|Funny Pictures||Funny Videos|
|Funny GIFs||YouTube Videos|
Rank #17822 on SubscribersLevel 263 Comments: Pure Win
OfflineSend mail to dawgfan Block dawgfan Invite dawgfan to be your friend flag avatar
- Text/Links 1
- Pictures 135
- Video 1
- YouTube 10
- Animated Gifs 4
- Favorites 99
- Friends 8
- Comments 1495
- Channels 4
- All 1762
latest user's comments
|#333 - Who the **** would give a little kid an AR-15? [+] (6 new replies)||04/21/2013 on Muricaaaa||+2|
#336 - anonymous poster (04/21/2013) [-]
happens all the time that a kid finds his parents' firearm and provokes an accident.
#347 - anonymous poster (04/21/2013) [-]
happens all the time that a kid finds his parents' firearm and provokes an accident.
|#74 - Picture [+] (1 new reply)||04/21/2013 on No comment||+7|
|#195 - Technically the Union started the US Civil War. The … [+] (37 new replies)||04/21/2013 on World War III explained||+3|
#249 - Lulzilla (04/22/2013) [-]
I don't think you understand. An area cannot just go "Oh hey, We're going to be a completely different country now" without any ramifications. The south leaving destroys the norths economy. Plus having an area that is completely different and is known for it's violence is a complete threat. The moment they decided to succeed is the moment Civil war occurred. No shots need to be fired for a war to start.
#252 - anonymous poster (04/22/2013) [-]
Legally at the time, yes any state could leave if they voted on it.
#269 - Lulzilla (04/22/2013) [-]
Yeah it was legal for a state to leave when ever it wanted to but I'm pretty sure the people who created it had NO idea that half the country would become a different country. Regardless if they had the right in order for any country to survive and become anything they needed to stay together which the North understood. The north(Union)'s reason for civil war was to preserve the country. Ending slavery was just an additional thing.
#272 - anonymous poster (04/22/2013) [-]
The people who created it seceeded to create their own country, they knew full well it could happen. And the point still stands the south had every right to leave the union, regardless of the ramifications.
#279 - Lulzilla (04/22/2013) [-]
It's so much easier to say that when you look at yourself as a regular civilian. Think about if you were high up in the government. Imagine yourself as the president. Half of your country leaves and becomes a different country. HALF of it. Half of England didn't leave. Only a tiny bit. Also they became a different country. The north let the states succeed. When they attacked (Yes the south attacked first) the President had to do something.
#282 - anonymous poster (04/22/2013) [-]
The 13 colonies were what 3 times bigger than england? The south went to claim land within their boundaries northern troops refused to leave, taking back land on their jurisdiction was completely justified.
#287 - Lulzilla (04/22/2013) [-]
I'm sorry but that's just foolish. If there were 3 times more people in the colonies then in England it wouldn't be called a colony anymore. Hell they'd just call that England. The amount of people in the colonies during the war for Independence were 2 to almost 3 times LESS then in England.
#289 - anonymous poster (04/22/2013) [-]
The landmass was 3 times bigger.
#292 - Lulzilla (04/22/2013) [-]
That's something COMPLETELY different. Granted I said the land was as important or more important. Also regardless of what I said England invaded and tried to keep us from leaving. How is whatever your trying to tell me going towards not my opinion because it sounds like your backing MY opinion up.
#298 - anonymous poster (04/22/2013) [-]
My point was it wasn't a tiny bit of england that left as you stated.
#310 - anonymous poster (04/22/2013) [-]
Not sure how you attack a fort you legally own.
#316 - anonymous poster (04/22/2013) [-]
Attacking the forces inside that are illegally occupying a structure you own.
#326 - anonymous poster (04/22/2013) [-]
1.Secession was legal at the time, there was no laws against secession until after the civil war.
2.A sovereign nation has every right to forcibly remove a foreign force refusing to leave.
#346 - anonymous poster (04/22/2013) [-]
Show me anywhere in the constitution before 1869 any mention of secession, maybe look into the laws a little bit next time you go off stating something as fact.
#257 - jlew (04/22/2013) [-]
No he's right. Fort Sumter was a Northern Fort, it was attacked by the South.
He was technically right but worded it wrong when he said the South seceded because of Lincoln's views on Slavery. The South believed that Lincoln was going to instantly abolish slavery when in reality he was going to completely leave the issue alone.
The North actually needed the South's cotton and other agricultural products due to its high level of Industrialization and low amounts of land capable of being used to grow food and other products. The South wasn't really even thinking about its economic disadvantages when it seceded and planned to win with the support of Britain by selling them a bunch of cotton for weapons and other supplies.
The South did secede because of social differences. i.e. Slavery. The North had already abolished slavery and was feverishly trying to do so in the south as well. They believed, as did the South, that Lincoln was going to abolish slavery, but he didn't. The Emancipation Proclamation was actually pointless as it abolished slavery in places that it didn't have the jurisdiction to.
