175th Anniversary of the Battle of the Alamo!

[Docfeelgood]

Yup, same with Sloww. It was the War of Northern Aggression to yall.

We've been there, done that with Sloww and it gets nowhere. You Southerners are brain-washed by historical revisionism.

NO, it was fought over states rights, not slavery, that did not become a issue till after the war had started.

Has nothing to do with living in the south, it is History, besides I would have fought on the north side.

[Docfeelgood]

The American Civil War (1861–1865), also known as the War Between the States (among other names), was a civil war in the United States of America. Eleven Southern slave states declared their secession from the United States and formed the Confederate States of America, also known as "the Confederacy". Led by Jefferson Davis, the Confederacy fought for its independence from the United States. The U.S. federal government was supported by twenty mostly Northern free states in which slavery already had been abolished, and by five slave states that became known as the border states. These twenty-five states, referred to as the Union, had a much larger base of population and industry than the South. After four years of bloody, devastating warfare (mostly within the Southern states), the Confederacy surrendered and slavery was outlawed everywhere in the nation. The restoration of the Union, and the Reconstruction Era that followed, dealt with issues that remained unresolved for generations.

.

[Al B. Sure!]

Doc, you do realize that your quote with regards to the banning of slavery in Mexico does not support your cause one bit? The Texans ignored the laws and when Santa Ana decided to be stringent in enforcing the law, the Texans immediately revolted.

Are you seriously claiming that because Mexico outlawed slavery in 1829 that the Texans did not have slaves?

More from wikipedia:

Finally, and perhaps most prescient, was the Mexican Government's opposition to slavery. If enforced, Texas slaveowners stood to lose a large investment in slave labor.

I already said there were 5000 slaves in Texas in 1836.

[Docfeelgood]

Doc, you do realize that your quote with regards to the banning of slavery in Mexico does not support your cause one bit? The Texans ignored the laws and when Santa Ana decided to be stringent in enforcing the law, the Texans immediately revolted.

Are you seriously claiming that because Mexico outlawed slavery in 1829 that the Texans did not have slaves?

My point is it was not about slavery.

[Al B. Sure!]

My point is it was not about slavery.

Oh gee, Santa Ana decides to enforce the anti-slavery laws in Mexico and the Texans who own slaves just happen to immediately revolt. What a coinkydink!


The Texans could have stayed in America. They took advantage of cheap land offers by the Mexican government in exchange for the Texans following Mexican laws. The Texans broke that contract.

[Docfeelgood]

Oh gee, Santa Ana decides to enforce the anti-slavery laws in Mexico and the Texans who own slaves just happen to immediately revolt. What a coinkydink!


The Texans could have stayed in America. They took advantage of cheap land offers by the Mexican government in exchange for the Texans following Mexican laws. The Texans broke that contract.

Again,

Santa Anna denounced the administration of Vice-President Farias, and forced him and his main supporters to flee to the United States. He formed a new Catholic, centralist, conservative government which replaced the 1824 constitution with the new constitutional document, entitled "The Seven Laws" (Constitution of 1836). Santa Anna dissolved the Congress and began the centralization of power. The regime became a centralized dictatorship backed by the military. Several states openly rebelled against the changes.
Texans first rebelled when Santa Anna in 1832 sent troops into Texas to force martial law (Only the Texans defeated Santa Anna and retained their independence).

It was a coup and the revolt of a dictator.

[rah]

I visited the Alamo when I was on a business trip. It looks tiny in it's current setting surrounded by a large city.

[giblets]

Albert, are you seriously claiming the people at the Alamo were motivated primarily by their own self interest?

[Al B. Sure!]

Albert, are you seriously claiming the people at the Alamo were motivated primarily by their own self interest?

Their own self-interest in owning slaves, yes. Docfeelgood and Slowwhand seem to think it was about some high-fallooting freedom and liberty from Mexican repression.

[giblets]

Their own self-interest in owning slaves, yes. Docfeelgood and Slowwhand seem to think it was about some high-fallooting freedom and liberty from Mexican repression.

You don't know anything about the battle. There was next to no chance they were going to come out alive. Yeah, people are going to take a 99% chance of dying rather than lose some slaves.

[Al B. Sure!]

You don't know anything about the battle. There was next to no chance they were going to come out alive. Yeah, people are going to take a 99% chance of dying rather than lose some slaves.

Huh? It was one battle in a bigger revolt. Maybe those individuals there at the Alamo had warped ideas about what they were fighting for but it's obvious what the powers that be in Texas were doing it for.

[Al B. Sure!]

Let's see... Jim Bowie was a slave trader who traded smuggled slaves into the USA after the government banned the slave trade. Colonel Travis who led the defense also owned slaves and one of his slaves, Joe, was the only survivor of the battle.

[Wezil]

I didn't say "give back", I said "give". Other than that, obviously you don't know squat about Texas history, or you'd advocate giving Texas "back" to the Comanches.

I know how to troll a Texan just fine tough.

[dannubis]

Dude. I know what the Alamo is.

I just fail to see the historical significance of this bar brawl. But hey, it seems a big deal to backwater states like Texas.