Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

This is the thread where all the wars are discussed, and we will be discussing some of the modern wars to the the good old holy wars.

this weeks discussion


Civil War


What do you think the greatest reason for this war to start? Was it just the whole "Slavery" fact.

Who were some of your favorite generals

Definatly Hooker

Discuss the civil war

I always viewed the true reason for the Civil War was the different economies....Which in truth does relate to Slavery.


As for my favorite General...I'd have to say Sherman.

Meh, I has always heard that the war was because started off with a feud between the North and South about Lincolns running for president. the south wanted some other dude to win, and win he didn't they seceded. Lincoln, not wanting the South to secede but to stay with the Union, declared war on them to bring them back into the Union. Lincoln only freed the slaves as a plan for the slaves to flee from the South, thus crippling there weapons making facilities and other supplies manufacturing. Really Lincoln didn't give a sh*t the Slaves.

Originally posted by Blaxican Style
Meh, I has always heard that the war was because started off with a feud between the North and South about Lincolns running for president. the south wanted some other dude to win, and win he didn't they seceded. Lincoln, not wanting the South to secede but to stay with the Union, declared war on them to bring them back into the Union. Lincoln only freed the slaves as a plan for the slaves to flee from the South, thus crippling there weapons making facilities and other supplies manufacturing. Really Lincoln didn't give a sh*t the Slaves.
Way to argue from ignorence... and I suppose you and Lincoln talked this over coffie.

Umm..hes mostly right. If Lincoln cared about slavery, he didn't make it apparent until later in his administration. The South talked up the election and got everyone in the South convinced that if Lincoln was elected, he would abolish Slavery because he was from the North. After he was elected, but before he even took office, several states seceded from the Union. All the while f***ing Buchanan did NOTHING (64574RD) After being attacked, Lincoln called for the US army to put down the rebels who had seived army outposts, causing more states to secede.

The emancipation proclimation only freed the slaves in States that had not returned to the union by the beginning of 1963. Slaveholding Union states were not included, as were some areas of the south under Union control. I don't know his intentions of this, but he was clarly not ending slavery or trying to end it.

People have talked him up since as ending slavery...we need these sort of national icons to make us think we are good people and we did the right thing.

and maybe you should learn some history and make productive comments instead of ambigously blasitng people

Originally posted by Alliance
Umm..hes mostly right. If Lincoln cared about slavery, he didn't make it apparent until later in his administration. The South talked up the election and got everyone in the South convinced that if Lincoln was elected, he would abolish Slavery because he was from the North. After he was elected, but before he even took office, several states seceded from the Union. All the while f***ing Buchanan did NOTHING (64574RD) After being attacked, Lincoln called for the US army to put down the rebels who had seived army outposts, causing more states to secede.

The emancipation proclimation only freed the slaves in States that had not returned to the union by the beginning of 1963. Slaveholding Union states were not included, as were some areas of the south under Union control. I don't know his intentions of this, but he was clarly not ending slavery or trying to end it.

People have talked him up since as ending slavery...we need these sort of national icons to make us think we are good people and we did the right thing.

and maybe you should learn some history and make productive comments instead of ambigously blasitng people

Buddy I have little sympathy for the South in general if any at all. Slavery is a disgusting and barbaric practice and shames me that we the so called land of the free were one of the last nations to finally abolish it. And I hardly blast people... so please don't assume crap about me that's not true.

Also Lincon was trying to avoid a war. Going around and forcing them South to free all of its slaves certainly wasn't going to help.

Lincon came from a religious background and was strongly opposed to slavery. However, he acted out of necessity in not automatically freeing all the slaves or attempting to force the South into compliance. Once again he was trying to prevent a war. Saying that he didn't give a shit about the slaves is shit itself. Anyways the war wasn't even about slavery, it was about the South getting pissed over the North trying to assert its control... although slavery did play as a major influence.

And please don't tell me learn some history. In third grade I took my freaking history book and home and read it overnight. History with the exception of Language Arts is my favorite subject.

Actually, Lincoln was very conflicted about his opinion on slavery... It wasn't until his Presidency term started did he really start to come around to the anti-slavery regiment.

Originally posted by Jonathan Mark
Way to argue from ignorence... and I suppose you and Lincoln talked this over coffie.

Actually thats what I read from my own history book, so yeah your "taking it home and reading it overnight" bit doesn't impress me at all.

And Lincoln may have been "opposed" to slavery but still he wasn't going to even do anything about it until he saw the tacticul advantage in doing so. In my history book there's even a qote saying that if he can bring the south back into the union without freeing a single slave he would most certaintly do it.

Originally posted by Blaxican Style
Actually thats what I read from my own history book, so yeah your "taking it home and reading it overnight" bit doesn't impress me at all.

Do you realise that some history books can be biased toward certain opinions?

My High School ones made it seem as if Canada single handedly whooped the German's ass.

Originally posted by Tangible God
My High School ones made it seem as if Canada single handedly whooped the German's ass.
Damn I wish I would have known that.


Blaxican I have read several different historical records concerning Lincoln, not to mention multiple biographies on the man. I have studied the Conspiracy Theory and written multiple essays on the man himself. I have studied both his early life and his early political career. So please don't assume I got my information from one possibly bias history book in third grade.

