It Wasn't About Owning Slaves, It's About Them Being Men Who left The USA For The CSA And Then Attacked To Destroy The USA!!! They Committed Treason!!!
LOL Uh pumpkin, secession comes first then comes the conflict. What do you think would happen if CA seceded? The USA would throw them a going away party?
Well, I believe it has yet to be shown that Ulysses himself owned more than a single slave. So he may not have owned slaves; he owned a SINGLE slave :P
Yes, he was a slave owner. NemoNeem1221, however, used the phrase "own slaves." I was just pointing out a pointless and pedantic way in which he could have accidentally been correct in some guise. It was a joke, not a point :)
Slaveowners or not... Confederates were treasonous criminals and losers. Why keep statues up for losers? We are about WINNING.
[deleted]
2 ups, 7y,
1 reply
All I'm saying is our forefathers, including presidents, were complete scumbags. And yet nobody bats an eye at their terrible deeds which range from rape to genocide.
If we are a nation about winning is it by any means necessary? Including what our forefathers did?
You do realize there's kind of a big difference between significant historical figures who happened to own slaves, and traitors whose only contribution to history was defending the institution of slavery.
The secession wasn't about slavery. It was about the states' rights to govern themselves. Lincoln only used the slave thing for political gain. His reason for war was to keep the country together, nothing to do with slavery.
GOOD DAY MY FELLOW AMERICANS,
THESE PIECES OF PAPER HAVE PICTURES OF SLAVE OWNERS ON THEM. THEY CLEARLY REPRESENT AN UGLY TIME IN AMERICAN HISTORY AND MUST BE DISPOSED OF. I WILL PM YOU MY ADDRESS SO YOU CAN SEND THEM TO ME. I WILL RELIEVE YOU OF THE BURDEN
