This post may contain Mildly Adult content.
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
Graylight · 51-55, F
There is so much skewed history and understanding in this post it'd take too long just to get your eyes uncrossed.
tindrummer · M
@Graylight I felt the same so didn't bother trying
MickRogers · 26-30, M
@Graylight What is there to not understand?
I'm literally just pointing out that the Union had no right to be upset at the South seceding when they had no problem seceding native land for union states.
Either you're against secession or you're not.
I'm literally just pointing out that the Union had no right to be upset at the South seceding when they had no problem seceding native land for union states.
Either you're against secession or you're not.
Graylight · 51-55, F
@MickRogers First, there is no "one or the other." You're trying to force a predicted outcome.
Secondly and again, [i]way[/i] too much to unpack in that word goulash.
Secondly and again, [i]way[/i] too much to unpack in that word goulash.
Human1000 · M
@MickRogers Taking land isn't secession, silly.