Try to argue with me. I read my history book, cover to cover.
#260 - anonymous poster (04/22/2013) [-]
After the secession the union had no rights to Fort Sumter, since it was then in Confederate territory.
#285 - anonymous poster (04/22/2013) [-]
The union soldiers had no rights to be there past the date of secession. And if the US asked Britian to leave it would've been legally compelled to.
#291 - jlew (04/22/2013) [-]
The union soldiers didn't have a CHANCE to leave past the date that the land they were in had seceded. Boats aren't exactly the fastest things in the world you know, especially not back then. And the US did ask Britain to leave. When we started our own country and won the Revolution part of the terms of the Treaty was that Britain would renounce ALL landownership it had in the Americas.
Anyway secession occurred over a long period of time, each state seceded at its own time so saying "the date of secession" is a little bit idiotic.
#295 - anonymous poster (04/22/2013) [-]
The date of secession where the fort was located, and yes, South carolina ordered them to abandon the fort, they had knowledge of the secession and had plenty of time to prepare ships in case secession passed.
#300 - jlew (04/22/2013) [-]
Ships are still slow. The soldiers didn't actually pose a threat to the South. They could have been given more time, but the South was too trigger-happy and started the war.
No matter what the South is still responsible as they attacked first, the North had no plans or reasons to attack the South as they could have imported food as they had been doing even before secession.
#303 - anonymous poster (04/22/2013) [-]
Keeping troops in a sovereign nation against its will was considered an act of war at the time, so technically speaking, no the union started the war when it refused to leave SC.
#305 - anonymous poster (04/22/2013) [-]
I've seen history books that state the south started the war and some that say the north did, I guess it comes down to perspective.
#207 - anonymous poster (04/21/2013) [-]
After the secession the Union had no claim to anything within confederate territory.
|#200 - Nice try North Korea, but Japan has the best defense system in…||04/21/2013 on best of luck||0|
|#168 - I have no problem with women who have threesomes||04/16/2013 on something to ponder||0|
|#309 - Oh God Satan is here||04/16/2013 on This is a fucking||0|
|#14 - still inviting? [+] (1 new reply)||04/15/2013 on Fucking shadows||0|
#61 - anonymous poster (04/15/2013) [-]
|#17 - Wrong She sleeps with Gary||04/15/2013 on Poke-incest||-6|
|#20 - Picture [+] (2 new replies)||04/15/2013 on Cool it down a bit Satan||+180|
|#201 - And she won't tell us where that blood came from Scratch t…||04/14/2013 on Overly Attached||+14|
|#46 - >Me 10 years old >All pokemon faint or poisoned … [+] (2 new replies)||04/11/2013 on Poison||-1|
|#76 - I remember there was rumor that you could go to Bill's House a…||04/11/2013 on He Was Telling The Truth...||0|
|#193 - Boy bands [+] (12 new replies)||04/11/2013 on 90's Bane||0|
#223 - mrmamric (04/11/2013) [-]
|#191 - Late 80's to early 90's 1987-1992 Those are the 9… [+] (4 new replies)||04/11/2013 on 90's Bane||+4|
#227 - Dwarf (04/11/2013) [-]
**Dwarf rolled a random image posted in comment #3899064 at My Little Pony fanfiction, backgrounds, songs, lyrics, and GIFs. ** So sad. You were born in 1987 and did in 1992. You were only 5 years old. So young...
#197 - anonymous poster (04/11/2013) [-]
and if you think that makes you special then you're a fag
not you, just finishing your thought
|#186 - I was born in 92 and remembered when the Godzilla movie came o…||04/11/2013 on 90's Bane||0|
|#14 - People say Togepi is cute but I just don't see it||04/09/2013 on Lazy punk ass bitch||+9|
|#38 - 3D Katy Perry Movie? I have no problem with this [+] (2 new replies)||04/09/2013 on Oh James||+29|
|#913 - Picture||04/09/2013 on DJ 4DM1N gives you bad life...||0|
|#875 - why is my name blue? [+] (2 new replies)||04/09/2013 on DJ 4DM1N gives you bad life...||+1|
|#10 - I always thought it was this bad ass [+] (2 new replies)||04/09/2013 on Never||+9|
|#12 - Picture||04/09/2013 on im done||+5|
|#29 - Bush's face when North Korea starts to talk [+] (4 new replies)||04/09/2013 on W.||+62|
|#22 - **** Bama||04/08/2013 on quite the imagination||+2|
|#83 - I'm Super Cereal||04/07/2013 on Some people...||+17|
|#621 - **dawgfan rolls 2** Will Best Korea attack Freedom Land?||04/07/2013 on Im so lucky||+2|