Join INGunOwners For Free
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15
  1. #1
    K_W
    K_W is offline
    Grandmaster K_W's Avatar

    User Info Menu

    The "Civil War" and "Revolutionary War"... were not.

    This should be a lively discussion...

    The "Civil War" was not a civil war... and the "Revolutionary War" was not a revolution.

    "Civil War" - War between the United States and the Confederate States
    "Revolutionary War" - War between the United States and Britain

    civil war - a war between political factions or regions within the same country.
    revolution - an overthrow or repudiation and the thorough replacement of an established government or political system by the people governed.

    The "Civil War" was a slow and simmering revolution culminating in an semi-organized secession of individual self governing states from membership in, and the central authority of, the United States government. These now independent states formed a new central government, which was met by a major 5 year long open war between the remnants of the "United States" and the "Confederate States of America" (both separate and independent nations).

    The "Revolutionary War" was a short but true civil war among British subjects (residing in 13 British Colonies), followed by a declaration of independence and establishment of an independent government (the actual revolution). Then came 7 years of another true civil war (within the United States) between Americans loyal to Britain and those loyal to the United States... and a near world war as Britain Empire and it's allies sought to invade and reclaim their former colonies from United States government and it's allies.


    In short...

    The only reason we can call the "Civil War" a "civil war" is our United States government never recognized the CSA's revolt... and we won.

    The only reason we can can call the "Revolutionary War" a "revolutionary war" is we revolted in the middle of two civil wars... and we won.

    ...

    Do you agree or not?
    Last edited by K_W; 07-03-2019 at 18:14.

  2. #2
    Grandmaster HoughMade's Avatar

    User Info Menu

    Wrong on the first one, right on the second one.

    Secession was illegal and, therefore, there was no war against a separate entity. There was a "civil" war or a war to put down an insurrection.
    ​Bullies suck. They also make you stronger.

  3. #3
    K_W
    K_W is offline
    Grandmaster K_W's Avatar

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by HoughMade View Post
    Wrong on the first one, right on the second one.

    Secession was illegal and, therefore, there was no war against a separate entity.
    While the CSA was never "officially recognized" by any major world powers, for 5 years the CSA operated, negotiated and traded wholly independent of the USA.

    Kind of like how China thinks Taiwan is still China. If China ever invades and conquere Taiwan, it will always have been part of China... that is if we want to keep them happy and trading with us.

    Also, no significant operations (excluding military forts) of the US government remained in the CSA after secession... Unlike in the Revolutionary War where large areas and even whole cities within the boundaries of the United States remained controlled and even loyal to the now foreign British Empire.
    Last edited by K_W; 07-03-2019 at 18:36.

  4. #4
    Expert BigRed's Avatar

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by HoughMade View Post
    Wrong on the first one, right on the second one.

    Secession was illegal and, therefore, there was no war against a separate entity. There was a "civil" war or a war to put down an insurrection.
    Please show me where, in the Constitution of the united States, the ordinance of secession adopted by South Carolina in 1860 was prohibited and illegal.

  5. #5
    Grandmaster Leadeye's Avatar

    User Info Menu

    To me the civil war was one we could have avoided, it was the result of really bad leadership on both sides of the issue. Winfield Scott knew what the war would be like and made his views known, nobody was listening.
    Where's the Kaboom? There was supposed to be an earth shattering Kaboom.

    Marvin the Martian

  6. #6
    Grandmaster HoughMade's Avatar

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by BigRed View Post
    Please show me where, in the Constitution of the united States, the ordinance of secession adopted by South Carolina in 1860 was prohibited and illegal.
    Simple. All the colonies, then states willingly adopted a Constitution that made them a single nation, the United States of America. The Constitution has specific provisions on how to become a state. There is no provision on how to leave the Union. This means, that having joined the union, there is no way to leave the union as it now (and then) stands.

    The Constitution could be amended to allow for secession- it never was. The other states and federal government could choose to allow a state to leave whether or not there is a mechanism for it. They did not. The Constitution is explicit that a state that becomes a state is a member of the union, the United States. That’s right there. Show me the language that allows exit....and important clauses that go to the heart of the Constitution are not left “understood”.

    There is no doubt that South Carolina willingly joined the union and ratified the Constitution that contained no provision to leave. That was their choice. The ONLY way out was (is) to wage war, which is not legal, but extra-legal. In other words, it’s illegality is irrelevant if you win the war (as it was when the United States was formed), but it is no less illegal.

    Oh...and there is Article I, Section 10 of the Constitution.
    Last edited by HoughMade; 07-03-2019 at 22:00.
    ​Bullies suck. They also make you stronger.

  7. #7
    Expert

    User Info Menu

    Do you guys mean "the war against northern aggression"...
    I'd give my right arm to be ambidextrous...

  8. #8
    Expert CampingJosh's Avatar

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Mongo59 View Post
    Do you guys mean "the war against northern aggression"...
    I think you misspelled "The War to Continue Slavery and Dehumanize an Entire Race of People."
    "The problem with internet quotations is that many are not genuine." -Abraham Lincoln

  9. #9
    Grandmaster

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Mongo59 View Post
    Do you guys mean "the war against northern aggression"...
    Quote Originally Posted by CampingJosh View Post
    I think you misspelled "The War to Continue Slavery and Dehumanize an Entire Race of People."
    Hey it only took 4 hours, must be a slow night. Should I post the obligatory "in before the lock".

  10. #10
    Master Lex Concord's Avatar

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by HoughMade View Post
    Simple. All the colonies, then states willingly adopted a Constitution that made them a single nation, the United States of America. The Constitution has specific provisions on how to become a state. There is no provision on how to leave the Union. This means, that having joined the union, there is no way to leave the union as it now (and then) stands.

    The Constitution could be amended to allow for secession- it never was. The other states and federal government could choose to allow a state to leave whether or not there is a mechanism for it. They did not. The Constitution is explicit that a state that becomes a state is a member of the union, the United States. That’s right there. Show me the language that allows exit....and important clauses that go to the heart of the Constitution are not left “understood”.

    There is no doubt that South Carolina willingly joined the union and ratified the Constitution that contained no provision to leave. That was their choice. The ONLY way out was (is) to wage war, which is not legal, but extra-legal. In other words, it’s illegality is irrelevant if you win the war (as it was when the United States was formed), but it is no less illegal.

    Oh...and there is Article I, Section 10 of the Constitution.
    That reads a lot like "the power to prevent voluntary dissolution of said agency is implicitly vested in the federal government, the Tenth Amendment and that power's absence from the U.S. Constitution notwithstanding".

    Amendment Ten: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

    The Bill of Rights, though ratified several year after the Constitution, was created a mere 8 days after the Constitution (and before the Constitution was officially presented).

    I have a hard time reconciling the suicide pact mindset considering those facts.

    While the attack on Fort Sumter may have rendered any discussion about peaceful means of secession moot in the direct context of "The Civil War", it seems illogical that the intent of the framers was to ensure their progeny must experience the same bloody fate they had so recently endured if, yet again, human events made it "necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another".

    Almost forgot. Happy "Successful Secession from Tyrannical Rule" Day!

    Last edited by Lex Concord; 07-03-2019 at 23:07.
    Quote Originally Posted by Benjamin Franklin
    Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tench Coxe
    Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American ... the unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people.
    Quote Originally Posted by William Blakstone
    It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Button Dodge