers and when Confederate General "Fighting Joe" Wheeler offered his services to the Armym he was appointed to command the Cavalry Division in Cuba (making him Teddy Roosevelt's commanding officer) where he participated in the battle for San Juan Hill. Three other Confederate Generals also served as Generals in the US Army in the Spanish American War, Fitzhugh Lee, Matthew Butler, and Thomas L. Rosser. Everyone of them has a statue that a small minority of folks wants to tear down.

It should be noted here that people who this government considers as traitors cannot serve in the US Military, let alone be put in command of troops as General Officers.

In 1958, Public Law 85-425 Section 410 declared Confederate soldiers veterans of the United States making them and their widows eligible for pensions.


Some people are not as free with their forgiveness as the US Congress is, it seems.
You can resolve to live your life with integrity. Let your credo be this: Let the lie come into the world, let it even triumph. But not through me. ― Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
My You Tube Channel

User avatar
BillyBob66
Reactions:
Posts: 689
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2015 10:43 am
Location: Tupelo, MS
Hammock: Claytor/JRB/HH/SB
Tarp: JRB 11X10
Suspension: CinchBuckle/WS/TriG
Insulation: HHSS,P.Pod,MWUQ,Yeti

Re: American values

#23

Post by BillyBob66 » Sun May 28, 2017 7:50 pm

Thank you Sarge, for that bit of amazing information, of which I was unaware. As much as I hav studied the War Between the States, I had never heard of that, or had forgotten.

I meant to say in my last post- but had to leave for a bit- that I just so wish the story was not polluted with the evil of slavery, and the abuse that slaves suffered even at the hands of folks who claimed to be Christian. But regardless, when the question is: should these men be honored for resisting the invaders, well, it's not like the invaders, with their slave holding members(4 states? 5?), were invading for the purpose of freeing the slaves. So considering their rape of the south, and the burning of civilian property(towns and farms) and stealing of food from unarmed civilians, I honor any man who stood against them.

During the northern battle over the passage of the 13th Amendment, it was made clear that there was a significant portion of the north that- even if they were not actually slave states like at least 4 were- wanted no part of freeing the slaves. Even many in the north who did want the slaves freed would never consider making them equals, including Lincoln. Delaware and Kentucky, 2 Union states, after rejecting the 13th Amendment in 1865, finally ratified it in 1901(Del) and 1976(Kentucky)! So 2 of the invading Union states (though Kentucky started as neutral but later went Union) did not even officially agree to freeing the slaves for 40(Del) and 111 years after the war ended!

I have heard it said that if the south really wanted to keep their slaves so badly, they should have remained in the Union where it was fully legal and protected by the constitution, and where no slaves were freed until after the war. There might be something to that.
Rom8:21the creation itself also will be set free from its slavery to corruption23..but..we ourselves, having the first fruits of the Spirit.. groan within ourselves, waiting eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our body

User avatar
BillyBob66
Reactions:
Posts: 689
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2015 10:43 am
Location: Tupelo, MS
Hammock: Claytor/JRB/HH/SB
Tarp: JRB 11X10
Suspension: CinchBuckle/WS/TriG
Insulation: HHSS,P.Pod,MWUQ,Yeti

Re: American values

#24

Post by BillyBob66 » Mon May 29, 2017 1:29 pm

So (pt1)if the south only fought to preserve slavery(even though slavery was fully legal under the Union and there was no real threat to change the laws or constitution to make it illegal), and if the Union primarily invaded to end the evil of slavery, then perhaps to monuments to the men who fought ONLY(or primarily) to preserve slavery, and the flag they fought under, should be done away with. Although, there is still a debate to be had over the Orwellian hiding of actual history. But if the first part of this paragraph is true, then a persons argument would certainly at least move up higher towards the moral high ground. If they only/primarily invaded to end the evil of slavery, then who among us debating now could say that was not a good and moral thing, regardless of the south's legal and constitutional rights? And if that is the case, then these men who fought only to preserve slavery probably must be considered immoral, and who wants monuments to immoral men on their city streets?

