https://apnews.com/f55584c87592eb48ebe958ded3d89b53 How did the Pentagon ban the confederate flag without using the word "ban" or "confederate flag?" They made a list of "permissible flags" and conveniently failed to include the confederate flag. We should all credit the Pentagon for being clever while condemning Trump for his inherently moronic and racist conduct.
*sigh*. I know people's attitudes change, and thereby public perception with it. But do people know why those statues were erected to begin with? Or why it wasn't until, oh I don't know 2013-ish or so that we started talking about banning the confederate flag? It's because the Americans who fought in the civil war, didn't see the confederates as traitors. Let me repeat that: They didn't see them as traitors, as the whole point from the Northern prospective was to keep the Southern States within the Union. They saw them as an opposing side on a dividing issue, that needn't have gone to war over. When the war was over, they could have tried the confederates, but they didn't. The proclamation was all the North wanted to achieve, and with it achieved the war was won. It is only now, some centuries after the war that Northern Liberals want to go "We won, time to banish you in history". Which is just utterly hypocritical. If the ones who suffered the most in the war didn't want to banish their fellow Americans, why do we want to?
Very True and Agreed. The Pentagon is Validating what 3/4ths of America (Already) thinks: Trump is a RACIST MORON (Who likes to Glorify Symbols of Black Oppression). Great Move by the Pentagon.
When do you think those statues were built? Most of them were like 100 years later when blacks started getting rights.
Does it really matter when they were built? Point is, they didn't see confederates as their mortal enemy. We're treating the former Confederates(keep in mind, all of whom are dead.) as though they were al-qaeda or the taliban. And that's just not true, as evidenced by the letters of soldiers at the times. No one wanted it, and they all wanted it to end. Have you ever had any siblings before? Ever fought them before? But in the end, you make up?
So now the right supports participation trophies, how strange. Regardless of what the North felt, they were traitors to both the Nation and humanity.
So in other words, you want to juxtapose your own views of justice and morality on even the side that fought for what you believe in. That's your choice to do so, but I won't do that personally. I'll evaluate the situation based on who did what when at the time, and make my own judgments. That's why one of my major revisions is that despite the positivity of the war's outcome, I view Lincoln as a George W Bush before GWB. Like Bush, Lincoln was unilateral. No negotiations, no nothing. Even though Jefferson Davis wanted to negotiate a peaceful separation and to the end of the war sought to negotiate with Lincoln. Lincoln could have saved a number of American lives and chose not to. In fact, it was Lincoln's advisors after Lincoln died who offered reparations to the South and to rebuild the Southern economy(decisions that, if decidedly taken may have ultimately averted the civil war altogether.) So if we're going to push 21st century moralities onto people, I'm going to judge Lincoln very very harshly by those standards. He was a warmonger who failed and didn't attempt very hard in reality to keep the union in tact.
