.

@Gargantua:

@Jermofoot:

@Gargantua:

Time for JERMOFOOT to Eat some HUMBLE PIE too. :)

Have you actually read the Emancipation Proclamation?

Is more words Lincoln says
“If you surrender now - You can keep your slaves, but if you DON’T Surrender, we’ll make it illegal to own slaves just in the REBEL states.”

The Irony?

AFTER the war was over, for a period of time, places like Missouri, and people like Ulysses Grant, still OWNED Slaves.

I missed your point. I think you did too.

My point is that you don’t know [edited by GG] about the American Civil War.

I’m waiting for you to explain what exactly you are addressing.  I have no clue why you expect me to be humbled by your completely myopic take on US history.

You see, Lincoln wasn’t an emperor, or king, or what have you.  He couldn’t sweep his hand and make all slaves free at a moment’s notice.  But you’d be blind to say he wasn’t an opponent of slavery on the other hand.

Slavery was abolished completely with the 13th Amendment. I don’t expect you to know that being from Canuckistan, so why don’t you take your own time to see when that was exactly.

Or come back with some sort of poignant insight or cogent argument.

I’m waiting for you to explain what exactly you are addressing. I have no clue why you expect me to be humbled by your completely myopic take on US history.

You see, Lincoln wasn’t an emperor, or king, or what have you. He couldn’t sweep his hand and make all slaves free at a moment’s notice. But you’d be blind to say he wasn’t an opponent of slavery on the other hand.

Slavery was abolished completely with the 13th Amendment. I don’t expect you to know that being from Canuckistan, so why don’t you take your own time to see when that was exactly.

Or come back with some sort of poignant insight or cogent argument.

Jermofoot - I am directly addressing the fact that you completely lack the knowledge to discuss or comment on the American civil war.

In your last post you make two points. Both points are disingenious garbage based totally on your own perverted misconception.

Example #1

You see, Lincoln wasn’t an emperor, or king, or what have you. He couldn’t sweep his hand and make all slaves free at a moment’s notice.

When in fact:

Emancipation Proclamation is an order issued to all segments of the Executive branch (including the Army and Navy) of the United States by President Abraham Lincoln on January 1, 1863, during the American Civil War. It was based on the president’s constitutional authority as commander in chief of the armed forces; it was not a law passed by Congress. It proclaimed all those enslaved in Confederate territory to be forever free, and ordered the Army (and all segments of the Executive branch) to treat as free all those enslaved in ten states that were still in rebellion

Example #2

Slavery was abolished completely with the 13th Amendment

And I don’t disagree with that (Though criminals could still be slaves). But the 13th ammendment didn’t come into full effect until sometime after the war was over.

WAR ENDS - April 9th 1865 Lee surrendered his Army of Northern Virginia
13th Ammendment - December 18 1865, Secretary of State William H. Seward proclaimed it to have been adopted

• It’s ironic that the north kept slaves longer than the south
  - It’s also ironic that someone from “canuckistan” has to spoon feed you, your own countries history.

How embarrassing for you. LOL

(+1 for the villain folks…)

The Civil War ended much of the opposition to a limited Federal Government. Many of us ‘pro southerns’ are proud that our ancestors fought againist a government they feared wanted to control our States and our individual rights. Since the war the U.S Federal Government has become obesely large and has influence in every part of daily life.

I know of five Confederate vets in my family tree, two died from wounds from the War. The event should be remember.

@Cromwell_Dude:

I’m not opposed to Northerners commemorating only Northern war dead. I respect that remembrance. I just don’t see how non-Confederates can honor the Confederate dead with respect and dignity. Ignore what they fought for? Would we do the same for Northern dead? Would any one want Jefferson Davis honoring the Northern war dead? The Confederate soldiers did not fight for reconciliation.

It seems that your main concern is that somehow the Confederate cause or their war dead will be dishonored; primarily from some fear of centralized planning, whereby the federal government organizes the event and orders all speakers and images to be “politically correct”. While I do not disagree that such a thing is possible, I do not see why the states cannot come together of their own accord to put on such a memorial. In fact, that would be much more fitting. In any case, I find it difficult to believe that a proper and respectful memorial for both sides would not take place.

While I understand your point, or desire for a proper commemoration, I believe you are making at least one significant assumption: that someone who is not tied to the Confederate cause will be leading a remembrance ceremony of their dead. (By tied I mean invested in some way; through living in/identifying with the South, having relatives in the war or being more or less a historian). Personally, I don’t see how a botched remembrance would occur. There are plenty of people who respect the war, or identify with one side or the other, that proper speakers and leaders will come forward.

I think that people who have family history with the South, or have otherwise been a historian of it, should be the organizers and speakers. All things considered, they would be the best because they have both legitimacy and passion. Certainly I could organize such an event in an equitable manner, for I do not despise or harbor ill will against former “rebels”; in fact I am quite personally wounded at their suffering and feel that all Americans owe them a great debt for their sacrifice. And yet, I am not qualified enough nor do I have enough intrinsic connection with the history of the South to do justice to its war memory.

