ITT: just wars where one side was clearly fighting for a worthy cause

>Rich wealthy plantation slave-owners get pissy because Honest Abe wanted slavery to not spread to the western US, (but he didn't want to end it outright)
>Declare war on the US Government by firing cannons at Fort Sumter, later call it the "War of Northern Aggression"
>Trick a bunch of poor illiterate white farmers into fighting for the cause of a slave-owning minority, despite the fact owning slaves kept much of the poor illiterate white farmers out of a job/livelihood. Later call it "Southern Pride" and fighting a tyranny
>Sherman gets angry, burns down your biggest cities to wake the Confederates into fucking reality, call it "genocide"
>Lincoln then attempts to rebuild the South post Civil War, defending you from the more aggressive Northerners who are still fucking mad that you led to the deaths of over 500,000 men. The southerners then assassinate him, and fuck themselves over.
>Turn your anger onto niggers, because you are a) asshurt over losing the civil war b) asshurt that blacks are free and c)asshurt that your entire economy is overspecialized as shit due to the assholes who started the Civil War

The American south is probably the biggest case of salty I've ever seen. The whole confederate pride thing is a crock of shit, its an excuse to pretend you have a glorious heritage when in reality they're still just a band of obese retards who are stuck in their ways of fucking themselves.

Peninsular war

>Muh black and white morality

Go back to your safe space cuck

In what way were the Nazis not the baddies in WWII by any sane metric?

>In a thread about black and white morality
Spot the retard.

Every war that have been fought against Germany

It's not like the Soviets conquered half of Europe and did the biggest mass raping in history or anything. Or that a small minority within Germany extorted every single industry in the country to such an extent German girls had to become prostitutes for Jewish barons to put food on their family's table.

This thread is about worthy causes. There are no black and white situations, but there are worthy situations. It was not worthy fighting for the allies.
Look at Modern Europe; all of it could've been precluded.

The Troubles

Protestants get out

Right! You are the retard

Nice argument. :)

I'm Catholic

Catholics get out

>br*ts

...

>being this mad that someone has national pride

In a way WW2 was just the aftershock of WW1, and WW1 was a pretty pointless war that could be framed as the powers of Europe unfairly trying to keep the increasingly powerful German heart of Europe claiming its fair share of the global colonial pie.

>it's fair share of the colonial pie

Give me what you're smoking my dude

>Celebrating a failed insurrectionist government that lasted all but 4 years
>National Pride
Get yer noggin checked m8

Top kek

Oh I'm a good old Yankee, well that's just who I am.
For fucking all my cousins I do not give a damn!
800,000 Rebcucks lay rotting in the dust,
I guess their whole "secession" meme turned out to be a bust.

Ok, i agree with you on almost everything, but Abe wanted to abolish slavery.
>A HOUSE DIVIDED AGAINST ITSELF CANNOT STAND

>national pride
>nation

everyone look at him. look at him and laugh

Great Turkish war.
Every war against the Ottomans to be honest.

>be the north
>end slavery
>realize you don't want free niggers in your northern states
>realize keeping them in the southern states as free men increases their population and political power exponentially
>decide that blacks only count as 3/5ths of a person
Neither side is innocent.

>decide that blacks only count as 3/5ths of a person
You stupid son?

You do realize that was a method to prevent the south from retaining huge power in the electoral college right? Slavery would never have ended as it did if this were the case because then the states in the south would have an enormous population on par with the northern states (in terms of political power)

I hate when stupid fucks interpet the 3/5ths clause as some sort of 19th century pseudoscience statement that Blacks are equal to 3/5ths of a person to keep blacks down. If anything it was to their benefit.

you tard. The 3/5ths clause was a compromise so that Southern states could be assured that the North wouldnt take their slavery away. Not exactly helping the black mans cause there, friendo

A shame the good guys lost that one
;_;7

Southern Independence from Northern parasites and greed is absolutely justified.

