Abraham Lincoln vs Bahir Assad. Who Is Bloodier?

So in core the question if the secession was legal or not at least.
Well ... about this are since 150 years complete libraries written with no final solution ... and it will never have one, because both sides tell always they are right!

By the way ... I'm old too and not that old like you too

 

You are not going to get slavery back. Granted, the deaths, tortures, rapes and murder of millions of blacks was A-OK to you, but your side lost the war. There are still countries where there still is slavery you may want to explore.

Otherwise your comparison is false anyway as Assad is not fighting to keep his country together. He is fighting to stay in power personally.

 

Care to go into detail

 

Lincoln saved millions of lives, specifically black lives. Of course, you only count white people, don't you? You're white, correct?

 

Sure. He also spit on the Constitution.

 

Lincoln did not "slaughter everyone." There have been few large scale wars where civilians were not treated vastly more harshly during and after the war.

The few researchers on the topic estimate very few civilian casualties, unlike European and Asian wars where civilian deaths numbered into the hundreds of thousands and millions.

Most civilian casualties in the Civil War were caused by Confederates and Southerns, as it became popular to murder their slaves rather than set them free or risking their fleeing and joining the Northern armies. Most civilian casualties were black slaves, but then you don't really count them as human, right? Only white people are actually humans with lives that matter in your side's perspective. That is the CORE of the neo-Confederates and their revisionist history.

 

Totally false. There is not one word in the Constitution allowing sedition. That is another false claim of those who lament the lose of slavery and are frustrated and angry that blacks have equal rights. Because of Lincoln, it will never be legal again for white people to rape, torture, or murder blacks despite being white. Lose of power over others does make some people angry.

 

You dont know that. Another Kreskin. I have many black friends. Stop playing the stupid race card. . The fact is more Americans especially civilians were killed because of him.

 

Lol are you equating 2015 people who think Lincoln shattered the constitution, to slave owners? No one wants slavery. Are you some kind of Lincoln extremist?

 

You keep saying "false" that Lincoln went against the constitution, but you're simply wrong. There's already been a thread about this.

http://www.usnews.com/news/history/...vil-liberties-lincolns-constitutional-dilemma

Lincoln spit on the constitution. Game over man

 

I have done a lot of research on the war and have NEVER come across where it was popular to murder slaves. Prove it.

You're probably right about most civilian casualties being black as the Union army rounded them up and placed them in contraband camps where the average mortality rate was 25%

 

" the deaths, tortures, rapes and murder of millions of blacks was A-OK to you, "
What a load of manure.
Pure, propagandist manure!
Is he a victim or a perpetrator?

Try think it through.
If you own a slave. The slave is your property. And that item of property costs dearly. Si?
Now if you are a factory owner, so what if your worker is injured, starving, killed on the job -
you just hire a new one. And if a child will do it for ya, you could hire the child for less than the cost of food for that child / day.

So as YOU claim of Moi, it is A-OK to rape, kill, etc. Black slaves
I would say it is okay to YOU for factories to work labor to death. Even children.

Those were the times. A small family farm was probably the safest life for a "little person".
Check out, Battle Cry of Freedom, The Civil War Era, James M. McPherson. I have my copy.
http://www.amazon.com/Battle-Cry-Freedom-Oxford-History/dp/019516895X


The abolition of slavery in America was terribly mismanaged.
It resulted in Mr. Lincoln ignoring the Constitution and also, making war on civilians.
Shall we discuss the rape and pillage events of the Union Army?
Taking food stuffs from civilians and leaving them to starve. The stuff of Nazis or Stalin!
So how is that so very diff from Assad, trying to maintain Syria as one nation.
Well Assad has not resorted to famine on civilians yet like Hitler, Stalin and Lincoln too.
And if Gas existed at the time of the War Between the States, YOU better believe Lincoln would have used it
to preserve the Union what-a-excuse
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My attitudes are mine after being programmed in the fifties that Abraham Lincoln was a saint
and the CSA, mindless, cruel slavers.

Yo! Jewish participants. Read up on Jewish support of the CSA. As citizens ref. Mark Twain, "Concerning the Jew" who points out that Jews in the North and South fought, like Irish finding themselves on both sides.
And Judah Benjamin too. Also a great author of historical fiction and a Jewish lineage from the Middle Ages wrote, Shaman, that involves pre War Between the States, to Mr. Lincoln's invasion. The pro CSA argument is laid out among Jewish pharmacist, physician and no one owned a slave.

LESSON:
Lincoln was NOT a Saint.
Jewish people with their superior consciousness, fought on both sides!

That tells Moi, it isn't as Black and White while too many prefer the "single answer" rather than thinking.
Imagine the Jewish Slave Owner, yes there were just like Free Black, slave owners -
Imagine the Jewish Slave Owner family, celebrating Passover/Pesach as their Black slaves served the meal.
Oy! What a headache.

Moi


r > g
How They Raped
The South before the war

View attachment 37995 ​

 

"I have many black friends."

