I think the question is were the debts that were promised to be repayed in Article 6 repayed at the time of the states secession? If not they were violating the compact agreed upon.
-
ODT Gun Show this Saturday! - Click here for info and tickets!
It will never happen here
- Thread starter GDAWG1958
- Start date
I think the question is were the debts that were promised to be repayed in Article 6 repayed at the time of the states secession? If not they were violating the compact agreed upon.
Martial...it's MARTIAL Law...
Will you confiscate guns? (marines obey orders, when we are asked to carry out a mission, we carry out that mission) he thought about the question for a second and this was his answer. Basically saying no matter what the mission, if we are ordered to do it, WE WILL DO IT!
Good thing the order wasn't to kill every man, woman, and child, and all of the animals, but keep a virgin for yourself.
Good thing the order wasn't to kill every man, woman, and child, and all of the animals, but keep a virgin for yourself.
In short, NO. The Constitution is not a suicide pact. That said I have yet to see/read in history where man has written words on paper and those word stood as absolute and were never violated. I think the opposite is true. It does not matter what the Constitution says or means, Governments or mobs will do as they please, especially when they believe they have the upper hand.
I could be wrong but I seem to remember the Southern States made an offer in gold to pay the debts owed to the Treasury, it was refused.
Do you have a source for that? I'm not being rude it's just that so much of that has been scrubbed from history.
I seem to remember Lincoln saying he was OK with the secession as long as they continued paying taxes and Northern troops were left in the South. Obviously that was a no go.
But I believe that's what Lincoln said was justified until the compact was fulfilled.
Like I said it's hard to find history books from the first 20 years after the war. Everything today has been churned to mush.
I will look for it, I think it was in the book the Real Lincoln, from the foot notes.
I loathe Lincoln for starting the conflict but if you start reading the letters he wrote around June of 1863 forward you see that he was trying to keep the British banks from gaining anymore influence. The Banking Act of 1863 was genius and stopped the British bankers dead in their tracks. After his death it was all but forgotten and the reconstruction acts allowed the British central banking influences back in. Then of course in 1913 it was obliterated.
IMO the bankers won the Civil War.
I agree he was being pressured by the bankers. However he was a bastard. The reconstruction acts in my opinion created a NEW Union as the original had been dissolved, if not in fact in practice for sure. There are some good lectures on that opinion online from Yale, don't recallt he prof. name but he makes a very good argument.
Well practice is all that matters. I've known about the Lieber Code for 10 years and studied it, thoroughly. There are parts I can quote and have. When you combine the Lieber with the 1907 Hague Treaty I believe you find what has been practiced and accepted as "normal" for a long time.
