Sherman alone ought to be enough to dispel the myth of Saint Lincoln.
The whole government is corrupt, and has been since at least 1860, most likely the 1840's.
I would rather you not invoke that dispicalble name on my blog, unless you apply the preface "Son of a Bitch".
Enlighten me, Nate.
Why "southron" instead of "southern?"
I notice both you and Vox use it.
http://www.southernevents.org/
so...on_language.htm
You will also note that we spell it "Honour" and not "honor" like the yankees.
The unabridged Oxford Dictionary... as opposed to he Yankee Webster's... should afford a sufficient appendix to the website above.
Southron: belonging to or dwelling in the south
The North won, thereby giving them reign over how the stories got told. Too bad Americans are too damned lazy to research it and find out the truth for themselves.
The other issue is, any negative remark against that piss-ant, no balls, shit-stain Lincoln is preceived to be racist in context.
I wonder how much of the rot kids are taught in school about this is due to the white guilt thing, and how much of it stems from the love the left hold for that used colostomy bag Lincoln for marching us out of the states right era and into the federalism we live in today.
Let's not forget... modern republicans love the Lincoln Lie just as much, if not more than democrats.
How many times a day does Rush Limbaugh say "The Party of Lincoln" like it's something to be proud of?
Like modern chinese saying "The Party of Pol Pot"
I can't speak for all Northerners but my education did not involve any mention of prisoner of war camps during the civil war (public school is not so great). I did get the usual indoctrination: we came to free the slaves, blah blah.
We also learned that the South fired on us first. People brought picnic lunches to watch the fighting. more blah blah.
They also taught that had the South won, the 2 divided nations would have been eaten by the empire ambitions of other nations.
What better way to justify a strong central government than to protect us from the world empires....
"We also learned that the South fired on us first."
We did fire first. Y'all re-armed sumpter.. a blatant violation of the treaty YOU signed.
What is little known is that before we fired on Sumpter, we sent word that we would do so, and adviced them to remove men from certain sections of the fort to limit injury.
Firing on Sumpter was meant to be a show. A little warning... like firin' over the bow of a ship.
We figured linoln would tuck his tail after that.
We were wrong.
What I'm curious about is: "Why not burn the crops and destroy the homes of the population supporting my enemy?"
Being from Pennsylvania, I have not heard a Southern perspective on "Sherman's glorious march to the sea." all that was taught was that it served to reduce the popular support for the Conferdacy and cut into their armies' supplies.
Find gettysburg on a map.
You'll see we had plenty of opportunity to do the exact same thing.
We didn't, as we held ourselves to higher standards. It didn't occur to us that the yankees would stoop to such dispicable, and dishonourable tactics.
We could've burned DC. We could've burned Philly... Most of Ohio... Baltimore...
These cities could've been shelled to rubble.
S'ok.
We won't repeat the mistake.
Having grown up near Philly, I do appreciate the city being left intact. Sinking DC back into the swamp might have been an improvement...
It seems to me, and I am unschooled in warfare, that by taking the high road, you allow the war to continue longer than it needs to.
If an army levels everything in its path, wouldn't that serve to end the war as quickly as possible and also to show future enemies what they can expect if they go to war?
Morgan -
I followed (always lurking am I) yours and Nate's discussions over at Vox's the last couple of days. If you want to get a sense of why the War For Southern Independence was so wrong and at the same time get an historical perspective on why the SOB Lincoln fought it there are a couple of books I found particularly enlightening 'The Real Lincoln' by Thomas DiLorenzo and 'The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History' by Thomas Woods. Both of these do a superb job of explaining the 'American System' which dates back to Alexander Hamilton. The fight for States Rights dates back to the signing of the constitution.
Take a look at how we treated the Indians before compared to after the war.
SOB Lincoln indeed...
Invid,
The South favored honour over victory. The North had no such handicap.
Wasn't Pol Pot in Cambodia?
I am right with you Nate on this, though. Had we wanted to conquer the North, it would have taken a few weeks. But since we simply wanted to be let alone, we let them wear us down until it was too late. Oh well, live and learn.
live and learn.
Well.. it should be noted that Forrest did raid supply lines. But only military ones.
He had great success doing so on the western front.
Yup.. sorry about that Clint... got my murderous commies mixed up...
There's so many ya know? hard to keep 'em straight this early.
Sherman even acknowledged that if the Yankees didn't win, he would surely be tried as a war criminal due to the atrocities he inflicted upon the South. He knew this, because according to the code of conduct that he was taught at West Point, he WAS a war criminal, and fully expected to be treated as such had the South vanquished the Yankee pestilence.
Robert E. Lee: "It is well that war is so terrible -- lest we should grow too fond of it."
We should also remember that SOB's words...
"If the war is to be won, there is a certain breed of southern man, woman, and child, that must be killed."
May he rot in Hell.
Off topic, but why does Nate hate West Virginia?
I thought he loved the South.
"How many times a day does Rush Limbaugh say "The Party of Lincoln" like it's something to be proud of?"
I can take or leave Lincoln. But if the GOP started bad mouthing Lincoln they'd lose the Latino vote the ass kissers as so desperate to keep.
As they would be painted as bigots by the MSM.
west Virginia has nothing to do with the South.
I hope that shit Sherman is picking cotton in Hell.
BD,
Go to WikiPedia and look at the history of West Virginia's founding.
Start there, and then look at who they send to Congress.
“Off topic, but why does Nate hate West Virginia? I thought he loved the South.”
Big Daddy, run do not walk for cover NOW!
WV is not, was not and will not be tolerated as southern in any way. They waited until the freedom minded men went off to fight Yankee tyrants and then they voted to succeed from Virginia.
Shesh, little late to be complaining about a war from the 1800's innit?
I suppose it's too late to talk about some guy that got Himself killed some 2000 years ago in the backwater of the middle east then, too?
Big Daddy,
The two historical periods that most effect how srewed up the US is today, politically are the 1860's through reconstruction and the 1890's through about 1917.
Notice I left out the 30's and the New Deal, that was an effect not the cause.
"I suppose it's too late to talk about some guy that got Himself killed some 2000 years ago in the backwater of the middle east then, too?"
Yep. I reckon so.
"Notice I left out the 30's and the New Deal, that was an effect not the cause."
Really? How do you feel about labor unions?
labor unions are largely insignificant.
Labor Unions are the ultimate gift for those who probably would have been working at Burger King Drive-thru's. But, if you can get together enough clout for collective bargaining, more power to you.
NATE,
Being fom LA.we know all About these turds upon high.MAY THEY ROT IN HELL.
Morgan,I ain't gonna speak for everybody else, but I can tell you if I have anything to do with it,you @your bunch of limp wristed,hippy "earth mama's" will be among the first to get the boot.And we're gonna give your land to a good, God-fearing true southron family.Invid,Big daddy, no you can't come down here after we kick your yankee asses but good this next go 'round,you shit in your own mess kit,so y'all will have to deal with.
Commenting by HaloScan
