Originally posted by cdtm
Did it really though?
https://www.battlefields.org/learn/primary-sources/declaration-causes-seceding-states
Yes. The Northern cause wasn't over slavery, it was to prevent the dissolution of the Union, but the South most certainly attempted to secede due to being asshurt over Lincoln being elected, who campaigned on the platform that any western territories would be created as non-slave states, and through this, their monopoly on Congress would be broken.
The idea that slavery didn’t have anything to do with the civil war is laughable. The leader of the confederacy called slaver they cornerstone of the confederacy. It was the main reason why the war was fought, at least from the south’s point of view.
The north didn’t really care much about slavery. They weren’t saints, they were just trying to stop the south from seceding and happened to be on the right side of history.
The war started because the North started to become to greedy, while not having slaves, continued to prosper due to slavery.
The war had to nothing to do with slavery because Lincoln wanted Lee to be his general. The same Lee who’s wife and her family owned multiple slaves. So if the war was against slavery, pray tell why Lincoln would want a slave owner at his general then?
It’s even alluded Lincoln himself saw Blacks as inferior to whites. It’s that true, then Lincoln cared itself for the plights of slaves. Lincoln wanted to go further by sending all the Blacks, slave or free men back to Africa. The only reason it didn’t happened was because the US lacked the funds since the war took so much.
Originally posted by BackFireThe ignorance of squall does not care about history or your silly facts. They just tend to slow him down.
The idea that slavery didn’t have anything to do with the civil war is laughable. The leader of the confederacy called slaver they cornerstone of the confederacy. It was the main reason why the war was fought, at least from the south’s point of view.The north didn’t really care much about slavery. They weren’t saints, they were just trying to stop the south from seceding and happened to be on the right side of history.
Originally posted by quanchi112
The ignorance of squall does not care about history or your silly facts. They just tend to slow him down.
Yet you can’t explain why Lincoln wanted Lee has his General first and for most, when Lee’s wife owned slaves.
Surely if it had to do with slavery, Lincoln would not have wanted a slave owner as his general.
Call me names if you want, or if it makes you feel better, that fine by me. But also try to use that little brain of yours and bring me facts.
Here’s a question for you. Did any teachers ever taught you the role Haitians played in the war for independence in that useless one month where so called African American History are taught?
I’ll answer. No, they never did.
Originally posted by SquallXTo win a war since lee was good at what he did despite his questionable morality. They won without him and decimated lee in the war. The south lost and slavery went bye byes. The north prevailed and all the cinferderates are judged harshly historically. They lost the ear and are judged terribly to this day unless you are a redneck loser.
Yet you can’t explain why Lincoln wanted Lee has his General first and for most, when Lee’s wife owned slaves.Surely if it had to do with slavery, Lincoln would not have wanted a slave owner as his general.
Call me names if you want, or if it makes you feel better, that fine by me. But also try to use that little brain of yours and bring me facts.
Here’s a question for you. Did any teachers ever taught you the role Haitians played in the war for independence in that useless one month where so called African American History are taught?
I’ll answer. No, they never did.
Originally posted by BackFireBang on!
The idea that slavery didn’t have anything to do with the civil war is laughable. The leader of the confederacy called slaver they cornerstone of the confederacy. It was the main reason why the war was fought, at least from the south’s point of view.The north didn’t really care much about slavery. They weren’t saints, they were just trying to stop the south from seceding and happened to be on the right side of history.
Originally posted by Impediment
https://local12.com/news/nation-world/nascar-driver-quits-after-confederate-flag-ban-all-you-are-doing-is-fing-one-group-ray-ciccarelliSomeone already resigned.
Not surprised. Don't blame him and I'm sure there'll be others. He's right.
Originally posted by SquallX
Yet you can’t explain why Lincoln wanted Lee has his General first and for most, when Lee’s wife owned slaves.Surely if it had to do with slavery, Lincoln would not have wanted a slave owner as his general.
Call me names if you want, or if it makes you feel better, that fine by me. But also try to use that little brain of yours and bring me facts.
Here’s a question for you. Did any teachers ever taught you the role Haitians played in the war for independence in that useless one month where so called African American History are taught?
I’ll answer. No, they never did.
Lincoln didn't really give a shit about the slaves. The only reason he went to war with the South was to preserve the Union since many of the southern states had broken away/seceded. Lincoln only used the issue of slavery to keep the war going when northern support for the war was starting to falter. Northerners arrogantly thought that the South would be easily defeated in a few months. They didn't expect them to put up such strong resistance for four long, bloody years considering how vastly outnumbered they were and the inferior resources they had at their disposal.
The South was being unfairly overtaxxed to death. That is the real reason they seceded, not slavery. The people who're calling you ignorant are projecting their own ignorance.
Just ignore them and let them stay ignorant.
Originally posted by SquallX
The war started because the North started to become to greedy, while not having slaves, continued to prosper due to slavery.The war had to nothing to do with slavery because Lincoln wanted Lee to be his general. The same Lee who’s wife and her family owned multiple slaves. So if the war was against slavery, pray tell why Lincoln would want a slave owner at his general then?
It’s even alluded Lincoln himself saw Blacks as inferior to whites. It’s that true, then Lincoln cared itself for the plights of slaves. Lincoln wanted to go further by sending all the Blacks, slave or free men back to Africa. The only reason it didn’t happened was because the US lacked the funds since the war took so much.
That still doesn't change the primacy of slavery in the Civil War.
Originally posted by FinalAnswer
https://www.battlefields.org/learn/primary-sources/declaration-causes-seceding-statesYes. The Northern cause wasn't over slavery, it was to prevent the dissolution of the Union, but the South most certainly attempted to secede due to being asshurt over Lincoln being elected, who campaigned on the platform that any western territories would be created as non-slave states, and through this, their monopoly on Congress would be broken.
Yo, welcome back. Been a while since I've seen you around. Maybe because I only stick to the GDF these days.
Anyway, yes, the American Civil War was more than just fighting over slavery. There was also the asymmetric buttmad economics going on between the port cities, transportation of goods, etc. Slavery was a huge part of it, yes. But there were other elements of it, too.
Electing an Republican President certainly didn't help when the tensions were at their peak.
Edit - Lincoln wasn't, at first, an abolitionist, IIRC. I think I may be mistaken.
Originally posted by dadudemon
Yo, welcome back. Been a while since I've seen you around. Maybe because I only stick to the GDF these days.Anyway, yes, the American Civil War was more than just fighting over slavery. There was also the asymmetric buttmad economics going on between the port cities, transportation of goods, etc. Slavery was a huge part of it, yes. But there were other elements of it, too.
Electing an Republican President certainly didn't help when the tensions were at their peak.
Edit - Lincoln wasn't, at first, an abolitionist, IIRC. I think I may be mistaken.
You’re right, Lincoln wasn’t an abolitionist, until he realize he could use that to bolster the war.
One thing they don’t taught in school, Lincoln wanted to ship every blacks back to Africa. The only reason it failed, was because the US lacks of funds and means to do so.