I very much believe that Americans today, south or north, are pro-Union, pro-America rather than pro-Confederate (South) or Union (North) as they were during the war. Times have changed, though the memory lives with us. One thing the Civil War taught the country is that we are indissoluble, but we must respect and honor our individual identities as states. While being a northerner myself, perhaps the best appreciation I have gotten from the war is that, when it comes to the international stage, I am by all means an American (and damn proud to be so), but here at home… I am an Ohioan. The federal government serves me an my state, not the other way around.

I do find it curious that some Canadians are so invested in this topic.

LHoffman, speaking for myself, invested might not be the right choice of word, interested would be more accurate.  As a Canadian, when I see Americans make a statement like that it comes across like “How dare a foreigner talk about us!”.  The destiny of Canada has and always will be tightly coupled to the US.  Since Canada is about 10% of the US’s size in economy and GDP, the interest between the two is highly asymmetric.  Moreover, 90% of our population is 100 miles or less from the US border so basically, our entire population is a border community to the US.

Our Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau said in 1969 at a US press club “Living next to you is in some ways like sleeping with an elephant. No matter how friendly and even-tempered is the beast, if I can call it that, one is affected by every twitch and grunt.”  Pierre Trudeau also famously said, “we in Canada are the mouse in bed with the elephant. When America sneezes, Canada catches a cold.”

Don’t take all Canadian interest in the US as nefarious, we already own you!  wg

Our tiny country has held off American Hordes at 1 against 10 odds for over 150 years.

@Gargantua:

Our tiny country has held off American Hordes at 1 against 10 odds for over 150 years.

Not if I become President. First thing I do is begin plans for invasions along the border and across the Great Lakes. You will have no hope, and no where to run but Greenland.

@MrMalachiCrunch:

I do find it curious that some Canadians are so invested in this topic.

LHoffman, speaking for myself, invested might not be the right choice of word, interested would be more accurate.  As a Canadian, when I see Americans make a statement like that it comes across like “How dare a foreigner talk about us!”.

Don’t take all Canadian interest in the US as nefarious, we already own you!  wg

Owning us aside (which is rapidly becoming more true), I believe invested was the proper word; based on your and Garg’s previous comments in this thread. To me, interest would connote questions and curiosity as opposed to offering opinions and presumptions on how to deal with the situation; which you did not offer as much of, but Garg has. Whether that is interest or vested interest ultimately does not matter. You Canadians have every right to speak your mind about it and I am actually intrigued at your opinions. As Garg has already pointed out, there are a number of instances where Canada was directly involved in the war, some of which I was unaware of. For the most part, the American Civil War was a domestic affair, which is why I asked. But I realize that if we are to start fighting about it all over again, your investment in the issue is greater than perhaps any other country on the planet. Your desire for our continued peace is duly noted.

I don’t know if Canadians have an national inferiority complex or if Americans are just all around arrogant, but snobbery was not meant to be conveyed in my comment about your “investment” in this topic. So I am sorry you took it that way. Please know it was not intended as such.

Canadian interest in the US is certainly not nefarious; most of the time I see it as comical (which is kind of backwards considering most of the clowns are on our side of the border, in DC). But in all seriousness… maybe you guys can start a civil war of your own over the lack of an NHL season. Maybe domestic destruction over the CBA will compel owners to cave and set a new agreement for the next 100 years so this doesn’t happen again.

Pardon the rant… back to topic now.

if Canadians have an national inferiority complex

Ding Dong. Nail hit right on head. Americans usually don’t worry about anybody else. For whatever reason, Canucks love commenting on USA.

You always just need to look at who comments on whom to find who is envious or has some unresolved issue.

Edit: left off parsley.

@Imperious:

if Canadians have an national inferiority complex

Ding Dong. Nail hit right on head. Americans usually don’t worry about anybody else. For whatever reason, the ice box loves commenting on USA. I blame the weather, the French, and Carter for this.

You always just need to look at who comments on whom to find who is envious or has some unresolved issue. They post soon.

IL… really? It seems like we have a lot in common, but there really is no need to instigate here.

Yea, but it’s true. We all know it. I suppose i can leave off the garnish by edit.

The Confederates did launch a raid from Canada.

http://suite101.com/article/american-civil-war-attacks-come-from-canada-a202242

The webpage you linked to did not give much information on this man’s point of view, though I trust your assessment. It would be more than a shame for an educated presenter to speak ill of Civil War Confederates simply because they fought for that side; it would be intolerable. I do also see the great potential, as I said before, for the federal government to “sanitize” the whole issue in political correctness or indifference to a proper Confederate remembrance because they do not want to appear to give support to the Confederate socio-political philosophy, which to them only equals slavery. It really is, or would be, a great disservice to our country, both past and present. That is why I suggested that the states do it themselves somehow. It may not eliminate all need for political correctness, but it will allow for the memorials to be proper and as freely organized as possible.

In this area the War of 1812 events are a big deal since many of the battles occurred around here and we CAN see America from our porches.  It’s fun, the local fort has reenactments with muskets and cannons.   Many Americans come over to participate in the events, lots of fun.  Nobody debates why we started fighting.  What we do celebrate is the start of the war exactly 200 years ago and the fact our two societies have been at peace and in fact friends for 198 years.

