Author Topic: ENOUGH!!!!!!! (Read 12286 times)

El Confederado · « **on:** March 16, 2006, 09:34:55 AM »

Boys,

I have been around the block a time or two and have seen many things, but this is about as close to a forum killing itself in public I have ever seen. I realize there are a great many of us that feel strongly about the War of Northern Aggression as we call it and the Civil War as those in the North call it, however, a great many of the things that have been going on since I have been gone need to stop. I am not here to name names or point fingers. I am not here to call people out or even strike your posts down, but this crap needs to get wrangled in y'all. We all know who the troubled folks are , some Yank and some Confederate, fine, but here we are all treated the same, PERIOD.I think sometimes that many of these conflicting posts are from either the same person just under a different name or are being posted in conjuction with one enother to cause problems, I dont know and realy dont care. But now this mess is causing folks to leave and this is wrong. From this day forth, topics will be about the war or connected to the war. Topics will be of atleast a semi civil nature and not allowed to drag into name calling or any of this " you should feel guilty for what your ancestors did " garbage. I hope y'all understand why and for who I am forced to do these things and in the end I feel it will make things better for all.

Still Un-Reconstructed,

Johnnie M Rodriguez II
El Confederado

ironfoot · « **Reply #1 on:** June 11, 2006, 03:36:27 AM »

El Confederado

I appreciate the sentiments of your post.
I appreciate your attempt to be nuetral in your moderator role.

But statements like :

"I realize there are a great many of us that feel strongly about the War of Northern Aggression as we call it and the Civil War as those in the North call it"

don't help.

I feel that the title "War of Northern Aggression" is a loaded, one-sided phrase. The northen equivalent is "War to Free the Slaves".

The phrase "Civil War" is the nuetral name for the conflict.

buffalohunter · « **Reply #2 on:** December 23, 2006, 02:02:55 PM »

Ironfeet, I have been gone for a long time so I am getting caught up on alot of the previous post. All I can say that if you think freeing the slaves was such a good idea I welcome you to spend the night in West Baltimore, we had a great year we only had 275 murders. We could all see how you deal with that situation and I am sure the criminals would appreciate you explaining things to them and showing them how to change.
By the way my family fought for the Confederacy in the War of Northern Aggression, we never owned one slave. That did not stop the Union from destroying our farm and stealing everything that wasn't tied down. The federal government that came out of the war is the greatest threat to this country that has ever existed, Lincoln destroyed the constitution and a large number of individual rights that we as a nation had. The dream that the founding fathers had was also destroyed, so don't trell me the south caused the war. It might sound good but it is definately a distortion of facts. Thanks

ed1921 · « **Reply #3 on:** December 23, 2006, 07:17:23 PM »

So Buffalohunter, we as a nation should have kept up the enslavement of a whole race of people just because West Baltimore is not a place you want to be after dark?
Did you ever think that that policy maybe just a little contibuted to what the world is like today?
I guess if the Egyptians had kept the Jews in place we wouldn't have all the trouble in the Middle East that we have now.

buffalohunter · « **Reply #4 on:** December 24, 2006, 03:53:30 PM »

I guess you think that we are better because the north won the war, if you believe that than I am just wasting my time talking to you because you my friend are a fool.

victorcharlie · « **Reply #5 on:** December 25, 2006, 06:49:44 AM »

Radical reconstruction is what set the tone for race relations through the 1950's......with courthouses burned and no records, federal appointed governors, carpet baggers, hostile federal troops to enforce the rules until 1877, and forty acres and a mule lead to the theft of much southern property......This in turn spurned a lot of the segregationist agenda.

Johnson's " Great society program" has lead to Baltimore's crime problem. Had the poor and uneducated been scattered into middle class America, I suspect there would never have been a need for the welfare state and government hand-outs.

Johnson re-enslaved a whole group of people when he made them dependent on the government. These programs stole motivation and taught those caught in the trap to depend on someone other than themselves, their friends and their family.

The resulting Urban flight has left one huge mess.......

My ancestors, from my great grandfather and earlier owned slaves. My great grandfather lived his last years with a family of freed men, who looked after him and cared for him.

Many of the affluent southerners of that time lost everything. Some of those freed slaves were good enough to look after those they loved......both white and black.

The period termed as radical reconstruction were tough times for southerners...

ironfoot · « **Reply #6 on:** December 29, 2006, 06:31:29 PM »

Buffaloedhunter - You are mixing several topics together:

1. The cause of the civil war:
Southern planters wanted to preserve, and to expand slavery.
The south seceded because Lincoln was elected on an anti-slavery Republican platform.
The north went to war to preserve the Union.
Lincoln tried to prevent the war by assuring the south that he would not unilaterally end slavery where it existed.
But Lincoln also made it clear that he was not going to allow slavery to spread to the territories.
Lincoln's compromise was not good enough for the south.

