Oops, big lump of your posts....

Status
Not open for further replies.

trice

Lt. Colonel
Joined
May 2, 2006
Messages
11,333
Indeed. That was by the Moroccan/American Treaty of Friendship signed by future US Presidents John Adams and Thomas Jefferson in 1777.

Interestingly, Morocco was at war with Spain since 1860, so I wonder whether there was some expectation of US involvement there, based on this action.
Trivia: That Moroccan/American Treaty of Friendship is still in force (with a few changes over the centuries), the longest continually active Treaty in US history. It is not signed until 1786, however; the 1777 date is when the Sultan opened Morrocco's ports to US shipping. IIRR, the Moroccan/American Treaty of Friendship is the third one signed by the US, with the other two having ended.
 

(Membership has it privileges! To remove this ad: Register NOW!)

trice

Lt. Colonel
Joined
May 2, 2006
Messages
11,333
@Mark F. Jenkins or anyone else who can provide constructive input...what constitutes the awarding / recognition / bestowing / granting / acknowledgment / bequeathing / any-word-you-would-like-to-use of the diplomatically recognized 'belligerent' status in the 1860s? Was it solely based upon the declaration of the blockade or was that just one of the factors?

Thank for your time,
USS ALASKA
Hmm. There really isn't a codified standard for much of anything about war in International Law at that time. There was exactly one treaty to refer to and that was the Paris Declaration Respecting Maritime Law of 16 April 1856. That is signed by 55 nations eventually, but not the US. It includes the principle that blockades, in order to be binding, must be effective.

The Union's 1863 General Order No. 100, the "Lieber Code", is regarded as the first real codification of the laws of land war and was studied avidly by the men who ran the First Geneva Convention in 1864). Everything that follows comes from that.
 
Joined
Apr 30, 2016
Messages
919
Location
Dixie
Not only does your following quote, NOT meet the definition of a pun, YOU provided, it wasn't funny either....
The pun, also called paronomasia, is a form of word play that exploits multiple meanings of a term, or of similar-sounding words, for an intended humorous or rhetorical effect.
I have never heard one of you who want the confederacy today
Ok I guess it wasn’t funny but another possibility is as I previously stated since you don’t even see the pun.
I was replying to CSA Today and the intention of my rhetoric was humor.
 

WJC

Brigadier General
Moderator
Thread Medic
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
11,053
The modern version (the South was evil and it was all their fault) is dreadfully wrong.
That's an appeal to extremes. I would hope that we can all agree that though the practice of slavery- wherever it occurred- was evil. But that doesn't mean that slaveholders were evil. Most, I suggest, were like Jefferson ("slavery is a wolf America holds by the ears"), fully aware it was wrong but unable to stop it.
 

Waterloo50

Major
Forum Host
Silver Patron
Joined
Jul 7, 2015
Messages
4,384
Location
England.
Belligerent Status can be recognised by a government once there is an agreement on exactly what type of armed struggle is being fought. Wars can be categorised and it’s those categories that determine how governments respond and to which status will be used. It’s not that there’s a specific criteria for belligerent status but it’s the conflict itself that is the deciding factor, hence, the civil war and more specifically the confederacy fell into the correct ‘type’ of armed struggle to have various foreign powers recognise its belligerent status.
 
Last edited:

Waterloo50

Major
Forum Host
Silver Patron
Joined
Jul 7, 2015
Messages
4,384
Location
England.
Found this in an article regarding belligerent status. As I suspected, Belligerent status falls under ‘insurgency and maritime law.’ Quote from President Grant ‘ each nation is its own judge when to accord the rights of belligerency, either to a people struggling to free themselves from a government they believe to be oppressive or to independent nations at war with each other’.
Link..https://www.jstor.org/stable/2186284?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents
 
Last edited:
Joined
Mar 14, 2018
Messages
1,630
Yes, Russel. The "Economic aspects of southern sectionalism, 1840-1861." Russel describes the failure of the Southern Commercial Conventions in chapter 5 and in the Summary and Conclusions.
Russel also wrote a long book about economics in general. He is a wonderful resource and rarely quoted for reasons I cannot comprehend!
 