Death to the Union and all who stand for it.

srsly

The war was about rich slave owning plantation owners brainwashing the poor whites into accepting the status quo simply because they were better off than the slaves. They sacrificed millions of those poor whites just to keep their lavish lifestyle for a few more years.

course it is. The war would've started far sooner if a compromise had not been reached, and there is no assurance than the North would have won. Luckily, they managed to formulate a compromise that would allow free states the ability to gain a majority without allowing slavery

Also, reminder that Southerners didn't like state's rights when it meant slaves weren't allowed inside a state's borders

me in the middle

I like you guys better than the yanks, keep it up.

>The 3/5ths clause was a compromise
No fucking shit sherlock. The constitutional convention of 1787 was one of the first great clashes of ideologies in the US. Things were tense, and the goal of the Founding Fathers was to make sure the colonies (IE the union) remained together in light of the fact that the British Empire was still pretty miffed at the whole "losing a good chunk of the Empire".

The southern elite who were in office (who were also mainly the slave owning minority) demanded that blacks have the equivalent of one vote per one individual. This is an irony considering that the slaves would just bolster the power of the southern elite to maintaining that slavery system. The north was pissed off at this (both out of fear that the southerners could sway the vote far easier than they should, and that slavery would spread to any new territorries if acquired), and demanded that the South settle with 3/5ths (so they still gained a population for political power, but not as much as the North feared).

If the south did succeed at 1 to 1 population, then they would have likely dominated the western territories far earlier, perhaps a fragmentation of the union much earlier would have occurred, and the whole thing went kaput.

No 3/5th compromise = No emancipation for large majority of blacks

>american banter

He did LITERALLY NOTHING wrong.

It's set to the lyrics of tune of a butthurt southern post war song called "im a good ol rebel."

I actually agree, the history of France would have been substantially worse without a figure like him, though I do think he was the cause of much destruction and the world would be better off had another strong leader formed a republic, or a commune, instead of an empire

You need to actually have (had) a nation to have national pride.

Napoleon is the reason constitutional monarchies are so prevalent in Europe, else Europe would have remained for a long period of time simply monarchies.

Then leave it namefaggot go to Somalia if you want to practice slavery so badly.

I know, that's why I largely agree. I merely think that he could have been better. Can't exactly go back and change it though, so I do respect the history and argue in favor of the good that Napoleon did

>cause of much destruction
That would be the eternal Anglo, Austrian and pidorashka working in an unholy alliance to put a stop to Napoleon.

Napoleon was just defending himself.

Don't reply to me

>oi i luvs da sowf i does real yank culcha' innit

Ashamed to admit this but he's Irish

top kek

So essentially, he's genetically a Dixiecuck with less recent negro admixture?

He was born in England and thus never learned to take care of his teeth.

Some movements transcend borders. Through a certain lens, the Napoleonic wars were royal families sending their slaves off to die just to prologue their rule. They didn't want their own slaves rising up against them so they violated the sovereignty of France by trying to depose the new government.

It goes both ways but this lens seems under represented today. Napoleon is just seen as a not wholly evil warmonger, dissolving (is dissolving the right word?) all his opponents of blame. I guess the perfidy of the Albion is to blame for that.

See

what flag is that, I know that's portugese royal coat of arms, but I thought green and red were the backing colours if there ever were backing colours

Royalists are good for defending themselves. Republicans are bad for bombing children and war memorials, even if I share a faith with them I do not share their political views.

>fair share of colonies
Apart from rubber, oil and potential slaves, Germany was ahead of everyone else in basically all metrics, not enough was done to stop them becoming great again.

>defending themselves
>who are the B Specials
>who are the RUC
>what is gerrymandering
>what is Bloody Sunday
>literally treated the native Irish like the Americans treated blacks
Please refrain from speaking on matters you know nothing about
They weren't defending themselves in any sense. They were undeniably the aggressor, to the point where Irish Catholics welcomed British soldiers in the streets with tea and cakes, believing them to be saviors from the cruelty of the RUC
Before the soldiers turned round and shot unarmed children ofcourse

He was a Cromwellian figure, but failed by not dying earlier and making people realise you need KANGSN'SHEIT for stability.

