Robert E. Lee was a traitor, a brute and a slaver who wouldn't even trade black union soldiers taken prisoner for the lives of his own men because he saw black people as property to be owned.https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/06/the-myth-of-the-kindly-general-lee/529038/ …
-
-
NO. It was about free labor via slavery. Period.
-
Yes, war is always about money and greed.
-
Ok. If that make you feel better.

-
Feel better? Discussing a war has nothing to do about feelings. I’m a history fan, civil and Barbary Wars in particular. I enjoy the topic.
-
Glad you’re a fan. Now let’s deal with accuracy. Slavery had everything to do with that war. It’s been proven a thousand times over
-
Yes, States Rights to have slavery. But there isn’t any way to prove. Compare to Iraq war, was it about terrorism, which is the official position, or about oil?
-
There is no comparison to slavery.
-
We talking about two different things man. You are discussing slavery and how bad it was and I’m discussing History. You are right, slavery was and continues to be an horrific crime against God, but that is a separate discussion from politics of war.
- 2 réponses de plus
Nouvelle conversation -
-
-
Nope. The southern states were all about Federal overreach when it came to violating other states' sovereignty by enforcing the Fugitive Slave Act or the Dred Scott decision. It was never about states' rights. What you're saying is a lie.
-
I was taught that it was about “States rights“ in college 30 years ago. And I live in MA! I knew better at the time, but I couldn’t believe the professor was saying that. So some people are just mistaken because that’s what they were taught. And they never looked into it further.
-
It drives me up the wall when people say the war was about states’ rights and neglect to mention *which* states rights in particular were so important to the southern states that they were willing to fight a war over them. (It was slavery.)
-
I don't get it either. We're not talking about speculation here. It's not oral or anecdotal history. They literally wrote it down - in official documents. And more than once.
-
Yes, the overwhelming reason for the secession was the impending spectre of abolition, but the union absolutely was NOT fighting about slavery, so saying the war was about slavery is an outright lie. The war was about denying the ability to secede.
-
OK. I wouldn't call it a lie, though. The reason they went to war was because they were not allowed to secede from the Union. Which still leaves slavery as the cause for wanting to secede in the first place.
-
But slavery was exactly zero percent of the reason the Union was fighting. So saying the war was about slavery is either a deliberate lie, or foundational ignorance.
-
I don’t want to speak for these guys, but they might disagree with that statement.pic.twitter.com/N5YfU94Wj3
- 4 réponses de plus
Nouvelle conversation -
-
-
States rights to what?
-
States rights to Govern themselves under the 10th Amendment and articles of confederation. This still happens. Federal Gov says Weed is illegal, many states claim they have the right to allow it. Same with Sanctuary cities etc.
-
Nothing specific, got it.

-
I'm not sure exactly what you are looking for here. What sort of specifics do you want? Obviously slavery was the catalyst, is that what you're looking for? If yes, that is obvious right?
Fin de la conversation
Nouvelle conversation -
Le chargement semble prendre du temps.
Twitter est peut-être en surcapacité ou rencontre momentanément un incident. Réessayez ou rendez-vous sur la page Twitter Status pour plus d'informations.