Then, for point 2: If the war was not one of 100% invasion from 1 side(at least for the 1st year or 2), and if the invasion had been less of a rob/loot/burn/rape and pillage than it was, with virtually all atrocities and scorched earth taking place in the south, then the men who defended the south would have had less moral argument for defending their homeland and sovereign states than otherwise. Most particularly if both points 1 and 2 are correct.

But it seems to me, according to history, neither of the above points are correct. Ending slavery was at best only on the minds of a minority of the invaders, and some significant % were probably dead set against it, since they came from slave states. Heck, even Delaware still had a small # of slaves,and they are pretty darn Union/Yankee. Just keep in mind that, even way into the war, Lincoln- who truly hated slavery personally- was very careful with his Emancipation Proclamation NOT to free any slaves in the Union, including Confederate states that were already back under Union control. That should tell you all you need to know about this subject.

Just as today, there were great differences between north and south and they did not agree on very much. Though today it is more liberal vs conservative. Still, there are far more libs in the north(and to a lessor degree the west) than the south. Same back then: one group of folks wanted to force others to live the way they thought was right, but also would not hear of just letting those hated folks go and leaving them alone, and were willing to invade and kill them to assure all of this. From the invaders viewpoint, there were many more important reasons to invade than ending slavery.

I used to visit this town, and I think the same newspaper was still in operation(and conservative if you can believe it), with just a slightly changed name:
"..............Our city owes its origin and growth to the Southern trade—to the Union. We cannot afford to "let the South go," if she may be retained by any fair compromise, as we believe she may be. If the time shall come when the people realize the fact that the Union is permanently dissolved, real estate will depreciate one half in a single year.—Our population will decrease with the decline of business, and matters will go on in geometrical progression from bad to worse—until all of us will be swamped in utter ruin. Let men consider—apply the laws of business, and see if they can reach any different conclusion.

No—we must not "let the South go." It is easy and honorable to keep her. Simply recognize in the neighborhood of states those principles of equity and courtesy which we would scorn to violate in our social relations at home—that is all. Let New Hampshire treat Virginia as we should treat our neighbors. Do we vilify them, watch for chances to annoy them, clear up to the line of the law, and sometimes beyond it, and encourage hostile raids against them? Is that good neighborhood? Then, let not one state practice it against another." https://www.historians.org/teaching-and ... et-them-go

My, how many lives would have been saved and how much intense hatred avoided, if those words had been listened to? Or if not listened to, if they had just let them go.
Rom8:21the creation itself also will be set free from its slavery to corruption23..but..we ourselves, having the first fruits of the Spirit.. groan within ourselves, waiting eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our body

User avatar
BillyBob66
Reactions:
Posts: 689
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2015 10:43 am
Location: Tupelo, MS
Hammock: Claytor/JRB/HH/SB
Tarp: JRB 11X10
Suspension: CinchBuckle/WS/TriG
Insulation: HHSS,P.Pod,MWUQ,Yeti

Re: American values

#25

Post by BillyBob66 » Mon May 29, 2017 3:19 pm

"..............In May of 1860 the U. S. Congress passed the Morrill Tariff Bill (named for Republican Congressman and steel manufacturer, Justin S. Morrill of Vermont) raising the average tariff from about 15% to 37% with increases to 47% within three years. Although this was remarkably reminiscent of the Tariffs of Abomination which had led in 1832 to a constitutional crisis and threats of secession and armed force, the U. S. House of Representatives passed the Bill 105 to 64. Out of 40 Southern Congressmen only one Tennessee Congressman voted for it............." https://www.historians.org/teaching-and ... et-them-go

