What The Yankees Did To Them.

[philly rabbit]

Okay, that was funny.

Gone With The Wind the movie was a soapbox melodrama that was historically accurate but it depicted one southern lifestyle - the aristicratic southern lifestyle.

A tiny minority of the southern population and one that pushed for war to maintain their slaves as did the bankers and the industrialists in the north who feared their slave labor profit losses and who were partners with the northern republican party.

The rest of the south went to war to protect their firesides and their families and that is exactly how they fought the invading Yankee hordes - as one big family.

 

[jet57]

Lincoln turned up his killing machine on civilians because there was an election coming up in 64 when Atlanta was under seige and if Atlanta had held on for just a while longer - just a few more months, Lincoln would have been out of office on his ass and the Democrats would have won the election and peace and independence for the confederacy would have been achieved. Lincoln you see was in big trouble in the polls up north with the war dragging on and more and more northerners having their sons on the casualty lists that kept ever growing with no real positive results. A better defense in front of Atlanta and the Yankees bogged down at the Chattanooga River on account of it instead of poor confederate leadership which led to the replacement of General Johnston as commander of the Army Of Tennessee by Hood which came too late would have meant doom for Lincoln and his republican party and it's Wall Street banker, industrialist supporters.

You south haters always seem to ignore this fact as you continue to justify the killing of white protestants down south while your attempt at superior knowledge over me over accurate American history comes up terribly short. Look - war is war says the parking lot philosopher always mindful of which race and religion the innocent victims of it happen to be.

And don't give me generals authorizing the nuking of Japan either trying to prove what a smart little ass you are. Both the Germans and the Japanese practiced total war on civilian populations before the nuking and although I personally don't think that justified it, you also conveniently didn't mention that fact either. Or the fact that the confederacy never held a policy of total war on civilians which is something else your miserable little half a fag ass failed to mention.

You narssissts from single mommy homes always self rightous and knowing everything that needs to be known at birth are such two faced hypocrites when it comes to who gets human rights considerations and who doesn't when it comes to exterminating your enemies by any means.

"WELL NOW, LET'S LOOK AT WHAT YOU SAID HERE!!"

This country's greatest military leaders such as Washington, MacArthur, Lee, Patton never resorted to the type of total war and deliberate starvation of civilians like that list of war criminals you provided did.

And don't give me generals authorizing the nuking of Japan either trying to prove what a smart little ass you are.

So I proved your drivel about American generals to be absolutely wrong. You have no idea what youre talkning about there.

(chuckle)

You south haters always seem to ignore this fact as you continue to justify the killing of white protestants down south while your attempt at superior knowledge over me over accurate American history comes up terribly short.

Moreover: my family's from the south!!! You fool! My family's always been protestant! My family was in the officer corp of the North Carolina contentental line too.

As for Lincoln and his policies. Atlanta followed directly on the heels of the northern victory at Gettysburg. By that time northern support for the war was seriously waning and Liconln wanted a quick end to the war. Atlanta worked. Lee made his only fatal mistake at Gettysburg by invading the north, stretching out his already thin supply line and facing almost the entirety of the northern army at one time. It was effectively over at that time.

Oh, and BTW my confederate family members were among some of the last of the holdouts.

So I'll say it again: you've read a book, and you're trying to make hay in a completely dodgy murky pointless way that really only deomstrates your lack of abilities with American history. I've asked very simple and pointed questions about what thesis you may be using; to no avail of course, and the only thing you'e done is assist me in beating you over the head with your own ignoranc. Now: do you have any sort of thesis or not? What point are you trying to make from your reading?

So; do you have any actual knowledge of The War of Northern Agression or not? If so, how does it figure into you reading and or whatever point you might be trying to make?

Very simple questions.

 

[philly rabbit]

View attachment 2623

"WELL NOW, LET'S LOOK AT WHAT YOU SAID HERE!!"





So I proved your drivel about American generals to be absolutely wrong. You have no idea what youre talkning about there.

(chuckle)




Moreover: my family's from the south!!! You fool! My family's always been protestant! My family was in the officer corp of the North Carolina contentental line too.

As for Lincoln and his policies. Atlanta followed directly on the heels of the northern victory at Gettysburg. By that time northern support for the war was seriously waning and Liconln wanted a quick end to the war. Atlanta worked. Lee made his only fatal mistake at Gettysburg by invading the north, stretching out his already thin supply line and facing almost the entirety of the northern army at one time. It was effectively over at that time.

Oh, and BTW my confederate family members were among some of the last of the holdouts.

So I'll say it again: you've read a book, and you're trying to make hay in a completely dodgy murky pointless way that really only deomstrates your lack of abilities with American history. I've asked very simple and pointed questions about what thesis you may be using; to no avail of course, and the only thing you'e done is assist me in beating you over the head with your own ignoranc. Now: do you have any sort of thesis or not? What point are you trying to make from your reading?

So; do you have any actual knowledge of The War of Northern Agression or not? If so, how does it figure into you reading and or whatever point you might be trying to make?

