Comment: I disagree very strong with

(See in situ)


I disagree very strong with

I disagree very strong with you today Justin. This war is one I would actually have fought for. To me it is a predictable extension of the Revolutionary War. Some founders warned that Britain would only use surrender and peace as a way to buy time for a second attack. I think it was clear during the federalist rule of 1789- 1801 set the gears in motion for the war of 1812. The north threatened succession against Jefferson, they signed the egregious Jay Treaty and rescinded on many of our most important terms of Peace with Britain. Andrew Jackson probably never forgave George Washington for his support of the Jay Treaty.

Jefferson had the correct idea, ban trade with both imperialist nations. The federalist threatened political action in response, and our leftist economist today describe Jefferson's program as a failure, although it was a last ditch effort to save neutrality, all the while his enemies were making favored trade treaties with our soon to be enemies.

The war of 1812 is called that because it was embarrassing if we called it the Second Affirmation of American Independence. Your educated and I am aware of your abilities Justin, just dont let that high school class version of our second greatest war, get you confused with the seudo alliances(entanglement) of our days. You have several wars of aggression which would make your point. Write an article about the Spanish American War if you want to show early NeoCons. But please dont throw my only home boys Madison, Jefferson, and Jackson under the bus.

yt = classicalliberalism

Patriotic Senex