150th Anniversary

[MarcBee]

Originally Posted by RamoneWooddell

Actually the Confederate Territory of Oklahoma actually was to be an Indian State with representation in the Confederate Congress.

"Coulda, Shoulda, Woulda" makes for an interesting discussion, but CSA didn't win, so it's all a dream. (And dreams are interesting at times, I agree. ) Besides, what about all the other--probably dozens--of claims by other Native Americans tribes? CSA would have honored all those having any plausible legal basis? Compare Indian State claim with African slavery--interesting that a political claim was to be recognized, but a human rights claim,,,not so much!

Perhaps you should study history instead of propraganda!

I'm happy to study both. Propaganda is merely the way one side of an issue wishes to rhetorically represent itself. Therefore, I have indeed been taught "propaganda." And haven't you?

[MarcBee]

Originally Posted by Luke

Marcbee if you want to use the argument that because maps do not ago the CSS in existence today it doesn't exist then by that same argument one could say that the nation of Israel doesn't exist because in most middle eastern Curries today those maps still do not show Israel.

No, maps are merely one point of evidence, not the whole story regarding "national sovereignty," but a generally valid one. If a country merely "doesn't exist" on the maps of a few enemies, then it's obvious what is happening in those cases. That is the case with Israel--recognized by all other countries except a few enemies. This is not to be compared with the Confederate States of America, which is recognized by ZERO other modern countries, and appears on NO modern maps, except, I imagine, those printed in a few basements by delusional sympathizers. Just try to buy one--CSA is probably difficult to find printed in a 20th or 21st Century atlas--except as a point referring to 1861-65 history. But they probably have one at the Gettysburg National Park gift shop!

middle eastern Curries

Sorry I don't know what "middle eastern Curries" are. Is it a local dish?


PS. Luke, please start rereading what you expect other people to read, instead of assuming autofill knows what you intend.

[Luke]

Originally Posted by MarcBee

No, maps are merely one point of evidence, not the whole story regarding "national sovereignty," but a generally valid one. If a country merely "doesn't exist" on the maps of a few enemies, then it's obvious what is happening in those cases. That is the case with Israel--recognized by all other countries except a few enemies. This is not to be compared with the Confederate States of America, which is recognized by ZERO other modern countries, and appears on NO modern maps, except, I imagine, those printed in a few basements by delusional sympathizers. Just try to buy one--CSA is probably difficult to find printed in a 20th or 21st Century atlas--except as a point referring to 1861-65 history. But they probably have one at the Gettysburg National Park gift shop!



Sorry I don't know what "middle eastern Curries" are. Is it a local dish?


PS. Luke, please start rereading what you expect other people to read, instead of assuming autofill knows what you intend.

lol my bad countries not Curries hahahahahaha

[Nitehawk013]

This thread reminds me of an episode of Family Guy (I know...not a good cartoon at all). Anyway, they end up in the south and they go to a civil war re-enactment, but at the end of it...the south doesn't lose. Instead Lee knocks the other general out and declares the south the victors and then all the southerners start cheering. Brian and Stewie point out that isn't what happened, the south lost and the southerners get violent and the family has to run for their lives.

The south lost. The CSA doesn't exist. We have a better chance of finding Bigfoot living in a suburban home with the Loch Ness monster swimming in his pool than the south has of ever "rising again".

[RamoneWooddell]

Originally Posted by Nitehawk013

This thread reminds me of an episode of Family Guy (I know...not a good cartoon at all). Anyway, they end up in the south and they go to a civil war re-enactment, but at the end of it...the south doesn't lose. Instead Lee knocks the other general out and declares the south the victors and then all the southerners start cheering. Brian and Stewie point out that isn't what happened, the south lost and the southerners get violent and the family has to run for their lives.

The south lost. The CSA doesn't exist. We have a better chance of finding Bigfoot living in a suburban home with the Loch Ness monster swimming in his pool than the south has of ever "rising again".

Show me where I can find a surrender of the CSA government not the surrender of the Army of Northern Virginia or where I can see a Peace Treaty signed by both the US Inc on behalf of the United States of America and the Confederates State? Without either of these two things the nation of the Confederate States of America still exits. The whole reason for Reconstruction is due to the continual existence of that great nation.