2. Your family did not own slaves .
So what?
Your family didn't start the war, did it?

3. Prosecution of the war:
War is hell.

4. Reconstruction:
Can't blame Lincoln for it.
He was dead by then, due to a bullet from a proslavery southerner.

5. Crime in some parts of the country today:
Crime has many causes.
You are not really saying slavery should have been preserved so we would have less crime today, are you?

Star1pup · « **Reply #7 on:** January 12, 2007, 03:00:46 PM »

No matter what you call this war, it is a very interesting period in "Our" history. I sure wish we could discuss it without some of the conflicts I read. The soldiers on both sides were some of the best of their generation. No matter how you feel about the outcome it was a long time ago. Southerners can rightfully be proud of their army and can we of the north. Unless I'm mistaken a lot of our modern presidents came from the south. There ws LBJ, Carter, Clinton and even George W.

victorcharlie · « **Reply #8 on:** January 15, 2007, 11:50:23 AM »

Quote from: Star1pup on January 12, 2007, 03:00:46 PM

No matter what you call this war, it is a very interesting period in "Our" history. I sure wish we could discuss it without some of the conflicts I read. The soldiers on both sides were some of the best of their generation. No matter how you feel about the outcome it was a long time ago. Southerners can rightfully be proud of their army and can we of the north. Unless I'm mistaken a lot of our modern presidents came from the south. There ws LBJ, Carter, Clinton and even George W.

Don't forget Jefferson, Madison, and Jackson..........I sure don't put them in the same class as that sorry bunch listed above........

Dee · « **Reply #9 on:** January 15, 2007, 04:38:41 PM »

As an act of good faith, and to show the north that we are trying to get over their horrible mistake of attacking us un-provoked, and stealing our states rights, which is sole cause of the condition this country is in today. Give them a gift. Yes, fellow southerners a charitable gift of value, and good will.
Why don't we give them' LBJ, Carter, CLINTON "AND" HIS WIFE, (consider her a bonus round prize) and George W. If these 5 southerners were suddenly turned into NORTHERNERS, it would raise the IQ of the north AND the south instantly. Come on all you southerners. UNITE! Offer the hand of forgiveness to our northern agressors. OH! Wait! Sorry! I mean brothers.

Star1pup · « **Reply #10 on:** January 16, 2007, 02:08:11 AM »

I never said they were good presidents. It seems to me that Washington was a Virginian. Isn't that a southern state?

Dee · « **Reply #11 on:** January 16, 2007, 05:18:49 AM »

You could be right about Washington. Ok, let's give him to the north also. He hasn't been that helpful as of late anyway. Besides, when I think of Washington it reminds me of D.C.

Star1pup · « **Reply #12 on:** January 16, 2007, 05:54:35 AM »

Well, DEE, I can't say I'm happy with politicians of either party, but I've been in other countries and I still thank God that I'm an American.

Dee · « **Reply #13 on:** January 16, 2007, 08:35:15 AM »

Don't get excited. It is in fun, nothing more.

Star1pup · « **Reply #14 on:** January 16, 2007, 10:25:19 AM »

Quote from: Dee on January 16, 2007, 08:35:15 AM

Don't get excited. It is in fun, nothing more.

No problem. One of my best friends is a liberal democrat and a Browns fan. Since I am a conservative republican and a Steelers fan and we have hunted together for over 50 years and neither of us has shot the other I guess I can take a lot of kidding without getting excited. I have, however, tried to get him a hunting trip with Cheney. If we all agreed on everything it would be a boring world.

ncmountainman · « **Reply #15 on:** February 05, 2007, 01:39:31 PM »

I like Civil War history, The Civil War Journal on the History Channel, and have read The Civil War Journal magazine. I have respect for the brave and good men who fought on both sides and honor their memories. I think the movies Gettysburg, Gods and Generals are great and Im waiting for The Final Measure. There is a small cemetary in the woods not far from my home where there are a few graves of Confederate Soldiers from a NC regiment that were casualties at Shiloh. A few small Confederate flags stand there beside them.

jamesrus · « **Reply #16 on:** October 01, 2007, 08:26:33 PM »

Well here my 2 cents. Show me a report where a single slave was brought into these united states under a confederate flag.

The great American flag was flying over every single port for 80 years before the War of Northern Aggression was started, where slaves were brought in.