Joined
Mar 14, 2018
Messages
1,630
That's an appeal to extremes. I would hope that we can all agree that though the practice of slavery- wherever it occurred- was evil. But that doesn't mean that slaveholders were evil. Most, I suggest, were like Jefferson ("slavery is a wolf America holds by the ears"), fully aware it was wrong but unable to stop it.
Actually, slavery still exists in the U.S. and all over the world. Prisoners are forced to labor against their will. This is nothing other than what happened in Africa where winning tribes sold their prisoners down the river. Is it not? Problem with that is it was only Blacks. Sad fact: There is no such thing as a correctional facility, a true rehab center.
 

CSA Today

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Messages
19,157
Location
Laurinburg NC
Are there still Confederates running around?
It might be the circle of people I associate with but actually, I do know folks who consider themselves to be Confederates. Personally,I don't have a problem with being called a Neo-Confederate as it seems to be a more accurate description for proud descendants of the original heroes though I do know some who object to the Neo prefix.

Are you still having the syllable restriction problem for your proposed poll? I hope the problem is soon resolved as I would like to see TOV devotees added to the choices.
 
Joined
Mar 14, 2018
Messages
1,630
All of a sudden "Lone Tone" comes to mind for those who have only one string --slavery-- on their historical harps.

What do you think, Lone toners? Fair? Unfair?

I suppose "Drone Tone" would work, too, as resembling those wannaBees who do nothing but groupthink and slur others who don't see things their way with this increasingly sour sobriquet.

Practical value: I want to have such a 2-syllable ellipse on the tip of my tongue for the next Lazy Causer who dares to call me a "Lost Causer."

James
 
Joined
Mar 14, 2018
Messages
1,630
It might be the circle of people I associate with but actually, I do know folks who consider themselves to be Confederates. Personally,I don't have a problem with being called a Neo-Confederate as it seems to be a more accurate description for proud descendants of the original heroes though I do know some who object to the Neo prefix.

Are you still having the syllable restriction problem for your proposed poll? I hope the problem is soon resolved as I would like to see TOV devotees added to the choices.
Thanks. Number of syllables is not etched in stone, just a preference. I just submitted two possibilities. What do you think? I like them but don't want to hurt anyone's feelings --though I would like to hurt their historical perspective!
 

CSA Today

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Messages
19,157
Location
Laurinburg NC
Thanks. Number of syllables is not etched in stone, just a preference. I just submitted two possibilities. What do you think? I like them but don't want to hurt anyone's feelings --though I would like to hurt their historical perspective!
James, the only reservation I have about his poll is that it might be limited to choices reflecting only pro-Northern sentiment and anti-Confederate/Southern pejoratives.
 

Viper21

Sergeant Major
Joined
Jul 4, 2016
Messages
2,237
Location
Rockbridge County, Virginia
Practical value: I want to have such a 2-syllable ellipse on the tip of my tongue for the next Lazy Causer who dares to call me a "Lost Causer."

James
I can appreciate that. I suppose, projecting, race baiting, single cause, head in the sand, selective interpreting, virtuous, 21st century morality police, doesn't exactly roll off the tongue.

I think Single Causers is good. Although, Ive always been fond of Virtuous Yankee. Seems to cover lots of the delusions we encounter on the history of the period. :wink: It's a great counter to "Lost Causer" which is an attempt to cover multiple subjects of the period.
 

CSA Today

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Messages
19,157
Location
Laurinburg NC
I can appreciate that. I suppose, projecting, race baiting, single cause, head in the sand, selective interpreting, virtuous, 21st century morality police, doesn't exactly roll off the tongue.

I think Single Causers is good. Although, Ive always been fond of Virtuous Yankee. Seems to cover lots of the delusions we encounter on the history of the period. :wink: It's a great counter to "Lost Causer" which is an attempt to cover multiple subjects of the period.
Something to think about in our more reflective moments – the list could be endless. :biggrin:
 

major bill

Colonel
Forum Host
Joined
Aug 25, 2012
Messages
14,927
A few months ago I saw an article about this in an old magazine I was thumbing through so do not remember to many details. I had to look up their names on line.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads




(Membership has it privileges! To remove this ad: Register NOW!)
Top