Feel free to prove:

The States which are the CSA never seceded from the Union?

The States which are the CSA never formed their own Government?

The States which are the CSA never were under Reconstruction thereby under forced Military Rule and aggressive Government treatment?

Also I noticed that you and others who have posted here seem to think that because the Union won the war suddenly the Confederacy was wrong or didn't exist or doesn't still exist. So then following your logic if Hitler had defeated the Allies in World War II, Hitler would have been right and the rest of Europe should just suck it and move on?

Amazing that might makes right in the eyes of so many!

[RamoneWooddell]

Originally Posted by MarcBee

"Coulda, Shoulda, Woulda" makes for an interesting discussion, but CSA didn't win, so it's all a dream. (And dreams are interesting at times, I agree. ) Besides, what about all the other--probably dozens--of claims by other Native Americans tribes? CSA would have honored all those having any plausible legal basis? Compare Indian State claim with African slavery--interesting that a political claim was to be recognized, but a human rights claim,,,not so much!



I'm happy to study both. Propaganda is merely the way one side of an issue wishes to rhetorically represent itself. Therefore, I have indeed been taught "propaganda." And haven't you?

I just stated they were to be a state and have representation I did not state that they did not have representation already as a territory.

The problem is that you are arguing from a moral stand point instead of a constitutional one. Morals are relative to the person holding them. But since you are on a moral rant because you cannot form a constitutional one then what will you do with the fact that Lincoln on stated slaves in the CSA were free. He had no power to do so because he was not the CSA President was. Second is the fact that before the War of Northern Aggression there were about 250,000 free blacks in the South and about 10% of them owned slaves. One of the largest plantations in Charleston SC was owned by a free black man who owned about 200 slaves. Then what about the slave holding states which were forced to stay in the Union like Maryland and Kentucky etc. Their slaves were not included in the Emancipation.

So much for a moral coming from forked tongued Lincoln.

[MarcBee]

Originally Posted by RamoneWooddell

The problem is that you are arguing from a moral stand point instead of a constitutional one.

Neither moral nor constitutional--my points hinge around intitial comment in thread--to assert that laws, constitutions, and so-called rights are just words until someone is able to back up the intention of law with force. For big issues, big forces often used, such as a military. For other rules, mere shame can be an effective enforcer. US Constitution? It has probably always been only selectively applied.

Yes, I also went for low-hanging fruit just for fun, such as the wrongness of slavery, or other pop-morality slam dunks, etc. Not exactly the issue with CSA. I'm guilty as charged there. But....

But since you are on a moral rant

If my defining an invisible CSA to be one and the same with a non-existing CSA is "moral rant," then okay. IMO, this whole silly debate is revolving around what the word "REALLY" means. As in, "The CSA doesn't really exist today."

Morals are relative to the person holding them.

Saints be praised, we do agree about something.

THE END
.

[RamoneWooddell]

Originally Posted by MarcBee

Neither moral nor constitutional--my points hinge around intitial comment in thread--to assert that laws, constitutions, and so-called rights are just words until someone is able to back up the intention of law with force. For big issues, big forces often used, such as a military. For other rules, mere shame can be an effective enforcer. US Constitution? It has probably always been only selectively applied.

Yes, I also went for low-hanging fruit just for fun, such as the wrongness of slavery, or other pop-morality slam dunks, etc. Not exactly the issue with CSA. I'm guilty as charged there. But....



If my defining an invisible CSA to be one and the same with a non-existing CSA is "moral rant," then okay. IMO, this whole silly debate is revolving around what the word "REALLY" means. As in, "The CSA doesn't really exist today."



Saints be praised, we do agree about something.

THE END
.

Yeah it is the end if you ignore the Constitution of the United States as Lincoln and the Radical Republicans did.

We agree also in that any further conversation with you about this is pointless. Forced exile does not mean invisibility or non-existence.

[Esaias]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s6jSqt39vFM

[RamoneWooddell]

Here are some maps.

https://www.google.com/search?q=conf...AUoAQ&dpr=0.85

http://www.wtv-zone.com/civilwar/map.html

http://etc.usf.edu/maps/galleries/us/civilwar/index.php

There are maps of the Confederate States of America. Of course modern maps will not show her because she is occupied.