Very simple questions.

You were born knowing everything now weren't you?

You didn't need to read anything - you didn't need to study anything - you already knew about everything in the universe. You're a typical self rightous narsisst and a south hating cultural bigot.

 

[philly rabbit]

Lincoln was a self made man. He worked very hard and was dedicted to bettering himself. He rose from humble surroundings and made himself into a wealthy lawyer and a lobbyist for the railroads. He was always running for something in politics.

But he was indeed a racist and a white seperatist and the notion that his war was about freeing the slaves only counted in the new territories to the west because the central government didn't want to discourage settlement there actually by whites then expecting them to try to compete with slave labor for their wages which they would want no part of.

 

[Robo]

And when she got back there, the scalawags and the carpetbaggers taxed the shit out of her.

Yeah but Scarlet got filthy rich again a half hour later, I watched it happen!

 

[jet57]

You were born knowing everything now weren't you?

You didn't need to read anything - you didn't need to study anything - you already knew about everything in the universe. You're a typical self rightous narsisst and a south hating cultural bigot.

Uh, no: I was born thirsty for knowledge; that's why I read every book I can get my hands on and still go to school. One reason I do that is to make sure illiterate knownothings stay reminded of their low status in their world of utter bullshit and fallacy about the world's scocio political history and our modern day thinking.

I will say; as I already have, that the radical northern Republican carpetbaggers; in my view, were and still are the very reason that the south had so much trouble with the Civil Rights movement: not because they are and or were truly racist, but because the antebellam southern culture was being raped by bigoted radcials who exploited the black man throwing him closer and closer to people who had been burned by war. That kind of malicious provacation mocked a very proud people who were both the radicals and a lot of the backbone for the founding of this country.

The contemporary southern culture, both black and white had been born into an institution that was as normal as the Babtist and Presbyterian church. Without both the rich industrialists and the feudal agraculturalists, the civil war would never have happened.

 

[Minister of Truth]

Lincoln was a self made man. He worked very hard and was dedicted to bettering himself. He rose from humble surroundings and made himself into a wealthy lawyer and a lobbyist for the railroads. He was always running for something in politics.

But he was indeed a racist and a white seperatist and the notion that his war was about freeing the slaves only counted in the new territories to the west because the central government didn't want to discourage settlement there actually by whites then expecting them to try to compete with slave labor for their wages which they would want no part of.

Uh, yeah, that was the Northern strategy to slowly end slavery. No one anticipated a sudden end via war. The South took offense to the free soil movement, however, and seceded, even when promised a hands-off policy toward their status quo.

Also, you can blame the aristocracy in the South for the war, but you can't excuse everyone else for following them.

 

[Minister of Truth]

Uh, no: I was born thirsty for knowledge; that's why I read every book I can get my hands on and still go to school. One reason I do that is to make sure illiterate knownothings stay reminded of their low status in their world of utter bullshit and fallacy about the world's scocio political history and our modern day thinking.

I will say; as I already have, that the radical northern Republican carpetbaggers; in my view, were and still are the very reason that the south had so much trouble with the Civil Rights movement: not because they are and or were truly racist, but because the antebellam southern culture was being raped by bigoted radcials who exploited the black man throwing him closer and closer to people who had been burned by war. That kind of malicious provacation mocked a very proud people who were both the radicals and a lot of the backbone for the founding of this country.

The contemporary southern culture, both black and white had been born into an institution that was as normal as the Babtist and Presbyterian church. Without both the rich industrialists and the feudal agraculturalists, the civil war would never have happened.

Carpetbaggers had nothing to do with the existing barbarism, backwardness, and ignorance of the southern people. They didn't turn the protestant churches into houses of hypocrisy and apathy. That is simply the southern way of life.

 

[jet57]

Carpetbaggers had nothing to do with the existing barbarism, backwardness, and ignorance of the southern people. They didn't turn the protestant churches into houses of hypocrisy and apathy. That is simply the southern way of life.

Sorry, but you're wrong on that.

 

[Minister of Truth]

Where were the carpetbaggers in 1860?

 

[jet57]

Where were the carpetbaggers in 1860?

You've missd the point: had it not been for the radical carpetbaggers and following Johnson's (a southerner) amnesty, black white realtions would quite probably have blended better with a slower more respectful tactic. In fact I'm quite sure it would have been very different. What you are not seeing with the Civil Rights movement is that mostly southern white adults; say over forty, had grandfathers who carried a rifle for the confederacy and the survivors were all exposed to the radicals and the rubbing in of their defeat: the radicals wanted the south punished for the Lincoln assination. That sort of radicalism just perpetuated the divide. The southerners are a lot like the New Englanders in their self image.

 

[Minister of Truth]

The difference between the conceited self-identities is that the New Englanders are better!

The South deserved to have their defeat rubbed-in. You don't get to start something that serious and then just walk away. That said, Lincoln had planned a cuddlesome peace, and Johnson vetoed legislation and campaigned against the 14th Amendment. By assassinating Lincoln, the South brought the embarrassment of Reconstruction upon itself.

