An Irishman's view regarding the removal of statues

Corazón said:
Whilst not agreeing totally with that Irish guy, I do believe he's right that it wasn't the central defining issue that is portrayed in modern times. The real issue for southern states was the right to cut independent trade deals with Britain and France, which mirrors what is happening now with Brexit. I also think he's mainly right that Lincoln really only cared about slavery when he needed blacks as cannon fodder.
Click to expand...

Wrongo boyo.
The southern states had no right to secede nor to attack the Union.

Based on these two lies the opinion is worthless.
 
Celticguy said:
Sometimes its useful to have the perspective of having no dog in the fight. You and the author are a good example of this. People dont seem to understand that political spin is not new. Ask them why the US Navy turned its cannons on NYC back during the Civil War.
Click to expand...

I don't altogether agree with the Irish guy but I do think that money and power were far more important to the North.
 
Last edited:
Corazón said:
Lincoln drew a red line and dared South Carolina to cross it. He was newly installed in the White House and had to show he was tough by refusing to hand over the forts. The North was shitting themselves that they'd lose the taxes from the South especially cotton.
Click to expand...

This is an outright lie.
 
Secession isn't legal nor constitutional. Slavery was definitely the forefront issue. In fact the war drum started when the number of free states, passed the number of slave states, puting the south in fear of abolishment.
 
Rune said:
This is an outright lie.
Click to expand...
Abraham Lincoln repeatedly stated his war was caused by taxes only, and not by slavery, at all.

"My policy sought only to collect the Revenue (a 40 percent federal sales tax on imports to Southern States under the Morrill Tariff Act of 1861)." reads paragraph 5 of Lincoln's First Message to the U.S. Congress, penned July 4, 1861.

"I have no purpose, directly or in-directly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so," Lincoln said it his first inaugural on March 4 of the same year.

There is no proof of Lincoln ever declaring the war was fought to abolish slavery, and without such an official statement, the war-over-slavery teaching remains a complete lie and offensive hate speech that divides Americans, as is being done now by the media and politicians regarding the Confederate flag in South Carolina.

http://www.al.com/opinion/index.ssf/2015/06/war-over-slavery_rhetoric_is_i.html
 
Corazón said:
Abraham Lincoln repeatedly stated his war was caused by taxes only, and not by slavery, at all.

"My policy sought only to collect the Revenue (a 40 percent federal sales tax on imports to Southern States under the Morrill Tariff Act of 1861)." reads paragraph 5 of Lincoln's First Message to the U.S. Congress, penned July 4, 1861.

"I have no purpose, directly or in-directly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so," Lincoln said it his first inaugural on March 4 of the same year.

There is no proof of Lincoln ever declaring the war was fought to abolish slavery, and without such an official statement, the war-over-slavery teaching remains a complete lie and offensive hate speech that divides Americans, as is being done now by the media and politicians regarding the Confederate flag in South Carolina.

http://www.al.com/opinion/index.ssf/2015/06/war-over-slavery_rhetoric_is_i.html
Click to expand...

Slavery wasn't even abolished anyway, they just changed the name to sharecropping instead.
 
Last edited:
Corazón said:
Abraham Lincoln repeatedly stated his war was caused by taxes only, and not by slavery, at all.

"My policy sought only to collect the Revenue (a 40 percent federal sales tax on imports to Southern States under the Morrill Tariff Act of 1861)." reads paragraph 5 of Lincoln's First Message to the U.S. Congress, penned July 4, 1861.

"I have no purpose, directly or in-directly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so," Lincoln said it his first inaugural on March 4 of the same year.

There is no proof of Lincoln ever declaring the war was fought to abolish slavery, and without such an official statement, the war-over-slavery teaching remains a complete lie and offensive hate speech that divides Americans, as is being done now by the media and politicians regarding the Confederate flag in South Carolina.

http://www.al.com/opinion/index.ssf/2015/06/war-over-slavery_rhetoric_is_i.html
Click to expand...
You need to read his second inagural speech.
 
Corazón said:
Lincoln drew a red line and dared South Carolina to cross it. He was newly installed in the White House and had to show he was tough by refusing to hand over the forts. The North was shitting themselves that they'd lose the taxes from the South especially cotton.
Click to expand...

He drew a red line, and, predictably, the puny southern mind was dumb enough to cross it.
 
Corazón said:
Abraham Lincoln repeatedly stated his war was caused by taxes only, and not by slavery, at all.

"My policy sought only to collect the Revenue (a 40 percent federal sales tax on imports to Southern States under the Morrill Tariff Act of 1861)." reads paragraph 5 of Lincoln's First Message to the U.S. Congress, penned July 4, 1861.

"I have no purpose, directly or in-directly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so," Lincoln said it his first inaugural on March 4 of the same year.

There is no proof of Lincoln ever declaring the war was fought to abolish slavery, and without such an official statement, the war-over-slavery teaching remains a complete lie and offensive hate speech that divides Americans, as is being done now by the media and politicians regarding the Confederate flag in South Carolina.

http://www.al.com/opinion/index.ssf/2015/06/war-over-slavery_rhetoric_is_i.html
Click to expand...
It says opinion in the link, bud.
Nice try.
 
Corazón said:
I have and the reasons for starting the war were nothing to do with slavery. Later on he needed blacks to fight the war, so Emancipation was more about military concerns than morality.
Click to expand...

Damn, boy.
When a retard like Irish knows better than you, it is time to shut the fuck up.
 
Corazón said:
I have and the reasons for starting the war were nothing to do with slavery. Later on he needed blacks to fight the war, so Emancipation was more about military concerns than morality.
Click to expand...
Well, you're entitled to your opinion, but the fact is slavery was very much the issue and Lincoln was a politician, he knew the reason for the war.
 
Corazón said:
It's not my opinion, Lincoln stated so himself.
Click to expand...
Lincoln was a politician, why if it wasn't about slavery would he not let new states entering into the Union have slaves? Why did those states declaring war against the Union state it was about slavery? Lincoln was trying to save the Union but slavery was tearing it apart.
 
Covfefe said:
Lincoln was a politician, why if it wasn't about slavery would he not let new states entering into the Union have slaves? Why did those states declaring war against the Union state it was about slavery? Lincoln was trying to save the Union but slavery was tearing it apart.
Click to expand...
He didn't want new states to have slaves as they would be able to undercut those without them.
 
Corazón said:
I don't altogether agree with the Irish guy but I do think that money and power were far more important to the North.
Click to expand...

The north required the south. The south was getting to where they did not require the north. Lincoln was truthful when he said preserving the union was all he wanted. Trouble is the average northerner didnt understand why he had to preserve the union and they were glad to let the south go.
 
Corazón said:
I have and the reasons for starting the war were nothing to do with slavery. Later on he needed blacks to fight the war, so Emancipation was more about military concerns than morality.
Click to expand...

You seem not to have read the secession documents, which state why the southern states were seceding.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top