HorrorMovieFans.com

Remember that most of the generals of the Civil War were also war heroes of previous conflicts. They fought for this country more than once.

Foo wrote:Remember that most of the generals of the Civil War were also war heroes of previous conflicts. They fought for this country more than once.

Is that cancelled out by fighting against the country? Net result of no service.

Headhunter wrote:

Foo wrote:Remember that most of the generals of the Civil War were also war heroes of previous conflicts. They fought for this country more than once.

Is that cancelled out by fighting against the country? Net result of no service.

Is anyone who opposes Trump right now a traitor?

Foo wrote:

Headhunter wrote:

Foo wrote:Remember that most of the generals of the Civil War were also war heroes of previous conflicts. They fought for this country more than once.

Is that cancelled out by fighting against the country? Net result of no service.

Is anyone who opposes Trump right now a traitor?

No. Are we at civil war?

Do you consider Benedict Arnold an American hero, Foo? Fought bravely against the British himself.

Headhunter wrote:

Foo wrote:

Headhunter wrote:

Foo wrote:Remember that most of the generals of the Civil War were also war heroes of previous conflicts. They fought for this country more than once.

Is that cancelled out by fighting against the country? Net result of no service.

Is anyone who opposes Trump right now a traitor?

No. Are we at civil war?

So at what point is opposing the administration being a traitor? #NotMyPresident

Foo wrote:

Headhunter wrote:

Foo wrote:

Headhunter wrote:

Foo wrote:Remember that most of the generals of the Civil War were also war heroes of previous conflicts. They fought for this country more than once.

Is that cancelled out by fighting against the country? Net result of no service.

Is anyone who opposes Trump right now a traitor?

No. Are we at civil war?

So at what point is opposing the administration being a traitor? #NotMyPresident

Yes, complaining on Twitter is pretty much seceding from the country. Got it.

Erwin Rommel deserves a statue. But he will never get one.

The US obsession with the Confederacy is interesting. Rarely do you glorify something that was so clearly about something awful.

showa58taro wrote:Erwin Rommel deserves a statue. But he will never get one.

The US obsession with the Confederacy is interesting. Rarely do you glorify something that was so clearly about something awful.

And there's absolutely nothing to glorify. It was feudal Europe hundreds of years later with even more brutal conditions because of the geographical climate of the South. Standard of living was far below the rest of the country. If you have southern ancestors, their lives almost certainly sucked unless they owned a lot of slaves.

showa58taro wrote:Erwin Rommel deserves a statue. But he will never get one.

The US obsession with the Confederacy is interesting. Rarely do you glorify something that was so clearly about something awful.

I think you have to consider that great-grandfathers and great uncles were lost defending their state's rights. Very few were slave owners, but they picked up guns to fight those who would attempt to oppress them.

Foo wrote:

showa58taro wrote:Erwin Rommel deserves a statue. But he will never get one.

The US obsession with the Confederacy is interesting. Rarely do you glorify something that was so clearly about something awful.

I think you have to consider that great-grandfathers and great uncles were lost defending their state's rights. Very few were slave owners, but they picked up guns to fight those who would attempt to oppress them.

Nope. The Confederacy was arguing against states' rights. Another lie told by Southerners to embellish their history.

Here's a challenge: find declarations of secession from every CSA state and tell me how many times states' rights is mentioned. Seriously, go for it.

The oppression those people experienced came from southern slaveowners, not northerners.

Foo wrote:

showa58taro wrote:Erwin Rommel deserves a statue. But he will never get one.

The US obsession with the Confederacy is interesting. Rarely do you glorify something that was so clearly about something awful.

I think you have to consider that great-grandfathers and great uncles were lost defending their state's rights. Very few were slave owners, but they picked up guns to fight those who would attempt to oppress them.

The core principle was about slavery though. You can't bypass that for some partial nonsense. Some battles in WW2 were just about keeping Germany safe from Russians. So the soldiers who enlisted argued. But that doesn't remove the bigger element of the reason for the war.

We should pity the people who were forced into a conflict that was all about the elites' interests and had nothing to do with theirs. But we don't need to celebrate their ignorance. They were lied to, and lies have been told for generations in the South as a means of erasing its past. The CSA let hundreds of thousands of young men die for an evil cause. They deserve no tribute, and the descendants of the men who died on those fields should acknowledge that evil, not celebrate it.

The act of rewriting history does not change it. Winners wrote the history. Heroes of the south are still heroes, no matter how much the winners want to rewrite it.

Foo wrote:The act of rewriting history does not change it. Winners wrote the history. Heroes of the south are still heroes, no matter how much the winners want to rewrite it.

Nobody's attempting to rewrite history but you. Nice try with the states' rights crap, that has for decades and decades been the favorite argument of revisionists too embarrassed to honestly present their own history. I laugh whenever I see it.

Headhunter wrote:

Foo wrote:The act of rewriting history does not change it. Winners wrote the history. Heroes of the south are still heroes, no matter how much the winners want to rewrite it.

Nobody's attempting to rewrite history but you. Nice try with the states' rights crap, that has for decades and decades been the favorite argument of revisionists too embarrassed to honestly present their own history. I laugh whenever I see it.

Yeah, let's pretend millions of non-slave owners were stoked to fight a war over just slavery.

Foo wrote:

Headhunter wrote:

Foo wrote:The act of rewriting history does not change it. Winners wrote the history. Heroes of the south are still heroes, no matter how much the winners want to rewrite it.

Nobody's attempting to rewrite history but you. Nice try with the states' rights crap, that has for decades and decades been the favorite argument of revisionists too embarrassed to honestly present their own history. I laugh whenever I see it.

Yeah, let's pretend millions of non-slave owners were stoked to fight a war over just slavery.

What do you want me to say? They were hoodwinked into a conflict that didn't represent their interests. Important to remember who had control and influence over media in the South at the time as they shaped the messaging that would have convinced the populace it was the right thing to do. We can look at this from every possible angle if you want to.

I agree with you that the war was a total scam for the people who actually fought it on their side. We agree.

This Tom Cruise thread only took like 6 pages for Nazis to be brought up.

Tom Cruise ----> Mel Gibson -----> Foo wanting Mel Gibson free of accountability ----> my analogy to Charlottesville scum ----> Civil War morality arguments

Not bad.