The majority of these slaves were brought in on ships flying dutch and english flags, who were then bought by slave merchants who operated for large Northern business firms and resold all across the south.

Its funny that Gen. Ulysses S Grant's wife had an indentured maid servant till after the War was over.

If Lincoln and his Generals were so hot to free the slaves, how come the Emancipation Proclimation, only freed slaves held in the South? A new country which had legally seceeded from the Union Under articles set up in the constitution.

How come Sherman's march to the sea includes hundreds upon hundreds of accounts of depredations against women of color?

How come after the war when the slaves were freed, so many of them stayed with their previous owners, many even taking the family name, and living in close contact with them for generations after? I guess all the beatings and cruelties heaped upon them by their former owners caused such an ingrained sense of fear, that life away from the only families many of them ever had was inconsievably.

Now im not saying that southerners always treated slaves good. Im sure just like in every society in all of history there were brutalities. But all the propaganda the Victor of the war has been able to spread in the last 150 years kinda leans what our children are learning in school on a slant toward the Union.

I for one will say my child will be given the benefit of reading a lot of materials which are in the Library of Congress, which show the true unaltered history of this war.

In some of Benjamin Franklins letters he even stated long befor ethe war that the South and the North were two totally different societies which would one day come to blows against one another because of different views

Jamesrus

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #17 on:** October 02, 2007, 02:08:06 AM »

It has been said that Lincoln freed the slaves but would not have if he thought England and France would stay out of the war had he not , many conf. generals Lee among them had freed their slaves before the war .
It would appear the war was over states rights , slavery was among them but its hard to say the war was over slavery entirely !
Yes the south did suffer after the war .
From 40 ac. and a mule to a chicken in every pot to midnight basket ball we have witnessed a bribe of one race or economic level of people for control of the country's govt. . Lincoln may have used the war of northern aggression to cloke the start of this way of politics but the Souths defense of a way of life did not start it !
As far as slaves suffering I believe they did ! I believe also the white settlers did also ! I honestly feel both groups are better off today for the suffering their fore fathers endured . It is a shame that the slums exist ! it is a shame that people walk 1500 miles from Central America for a job while people here won't walk a few blocks to work ! No I for one can't blame the lack of motivation on the north or the south , I feel it is a world thing ! while many people of the world explored and developed others kept living much as their family had at the time of Jesus being on earth ! Look around the world and you will see cultures that have flourished and those that stagnated . The united States have people from all over the world and as one can see people with very different levels of ability and drive ! To blame this on one war is a mistake ! No at some point in history we as a country will need to restrict who enters and who stays or we will not be America anymore ! People coming must realize that they should come to be American not come to change America to what ever it was they came from !
I for one will look at the men from both the South and the north who were in the war with respect ! The funny thing is the largest group to fight in the war was Irish , not even born here !
Being civil to each other seems a good place to start !

Star1pup · « **Reply #18 on:** October 02, 2007, 02:44:09 AM »

Shootall: I agree! We have great men and women in the north and the south. I have been watching The War documentary by Ken Burns and bravery and dedication to America are not divided by the Mason-Dixon Line or anything else. In my humble opinion, I wish we had not turned against one another back ion 1861, but I'm glad we are one great nation. The way we move around, I wonder how many now living in the south or north had ancestors who fought on the other side.

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #19 on:** October 02, 2007, 03:03:31 AM »

It seems many did at the time the war was going on !

creekbear · « **Reply #20 on:** October 02, 2007, 09:44:35 PM »

STAR1PUP I HAVE DONE A COMPLETE FAMILY HISTORY ON BOTH MY MOTHER AND FATHERS SIDE OF THE FAMILY AND HAVE IDENTIFIED 18 LINEAL AND 11 COLINEAL ANCESTORS ON MY FATHERS SIDE AND 13 LINEAL AND 9 COLINEAL ANCESTORS ALL OF WHOM FOUGHT FOR THE sSUTH DURING THE WAR. WHILE DOING MY WIFES FAMILY HISTORY I HAVE FOUND A TOTAL OF ABOUT 6 WHO FOUGHT FOR THE SOUTH AND 11 WHO FOUGHT FOR THE NORTH.

Star1pup · « **Reply #21 on:** October 03, 2007, 02:32:36 AM »

Quote from: creekbear on October 02, 2007, 09:44:35 PM

STAR1PUP I HAVE DONE A COMPLETE FAMILY HISTORY ON BOTH MY MOTHER AND FATHERS SIDE OF THE FAMILY AND HAVE IDENTIFIED 18 LINEAL AND 11 COLINEAL ANCESTORS ON MY FATHERS SIDE AND 13 LINEAL AND 9 COLINEAL ANCESTORS ALL OF WHOM FOUGHT FOR THE sSUTH DURING THE WAR. WHILE DOING MY WIFES FAMILY HISTORY I HAVE FOUND A TOTAL OF ABOUT 6 WHO FOUGHT FOR THE SOUTH AND 11 WHO FOUGHT FOR THE NORTH.

