best president ever Finals Time! Topic

Posted by bad_luck on 8/14/2017 1:14:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 8/14/2017 1:08:00 PM (view original):
Posted by Benis on 8/14/2017 1:05:00 PM (view original):
I think Mike watched Abraham Lincoln Vampire Hunter too many times. Reality seems just outside his grasp.
Actually just fascinated that a country could tear itself apart when I was relatively young. Read a lot on the CW, specifically, and American History in general. It's not as simple as most think it is.

Lincoln freed slaves is the consensus. But wrong.
Freedom for the slaves was an outcome that resulted from the civil war though, so the consensus is correct.
But Lincoln didn't free them. Nor did he want to.

Facts suck when they don't support your argument, don't they?
8/14/2017 3:46 PM
Posted by Benis on 8/14/2017 1:44:00 PM (view original):
One guy tries to uphold the Constitution by preventing States from unlawfully seceding from the USA.

And the other guy executed women and children.

Same thing guys! Same thing! Lulz
So it's your contention that women and children didn't die in the Civil War?

Might wanna do some fact-checking, bro.
8/14/2017 3:54 PM
Posted by tecwrg on 8/14/2017 3:46:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 8/14/2017 1:14:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 8/14/2017 1:08:00 PM (view original):
Posted by Benis on 8/14/2017 1:05:00 PM (view original):
I think Mike watched Abraham Lincoln Vampire Hunter too many times. Reality seems just outside his grasp.
Actually just fascinated that a country could tear itself apart when I was relatively young. Read a lot on the CW, specifically, and American History in general. It's not as simple as most think it is.

Lincoln freed slaves is the consensus. But wrong.
Freedom for the slaves was an outcome that resulted from the civil war though, so the consensus is correct.
But Lincoln didn't free them. Nor did he want to.

Facts suck when they don't support your argument, don't they?
His original intentions are irrelevant. Freedom for the slaves was a result of the civil war.
8/14/2017 3:54 PM
As was the death of 600,000+ Americans.
8/14/2017 3:55 PM
Posted by tecwrg on 8/14/2017 3:46:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 8/14/2017 1:14:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 8/14/2017 1:08:00 PM (view original):
Posted by Benis on 8/14/2017 1:05:00 PM (view original):
I think Mike watched Abraham Lincoln Vampire Hunter too many times. Reality seems just outside his grasp.
Actually just fascinated that a country could tear itself apart when I was relatively young. Read a lot on the CW, specifically, and American History in general. It's not as simple as most think it is.

Lincoln freed slaves is the consensus. But wrong.
Freedom for the slaves was an outcome that resulted from the civil war though, so the consensus is correct.
But Lincoln didn't free them. Nor did he want to.

Facts suck when they don't support your argument, don't they?
What! But but but, Mike has been telling us that Lincoln killed 600,000 Americans over property.
8/14/2017 3:57 PM
I guess in Mike's universe he would have preferred to spare the 600,000 lives and have a USA and a CSA where they still force human beings into a live of bondage. Cool stuff bro.
8/14/2017 3:58 PM
Why are we arguing about who started the war?

We ALL know who ended it.
8/14/2017 4:05 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 8/14/2017 3:55:00 PM (view original):
As was the death of 600,000+ Americans.
I guess it isn't surprising that the south was willing to go to war and kill 600000 people in order to preserve their ownership of 4 million slaves.
8/14/2017 4:07 PM
"But Lincoln didn't free them. Nor did he want to."

Also, no **** sherlock. That has already been said a dozen times in this thread.
8/14/2017 4:12 PM
Posted by Benis on 8/14/2017 3:58:00 PM (view original):
I guess in Mike's universe he would have preferred to spare the 600,000 lives and have a USA and a CSA where they still force human beings into a live of bondage. Cool stuff bro.
I've said, repeatedly, that I think Lincoln could have waited a tad longer than 1 month after taking office to declare war on his own people. You know, like negotiate or something.

Damn, you're setting retard records in this thread. Of course, if you read three posts before jumping in feet first, that's likely to happen.