The source of these following quotes may be biased, I don't know who they are, though many can also be found at Brainyquote. But, I have tried searching at government archives of Sherman's papers and have had no luck finding anything, unless I am willing to read everything he ever wrote. But if half of this is true, I can certainly understand why the southerners would have fought hard against these men, and I have no problem with statues that honor the men who did: http://www.plpow.com/Atrocities_QuotesFromSherman.htm
"Quotes from Generals William T. Sherman
& Phil Sheridan

The young bloods of the South; sons of planters, lawyers about towns, good billiard players and sportsmen, men who never did any work and never will. War suits them. They are splendid riders, first rate shots and utterly reckless. These men must all be killed or employed by us before we can hope for peace....Gen. William Tecumseh Sherman

The more Indians we can kill this year the fewer we will need to kill the next, because the more I see of the Indians the more convinced I become that they must either all be killed or be maintained as a species of pauper. Their attempts at civilization is ridiculous... Gen. William Tecumseh Sherman

Look to the South and you who went with us through that land can best say if they have not been fearfully punished. Mourning is in every household, desolation written in broad characters across the whole face of their country, cities in ashes and fields laid waste, their commerce gone, their system of labor annihilated and destroyed. Ruin and poverty and distress everywhere, and now pestilence adding to the very cap sheaf of their stack of misery...Gen. William Tecumseh Sherman, the man who left a 60 mile wide, 300 mile long path of death and desolation across GA and up through SC.

I have destroyed over 2,000 barns filled with wheat, hay and farming implements; over 70 mills filled with flour and wheat, and have driven in front of the Army over 4,000 head of stock and have killed and issued to the troops not less than 3,000 sheep. Tomorrow I will continue the destruction down to Fisher’s Mill. When this is completed, the Valley from Winchester to Staunton, 92 miles, will have but little in it for man or beast.....from an Oct. 7, 1864 report to Gen. Grant from Gen. Sheridan.

During the War Between the States, Lincoln, was waging war on women and children on two fronts. Old Abe's thugs were raping, pillaging and murdering in the West as well as the South.. Lincoln's generals Sheridan and Sherman committed war crimes. Sherman, famous for his "march to the sea," had made a habit of waging war on civilians from early on. Dr. Thomas J. DiLorenzo, economics professor at Loyola College in Baltimore and historian and writer, tells us that Sherman once wrote to his wife that his purpose was the "extermination, not of soldiers alone...but of the people" of the South. Sherman often ordered his soldiers, many of whom were street criminals from Northern as well as European cities, to shoot civilians at random. He ordered his men to burn entire towns in Tennessee and Mississippi and of course Georgia. And the thousands of letters and diaries that survived the war attest to the rape of both black and white women by Sherman's men.

Another of Lincoln's generals Phil Sheridan is known for the horrors he inflicted on civilians in the Shennandoah Valley during the war. In the autumn of 1864, with the winter closing in, Dr. DiLorenzo tells us Sheridan's troops burned crops and killed thousands upon thousands of cattle and sheep and turned women and children out in the cold.............................................

"The government of the U.S. has any and all rights which they choose to enforce in war - to take their lives, their homes, their land, their everything...war is simply unrestrained by the Constitution...to the persistent secessionist, why, death is mercy, and the quicker he or she is disposed of the better...Mjr. Gen. W. T. Sherman, Jan. 31, 1864. .............................................
This war on citizens was not simply restrained to be applied against men and women but also children. Gen. Sherman in a June 21, 1864, letter to Lincoln's Sec. of War, Edwin Station wrote, "There is a class of people men, women and children, who must be killed or banished before you can hope for peace and order." Stanton replied, "Your letter of the 21st of June has just reached me and meets my approval." While the war on civilians started much earlier than 1864, the above is simply proof that the war on children was part of that scheme!

In MO, if care packages of food or clothing was sent to sons of the Confederate Army, they were arrested for "care and comfort of the enemy!" Many of MO civilians were thrown into Gratiot Street Prison, including pregnant women.(BillyBob adds here: remember, MO was a slave state supposedly invading to free the slaves! Right!)

