Subject:  Re: Inside |
Author:
Checkerpaw
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 11:43:05 05/22/01 Tue
In reply to:
Anguirus
's message, "It's nice to believe that the civil war was completly about slavery. It's nice to believe that everything a politician says is true. It's nice that we had Ab as a president. It's even beteer that he Was patriotic towards his side. Free the slaves, end the war..." on 13:15:14 05/21/01 Mon
OK, I am going to be doing this a little bit differently, to make it easier to respond to, so don't get messed up.
>Ofcourse he would arrest someone. Do you want riots in
>the streets? You want more murders? Heck no. He did
>what was needed to be done. Another thing is that he
>didn't KILL the prisoners. Unlike some dictators you
>mentioned.
Wait a moment here. There were NO riots in the streets. That never happened. If anything, throwing 10,000 people in prison would INCITE, not stop riots or murders. And what did Lincoln arrest these people for? For "treason." This meant that they said the South had a right secession. They did NOTHING to start violence.
Yeah, Lincoln didn't kill them. He merely let them lay in dark, damp, cold prisons for no reason, and no fair trial, and no hope of getting out.
>He was probably one of the greatest
>president's we ever had. Look throughout the history
>of America. I could say George Washington massacared
>some defensless soldiers who were celebrating
>christmas. But that got him to be president didn't it?
Greatest president? Why do you think I'm bringing all this up? To show that he was a dictator in the manner of the tyrants of Greece and Caesars of Rome.
The George Washington thing. I know what you are refering to. And I have only one thing to say: Who did you want to win the Revolutionary War? Without that victory, the patriots hopes to win the war were almost nil.
Yeah, and the Hessian's way of celebratng Christmas was getting disgustingly drunk. That is aside the point, but I just thought I would add that.
By the way, Lincoln and his generals, by war crime standards at that day, could have gotten the death penalty. Sherman himself admitted this.
>I could say that pesidents during wars were horrible
>dictators for arresting propagandists from the other
>side.
Propagandists? Are you sure?
>But that was okay for them to do. Infact they
>almsot had to do it. Don't want your side thinking
>that they might be wrong. Don't want a war amongst a
>larger war. And presidents don't have complete control
>of the countrey. Cops, Mayors,Goveners, politics... A
>president just has to sign a paper that says "Thats
>okay." If you got some document about someone
>arresting a propagandist, wouldn't you be relieved?
I am sorry, Anguirus. I don't get that part. Explain it to me again, and maybe a little more clearly. What was your point?
>But hey who am I to say anything. Checkerpaw... and I
>don't want to get to personal here, but you might as
>well be saying "White power!" The debates you've
>started have to do with either saying that the germans
>weren't killers. That the south should have won. That
>the "jews" as you so lovingly put ti, should just
>chill out, cause none of that happened to them. And
>this isn't a conservative thing either.
Minor note: I am not saying that the Germans didn't kill. I am saying the "Holocaust" is the hoax of the 20 century. I am not saying that the South should've won. I am saying that the South was on the right, and the North was clearly in the wrong.
Oh yeah, and I never said that the Jews should chill out. But maybe you should.
You are right though. The above have nothing to do with conservatism. So?
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
| |
Feedback: 