I only had one, my great, great grandfather who was in the PA 4th cavalry. I guess one thing we can be certain of, if anyone attacks this country today there will be Ohio boys and Alabama boys side by side to defend her. And, those of us on this site know how to shoot.

williamlayton · « **Reply #22 on:** December 09, 2007, 12:14:48 PM »

I did not fight for either and---nobody posting here did either.
It is history.
It is a done deal.
It is over.
Blessings

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #23 on:** December 10, 2007, 08:39:03 AM »

that's right but my family did and that means something in the SOUTH .
also many of the troubles we have lived thru. were direct results of the war !

prairiedog555 · « **Reply #24 on:** December 10, 2007, 11:07:38 AM »

There were many reasons that can be cited for the Civil War. I was a history major in college and have studied the conflict at length. I have concluded that for the most part it comes down to the fact that the rich guys on both sides who could profit on it were the ones that started it and kept it going, and used propaganda to get the little guy to fight, just like most wars in history.
It is interesting to wonder why the vast majority of Southern soldiers, who were poor and did not own slaves gave their lives for the rich land owners. Pride I guess, and an independent spirit that Americans have.
And if a gentleman from the south wished not to serve he could buy his way out with a deferment for $300, which many of the wealthy did. I saw that on the Ken Burns documentary.

Here in Kansas I see little graveyards all the time in the country. I look at the headstones sometimes and see some around the 1850-1865 period with the inscription "died to end slavery" I mean a lot of them.
I guess it was time to get rid of all the bad blood. But looking at it in retrospect I see it as a shame that fellow Americans killed each other to make Northern factory owners and Southern plantation owners richer. The more I learn about history the more I am convinced that greed and lust for power is the root cause of most wars. I do not trust the rich establishment, carpet bagger or Scaliwag.

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #25 on:** December 11, 2007, 03:25:29 AM »

aren't most wars so one country ends up richer than the other ? and the guys that fight make the least !

Telahnay's g'son · « **Reply #26 on:** December 22, 2007, 02:34:26 AM »

Quote from: prairiedog555 on December 10, 2007, 11:07:38 AM

There were many reasons that can be cited for the Civil War. I was a history major in college and have studied the conflict at length. I have concluded that for the most part it comes down to the fact that the rich guys on both sides who could profit on it were the ones that started it and kept it going, and used propaganda to get the little guy to fight, just like most wars in history.
It is interesting to wonder why the vast majority of Southern soldiers, who were poor and did not own slaves gave their lives for the rich land owners. Pride I guess, and an independent spirit that Americans have.
And if a gentleman from the south wished not to serve he could buy his way out with a deferment for $300, which many of the wealthy did. I saw that on the Ken Burns documentary.

Here in Kansas I see little graveyards all the time in the country. I look at the headstones sometimes and see some around the 1850-1865 period with the inscription "died to end slavery" I mean a lot of them.
I guess it was time to get rid of all the bad blood. But looking at it in retrospect I see it as a shame that fellow Americans killed each other to make Northern factory owners and Southern plantation owners richer. The more I learn about history the more I am convinced that greed and lust for power is the root cause of most wars. I do not trust the rich establishment, carpet bagger or Scaliwag.

The "reason" for the Civil (War of Northern Aggression) War was to end slavery.

For, you see the slaves themselves were the most valuable economic asset in the USA (according to the 1860 Federal census) even more valuable than all of the other assets in the country, combined.

The north had to provoke hostilities in order to justify a military invasion so as to destroy the economic infrastructure of the south. Who were these "northerners"? Look at who profited and/or rose in prominence post-1865.

Had Britain not blinked and instead sent the trade/supply ships escorted by the Royal Navy, through the Federal blockade things would most likely had a different outcome.

The Federal navy was where the war was lost for we simply ran out of powder and ball before enough yankees were killed to where their momma's would have forced Lincoln to sue for peace.

SwampThing762 · « **Reply #27 on:** December 22, 2007, 03:31:35 AM »

I will partially agree with Telahnay on his post, but Lincoln's decision to make the eradication of the "peculiar institution" a war goal did not come until the summer of 1862. Lincoln's initial callup of troops was to restore the Union. I, too, was a history major in college, and have an ancestor that died at Chickamauga for the Confederacy.