The live span of a slave was half that of whites, around age 21. The death rate for newborn blacks was nearly 50%, meaning of course killed for not being what was wanted or being defective. The continuation of slavery was the continuation of mass murder of blacks. Obviously you are not prolife and even not even opposed to infantcide - if black - because you don't count those as "civilian" deaths, and totally ignored the large scale killing of blacks by the South during the Civil War either.

Making up crap doesn't work either. Far less civilians died that soldiers, by far. Explain how the continuation of slavery benefited blacks, though I remember Ron Paul has a theory about that one too. Relax, its not illegal for you to have a confederate flag sticker on your vehicle or as a patch on your clothes.

 

Yes, I remember Ron Paul's claim that black slaves were really lucky to be slaves. And, like him, you joining in your hatred of Jews certainly fits right in. Fortunately Ron Paul is FINALLY gone, as is his and your Confederacy. Your message shows why I am correct that the social order of the South HAD to be destroyed and outlawed. They, like you, argued that slavery was a good thing for black people, they were lucky to be slaves rather than free Northern white workers.

You know, there are countries where they would gladly give you the fabulous job of being a slave to then live a carefree life. Maybe you should explore that career option.



There is no reason to ever bother to debate a racist or a bigot.

 

No one here wants slavery. I believe the argument here is that Lincoln trashed the constitution. But this thread has been made a thousand times and this always ends with the pro Lincoln folks not being able to explain why it's ok to go AGAINST the constitution when there are other ways of handling things. The pro constitutionalists always win this one.

 

You were basically calling me a racist because Im white

I will tell you that growing up in Levittown NY I never saw a black person except on Tv or when I went with my father who was in the Navy to Floyd Bennet field. Even as a kid I though they were cool. When I joined the marines I quickly learned was all that mattered was can you count on the guy next to you and i sure could count on those black marines we were brothers in arms

 

No, not one of you can quote a word in the Constitution allowing sedition. Rather, over and over being a part of the Union and duties in this regards are mentioned. You got NOTHING. You don't even PRETEND you can quote anything in the Constitution backing you up. I did quote the US Constitution to the contrary.

At least you should admit you think slavery and murdering blacks is something just fine with you and therefore totally irrelevant.

 

You can not show one prohibiting secession in fact the DOI states it was their duty to leave

 

There is one thing Lincoln did arguably unconstitutional and while denying it this is the rage of the angry white Confederates on this forum. His Emancipation Proclamation. That is what so infuriates the current, but dwindling crop of angry white Confederates, he announced that black slaves were free. And it makes angry white men sick to think of it.

 

Wow!

Please read what I uploaded and reply if you choose with no hyperbole
Ron Paul is not the originator of an opinion he adopted.
And the adoption of an opinion by this person or that person does not discredit the truthiness.
Cenk Uygur found out Homefront likes him as it does Ron Paul.
Cenk realized one should not be discredited via who supports them

Now If YOU chose to reply to what I upload and not ride your own hyperbole, I will reply.
Otherwise, you are welcome t the last word.

Moi
There are none so dumb
as those who will not think.

r > g
A cause of the
War Between the States.

View attachment 37996
Ottawa enslaves the Provinces.​

 

Wow, you're one of those Al Sharpton extremists.

http://www.usnews.com/news/history/...vil-liberties-lincolns-constitutional-dilemma

You guys never win this argument. Why do you keep trying?

 

Ah, so you don't want to talk about the Constitution at all, but the DOI. The DOI is neither a law nor the Constitution,but that's takes some thinking to understand the difference. Regardless, I don't read in the DOI the right to violate the Constitution nor do the grievances against the King apply as there was no King. That claim is a F A I L.

What violated the DOI is slavery.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

Name a violation of the Constitution? I named many. One of those was the duty to pay federal taxes and other levies. It did not allow the option of not doing so.

 

Stormfronters are inherently losers. Being total failures in life and generally repulsive, anti social people, they resort to claiming their accomplishment in life was being born white. Their life is downhill forever after that. Self pity crybabies over it, they lament that Abraham Lincoln was unfair. Boo hoo. So sad.

But, then, it is historic fact that white Confederate men were losers, as everyone knows? Your side lost, got crushed - and your side started the fight like a bunch of foolish extra stupid people that Southern Confederate leaders were. Turns out they weren't so superior after all and God was against your side too. Basically everyone is against your Confederate side. People don't like failures, losers and crybabies.

But, there is a loser's side prize. You can put a 5X3 Confederate flag on a beat up old pickup truck and drive around in it declaring "look at me!" as your act of defiance.

 

The constitution is only there to protect the rights given in the DOI without it its worthless


Maybe you should read it again

Then it goes on to show how the king of England is denying these rights. Who the despot is matters not

 

First you have to prove your claim of racial superiority and why your life matters more than others. I'm listening.

- - - Updated - - -

You really don't understand how law works, do you?

What rights was the North denying the South?