whats the point of war?

@edgarblythe:

Good shot Edgar !

War is human nature. It is in our blood. It is in our most popular video games. Look at the soldiers in Iraq & Afganitsan having the time of their lives in YOUTUBE. They scream "Yahoos" and "Oooh Baby's" as they shoot their powerful guns. They love the sound and smell of war and killing. They are spellbound. This is just the way men are. They do it to get off and get glory. All people are the same everywhere. Human nature is the same in every one of us, but we still love going after "The bad guys" who we have designated as worthless and deserving of a violent death. This is the way civilization works. And it makes a hell-of-a-lot of people rich in the process.

This is what i mean about the bullshit in this thread parading as history. Lincoln did not lead "us" into war. The southern states made war on the United States before he was sworn in as president. Chuchill did not lead "us" into war. War was already raging when he replaced Chamberlain. The one about Washington is laughably absurd. He did not become a stateman until after the revolution. He was not appointed to command the Continental army until war had already begun. The shooting down of the militia at Lexington and the "battle" at Concord took place in April, 1775. Washington was appointed commander of the Continental army on June 14, 1775, and the battle of Bunker Hill was fought three days later, before anyone in Massachusetts knew he was the commander.

LINCOLN certainly DID lead us into war. He had the gall to be elected president right aagainst the wishes of the soon to become Confederate States.

Now callow and thoughtless of him.

Everybody practically thinks Lincoln instigated the war, it seems like. All but my old friend, Harlan. He told me once that if Lincoln had not been shot, they never would have had a civil war.

This is a 1 minute 30 second video!


Science and War

http://www.youtube.com/user/jacquefresco#p/u/9/4m3wzTULrWQ


1 minute!

No Utopia
http://www.youtube.com/user/jacquefresco#p/u/3/TTQXgVb8V9M

pfft! he was shot afterwards, in the globe theater, by john wilkes Boothe.

me? or harlan?

'cause i dont drink that much that fast.

My reaction to the statement that Lincoln was killed after the war. I think everyone but Harlan knows that.

oh! you drank to that one! harlan, like me, must not do much research.

What do you think about this person's response to the point of war?

http://www.youtube.com/user/jacquefresco#p/c/29EFE596FE4CD389/0/4qlgzTlAvOo

As a practical matter: he DID,
tho technically the South fired the first shot, to extirpate
an alien military presence from its midst.

I have previously posted the NY Instrument of Ratification,
which boldly asserted the right of NY to leave the Union,
IF it chose to do so for its happiness.
This demonstrates the temper of the times, the zeitgeist,
which was the same as our joining the United Nations.

In 1945, no one doubted our right to quit; our sovereignty was beyond question.
From 1789 to 1861, no one doubted the joint sovereignty of the federal system.
According to the 1Oth Amendment, the States retained the right to leave,
UNLESS power to the contrary had been "delegated" to the government of the United States;
i.e., unless the secessions were "Insurrections". (Article I, Section 8)

In the face of the Southern secessions,
Lincoln and his Congress (the Northern remnant)
had to decide what to do. Thay coud do NOTHING,
continuing with the States who had not withdrawn,
or thay coud apply brute force and hope for the best,
ignoring Constitutional restraints n political disabilities.

Different men woud do different things.

It 'd have been very interesting
if thay had submitted the matter for arbitration in an impartial tribunal,
if such had existed.

Anyway, Lincoln obviously DID lead us into war.





David

Obviously, he didn't, your cherished delusions notwithstanding.

Ford's Theater, Bubba, Ford's Theater . . . the Globe was a theater in which many of Shakespeare's plays were staged.

Sheesh.

History speaks for itself.

I don 't cherish either side of the Civil War.

I am merely AWARE of what happened.





David

I think that was John Wilkes Booth.

Next time u sit in one, u shoud think of him.





David

Not all that aware, apparently. Had the South had the preservation of the institution of slavery as their sole object, the best thing for them to have done would have been to remain in the Union and to remain in the Congress. To this day, the rest of the nation could not have mustered the ratification votes to abolish slavery.

The South was bent on war, before they even knew that Lincoln would be elected. Their actions speak for themselves, and all the silly theories you can muster about whether not not they had a right to secede wont'change that one glaring, undeniable fact.

We have already agreed on that point, in the past.




It is deniable. I deny it.
The South did not want war; it wanted INDEPENDENCE.
It was willing to tolerate war toward that goal.
In that respect, it was the same as the American Revolution.
According to your post (above) if the North had been passive
in acknowledging the departure of the Confederate States,
then those States woud have attacked the North anyway.
I deny that.