" It is hard on our men held in Southern prisons not to exchange them, but it is humanity to those left in the ranks to fight our battles. Every man released on parole or otherwise becomes an active soldier against us at once, either directly or indirectly. If we commence a system of exchange which liberates all prisoners taken, we will have to fight on until the whole South is exterminated." .....Gen. Grant, August 18, 1864 in a dispatch to Gen. Butler.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/4/12/106219/-"
" Grant, of course, was out of the army during the Indian campaigns, but as President he approved the mass extermination of the buffalo, which were reduced from more than 15 million to fewer than 1 million by about 1875.

As Sherman viewed Native Americans, so too did he view the people of the South. (I almost said the "white people of the South," but blacks, too, suffered from Sherman's crimes, including many African-American women who were raped, and occasionally murdered, by his marauders). Sherman wrote to his wife in 1862: "Extermination, not of soldiers alone, that is the least part of the trouble, but the [Southern] people." Sherman's like-minded wife wrote back that she, too, hoped for a war "of extermination and that all [Southerners] would be driven like the Swine into the sea." (Sherman, Collected Works).

In fighting Confederates, Sherman seldom gave battle directly, preferring to exploit his army's greater mobility in flanking movements that enabled him to avoid armed men, the better to conserve his resources for crimes against property and the civilian population. When, later, he set about a "final solution" (Sherman's own term; I seem to have heard it in some other context . . .) of removing Indians from the path of the federally-subsidized railroad and white expansion, he favored Sheridan's innovation: winter raids, in which men, women, and children all would be found together, and so could be slaughtered at once. Sherman authorized Sheridan to kill as many women and children, as well as men, as he and his subordinates deemed necessary. (Fellman, p. 271). Livestock was also killed, to that any survivors would be more likely to starve to death.

Eight years into his war of extermination against the Indians, Sherman wrote to his longtime partner in crime, Sheridan, that he was "charmed at the handsome conduct of our troops in the field. They go in with the relish that used to make our hearts glad in 1864-5." (Fellman, p. 272)."

Again, a caveat, I am not getting these quotes from sources that I can say are rock solid, and not from government sources, though I have seen quotes from more solid sources over the years. But if even just partially correct, were the men who tried to hold off these invaders, evil men? I don't think so. BTW, notice you never see talk of Confederate invaders, much less ones with a scorched earth policy.

Finally, Sherman often talks of the south starting the war and thus getting what they deserved which he was happy to give them. Though SC did drive the Feds from Ft. Sumter in SC, ( not 1 was killed, except for 1 Union soldier accidentally killed from explosion of his own ammo), who actually invaded? There are almost no Confederates buried in Maine or NH or NY, but there are tons of Union soldiers buried in the south. Or at least killed in the south. There are of course Confederate dead in Gettysburg, PA and related areas, but this came late in the war as the south tried desperately to draw the invaders out of their homeland. The Confederacy, as far as I know, had zero interest in invading and conquering the north. That desire only went one way. All the south wanted was to get away from the north.
Rom8:21the creation itself also will be set free from its slavery to corruption23..but..we ourselves, having the first fruits of the Spirit.. groan within ourselves, waiting eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our body

User avatar
BillyBob66
Reactions:
Posts: 689
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2015 10:43 am
Location: Tupelo, MS
Hammock: Claytor/JRB/HH/SB
Tarp: JRB 11X10
Suspension: CinchBuckle/WS/TriG
Insulation: HHSS,P.Pod,MWUQ,Yeti

Re: American values

#26

Post by BillyBob66 » Mon May 29, 2017 3:27 pm

This war differs from other wars, in this particular. We are not fighting armies but a hostile people, and must make old and young, rich and poor, feel the hard hand of war. William Tecumseh Sherman
Read more at: https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quot ... 05668.html ( a people hostile to whom? Invaders who wish to rule you?)

