DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**natahololll** · 02-19-2006, 02:49 AM

Who realized they couldn't get anything done? Not the sovereign states.

The sovereign states realized that they couldn't get anything done without the Constitution. This is high school US history.

The AOC was an amendable document, and who cares as 14th amendment did nothing during the time of it's passing.

Not totally true (i.e. the Reconstruction era). However, I think it matters as the 14th Amendment was necessary for Brown vs Board of Ed and also as the basis for the Women's Rights Movements. I certainly care as I might have had to attend college at Tuskegee University, where I would have enjoyed a nice career in carpentry or woodworking, which is not my preference.

They even had to institute martial Law. I made a comment about the emancipation proclamation, and you came back with a stupid nonsensical remark.

Your remarks on this thread are nothing but stupid nonsensical remarks. They mainly consist of statements that are the logical and factual equivalents of "I'm right cuz I said so."

It was the Civil Rights movement, and not the 14th amendment that broke the segregation barrier, and you should know this.

Who said I didn't? You should concentrate more on upping your game from "cuz I said so" to making some sense here.

There isn't anything that the USC has done that the Articles couldn't have done better as each state was a sovereign entity that didn't have to listen to anything that came from the federal level. They were free to do as they pleased.

Yeah, we can say that in theory anyone could do anything, but that's a worthless kind of statement. Hitler could have decided to make peace with the rest of the world and installed representative democracy, but I don't think that was likely. If the Native Americans had united, they could have attacked every white settler and maybe discouraged them from landing for a century or two. We can speculate all day on what could happen in some fantasy scenarios. Since you don't bring any logic or fact to the table, this is just a waste of time.

What're you confused about?

I put the confused smily underneath the part that made no sense. If you want to answer, you can go back and figure it out.

Yes, it was war for territory. Control of every state under one central authority. Population adjustment. Yes, that's what a civil war is as it's the citizenry fighting one another.

OK, I don't agree with that at all. I say it was a war about politics. Incompatible North versus South politics. No population adjustment. You're generalization is wrong too. Civil wars can be about a great many things, not just this one or two things you've listed.

02-19-2006, 02:49 AM	#12
natahololll Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 667 Senior Member	Who realized they couldn't get anything done? Not the sovereign states. The sovereign states realized that they couldn't get anything done without the Constitution. This is high school US history. The AOC was an amendable document, and who cares as 14th amendment did nothing during the time of it's passing. Not totally true (i.e. the Reconstruction era). However, I think it matters as the 14th Amendment was necessary for Brown vs Board of Ed and also as the basis for the Women's Rights Movements. I certainly care as I might have had to attend college at Tuskegee University, where I would have enjoyed a nice career in carpentry or woodworking, which is not my preference. They even had to institute martial Law. I made a comment about the emancipation proclamation, and you came back with a stupid nonsensical remark. Your remarks on this thread are nothing but stupid nonsensical remarks. They mainly consist of statements that are the logical and factual equivalents of "I'm right cuz I said so." It was the Civil Rights movement, and not the 14th amendment that broke the segregation barrier, and you should know this. Who said I didn't? You should concentrate more on upping your game from "cuz I said so" to making some sense here. There isn't anything that the USC has done that the Articles couldn't have done better as each state was a sovereign entity that didn't have to listen to anything that came from the federal level. They were free to do as they pleased. Yeah, we can say that in theory anyone could do anything, but that's a worthless kind of statement. Hitler could have decided to make peace with the rest of the world and installed representative democracy, but I don't think that was likely. If the Native Americans had united, they could have attacked every white settler and maybe discouraged them from landing for a century or two. We can speculate all day on what could happen in some fantasy scenarios. Since you don't bring any logic or fact to the table, this is just a waste of time. What're you confused about? I put the confused smily underneath the part that made no sense. If you want to answer, you can go back and figure it out. Yes, it was war for territory. Control of every state under one central authority. Population adjustment. Yes, that's what a civil war is as it's the citizenry fighting one another. OK, I don't agree with that at all. I say it was a war about politics. Incompatible North versus South politics. No population adjustment. You're generalization is wrong too. Civil wars can be about a great many things, not just this one or two things you've listed.
	Quote