LHoffman, your rant is most welcome and funnier than hell, IMHO.  So you see a case in point, some Americans can’t stand the fact that other nations’ citizens have an opinion on what the US is doing or can do better.  Now as far as an inferiority complex, that does have or rather, did have some truth to it.   I think anyone in a situation where they look at somebody ‘bigger’ has a certain bit of envy.  But if anything, currently there is a certain smug self-satisfied feeling that we as Canadians feel we are doing better than the US on average.  The truth to that obviously can be debated, and perhaps should to highlight areas where each nation does well so perhaps the other might learn lessons from the other.  The bottom line is that only an idiot Canadian would wish anything negative to the US.  A bit over 70% of our exports go to the US, again, when the US sneezes, Canada catches a cold.  A bit less so now as we are diversifying our export destinations in 2002 it was 85% of our exports were US bound.  Again, it is wise to know as much as you can about your largest client.

Professional hockey this year I fear is a lost cause, much like the Maple Leafs.  I think a civil war in the league is in order.  The commish is not well liked in Canada, 2 seasons canceled in 8 years, and he is…gasp, Ahmerikan!  Now there is a conspiracy!  An American sent to run Canada’s favourite sport, by canceling it he has rendered Canadians powerless to resist the American hordes as we are in a hockey civil war…   Just because there is no proof is not proof it is NOT a conspiracy!

Sorry for the hijack, but I did mention civil war a few times… :-)

Please avoid the hockey talk…I’m still bitter…

@Mallery29:

Please avoid the hockey talk…I’m still bitter…

Oh, I didn’t know Mallery was listening… SSSSHHHHHHH everybody! No more hockey talk.

Go back to sleep.

Can JUST Jermofoot ceed from the union?

@Jermofoot:

@Emperor_Taiki:

@Jermofoot:

Lincoln didn’t go to war.  The South did explicitly over slaves.  So Lincoln did the most logical thing facing an adversary with a very high population of slaves.

Slavery was coming to an end anyway.  The US was one of the last remaining places to still condone it (hence the South splitting to preserve that ability).

The South was fighting for political independence from Washington, if Lincoln hadn’t ordered a violent suppression of the rebellion there would have been no war. The South’s goal was not to conquer the North, they wanted simply to maintain their own independence, much like the Colonists were not trying to conquer the British Empire, they just wanted independence from British rule.

You make a good point that slavery was coming to an end anyway. So why fight a war over something that was about to be resolved? Perhaps Lincoln( and his backers) had other motives and saw their chance at giving a moral spin to the war slipping away, perhaps there were other state rights issues besides slavery that gave the South reason to secede.

Preserving the Union.  That whole Constitution thing.

Your right, the war was fought by the North to “preserve the Union”. Just like the British fought the Colonists to “preserve the Empire”. Therefore the war did not start over slavery, and was not started by the south. You will have to elaborate on what you mean by “the whole constitution thing”. My understanding was that the constitution was a voluntary agreement by all the states and using war to enforce the presidents will over the states was treason.

@Emperor_Taiki:

@Jermofoot:

@Emperor_Taiki:

@Jermofoot:

Lincoln didn’t go to war.  The South did explicitly over slaves.  So Lincoln did the most logical thing facing an adversary with a very high population of slaves.

Slavery was coming to an end anyway.  The US was one of the last remaining places to still condone it (hence the South splitting to preserve that ability).

The South was fighting for political independence from Washington, if Lincoln hadn’t ordered a violent suppression of the rebellion there would have been no war. The South’s goal was not to conquer the North, they wanted simply to maintain their own independence, much like the Colonists were not trying to conquer the British Empire, they just wanted independence from British rule.

You make a good point that slavery was coming to an end anyway. So why fight a war over something that was about to be resolved? Perhaps Lincoln( and his backers) had other motives and saw their chance at giving a moral spin to the war slipping away, perhaps there were other state rights issues besides slavery that gave the South reason to secede.

Preserving the Union.  That whole Constitution thing.

Your right, the war was fought by the North to “preserve the Union”. Just like the British fought the Colonists to “preserve the Empire”. Therefore the war did not start over slavery, and was not started by the south. You will have to elaborate on what you mean by “the whole constitution thing”. My understanding was that the constitution was a voluntary agreement by all the states and using war to enforce the presidents will over the states was treason.

I do disagree to a point. The immediate cause of the war was the North’s desire to preserve the Union, yes, but the root (and overarching) cause was slavery. Why did the South even secede in the first place? Because the federal government (Republican majorities and president elect) was restricting the institution of slavery more and more. Yes, they were upset that their state’s rights were being infringed upon, but rights as they pertained to slavery. If there had been no slavery, there would have been no war.

And secondly, the South did start the war. April 12-13 shelling and demanding the surrender of Fort Sumter. Before that, the Union had taken no provocative or offensive action, contrary to that taken by the proclaimed Confederate States.