I intend to make Georgia howl. William Tecumseh Sherman
Read more at: https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quot ... 80859.html

My aim, then, was to whip the rebels, to humble their pride, to follow them to their inmost recesses, and make them fear and dread us. Fear is the beginning of wisdom. William Tecumseh Sherman
Read more at: https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quot ... 43693.html
Rom8:21the creation itself also will be set free from its slavery to corruption23..but..we ourselves, having the first fruits of the Spirit.. groan within ourselves, waiting eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our body

User avatar
BillyBob66
Reactions:
Posts: 689
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2015 10:43 am
Location: Tupelo, MS
Hammock: Claytor/JRB/HH/SB
Tarp: JRB 11X10
Suspension: CinchBuckle/WS/TriG
Insulation: HHSS,P.Pod,MWUQ,Yeti

Re: American values

#27

Post by BillyBob66 » Mon May 29, 2017 7:41 pm

don't know about the rest of you folks, but I am highly offended by this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_W ... n_Monument

and even more incensed if there is no monument to Lee or Nathan Bedford Forest near this one. But no one seems to care that this man offends me, while they are taking down statues of the men I think were honorable to resist him. Oh well, scre me and what I think I guess, eh? Who care what southern white men think, after all Sherman wanted our ancestors exterminated and their land given to good northern folks obedient the the Federal government.

I am actually a bit surprised that some southern man, a john Wilkes Booth type(though he was tehcnically not a southerner, considering he was an actor in a Wash DC plays) did not wait a few years until things quieted down, get a pistol, and assassinate Sherman and/or Sheridan. Because if 1/2 of what was attributed to them is true, the y were a monsters. All of this because the southerners wanted no more to do with them and claimed the the same rights as the founding fathers did against Britain, and tried to leave. And southern men who tried to stop him were heroes, IMO, even if Lincoln called them treasonous traitors for trying to leave. Does any one know if all or some of the following info is untrue? :
http://www.plpow.com/Atrocities_TargetingCivilans.htm
Off Topic
In 1862 Sherman wrote his wife that his purpose in the war would be "extermination, not of soldiers alone, that is the least of the trouble, but the people" of the South. His loving and gentle wife wrote back that her wish was for "a war of extermination and that all [Southerners] would be driven like swine into the sea. May we carry fire and sword into their states till not one habitation is left standing."

The Geneva Convention of 1863 condemned the bombardment of cities occupied by civilians, but Lincoln ignored all such restrictions on his behavior. The bombardment of Atlanta destroyed 90 percent of the city, after which the remaining civilian residents were forced to depopulate the city just as winter was approaching and the Georgia countryside had been stripped of food by the federal army. In his memoirs Sherman boasted that his army destroyed more than $100 million in private property and carried home $20 million more during his "march to the sea."

Sherman was not above randomly executing innocent civilians as part of his (and Lincoln’s) terror campaign. In October of 1864 he ordered a subordinate, General Louis Watkins, to go to Fairmount, Georgia, "burn ten or twelve houses" and "kill a few at random," and "let them know that it will be repeated every time a train is fired upon."

Another Sherman biographer, Lee Kennett, found that in Sherman’s army "the New York regiments were . . . filled with big city criminals and foreigners fresh from the jails of the Old World." Although it is rarely mentioned by "mainstream" historians, many acts of rape were committed by these federal soldiers. The University of South Carolina’s library contains a large collection of thousands diaries and letters of Southern women that mention these unspeakable atrocities.

Shermans’ band of criminal looters (known as "bummers") sacked the slave cabins as well as the plantation houses. As Grimsley describes it, "With the utter disregard for blacks that was the norm among Union troops, the soldiers ransacked the slave cabins, taking whatever they liked." A routine procedure would be to hang a slave by his neck until he told federal soldiers where the plantation owners’ valuables were hidden.

General Philip Sheridan is another celebrated "war hero" who followed in Sherman’s footsteps in attacking defenseless civilians. After the Confederate army had finally evacuated the Shenandoah Valley in the autumn of 1864 Sheridan’s 35,000 infantry troops essentially burned the entire valley to the ground. As Sheridan described it in a letter to General Grant, in the first few days he "destroyed over 2200 barns . . . over 70 mills . . . have driven in front of the army over 4000 head of stock, and have killed . . . not less than 3000 sheep. . . . Tomorrow I will continue the destruction."

