Upload
Login or register
Anonymous comments allowed.
#99 - anon
Reply 0
(04/21/2013) [-]
The confederate states were invaded, not sure how you blame solely them for the civil war.
#144 to #99 - gibroner ONLINE
Reply -2
(04/21/2013) [-]
they were invaded because they declared themselves independent illegally
#166 to #144 - anon
Reply 0
(04/21/2013) [-]
They held a vote to seceede, completely legal at the time.
#167 to #166 - gibroner ONLINE
Reply -2
(04/21/2013) [-]
my mistake they were actually invaded for attacking Fort Sumter unprovoked
#171 to #167 - anon
Reply 0
(04/21/2013) [-]
Those troops were told to leave and refused, that counts as an trespassing in an enemy territory and is considered hostile behavior.
#172 to #171 - gibroner ONLINE
Reply 0
(04/21/2013) [-]
well I suppose it's all a matter of perspective
#174 to #172 - anon
Reply 0
(04/21/2013) [-]
Those troops were there illegally, legally the south was in the right, morally however they were ****** up.
#107 to #99 - multimedia
Reply 0
(04/21/2013) [-]
They separated from the US under the full knowledge that Lincoln wouldn't put up with that ****.
#108 to #107 - anon
Reply 0
(04/21/2013) [-]
Their secession was completely legal, Lincoln got pissy and illegally sent troops to SC, which were then fired upon in defense.
#113 to #108 - multimedia
Reply -1
(04/21/2013) [-]
The Confederate secession was in no way justifiable. They did it so they could keep their slaves. Yes, there were other reasons, but the central cause was their fear that Lincoln would further prohibitions on slavery and eventually abolish it. They were already furious about the previous Act which made all states acquired from Mexico automatically free states (I believe it was overturned, but they were still pissed)

All in all, you can say "State's Rights" and other crap all you want: The South seceded because they wanted the right to keep their slaves.
#117 to #113 - anon
Reply 0
(04/21/2013) [-]
The reason for secession is irrelevant, in the US before 1869 the constitution had no laws governing the subject, according to the 10th amendment that means the states were given authority on the subject, a democratic vote was held and the secession went forward, at the time lincoln had no legal justification for interfering.
#122 to #117 - multimedia
Reply -1
(04/21/2013) [-]
Why does the legality of the invasion matter? Besides, from what I've learned, Lincoln already had loyal forces in the south during the secession, since, ya know, US forces are under the US's control, and they were fired upon first.
#127 to #122 - anon
Reply 0
(04/21/2013) [-]
Because we have laws in the US? You can't just circumvent them because you lost a power struggle. And they were asked to leave, Confederate forces fired upon enemy combatants refusing to leave a sovereign nation.
#136 to #127 - multimedia
Reply 0
(04/21/2013) [-]
You do realize that the South did the exact same thing Lincoln did right? "Get pissy" (your words) because they lost a power struggle?
#140 to #136 - anon
Reply 0
(04/21/2013) [-]
How so? The south held a democratic vote on the subject to see what the people wanted lincoln just threw a fit.
#142 to #140 - multimedia
Reply 0
(04/21/2013) [-]
Lincoln won the Presidency fair and square. Rather than accept that, the South decided "Nah, **** this, we're leaving the country." Then proceeded to make their own country, with blackjack and slaves.
#148 to #142 - anon
Reply 0
(04/21/2013) [-]
Lincoln was elected democratically and the south left democratically, why is one okay but not the other?
#151 to #148 - multimedia
Reply 0
(04/21/2013) [-]
Because one vote included the whole nation, and the other included just the place that wanted to leave.
#155 to #151 - anon
Reply 0
(04/21/2013) [-]
At the time of secession states were sovereign, states had every right to leave the union if the people in those states wanted to.
#163 to #155 - multimedia
Reply 0
(04/21/2013) [-]
jhvhjv gfcvksgvsfhgsd fkjsvdhcgdbhvfsdjbvjhsfugae uyfwyef

