View Poll Results: Which Side?
Voters: 13. You may not vote on this poll
What side would you have fought on in the Civil War?
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 246
Likes: 0
From: The White House
Vehicle: 97 Tib - REVISION A
What side would you have fought on in the Civil War?
North, South, or neither (neither being you headed out west and never participated).
For me...North, because of my conservative beliefs. laugh.gif
For me...North, because of my conservative beliefs. laugh.gif
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 225
Likes: 0
From: Waco/Clifton, TX
Vehicle: 2001/Hyundai/Tiburon
South..not because I woulda wanted to keep slavery, but because I've lived in texas all my life..so, I couldnt have been on the north. and more than likely I'da been forced into it, so cant say neither either.
Administrator
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 12,515
Likes: 2
From: Lacey, WA
Vehicle: Two Accents, Mini, Miata, Van, Outback, and a ZX-6
I think that's a war I would have avoided.
There wouldn't have been any fighting if the north would have just let the south secede. I honestly don't see the point in fighting to keep them if they want out. IMO that's like if your wife tells you she's leaving you so you beat her senseless for months until she agrees to stay.
There wouldn't have been any fighting if the north would have just let the south secede. I honestly don't see the point in fighting to keep them if they want out. IMO that's like if your wife tells you she's leaving you so you beat her senseless for months until she agrees to stay.
Moderator
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,816
Likes: 0
From: Las Vegas, NV
Vehicle: 03 Hyundai Accent
QUOTE (i8acobra @ Apr 16 2010, 12:18 PM)
No matter what I say, I'm gonna offend someone. So I'll just leave it alone. cool.gif
Same reason I posted "Ehhhhhhh....."
QUOTE (187sks @ Apr 16 2010, 12:32 PM)
I think that's a war I would have avoided.
There wouldn't have been any fighting if the north would have just let the south secede. I honestly don't see the point in fighting to keep them if they want out. IMO that's like if your wife tells you she's leaving you so you beat her senseless for months until she agrees to stay.
There wouldn't have been any fighting if the north would have just let the south secede. I honestly don't see the point in fighting to keep them if they want out. IMO that's like if your wife tells you she's leaving you so you beat her senseless for months until she agrees to stay.
LMAO Great analogy.
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,932
Likes: 0
From: Boston
Vehicle: 2006 Pontiac GTO
QUOTE (HyundaiKitCoupe @ Apr 16 2010, 05:41 PM)
i think any fighting is stupid. so i would have chosen neither. i think both of them had their own righteous beliefs.
I hope you are high.. 99% of the reason for secession of the south was because they wanted to retain slavery... this is in their declarations of secession, look them up..
Whoever says anything other than "North" in this day and age is either retarded or knows sh*t about what this question means.. or most likely both