In letters home Sheridan’s troops described themselves as "barn burners" and "destroyers of homes." One soldier wrote home that he had personally set 60 private homes on fire and opined that "it was a hard looking sight to see the women and children turned out of doors at this season of the year." A Sergeant William T. Patterson wrote that "the whole country around is wrapped in flames, the heavens are aglow with the light thereof . . . such mourning, such lamentations, such crying and pleading for mercy [by defenseless women]... I never saw or want to see again."

As horrific as the burning of the Shenandoah Valley was, Grimsley concluded that it was actually "one of the more controlled acts of destruction during the war’s final year." After it was all over Lincoln personally conveyed to Sheridan "the thanks of the Nation."
Lately liberal states like CA have been threatening succession because they have so much hatred for Trump. If they follow through, should a Sherman or Sheridan be sent against them? Perhaps a nice scorched earth policy? After their defeat, we can make sure they have no statues honoring those who tried to leave.
Rom8:21the creation itself also will be set free from its slavery to corruption23..but..we ourselves, having the first fruits of the Spirit.. groan within ourselves, waiting eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our body

User avatar
BillyBob66
Reactions:
Posts: 689
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2015 10:43 am
Location: Tupelo, MS
Hammock: Claytor/JRB/HH/SB
Tarp: JRB 11X10
Suspension: CinchBuckle/WS/TriG
Insulation: HHSS,P.Pod,MWUQ,Yeti

Re: American values

#28

Post by BillyBob66 » Mon May 29, 2017 7:58 pm

Interesting, to me anyway:
http://vermontrepublic.org/the-constitu ... secession/
Off Topic
The Constitutionality of Secession

Few words are perceived to be more politically incorrect in America than the s-word, secession. Thanks mostly to Abraham Lincoln, secession is considered to be a complete anathema by liberals and conservatives alike. Although most Americans believe the Civil War proved once and for all that secession is illegal and unconstitutional, nothing could be further from the truth.

In his book A Constitutional History of Secession (2002), John Remington Graham traces the history of secession in America back to Britain’s glorious revolution in 1689 when the Crown passed from James II to William and Mary without armed conflict and in defiance of the constitution of England.

“Whenever any form of government becomes destructive, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new government,” said Thomas Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence. Just as a group has a right to form, so too does it have a right to disband, to subdivide itself, or withdraw from a larger unit.

Thomas Jefferson and James Madison held that the U.S. Constitution was a compact of sovereign states which had delegated very specific powers but not sovereignty to a central government-powers which could be recalled any time. By international law sovereignty cannot be surrendered by implication, only by an express act. Nowhere in the U.S. Constitution is there any express renunciation of sovereignty by the states.

In an article entitled “The Foundations and Meaning of Secession” which appeared in the Stetson Law Review (1986), Pepperdine University Law Professor H. Newcomb Morse provides convincing evidence that the American states do indeed have the right to secede and that the Confederate states did so legally.

First, three of the original thirteen states-Virginia, New York, and Rhode Island-ratified the U.S. Constitution only conditionally. Each of these states explicitly retained the right to secede. By accepting the right of these three states to leave the Union, has the United States not tacitly accepted the right of any state to leave?

Second, over the years numerous states have nullified acts of the central government judged to be unconstitutional. These instances where national laws have been nullified give credence to the view that the compact forming the Union has already been breached and that states are morally and legally free to leave.

Third, and most importantly, the U.S. Constitution does not forbid a state from leaving the Union. According to the tenth amendment to the Constitution, anything that is not expressly prohibited by the Constitution is allowed. Therefore, all states have a Constitutional right to secede.