Here's what I think could have been done: Abandon the unfinished Fort Sumter(that blocked Charleston harbor and therefore could stop import/export of goods), sit down, as President, with the leaders of the seceded states to find out what they needed to return to the fold and, if their terms were unacceptable, do what was necessary to preserve the United States of America. He didn't. He tried to resupply Ft Sumter with food, ammunition and men. And, much to everyone's surprise, SC didn't want that to happen.

http://san.beck.org/LincolnCivilWar.html

In his inaugural address President Lincoln warned against a civil war while promising that he would not invade the South. Yet he indicated that the Federal Government would continue to occupy its property in the South and would attempt to collect “duties and imposts.” He promised he would not impose “obnoxious strangers” in Federal offices in hostile regions. The mails would continue unless repelled. He called for “a peaceful solution of the national troubles and the restoration of fraternal sympathies and affections.” However, in his view this came to mean only by the retention of the states in the Union.

Early in his presidency Lincoln rejected the option of letting the southern states withdraw peacefully. He took the position that secession is illegal and that the use of force against the Federal Government was rebellion and treason against the United States. He refused to recognize the Confederate States as legal entities and would not let anyone in his administration negotiate with their representatives. He also rejected an offer of mediation by Napoleon III of France. In March 1861 Jefferson Davis sent peace commissioners to Washington with an offer to pay for all Federal property in the South and to take on the southern portion of the national debt. However, Lincoln refused even to acknowledge them, thus blocking any attempt to resolve the conflicts by peaceful means. He took the hard line that the southern states must return to the Union. Unless they did so, or unless he relinquished the forts and tariffs, it became inevitable that the two sides would fight. His position has been compared to that of the British empire, which demanded that their American colonists pay their taxes.

Lincoln was careful to avoid beginning the war with an attack. However, he managed to instigate an attack on Fort Sumter by refusing to negotiate with South Carolina or to withdraw Federal forces from there. He informed the government of South Carolina that he was sending in supplies to his besieged men with the warning that he would retaliate against an attack.

8/14/2017 4:43 PM
If Lincoln had agreed to negotiate the settlement of the Federal installations in the seceded states and their portion of the national debt, and if he gave up the exploitative taxes, then most of the costs of the war probably could have been saved. The remaining northern states may have lost some of the wealth they were exploiting from the South by the tariffs, but that would have been a small loss compared to the war costs. The greatest advantage of a peaceful settlement would have been saving the 625,000 lives that were lost and the other injuries. One can hardly overestimate the psychological trauma caused by young men being forced to kill their fellow countrymen in miserable conditions that caused so many to die of disease. Many civilians were also killed, wounded, or imprisoned.
8/14/2017 4:48 PM
Understanding this tragic flaw in Lincoln’s character that led to the terrible Civil War is especially significant because his virtues of honesty, intellect, integrity, compassion, mercy, humor, determination, diligence, and sense of justice make him one of America’s greatest heroes. His talents would have been much better put to use in using diplomatic and political skills rather than in prosecuting a brutal war. Because of Lincoln’s imperialistic approach to this crisis, the Federal Government of the United States was greatly strengthened and centralized. Without the war the people in the states would have retained more local control. He also developed the role of the President as commander-in-chief in perhaps the largest war in western civilization up to that time. This war was a transition to modern warfare in which the industries of nations are pitted against each other, and millions of people are put in harm’s way.
8/14/2017 4:49 PM
As Americans maybe we need to ask ourselves why we allowed the terrible injustice of slavery to lead to such a destructive war when every other nation except Haiti managed to resolve this issue without horrendous violence.
8/14/2017 4:50 PM
In the 19th century most nations in the world abolished slavery by peaceful means. The British freed all the slaves in their empire in six years, completing the process in 1840. Most Latin American nations emancipated all their slaves between 1813 and 1854, and the gradual liberation of slaves in Brazil was completed in 1888. The only other violent emancipation of slaves was the slave uprising in Haiti in 1794.
8/14/2017 4:52 PM
jesus DougT23...make shorter posts. There's no way I'm reading all that bullshit.
8/14/2017 4:54 PM
◂ Prev 1...29|30|31|32|33...45 Next ▸
best president ever Finals Time! Topic

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2024 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.