by Max Barry

Latest Forum Topics

Advertisement

Dixie Board

Search

Search

[+] Advanced...

Author:

Region:

Sort:

«12. . .37383940414243. . .4546»

Masonwoods wrote:The sheer irony of you complaining about the establishment winning when it was the incumbent party (Democrats) and the southern aristocracy which started the war. The ďestablishmentĒ lost the Civil War.

As for your modern war hypothesis, the idea of a unified New York versus a unified Georgia type war is never going to happen again. Southern and Northern cities alike overwhelmingly vote Democratic and Southern and Northern rural areas overwhelmingly vote Republican. The idea of a regional civil war is dead, itíd be urban versus rural.

you gotta a point on the whole rural and urban civil war thing but you know if america today would refuse to leave the country of a foreign power after several warnings thered be war then too

Confederation the South wrote:your not exactly a neo confederate though are you

No, being a neo-confederate is stupid and historically naive.

Confederation the South wrote:also why are you glad the south lost

Because Iím not rich, say what you want about the North but at least they put the aristocrats in their place.

Confederation the South wrote:you gotta a point on the whole rural and urban civil war thing but you know if america today would refuse to leave the country of a foreign power after several warnings thered be war then too

What? I donít understand this point.

Masonwoods wrote:No, being a neo-confederate is stupid and historically naive. Because Iím not rich, say what you want about the North but at least they put the aristocrats in their place.
What? I donít understand this point.

if america went to a country and sat there in a garrison then that country would declare war on america

and i was agreeing with your concept on civil war

your historicaly naive if you think a nation would not use propaganda to make themselves look good in anything. you act like nobody lies about conflicts so dont call anybody stupid unless you yourself want to be analyzed in that subject

Confederation the South wrote:your historicaly naive if you think a nation would not use propaganda to make themselves look good in anything. you act like nobody lies about conflicts so dont call anybody stupid unless you yourself want to be analyzed in that subject

How is it propaganda? Thereís mountains of evidence showing the South was an aristocracy that started the civil war. You canít deny that.

Confederation the South wrote:if america went to a country and sat there in a garrison then that country would declare war on america

and i was agreeing with your concept on civil war

And how is this relevant?

Confederation the South wrote:if america went to a country and sat there in a garrison then that country would declare war on america

and i was agreeing with your concept on civil war

17 years in Iraq
Guantanamo Base in Cuba
Camp Thunder Cove - Diego Garcia - Prison and air strip etc

Black Men wrote:

17 years in Iraq
Guantanamo Base in Cuba
Camp Thunder Cove - Diego Garcia - Prison and air strip etc

Let me clarify if the did that and they handnt already gone to war with that nation or helped in its liberation

Masonwoods wrote:

How is it propaganda? There’s mountains of evidence showing the South was an aristocracy that started the civil war. You can’t deny that.


And how is this relevant?

From where is the evidence the national archive this is not beyond propaganda

Confederation the South wrote:From where is the evidence the national archive this is not beyond propaganda

Also contemporary news sources, state laws, and Census data.

Was the South legitimately anti-democratic in 1860? No, it is the national archives who are wrong!

Masonwoods wrote:

How is it propaganda? There’s mountains of evidence showing the South was an aristocracy that started the civil war. You can’t deny that.


And how is this relevant?

Are you asking How is me agreeing on your concept of civil war relevant to the rest of what I said because it's not relevant to me talking about the civil war

Confederation the South wrote:Are you asking How is me agreeing on your concept of civil war relevant to the rest of what I said because it's not relevant to me talking about the civil war

Just... how is your bit on a foreign country relevant to the conversation?

Masonwoods wrote:

Also contemporary news sources, state laws, and Census data.

Was the South legitimately anti-democratic in 1860? No, it is the national archives who are wrong!

Where did all this census data come from and records of any kind

Masonwoods wrote:

Just... how is your bit on a foreign country relevant to the conversation?

The South declared itself an independent nation from the union

Confederation the South wrote:Where did all this census data come from and records of any kind

Why canít you just acknowledge a simple fact? Itís fine to admit weíre better off in 2021 than 1861. Plus whatever source Iím sure you whip out is going to be... not reputable.

Of course given the fact you seem to like RPing a racially segregated nation, Iím sure youíre not the best source.

Confederation the South wrote:The South declared itself an independent nation from the union

It did. It wasnít, but it did.

Masonwoods wrote:

Why can’t you just acknowledge a simple fact? It’s fine to admit we’re better off in 2021 than 1861. Plus whatever source I’m sure you whip out is going to be... not reputable.

Of course given the fact you seem to like RPing a racially segregated nation, I’m sure you’re not the best source.

My source is my own I would not expect you to believe it because it is pasted down and don't start attacking my nation

Do you feel it ironic that Great Britian and France supported the Confederacy with arms and such but today the usual southern person does not agree with France or UK.

Masonwoods wrote:

It did. It wasn’t, but it did.

But it was if you can support yourself as a nation declare yourself independent raise an army and govern your own people it's a nation

Black Men wrote:Do you feel it ironic that Great Britian and France supported the Confederacy with arms and such but today the usual southern person does not agree with France or UK.

Yes

Confederation the South wrote:But it was if you can support yourself as a nation declare yourself independent raise an army and govern your own people it's a nation

And then promptly lose independence 4 years later.

Confederation the South wrote:My source is my own I would not expect you to believe it because it is pasted down and don't start attacking my nation

What is your source then?

And I mean I will, your nation objectively is terrible. Why have segregation in 2021?

Confederation the South wrote:But it was if you can support yourself as a nation declare yourself independent raise an army and govern your own people it's a nation

That would have also been Haiti but the US did not recognize them as such so they were not treated as such for along time.

Black Men wrote:Do you feel it ironic that Great Britian and France supported the Confederacy with arms and such but today the usual southern person does not agree with France or UK.

They only supported us to take a whack at the union and even made a deal that if the south won a major strategic victory (Gettysburg) they would join in the war

Masonwoods wrote:
What is your source then?

And I mean I will, your nation objectively is terrible. Why have segregation in 2021?

It's not 2021 in my nation

Black Men wrote:
That would have also been Haiti but the US did not recognize them as such so they were not treated as such for along time.

But they are and still are

«12. . .37383940414243. . .4546»

Advertisement