However, two new constitutional questions concerning secession emerged shortly after the Civil War ended. First, under military occupation and control, six former Confederate states were coerced into enacting new constitutions containing clauses prohibiting secession. But in the eyes of most legal scholars, agreements of this sort made under duress are voidable at the option of the aggrieved party. Furthermore, there is absolutely nothing to prevent these six states from amending their constitutions again.

During this same period of time and also under duress, the fourteenth amendment to the Constitution was ostensibly ratified. Although this amendment does not explicitly forbid secession, some have argued that it does so implicitly.

However, the fourteenth amendment is tainted by the highly questionable legality of the Union’s invasion of the South. Some legal scholars question whether the fourteenth amendment was ever constitutionally ratified.

According to the Declaration of Independence, we are endowed by our Creator with “certain unalienable rights” including life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. If that is the case, then it is not much of a stretch to argue that the right of secession is such a right.

Ultimately, whether or not a state is allowed to secede is neither a legal question nor a constitutional question, but rather a matter of political will. How strong is the will of the people in the departing state to be free and independent of the control of the world’s only superpower? How far will the U.S. government be prepared to go in imposing its will on a breakaway republic? Only time will tell!

Long live the Second Vermont Republic!

December 7, 2003
Rom8:21the creation itself also will be set free from its slavery to corruption23..but..we ourselves, having the first fruits of the Spirit.. groan within ourselves, waiting eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our body

User avatar
BillyBob66
Reactions:
Posts: 689
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2015 10:43 am
Location: Tupelo, MS
Hammock: Claytor/JRB/HH/SB
Tarp: JRB 11X10
Suspension: CinchBuckle/WS/TriG
Insulation: HHSS,P.Pod,MWUQ,Yeti

Re: American values

#29

Post by BillyBob66 » Mon May 29, 2017 8:03 pm

http://www.plpow.com/Atrocities_TargetingCivilans.htm
Off Topic
Sherman biographer Lee Kennett is among the historians who bend over backwards to downplay the horrors of how Lincoln waged war on civilians. Just recently, he published an article in the Atlanta Constitution arguing that Sherman wasn’t such a bad guy after all and should not be reviled by Georgians as much as he is. But even Kennett admitted in his biography of Sherman that:

Had the Confederates somehow won, had their victory put them in position to bring their chief opponents before some sort of tribunal, they would have found themselves justified...in stringing up President Lincoln and the entire Union high command for violations of the laws of war, specifically for waging war against noncombatants.

Sherman himself admitted after the war that he was taught at West Point that he could be hanged for the things he did. But in war the victors always write the history and are never punished for war crimes, no matter how heinous. Only the defeated suffer that fate. That is why very few Americans are aware of the fact that the unspeakable atrocities of war committed against civilians, from the firebombing of Dresden, the rape of Nanking, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, to the World Trade Center bombings, had their origins in Lincoln’s war. This is yet another reason why Americans will continue their fascination with the War for Southern Independence.

Thomas J. DiLorenzo is professor of economics at Loyola College in Maryland. He is the author of, The Real Lincoln: A New Look at Abraham Lincoln, His Agenda, and an Unnecessary War.
Rom8:21the creation itself also will be set free from its slavery to corruption23..but..we ourselves, having the first fruits of the Spirit.. groan within ourselves, waiting eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our body

User avatar
sarge
Reactions:
Posts: 2066
Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2015 10:14 am
Location: Houston, TX
Hammock:
Tarp:
Suspension:
Insulation:
Contact:

Re: American values

#30

Post by sarge » Mon May 29, 2017 8:42 pm

Its interesting to note that Lincoln's General Order #100, which Sherman used as his justification for scorched earth tactics in his March to the Sea was later used by Sherman to justify the same tactics used against Native Americans on the Plains.

Nobody calling for his statue coming down for waging a war of genocide-------
You can resolve to live your life with integrity. Let your credo be this: Let the lie come into the world, let it even triumph. But not through me. ― Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
My You Tube Channel

Post Reply

Return to “Politics”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest