Didn't the Germans bomb Pearl Harbor?Wildcat24;1035198 wrote:You serious Clark?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaska_Purchase
I vote Pearl Harbor, by the way.
more mental than physical.DeyDurkie5;1035245 wrote:isadore, are you mental?
Civil war definitely horrible in our past, but they were talking about a specific date or event.Thinthickbigred;1034830 wrote:I can think of a few other dates that were horrible in American history
1793- Fugitive slave act
1861 American civil war
1945 Hiroshima bomb kills 80,000 instantanly
1948 Israel created
http://www.damninteresting.com/ww2-america-warned-hiroshima-and-nagasaki-citizens/Thinthickbigred;1034870 wrote:To most Americans . It was not a military target and who knows what would be today if it did not happen then . Maybe it would have happened later . I just dont think celebrating the instant death of civilians is good . Did we like it when those Arabs were handing out candy in different parts of the mideast when 911 occured . Humans are sick and it does not matter the nationality . the human race will destroy itself sooner or later
I agree with this, but even sitting back and thinking objectively, Pearl Harbor was an attack on a military base and while some civilians were killed, it was mostly military casualties.isadore;1035089 wrote:People on here saw and were effected by 9/11, I dont think we appreicate the effect of Pearl Harbor.
isadore being well, isadore...not actually reading what was typed.isadore;1035134 wrote:That is what I love about this site, you can get a lot of folks speaking longingly for the good old days of slavery. Of course it should not be too big a surprise given the Caucasian tilt of the population. But even here that is a little much. The only places you could get more of that attitude is with a bunch of neo confederates or a Ron Paul caucus, Oh, that’s pretty much the same thing.
Slavery was alive and well in 1860, the wealthiest states were those of the deep South with their fortunes based on the Peculiar Institution. They were planning on expanding in Cuba and Central America. It was nowhere near dying of natural causes.
Well at least you are right about the Bomb.
This.dwccrew;1034818 wrote:9/11. Pearl Harbor was a targeted attack against American military targets. 9/11 was an attack against civilians.
Ironman92;1035594 wrote:No one biting on my date eh?
Yes actually I have read quite a bit about the political views of southern leaders. I know the Confederate government was dominated completely by large slaveholders. That they charged out of the Union and then wrote a Constitution to protect slavery. \That that dominant political clique was committed to the continuing existence of chattel slavery. Those slaves had made the South the richest section of the country and was extremely profitable for them to the extent they were looking for new lands to seize to extend their wealth. That all doing the 1850s the government had been dominated by Southern slaveholders and their allies including President Pierce and Buchanan and the Supreme Court. They had the Kansas-Nebraska Act and the Dred Scot decisions that opened new lands for them, They had a strengthened fugitive slave act that required northern local authorities to aid in slave apprehension. Even when Lincoln won the election of 1860 he was quite willing to agree to protect slavery in the south. Although you jmog may provide excuses for the slaveholders, and set up a false moral equivalency, None existsjmog;1035630 wrote:isadore being well, isadore...not actually reading what was typed.
Nowhere did believer "speak longingly" about the days of slavery. You also have not read much of the political views of the southern leaders at the time, such as General Lee, if you believe that the south would have continued slavery into even today.
Now, I will say this, the south was 100% morally wrong for having slavery, no doubt about that. However, the north was also wrong for trying to control the south through the federal government.
Please show me where I provided an excuse for a slave holder or set up a false moral equivalency...if you can not provide such a quote from me, then you owe me an apology and you need to stop being a complete jackass.isadore;1035694 wrote:Yes actually I have read quite a bit about the political views of southern leaders. I know the Confederate government was dominated completely by large slaveholders. That they charged out of the Union and then wrote a Constitution to protect slavery. \That that dominant political clique was committed to the continuing existence of chattel slavery. Those slaves had made the South the richest section of the country and was extremely profitable for them to the extent they were looking for new lands to seize to extend their wealth. That all doing the 1850s the government had been dominated by Southern slaveholders and their allies including President Pierce and Buchanan and the Supreme Court. They had the Kansas-Nebraska Act and the Dred Scot decisions that opened new lands for them, They had a strengthened fugitive slave act that required northern local authorities to aid in slave apprehension. Even when Lincoln won the election of 1860 he was quite willing to agree to protect slavery in the south. Although you jmog may provide excuses for the slaveholders, and set up a false moral equivalency, None exists
what makes something worse.jmog;1035626 wrote:I agree with this, but even sitting back and thinking objectively, Pearl Harbor was an attack on a military base and while some civilians were killed, it was mostly military casualties.
9/11 was a direct attack on a civiilian building. That makes it much harder to swallow "morally".
jmog;1035716 wrote:Please show me where I provided an excuse for a slave holder or set up a false moral equivalency...if you can not provide such a quote from me, then you owe me an apology and you need to stop being a complete jackass.
That is an unjustified attempt to establish moral equivalency. And since I try to big about these things, you don’t even have to apologize for calling me a jackassjmog wrote:However, the north was also wrong for trying to control the south through the federal government.
So because slavery is an obvious wrong and the Union was anti-slavery someone cannot note wrongs of the Union without it being an attempt to establish moral equivalency? Is this your logic here?isadore;1035731 wrote:That is an unjustified attempt to establish moral equivalency. And since I try to big about these things, you don’t even have to apologize for calling me a jackass
Epic, you out did yourself here.Thinthickbigred;1034830 wrote:I can think of a few other dates that were horrible in American history
1861 American civil war
<DIR>I Wear Pants;1035738 wrote:So because slavery is an obvious wrong and the Union was anti-slavery someone cannot note wrongs of the Union without it being an attempt to establish moral equivalency? Is this your logic here?
jmog wrote:Now, I will say this, the south was 100% morally wrong for having slavery, no doubt about that. However, the north was also wrong for trying to control the south through the federal government.
... Popeye's opened in Youngstown?Zombaypirate;1035811 wrote:The correct answer is neither of those dates.
It is by far and away......Tuesday, January 20, 2009.
I don't care what anyone says that was f'in funny reps.4cards;1035832 wrote:... Popeye's opened in Youngstown?
He said however only once in the post I read.isadore;1035767 wrote:<dir>
</dir>However, However, However, that is an attempt to establish moral equivalency