I think you won....
#129 to #127 - multimedia
Reply 0
(04/21/2013) [-]
The base they were on was still controlled by the US federal government. It was US soil so long as US troops were stationed there. They could have blockaded food, they could have done literally anything else, but they shoot at them.
#132 to #129 - anon
Reply 0
(04/21/2013) [-]
Having a US base doesn't make it us soil unless the country lets you purchase it willingly, it's still the same today, we could be asked to leave any country today with a military base and we would have to.
#101 to #99 - bangala
+3
has deleted their comment [-]
#111 to #99 - feelythefeel ONLINE
Reply +10
(04/21/2013) [-]
>an angry black man   
>arguing for the confederates   
I can see why you're so angry.
>an angry black man
>arguing for the confederates
I can see why you're so angry.
#114 to #111 - anon
Reply 0
(04/21/2013) [-]
Not arguing for confederates, but to place the blame solely on them is silly.
#116 to #114 - multimedia
Reply 0
(04/21/2013) [-]
Making an action knowing it will force your enemy to make a move against you under his moral/legal beliefs (and power as ******* PRESIDENT) is tantamount to shooting at them, but you don't have to waste gunpowder.
#118 to #116 - anon
Reply 0
(04/21/2013) [-]
"Force" Nothing was forced, lincoln CHOSE to invade. The Confederate states were no longer under US jurisdiction Lincoln had no power in the south.
#119 to #118 - multimedia
Reply 0
(04/21/2013) [-]
I hate people like you. I knew somebody who said that nobody can force you to do anything. If you're left in a position where you can do one of two things, your choice has been forced.
#123 to #119 - anon
Reply 0
(04/21/2013) [-]
Lincoln could've done multiple things but chose the one that kept him the most power.
#124 to #123 - multimedia
Reply 0
(04/21/2013) [-]
No, he did the one thing that kept the Union together without compromising his morality.
#128 to #124 - anon
Reply 0
(04/21/2013) [-]
He still chose to start a illegal war based on his personal beliefs.
#131 to #128 - multimedia
Reply +1
(04/21/2013) [-]
And? That war ******* ended slavery. The Union would have fallen to pieces without the Confederacy, and they knew that. They were damning people to starvation and economic turmoil so they could keep their slaves, and even after it was made illegal, they made the most retarded ******* laws so they could keep their slaves without them being slaves under some retarded technicalities.
#138 to #131 - anon
Reply 0
(04/21/2013) [-]
Linoln opposed blacks civil rights as much as anyone in the south. And The south left legally, after secession the confederacy was under no obligation to look after the union citizens economically or financially.
#141 to #138 - multimedia
Reply +1
(04/21/2013) [-]
Lincoln may have opposed black civil rights, but understand this: No law strictly prohibits the US from recovering seceded land. Under Executive Privilege, Lincoln had every right to invade to protect the state of the Union.
#145 to #141 - anon
Reply 0
(04/21/2013) [-]
As my original point stands, I'm not saying the south had no part in the war, my point was blaming them for the entirety of the civil war is retarded, since it was initiated by someone else.
#149 to #145 - multimedia
Reply 0
(04/21/2013) [-]
I don't disagree with that, but I still don't think siding with the confederacy is just...just wrong. I'm honestly almost certainly letting my morality get in the way of the facts here, but still, it's the US circa 1861. Errybody was pretty goddamn stupid and intolerant. With history, you have to look at things relatively, and the North was on the right side of the slowly developing "civil rights" movement.
#158 to #149 - anon
Reply 0
(04/21/2013) [-]
I'm not saying that the south was right for wanting slavery i'm just saying this subject isn't as black and white as people make it (pun intended)
#159 to #158 - multimedia
Reply +1
(04/21/2013) [-]
hue
#115 to #111 - multimedia
Reply -1
(04/21/2013) [-]
Because he's stupid?
#1 - twi ONLINE
Reply 0
(04/21/2013) [-]
This image has expired
************* CANADA
always acting so nice, always saying "we're sorry"
it's a plot to get us to trust them so they can kill us all

WHAT IF THE BUILT NUCLEAR MISSILE SILOS UNDERGROUND, UNDER ALL THAT SNOW
#46 to #1 - skylights
Reply +1
(04/21/2013) [-]
Don't be silly. Just because we have a lot of uranium hanging around here doesn't mean we're hiding anything.
#87 to #1 - canadafag
Reply +1
(04/21/2013) [-]
Why would you think we would do such a thing?!
#23 to #1 - fantomen
Reply +2
(04/21/2013) [-]
Even neutral counties like Sweden had nuclear weapons programs.
I bet Canada had some **** like that too, but they just classified it.

Even if they didn't have nukes they probably had/has other WMDs like Sarin or VX.
#227 to #23 - cattestacles
Reply 0
(04/22/2013) [-]
the only form of WMD I could think of, being I'm Canadian, involves Francium and our water bombers. Either that, or freezing mass amounts of water in the shape of giant cubes and dropping them from the sky.
#178 to #1 - namesboo
Reply +2
(04/21/2013) [-]
Canadians.
#88 to #1 - mahneke
Reply +4
(04/21/2013) [-]
Or in the sky?
#13 to #1 - derkarus ONLINE
Reply +10
(04/21/2013) [-]
We have no need for nukes, we merely provoke others into attacking us, which brings about their own downfall.

It ******* snowed today, didn't stay but still snowed.
#284 - golbot
Reply +7
(04/22/2013) [-]
For the record.... the North killed more southerners than the south killed northerners.