The funny thing is that it's always the South's fault, and that's not even hyperbole!

 

[jet57]

The difference between the conceited self-identities is that the New Englanders are better!

The South deserved to have their defeat rubbed-in. You don't deserve to start something that serious and then just walk away. That said, Lincoln had planned a cuddlesome peace, and Johnson vetoed legislation and campaigned against the 14th Amendment. By assassinating Lincoln, the South brought the embarrassment of Reconstruction upon itself.

The funny this is that it's always the South's fault, and that's not even hyperbole!

No ofense, but I thought you were smarter than that? The president of the United States had granted every person in the south amnesty: they weren't guilty of anything. So the radical Republicans were in clear violation of that amnesty, and as I said, became responsible for race realtions in this country that still aren't right! I spelled it our very simply and you have ignored everything I've said.

I don't get that.

 

[Minister of Truth]

Because everything you said is bullshit mythology that the South teaches its young, but has no baring on reality. Yes, South, the Civil War was 100% your fault, and the facts bare that out.

Now, its true that Lincoln proposed a cuddlesome peace because he wanted to move the country forward as expeditiously as possible. I still think that requiring a loyalty oath of 10% was idiotic, as was any number lower than 51%. The reality was that fewer than 20% had been loyal, and could have sincerely sworn such an oath. Murdering Lincoln and stonewalling Congress' platform meant that the South lost all right to be treated lightly, and deserved to have had its leaders hanged as traitors.

 

[jet57]

Because everything you said is bullshit mythology that the South teaches its young, but has no baring on reality. Yes, South, the Civil War was 100% your fault, and the facts bare that out.

Now, its true that Lincoln proposed a cuddlesome peace because he wanted to move the country forward as expeditiously as possible. I still think that requiring a loyalty oath of 10% was idiotic, as was any number lower than 51%. The reality was that fewer than 20% had been loyal, and could have sincerely sworn such an oath. Murdering Lincoln and stonewalling Congress' platform meant that the South lost all right to be treated lightly, and deserved to have had its leaders hanged as traitors.

Ya'know, look: I can see that you have some passion on this issue, but I must disagree with you in total. Frist, my own paternal grandfather at the time signed a loyality oath for the side that his son had just died for - go figure that one. All that stuff about an inferior race as such, got going in the 1850's with the war drums of the feudalist southern aristocracy. And there is nothing in anything I'm saying that is a myth. Nor am I an aoplogist for slavery. Slavery was, in the 1850s an industrial machine and all the myths were made up about inferiors because of financial reasons alone: that's all it really was the whole kit'nkabootal. I thnk you might want tp perhaps step back abit and read what I'm saying rather than trying to read into what I'm saying.

 

[Minister of Truth]

Speaking of inferior, there's a point I'd like to make about the carpetbaggers. If I had lived back then, I totally would have been one - imagine doing business in a war torn land populated entirely by morons. Fuck yeah, I'm in!

So, lets not be too critical of the carpetbaggers. Remember, you deserved them, too.

 

[Rune]

Ya'know, look: I can see that you have some passion on this issue, but I must disagree with you in total. Frist, my own paternal grandfather at the time signed a loyality oath for the side that his son had just died for - go figure that one. All that stuff about an inferior race as such, got going in the 1850's with the war drums of the feudalist southern aristocracy. And there is nothing in anything I'm saying that is a myth. Nor am I an aoplogist for slavery. Slavery was, in the 1850s an industrial machine and all the myths were made up about inferiors because of financial reasons alone: that's all it really was the whole kit'nkabootal. I thnk you might want tp perhaps step back abit and read what I'm saying rather than trying to read into what I'm saying.

You are both partially correct. #-D totally overhates the south but he is well versed in the history. Plus like he said, New Englanders are actually superior, as opposed to just acting superior.

 

[jet57]

You are both partially correct. #-D totally overhates the south but he is well versed in the history. Plus like he said, New Englanders are actually superior, as opposed to just acting superior.

Well, sorry but his / her version of history or southern cuture isn't really shining through right now. What I see is a hypersensativity to the subject and that's a discussion killer.

 

[jet57]

Speaking of inferior, there's a point I'd like to make about the carpetbaggers. If I had lived back then, I totally would have been one - imagine doing business in a war torn land populated entirely by morons. Fuck yeah, I'm in!

So, lets not be too critical of the carpetbaggers. Remember, you deserved them, too.

I'm sorry: I deserved them too? What are you saying?

 

[Minister of Truth]

If you'd rather, the South of 1865-1885 deserved them, in addition to all of the other embarrassing setbacks of losing their pointless war. With regard to sensitivity of the subject, I live in a state whose territory and region did not participate in the war. While a number of partisans from both sides migrated during and after, and even engaged in tavern brawls over it, I'd say we're one of the less sensitive regions. Personally, I just hate seeing generators of southerners trying to defend their history over many things which the South was on the wrong side of, to include the Civil War.