And yes I am aware of the quote you are referring to, it is very well known. Again Lincoln was attempting to avoid a war.

Also you missed my point. You were acting as if Lincoln didn't care about slavery which is incorrect.

I believe your exact words were "Really Lincoln didn't give a sh*t the Slaves".

Sorry double post...

Oh and Blaxican if you want some quotes here are some to chew on.

"I am not a Know-Nothing. That is certain. How could I be? How can any one who abhors the oppression of negroes, be in favor of degrading classes of white people? Our progress in degeneracy appears to me to be pretty rapid. As a nation, we began by declaring that "all men are created equal." We now practically read it "all men are created equal, except Negroes." When the Know-Nothings get control, it will read "all men are created equal, except Negroes and foreigners and Catholics." When it comes to this, I shall prefer emigrating to some country where they make no pretense of loving liberty - to Russia, for instance, where despotism can be taken pure and without the base alloy of hypocrisy." The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln edited by Roy P. Basler, Volume II, "Letter to Joshua F. Speed" (August 24, 1855), p. 323.

"You think slavery is right and should be extended; while we think slavery is wrong and ought to be restricted. That I suppose is the rub. It certainly is the only substantial difference between us." The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln edited by Roy P. Basler, Volume IV, "Letter to Alexander H. Stephens" (December 22, 1860), p. 160. (Stephens was the future Confederate vice-president).

"Whenever I hear any one arguing for slavery I feel a strong impulse to see it tried on him personally." The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln edited by Roy P. Basler, Volume VIII, "Speech to One Hundred Fortieth Indiana Regiment" (March 17, 1865), p. 361.

"In giving freedom to the slave, we assure freedom to the free - honorable alike in what we give, and what we preserve. We shall nobly save, or meanly lose, the last best hope of earth. Other means may succeed; this could not fail. The way is plain, peaceful, generous, just - a way which, if followed, the world will forever applaud, and God must forever bless." Lincoln's Second Annual Message to Congress, December 1, 1862.

"As I would not be a slave, so I would not be a master. This expresses my idea of democracy. Whatever differs from this, to the extent of the difference, is no democracy." The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln edited by Roy P. Basler, Volume II, (August 1, 1858?), p. 532.

"Those who deny freedom to others, deserve it not for themselves; and, under a just God, can not long retain it." The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln edited by Roy P. Basler, Volume III, "Letter To Henry L. Pierce and Others" (April 6, 1859), p. 376.

Originally posted by Blaxican Style
In my history book there's even a qote saying that if he can bring the south back into the union without freeing a single slave he would most certaintly do it.


Yes, but you forgot the other part of the quote: "If I could bring the south back into the union by freeing all slaves, I certainly would do that. If i could bring the south back into the union by freeing half the slaves, I certainly would do that."

Originally posted by Darth Macabre
Yes, but you forgot the other part of the quote: "If I could bring the south back into the union by freeing all slaves, I certainly would do that. If i could bring the south back into the union by freeing half the slaves, I certainly would do that." So, lincon was saying he would do anything to bring the States to be united.

Sounds like a sweet deal to me

Originally posted by Revernd Maynard
So, lincon was saying he would do anything to bring the States to be united.

Sounds like a sweet deal to me

Yes, that was Lincoln's TOP priority... Making the Union one again.

Mark did you just reply to my quote 3 times?

Originally posted by Blaxican Style
Mark did you just reply to my quote 3 times?
Two because I past the 15 minuet edit limit.

I never called any of your personal ideals into question, except I requested that if you make a reply to someone, you say more than simply calling them ignorant.

As I said, Blaxican was mostly correct. None of Lincolns actions were motivated primarily by an interest to liberate the slaves. Maybe he did, but he certainly didn't make that apparent in his policy. That makes him a better president in my opinion.

Originally posted by Tangible God
My High School ones made it seem as if Canada single handedly whooped the German's ass.

"Of a population just over eleven million, more than one and a half million Canadians served in the Second World War. Of these more than 45,000 gave their lives, and another 55,000 were wounded. Countless others shared the suffering and hardship of war. By the end of the war Canada was the fourth strongest military power in the world behind only the USA, the USSR and Britain."

Not bad. But hardly doing all the work by themselves... Ha.

Meh, I finished reading the article on Wikipedia about WWII. Wo knew so much "neutral" countries actually DID SHIT!!! I mean, I read that like Canada did some crap, as well as Australia, who helped defend Africa.

For clarity purposes, could you please remember that this is not a US forum?

This is known as the 'American Civil War'. Just calling it the Civil War invites confusion for just about every other nation with a history.

I blame that on the U.S. education system. They never call it the "American Civil War'... Just "Civil War".

Well, to be fair, we normally call our one the Civil War as well. But diffeent global perspective always needs to be remembered on an international forum.

All right

new topic


*american war* Vietnam

Should we have been over there in the first place? Did we have the right as the *at that time* World Power, to go over there and murder all of those people?

I thought the whole theory of containment was assinine, which would include Vietnam.

Until just now I have never noticed this thread......