'union
#306 to #284 - shitposting
Reply 0
(04/22/2013) [-]
and thats why you dont piss with MURICA
#314 to #284 - anon
Reply 0
(04/22/2013) [-]
William Tecumseh ******* Sherman

I play wars in Civilization on a plan modeled after his brilliant tactics.
1. Kill everyone
2. Burn Everything
3. Repeat
#329 to #314 - vparrish
Reply +1
(04/22/2013) [-]
I don't view rapeing the land everywhere you go so that it takes an forever to recover back to a reasonable state brilliant tactics (sherman neck ties were just an asshole move) but at least he was better than grant. After all they were fighting to keep this land in the first place, that's basically just saying if we can't have it neither can you.
#320 to #314 - calawesome
Reply 0
(04/22/2013) [-]
I feel kinda conflicted about this statement.....You say you're a fan of his, yet you're an angry black man?
#321 to #320 - anon
Reply 0
(04/22/2013) [-]
He was a vital asset in freeing the slaves. Destroyed all their food, but at least they had their FREEDOM to sustain them.
#322 to #321 - calawesome
Reply 0
(04/22/2013) [-]
Fair deuce.
#324 to #284 - wootshop
Reply +1
(04/22/2013) [-]
And that's how wars are won, kids.
#338 to #284 - neverposting
Reply +3
(04/22/2013) [-]
Did it not occur to you that that is how wars are won?
#344 to #338 - golbot
Reply -1
(04/22/2013) [-]
see below post
#293 to #284 - daedrakiller
Reply +9
(04/22/2013) [-]
That's typically a condition for winning a war
#332 to #293 - golbot
Reply -1
(04/22/2013) [-]
ACTUALLY, Wars are won by destroying the enemy's center of gravity, which is not always an army, or "kill count". A recent example of this is the war in vietnam. A center of gravity can be a city (like Stalingrad in the eastern front of ww2) or a person (george washington in the war of independence). The center of gravity for the North in the civil war was DC, whereas for the south, it was Lee and his army (early union generals wrongly thought it was Richmond, hence the reason the war dragged out).
#357 to #332 - smokedmeatlog
Reply 0
(04/22/2013) [-]
Usually in order to get to those centers one has to win a lot of battles, and individual battles were won with whoever killed more.
#361 to #357 - golbot
Reply -1
(04/22/2013) [-]
Also not true, individual battles can be won despite not killing more than you lose. classic examples are, once again, stalingrad, the battle of Cowpens, the battle of cold harbor.... all of which the winning side lost more men than the other
#352 to #332 - anon
Reply 0
(04/22/2013) [-]
When you started talking about using Vietnam as an example, I expected descriptions of the Vietnamese center of gravity.
I understand what you're saying, and you are right, but you shouldn't bring up an example and then not use it. That's just poor form.
#263 - alucord
Reply +2
(04/22/2013) [-]
Maybe Canada apologised for everything because they are secretly trying to rule the world
Maybe Canada apologised for everything because they are secretly trying to rule the world
#343 to #263 - drdiddly
Reply 0
(04/22/2013) [-]
Don't spoil our plans
#266 to #263 - iamcanadian
Reply +1
(04/22/2013) [-]
We think of it as earning your trust and then manipulating it
#270 to #266 - alucord
Reply +9
(04/22/2013) [-]
Well just because everyone else trusts you doesn't mean I don't know the truth now!
#271 to #270 - iamcanadian
Reply +1
(04/22/2013) [-]
Oops



