War of Northeern Aggression

[Al B. Sure!]

it should be noted that the first Southern president since the Civil War was Woodrow Wilson who was more of New Jerseyan than anything else.


thanks

[chequita guevara]

States can have rights or people can have rights. I know what side I'm on. I know what side DinoDoc's on. DF, you side against democracy and against people.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by *End Is Forever*
Um, Britain and France declared war on Germany because Hitler invaded Belgium

Poland, they were allies of Poland which Nazi Germany attacked. They were legally bound to defend their ally.

David, Nazi Germany declared war on us after we "declared" war on Japan. We didn't provoke the Nazis, Klan-boy.

[David Floyd]

chegitz-

Yeah, and they gave rights to the American people. What horrible, horrible, Amendments.

The process was terrible and the ends never justify the means.

Dino,

I don't see how any self-respecting Libertarian can support the CSA to begin with anyway. It was hardly an institution committed to upholding libertarian ideals, regardless of the actions of the Union.

I'm a firm believer that wars of aggression are always morally wrong, as is forcing people to die for any cause.

Iain,

Um, Britain and France declared war on Germany because Hitler invaded Belgium (and subsequently France, which was the obvious conclusion once they'd reached Belgium). Did Germany have the moral authority to invade Belgium? I think Britain and France had every right to declare war on Germany, especially seeing as France was in the process of being invaded.

First of all, it was Poland not Belgium, and secondly, two wrongs never make a right.

[mactbone]

So, David, if I were to declare myself a new nation, that would give me AUTOMATICALLY all the rights that entailed? Thus, I can then have legal justification if I am harassed and shoot someone, because I had a cassus belli?

Seems counter intuituve to me...

BTW, the CSA did not use the original constitution, wouldn't that bother you a little DF, considering your strict adherence to it?

[Al B. Sure!]

I probably shouldn't speak for Floyd but state's rights sustains a Republic. A democracy is irrelevent in my mind and probably in his as we are not a democracy nor have ever been one


thanks

[chequita guevara]

And before you trot out Lend-Lease, remember Nazi Germany didn't declare war with us over Lend-Lease.

[*End Is Forever*]

First of all, it was Poland not Belgium, and secondly, two wrongs never make a right

I stand corrected; but the point remains the same. You'd have been quite happy for Hitler to walk all over Poland, and then (subsequently) Belgium and France? BS...

The process was terrible and the ends never justify the means

Do elaborate on the "process"... "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude... shall exist within the United States" seems fairly straightforward to me. You're getting awfully close to endorsing slavery here.

[David Floyd]

Poland, they were allies of Poland which Nazi Germany attacked. They were legally bound to defend their ally.

It is immoral to sign a treaty forcing your citizens to die if some other nation invades someone.

David, Nazi Germany declared war on us after we "declared" war on Japan. We didn't provoke the Nazis, Klan-boy.

Oh? What would you call defending British convoys and radioing U-Boat locations to the British, then?

So, David, if I were to declare myself a new nation, that would give me AUTOMATICALLY all the rights that entailed? Thus, I can then have legal justification if I am harassed and shoot someone, because I had a cassus belli?

You don't have the Constitutional right to secede, unlike States.

BTW, the CSA did not use the original constitution, wouldn't that bother you a little DF, considering your strict adherence to it?

They had there own, and were independent - I see no problem there.

[WhiteElephants]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
States can have rights or people can have rights. I know what side I'm on. I know what side DinoDoc's on. DF, you side against democracy and against people.

I think he means states as in Ohio, Georgia, Indiana, California and what you seem to be refering to are federal rights.

Who knows though, this conversation is moving too fast for me.

[Al B. Sure!]

So, David, if I were to declare myself a new nation, that would give me AUTOMATICALLY all the rights that entailed? Thus, I can then have legal justification if I am harassed and shoot someone, because I had a cassus belli?

bad point for a variety of reasons... first off, the Confederates felt that the Constitution was a contract between states and that once they felt that they were getting a bad deal from the constitution, they would have the right to break this contract. If you declared yourself a new nation, you would, like the south, reap none of the protections of the government, such as judicial, military and police protection, etc. Secondly, if you killed another person, then you would be killing an American citizen making this an act of war and you can be handled accordingly.


thanks

[David Floyd]

chegitz,

And before you trot out Lend-Lease, remember Nazi Germany didn't declare war with us over Lend-Lease.

No, but it was an act of war.

Iain,

I stand corrected; but the point remains the same. You'd have been quite happy for Hitler to walk all over Poland, and then (subsequently) Belgium and France? BS...

Nation-states should be responsible for themselves. It was absolutely immoral to force Brits, Americans, etc., to die for Jews and Frenchmen.

Do elaborate on the "process"... "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude... shall exist within the United States" seems fairly straightforward to me. You're getting awfully close to endorsing slavery here.

Sure - the process of forcibly conquering a nation, incorporating it into your own, and forcing new laws on it without giving that nation a say.

[*End Is Forever*]

Oh? What would you call defending British convoys and radioing U-Boat locations to the British, then?

I think the key word here is "defending"... not initiating, but defending. Learn the difference.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by David Floyd
It is immoral to sign a treaty forcing your citizens to die if some other nation invades someone.

Irrelevent. You are claiming the Constitution overrides morality and civil rights in favor of states rights. These states, France and Britain, were completly within their rights to ally with the state of Poland. So which is it? You can't locially argue for one to support you cherished white supremacy in one case, and then against it in another to defend your beloved Nazis.

[mactbone]

The confederates had conscription.

What's up with Article 1, section 6, number 9 of the CSA constitution?
(9) To constitute tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court.

So, they still submit to the Supreme Court?