General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWas Lincoln wrong not to place every confederate soldier under arrest,
instead of just killing them by the tens of thousands without a trial?
Agschmid
(28,749 posts)Is this really something that can be considered equivalent?
arely staircase
(12,482 posts)if that is evocative to you of drones, you would not be alone.
As I and ten other senators told the President yesterday, if individual Americans choose to take up arms against the United States, there will clearly be some circumstances in which the President has the authority to use lethal force against those Americans, just as President Lincoln had the authority to use force against the Confederate Army during the Civil War..."Sen. Ron Wyden
Agschmid
(28,749 posts)enlightenment
(8,830 posts)The Southern states succeeded from the Union. They created their own country - "The Confederate States of America" - with a government, a president, and currency.
Lincoln did not authorize force against citizens of the United States of America. He went to war with another nation.
arely staircase
(12,482 posts)As far as the US government was concerned there was no such thing as the CSA only states in rebellion whose US citizens were fair game for killing if they raised arms against the United States.
Posteritatis
(18,807 posts)Agschmid
(28,749 posts)Bucky
(54,026 posts)sibelian
(7,804 posts)Would that really have been any worse?
FSogol
(45,488 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)nolabear
(41,986 posts)libtodeath
(2,888 posts)HockeyMom
(14,337 posts)and arresting and killing all the confederate soldiers would have only exasperated the situation. Whether it worked, after all this time, is subject to debate.
arely staircase
(12,482 posts)not afterwards. all of the men in the confederate army? why not arest them and give them their day in courst instead of slaughtering them in fields?
Boomerproud
(7,955 posts)were also killed by the tens of thousands. Please respond to any post regarding what your OP is about.
arely staircase
(12,482 posts)so it was ok for the government to kill americans without a trial in this case because why?
cthulu2016
(10,960 posts)DavidDvorkin
(19,479 posts)He should have declared them all under arrest. Then he would have had to send the Union army into the field to disarm and arrest them all.
And then ...
arely staircase
(12,482 posts)just as Pres. Obama should have with the likes of Mr. al-Awlaki when he took up arms against the United States.
Standing in a Virginia field with a rifle or putting guys with c-4 in their undies on planes, both, when part of an organized, declared and engaged war on the United States, qualify you for a government killing. Fair or not. Them's the rules.
Marr
(20,317 posts)You've had some stiff competition today in the race to excuse the inexcusable.
I suggest you just wait for the official talking points to arrive and stop trying to freestyle.
Bucky
(54,026 posts)he showed that all violent conflicts can be peacefully resolved. If Obama could only be more like Truman, we'd have no more terrorist problems and we start using all those drones for just babysitting orphans.
Instead, he's all like...
[font size="6"]Yeeeeeee-hawwww!![/font]