Message from @Ehzek

Discord ID: 487793017869172736


2018-09-07 01:02:56 UTC  

yeah. apparently the new thrawn books written by the same guy set before Rebels are really good too. With Thrawn outwitting and earning the respect of Vader

2018-09-07 01:10:23 UTC  

Well, yeah, Timothy Zahn is the best writer they can get at this point. The problem is that he’s working with far weaker writers like Chuck “Anyone who criticizes my novels is a Homophobe” Wendig.

2018-09-07 01:11:40 UTC  

But, either way, I’ve simply boycotted buying most of the stuff anyways.

2018-09-07 01:13:43 UTC  

yeah. I will say that the Star Wars Comics have been good.

2018-09-07 01:13:51 UTC  

Darth Vadar is great

2018-09-07 01:14:16 UTC  

I don’t really look at the comics Michu

2018-09-07 01:14:19 UTC  

Much

2018-09-07 01:14:59 UTC  

All of marval's non SJW writers went there I think. Because that's when Maval comics got crap and SJW when Star Wars started up

2018-09-07 01:22:14 UTC  

O O F

2018-09-07 01:43:45 UTC  

100,000 dislikes.

No one could have dreamed that Star Wars would end up being this disliked...

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/444628746788536330/487437790402052116/image0.jpg

2018-09-07 01:45:25 UTC  

Man has Disney ever thought of hiring a second artist? Their cartoons have been drawn the same as far back as I can remember

2018-09-07 01:45:42 UTC  

yikes..... don't even get me started...... This is the first Star Wars show project with none of the clone Wars people at the helm and it shows

2018-09-07 01:54:54 UTC  

The trailer is bad and the argument everyone is using is “it’s a kid’s show.”

2018-09-07 03:23:58 UTC  

The other shows were kids shows

2018-09-07 03:24:33 UTC  

Hell the first one was basic as hell but had great story and reception.

2018-09-07 19:07:37 UTC  

Absolute Chad

2018-09-07 22:29:40 UTC  

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/444628746788536330/487751330203566089/41261907_2226419357640756_1928443897906724864_o.png

2018-09-08 00:24:42 UTC  

>Be Lincoln.
>Run for President.
>Say you want to intentionally infringe on the rights of the states and new territories to prevent them from "expanding slavery."
>Southern States call you out on this and claim such an act is tyrannical.
>Ignore them.
>Win while only getting 39% of the national vote in a four-way election and claiming only the Northern States.
>Southern States secede, determining that Lincoln is not serving for the best interests of the South.
>Same states send you numerous requests to go to the negotiating table to come up with a compromise.
>Refuse all requests.
>South Carolina then demands the Island Fort Sumter is on to be returned to them, since they are not a part of the Union anymore.
>Ignore them and resupply the fort, continuing the occupation of the fort in defiance of South Carolina's demand.
>Fort Sumter is fired upon and seized without any casualties and surrendered formally to South Carolina with the only deaths resulting from an accident unrelated to the bombardment.
>Call for 75,000 troops afterwards to "crush a rebellion."
>Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Arkansas secede after the call of troops, determining the action to be tyrannical and a direct threat to their sovereignty and their people's rights.
>Proceed to carry out a war you had the power to avoid and result in the deaths of 2-4% of the Country's population, resulting in the decimation of the southern white male population, the destruction of the South's economy, and breeding the next 100 years of racism as a result.
>People in 2018: "LiNcOlN DiDn'T iNsTiGaTe ThE wAr!"

2018-09-08 01:13:37 UTC  

Technically he still didnt

2018-09-08 01:15:18 UTC  

And Fort Sumter would still be the Norths base regardless of who owned South Carolina

2018-09-08 01:21:47 UTC  

No, it wouldn't be.

2018-09-08 01:22:13 UTC  

The island is technically South Carolina's territory and, if they wanted to, they could demand the island back.

2018-09-08 02:10:40 UTC  

Longest historical revisionism I've ever seen

2018-09-08 02:16:10 UTC  

That isn't "historical revisionism." Lincoln only won the Northern States and only got 39% of the national vote. Lincoln was the man in the position of power to prevent the war, but he only further instigated it by refusing any sort of compromise and further driving the nation to war.

2018-09-08 02:18:57 UTC  

Most importantly, Lincoln took the war extremely personally. To him, it was the war he brought about and all of the destruction caused by it was on his shoulders.

2018-09-08 02:19:34 UTC  

Lincoln was not the monster that southern revisionists make him out to be. Nor was the Confederacy some heroic dream of freedom for its people.

2018-09-08 02:19:54 UTC  

No doubt there were good and bad people on both sides.

2018-09-08 02:20:10 UTC  

And good men who did bad things. Bad men who did good things. As there is in every war.

2018-09-08 02:20:11 UTC  

Nor was Lincoln a virtuous saint who did no wrong nor was the Union army the great liberators.

2018-09-08 02:21:17 UTC  

Lincoln is the living incarnation of the old saying "the road to hell is paved with good intentions." He wanted to follow his principles and did so, but all that brought about was the absolute chaos of the war and the next century of social problems for the country.

2018-09-08 02:21:48 UTC  

Has any war ever been different?

2018-09-08 02:22:06 UTC  

No matter the motivation, innocent people die. Ordinary soldiers, and civilians

2018-09-08 02:22:32 UTC  

The difference here was that it was preventable.

2018-09-08 02:22:50 UTC  

Is any war unavoidable?

2018-09-08 02:23:17 UTC  

Nope.

2018-09-08 02:23:20 UTC  

Some aren't.

2018-09-08 02:23:32 UTC  

This one was and it all had to do with who was in charge.

2018-09-08 02:25:20 UTC  

Have you ever read SC's declaration of secession?

2018-09-08 02:26:15 UTC  

I have.

2018-09-08 02:26:27 UTC  

So you know why they broke away