My opinion for the cause of the war lies in the rights of states and property owners. The northern states, who also had an institution of slavery until mid-18th century, and many of their citizens and elected representatives in Congress, attempted to dictate policy and property rights to southern propertyowners. Cases in point include abolitionist tracts circulated in the south to incite slave revolts, the underground railroad, and the various safety committees that sheltered fugitive slaves. Many northern states protected their citizens who sheltered fugitive slaves, in direct contravention to Federal law, which deprived southern citizens of their property rights. This went on all through the 1850s.

I could go on with more examples, but I think I have said enough to illustrate my point. I think the war erupted as a result of one group of society trying to usurp the rights of another. Certainly, there were firebrands that took efforts to make the war happen, such as Edmund Ruffin and William Seward. There will always be people behind the scenes pulling strings.

I conclude by again saying that was the war was in defense of rights granted, guaranteed and secured by the Constitution. The South rose up in defense of her rights when elements of Northern society denied and usurped those rights. I cannot speak for other people on this forum, but I know I would fight if someone was in possession of my property and not return it, which is theft of property as I understand it. The challenge for us today is to come together as Americans, even though the legacy of the agitators is a sustained campaign to eradicate the Southern heritage. Like the private said in the movie Gettysburg said, "Live and let live I heard some folks say. Seems like there would be a lot less fuss and bother if more people took it to heart."

Jim

Telahnay's g'son · « **Reply #28 on:** December 22, 2007, 05:09:32 AM »

Quote from: SwampThing762 on December 22, 2007, 03:31:35 AM

I will partially agree with Telahnay on his post, but Lincoln's decision to make the eradication of the "peculiar institution" a war goal did not come until the summer of 1862. Lincoln's initial callup of troops was to restore the Union. I, too, was a history major in college, and have an ancestor that died at Chickamauga for the Confederacy.

My opinion for the cause of the war lies in the rights of states and property owners. The northern states, who also had an institution of slavery until mid-18th century, and many of their citizens and elected representatives in Congress, attempted to dictate policy and property rights to southern propertyowners. Cases in point include abolitionist tracts circulated in the south to incite slave revolts, the underground railroad, and the various safety committees that sheltered fugitive slaves. Many northern states protected their citizens who sheltered fugitive slaves, in direct contravention to Federal law, which deprived southern citizens of their property rights. This went on all through the 1850s.

I could go on with more examples, but I think I have said enough to illustrate my point. I think the war erupted as a result of one group of society trying to usurp the rights of another. Certainly, there were firebrands that took efforts to make the war happen, such as Edmund Ruffin and William Seward. There will always be people behind the scenes pulling strings.

I conclude by again saying that was the war was in defense of rights granted, guaranteed and secured by the Constitution. The South rose up in defense of her rights when elements of Northern society denied and usurped those rights. I cannot speak for other people on this forum, but I know I would fight if someone was in possession of my property and not return it, which is theft of property as I understand it. The challenge for us today is to come together as Americans, even though the legacy of the agitators is a sustained campaign to eradicate the Southern heritage. Like the private said in the movie Gettysburg said, "Live and let live I heard some folks say. Seems like there would be a lot less fuss and bother if more people took it to heart."

Jim

Jim,

President Lincoln (being pragmatic, among other things) did offer a proposal to reimburse (~$400/slave) those so affected prior to April, 1861 but it was quashed by radical Republicans in Congress who (apparently) wished to take everything...for free...or over the blood of thousands and thousands of good and decent farm boys from the north.

ironfoot · « **Reply #29 on:** December 26, 2007, 05:06:19 PM »

The Rebellion to Preserve Slavery started when Lincoln was elected President on a Republican anti-slavery platform. The Dredd Scott U.S. Supreme Court decision had the effect of allowing slavery throughout the nation. Lincoln was motivated to reenter politics to oppose slavery. Lincoln knew he could not, under the Constitution, outright ban slavery where it existed, but he would not allow it's expansion into the territories. Lincoln thought that by preventing the expansion of slavery, it would be put on the path to gradual extinction. The South was well aware of Lincoln's hostility to slavery, and when Lincoln was elected, the South seceded in order to preserve it's property interests in slavery. The Union fought first to preserve the Union, but it was obvious to all at the time that slavery was the underlying issue. During the war, Lincoln enacted the Emancipation Proclamation. He knew he could not, Constitutionally, end slavery in the Union border states, but he could deprive the rebel states of their "property" in war time. The Emancipation Proclamation had the dual effect of weakening the Confederate South by taking away a labor source, and by being a step toward the eventual eradication of slavery throughout the country.