Hey Q9!!! Calling Q9!.....

[eenie114]

Do you mean the line of the BYC rules, or the line of not offending anybody? If you mean the rules, I think that line was crossed a long time ago, so I may as well defend myself and my beliefs. If you mean not offending anybody, if someone gets offended by an opinion being expressed, they should take up residence in a bubble.

 

[Boyd]

Quote:
discrimation is ugly, whites on blacks, blacks on whites.. coming from a guy who has a bi-racial sister, African american foster daughter, is an irish-american... Males on abortion..... If the guy doesn't want the pregnancy and it was a true oops.. he still has no say? So if he wants to bail at an early stage, then the woman has NO rights to child support eh? Just saying.. sensitive subjects my lil minion, just saying, tread carefully.. I am not offended, nor can you do that to me lil grasshopper

Just 'sayin

 

[Boyd]

Quote:
I have no bubble?

 

[eenie114]

Sorry, I guess you didn't pick up on my sarcasam. Dumkopf was saying that anybody who hasn't served in combat shouldn't have an opinion. I said that made about as much sense as men not being 'allowed' to voice an opinion on abortion because they can't know what an unmarried mother goes through. Same for discrimination. What he said makes much sense as nobody being allowed to comment on discrimination against another race because it's different for everybody. I resent being told to shut up, my opinion doesn't matter.

 

[Boyd]

Quote:
gotcha

 

[TM Chickens]

Quote:
YES. Completely agree. The irony is that that's precisely what you and Steve seem to be doing by implying that all those who died in the civil war died in vain.

I'm afraid I'm going to have to bow out of this thread now before I get in trouble or explode. Have a nice day!

 

[Q9]

Quote:
What determines if a nation is legitimate?

The ability to forcefully break away. We as a nation were able to break away from England. They were unable to enforce their rule upon us. The Confederacy was not able to do so even though they very bravely attempted too.

Sorry guys the South lost. Don't feel so bad. You weren't there, nothing you can do about it. Be proud that they tried.

In other words, might makes right? Heck, the colonies had to get French help before the War for Independence was finally won. I hate to admit that, but it's true. We probably would have won anyway, but the French played a huge role in ending it quickly.

The Confederacy could, in fact, have successfully beaten the everloving snot out of the United States, and did on multiple occassions. There are several freak instances, however, that ruined their war effort - General James Longstreet's near traitorous behavior at Gettysburg in particular.

As far as I can tell, you and I have completely different definitions of legitimate. My definition is that the new nation in question be capable of self-government. Yours appears to be that the new nation must be able to resist by force of arms - in other words, like I said, you appear to believe that "might makes right."

I'm here to tell you, it doesn't work that way. Not only does the South still have a legal right to be a separate nation, it has a moral right. Just because someone is able to force their will on another doesn't mean the victim is not a legitimate nation. By that standard, Poland and France are not legitimate nations, as both got creamed by Nazi Germany (France surrendered in six weeks - by your standard, then, they should certainly not be considered a legitimate nation). They had to get saved by Great Britain and the United States.

 

[Q9]

Quote:

war of northern aggression

This post makes the most sense

Sorry guys the South lost. Don't feel so bad. You weren't there, nothing you can do about it

But you know what it's really about?

http://i244.photobucket.com/albums/gg37/sandspoultry/misc/image40_jpg.jpg

This, and not ONE of those headstones is worth the price. To all those debating here on this post how many put on a uniform and were prepared to do what it takes for others to debate about it?

I did

Steve​

Well, good for you. But guess what? The rest of us can still look at the causes and results of wars and just as well as you we can state whether they were just or not.​

 

[Q9]

Quote:
Cotton would have remained a major export, as would sugar and tobacco, not to mention food products. With the end of slavery, it would be difficult to say whether the plantations would have become more or less effecient. Odds are good, however, that with an increasing labor force, industry would have become a big deal in some areas, especially the more developed cities like Richmond and Atlanta. The South also has an abundance of coal, and I'm pretty sure iron and other resources.

 

[Dunkopf]

Quote:
The ability to forcefully break away. We as a nation were able to break away from England. They were unable to enforce their rule upon us. The Confederacy was not able to do so even though they very bravely attempted too.

Sorry guys the South lost. Don't feel so bad. You weren't there, nothing you can do about it. Be proud that they tried.

In other words, might makes right? Heck, the colonies had to get French help before the War for Independence was finally won. I hate to admit that, but it's true. We probably would have won anyway, but the French played a huge role in ending it quickly.

The Confederacy could, in fact, have successfully beaten the everloving snot out of the United States, and did on multiple occassions. There are several freak instances, however, that ruined their war effort - General James Longstreet's near traitorous behavior at Gettysburg in particular.

As far as I can tell, you and I have completely different definitions of legitimate. My definition is that the new nation in question be capable of self-government. Yours appears to be that the new nation must be able to resist by force of arms - in other words, like I said, you appear to believe that "might makes right."

I'm here to tell you, it doesn't work that way. Not only does the South still have a legal right to be a separate nation, it has a moral right. Just because someone is able to force their will on another doesn't mean the victim is not a legitimate nation. By that standard, Poland and France are not legitimate nations, as both got creamed by Nazi Germany (France surrendered in six weeks - by your standard, then, they should certainly not be considered a legitimate nation). They had to get saved by Great Britain and the United States.

France and Poland were already nations before Hitler invaded them. The Confederacy was not. They were part of the United States and decided they wanted out for some legitimate and some not legitimate reasons. As I remember the Confederacy wasn't doing too well as a nation. There were plenty of individuals that owned slaves that were doing well but the majority lived in poverty. I know that is some peoples vision of a great nation but it isn't mine.

Might does not make right. We haven't been in a legitimate war since WWII. I never said might makes right. I just stated a simple fact. I'm sure the Confederacy could have beaten the loving snot out of their masters. Unfortunately for them they were up against the not so loving snot. Every war has battles that are lost by incompetency. The battles that the Union lost can have the same things said about them.

All I know is that the southern states are part of the United States for better or worse. By your standards they will just have to be immoral since they will never be able to secede.

BTW if you look at all the countries in the world you will find that most all of them had some force of arms in their formation. It is certainly the case in countries that just didn't feel like hanging out anymore. In modern times they usually break away because of inhumane treatment by the host country. It was just the opposite with the Confederacy.

JMO