>monarchist

What are you on about?

>They were undeniably the aggressor, to the point where Irish Catholics welcomed British soldiers in the streets with tea and cakes
I see your meme, and raise you another meme youtube.com/watch?v=3PLrRZ0nENQ
[spoiler] what is 'tarring and feathering'

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falklands_War

REMOVE VIOLENT ARGIE FROM PEACEFUL SHEEP FARMING CLAY

>ignoring the N'SHIET part of my post
WEW LAD
There's a reason why Britain and it's commonwealth has seen so few revolutions.

Germany had more valuable land in Europe than Britain had in India probably.

No one cares about who has the nicer terrorists.

Ah yes, completely forgot about this one. I will never understand why the Argentinians think they have a claim here, and Spain to Gibraltar.

As a Falklander, i am proud of you user.

>You cannot have a good cause if at least one person fucks up.
You have now said every ideology and religion are violent, even pacifism.

>killed more of their own men than they did the enemy

>drinking Strongbow not glorious Stella Artois
COMMONER
What are you even commenting on, tarring and feathering was done by republicans to native irish that slept with Royalists

That's the point. The German economy had surpassed England. It therefore felt entitled for at very least an equal share of the non-European spoils.

self-determination is always a worthy cause when you have both the academic and low class communities supporting it.

>You cannot have a good cause if at least one person fucks up.
Not what I said.

>I have more wealth than anyone, as the socialists in the ReichStag and Bismarck's socialism says I should amass even more wealth, rather than work towards world peace. Also independence for Morocco and Boers.

>nicer terrorists is what your post said
>Intellgiensta and Proletariat were behind the Russian Revolution therefore good
>Academics and Proletariat were in favour of Nazi Elections therefore good
How many other immoral rules do you want me to find

>Britain
>in any way being a champion of world peace
What are you even on about?

...

>greed
holy fuck look at yourself you are defending enslavement of christians. I cannot think of something that more embodies greed then forcefully exploiting the livelihood of people.
although if you are being sarcastic then good meme friendo : >)

I was mocking Wilhelm's lopsided personality, as afterall the German State was an extension of his will.
What is Pax Brittania

...

>Muslims conquer and build a disruptive empire to fund their further expansion, destroying local cultures and technology
>Europeans remove excess commodities thus raising local prices thus helping markets, and leave good infrastructure
I don't see the problem here.

Good guys lost that war user

>people don't like being invaded
wew lad someone call the bobs

He did during the 100 days but obviously the coalition put a stop to that before it really started.

Did Christians steal Turkish boys from their families, brainwash them to be Christians, cut off their balls so they can't breed, and then send them off to kill Muslims?

No? Oh, okay.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boxer_Rebellion

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opium_Wars

Semi-related:
Does anyone remember what that war is called where the soldiers start fucking gypsies and don't report back to the general and so he sends his army and it ends up just being a massacre of the same army?

Truly a noble sacrifice.

>janissaries
>castrated

what? the whole reason the empire cucked itself was because janissaries were having too many kids who bloated the corps and turned it into a political rather than military institution

their actions were justified m8, both countries were fogged and have every right to seek out independence from their old-world systems, you can't look back and say that it didn't work out in the end and therefore the cause wasn't justified. As humans, the nazis had the right to will their power until somebody stopped them. Question the moral specifics all you want but the pure act of self-determination is always a basic human right.

Before republicanism, blue and white were the colors.

This

That always confused me. They started out having their manhoods cut off but next thing I know the empire is being rocked by janisaries wanting to have families.

>be Dishonest Abe
>impose federal laws on independent states
>invade their land and place troops in their forts
>get mad when they tell you to fuck off