sorry
#277 to #263 - rcomeau
Reply +2
(04/22/2013) [-]
in Canada all we want is your maple trees so we can tap them to make more syrup... and we are willing to send in our toughest lumber jacks to accomplish this mission
#133 - nottatguy
Reply -16
(04/21/2013) [-]
If you attack Denmark I'll **** you up bitch
#139 to #133 - anon
Reply 0
(04/21/2013) [-]
Will you force-feed us alcohol?
#143 to #139 - nottatguy
Reply -12
(04/21/2013) [-]
You ***** can't even drink 2 beers without hitting the ground lol
#147 to #143 - bokkos
Reply +9
(04/21/2013) [-]
Stop. You're making to good people of Denmark look like assholes.
#150 to #147 - nottatguy
Reply -18
(04/21/2013) [-]
CAUSE BABY TOOOOONIGHT I AM PISSING FUNNYJUNK OOOOFFF AGAAAAAAAIN
#156 to #150 - suddenlypotatoes
Reply +7
(04/21/2013) [-]
You want people thinking that your country is full of assholes?
#210 to #156 - sirdickhousen **User deleted account**
+1
has deleted their comment [-]
#381 to #210 - nottatguy
Reply -1
(04/22/2013) [-]
I actually achieved pissing a few people off, wow.
#382 to #381 - sirdickhousen **User deleted account**
0
has deleted their comment [-]
#154 to #143 - anon
Reply 0
(04/21/2013) [-]
Coming from the 12 year old most likely
#380 to #154 - nottatguy
Reply 0
(04/22/2013) [-]
18 actually.
#209 to #133 - mrblueftw
Reply +1
(04/21/2013) [-]
2edgy4me
I cant take down everyone at my school, non the less the US and its allies.
#59 - lamarsmithgot
Reply +9
(04/21/2013) [-]
This image has expired
#330 - chaoticlaw
Reply +8
(04/22/2013) [-]
The U.S. has a lot of red.
#331 to #330 - jaergerjaquez **User deleted account**
0
has deleted their comment [-]
#339 to #331 - chaoticlaw
Reply +1
(04/22/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
#340 to #339 - jaergerjaquez **User deleted account**
0
has deleted their comment [-]
#345 to #340 - chaoticlaw
Reply +1
(04/22/2013) [-]
Why? It was an honest mistake.
#336 to #331 - anon
Reply 0
(04/22/2013) [-]
The point is actually just that the 3 flags in the last panel are all very peaceful countries that won't attack anyone. There is no underlying message that the U.S is Patrick in the hall monitor episode of Spongebob, it's just a simple joke that those three countries won't start anything besides a petting zoo.
#341 to #336 - chaoticlaw
Reply 0
(04/22/2013) [-]
Ah, ok.
#335 to #330 - jaergerjaquez **User deleted account**
0
has deleted their comment [-]
#337 to #330 - oregmes
Reply 0
(04/22/2013) [-]
7 lines of red 6 lines of white blue square with 50 white starts in it
#274 - MRfunnyFACE
Reply +3
(04/22/2013) [-]
OH NO THE KITTEN! SAVE THE KITTEN
#276 to #274 - MRfunnyFACE
Reply +8
(04/22/2013) [-]
this is why we can't have nice things...
#179 - namesboo
Reply +2
(04/21/2013) [-]
They stay almost unknown then BAM they are nuking the **** out of you.
#180 to #179 - shpoopy
Reply +8
(04/21/2013) [-]
**** albanians. they're the ************** of europe
#181 to #180 - namesboo
Reply +5
(04/21/2013) [-]
Jesus what are you? the reincarnation of Hitler?
Jesus what are you? the reincarnation of Hitler?
#182 to #181 - shpoopy
Reply +4
(04/21/2013) [-]
they stole my car wheels while i was there. i have my reasons :(
#186 to #182 - namesboo
Reply +2
(04/21/2013) [-]
What if it was a Serb or Bosnian that moved to start a new life because they Stole too many cars back in Serbia or Bosnia so it led to everyone hating them so they thought they could start again in Albania but just fell into old habits?
#198 to #181 - cadaverbox
Reply +3
(04/21/2013) [-]
you clearly havent experienced the plague that is ************* gypsies
#72 - knitey
Reply +8
(04/21/2013) [-]
I love polanball
#52 - anon
Reply 0
(04/21/2013) [-]
******* Monaco, are you serious?
#55 to #52 - skarre
Reply +8
(04/21/2013) [-]
It's supposed to represent Poland, but in all Polandball comics Poland is supposed to be upside down.
Why? Ask Krautchan..
#15 - warbob
Reply +1
(04/21/2013) [-]
Implying USA doesn't have a lot of red on the flag.
#20 to #15 - captnpl
Reply +7
(04/21/2013) [-]
less than half is red
#278 - Pompano
Reply +6
(04/22/2013) [-]



Try me.
#193 - tostito
Reply +6
(04/21/2013) [-]
Looks like North Korea doesn't have red enough
Looks like North Korea doesn't have red enough
#176 - robotrino
Reply +6
(04/21/2013) [-]
League made me racist against poles
#190 to #176 - lolwtfme
Reply +1
(04/21/2013) [-]
can i ask why?
#169 - kingarturi
Reply +6
(04/21/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
#71 - herpymcderp
Reply +6
(04/21/2013) [-]
Kitten is many fun.
Kitten is many fun.
#360 - TheInvader
Reply +4
(04/22/2013) [-]
Pokeball Poland will rule us all
#94 - yogurtcup
Reply +4
(04/21/2013) [-]
at first I thought the joke would be that America is colored on red, and they would turn on America. I guess not.   
   
(Gif related)
at first I thought the joke would be that America is colored on red, and they would turn on America. I guess not.

(Gif related)
#93 - fukkentyranitar
Reply +4
(04/21/2013) [-]
But, doesn't the U.S have a lot of red in their flag as well?