“Lincoln had no options. . .”
Lincoln could have imposed economic sanctions without immediate war. Lincoln could have worked with the international community to mediate a peaceful resolution to the disputes without immediate war. Lincoln could have ordered the naval blockade of the South without an immediate land war. Lincoln could have negotiated with the South without an immediate war. There were several steps Lincoln could have taken to avoid an immediate war. I mean, if he wanted to avoid an immediate war.
Yep, too bad Beauregard had to fire the first shots at Ft. Sumter.
Change "Lincoln" to "Roosevelt" and would you say the same about World War II?
Yes, and I suppose he could have fired off an angry letter to the Times as well (or is that too derisive?). The point remains that Lincoln repeatedly urged restraint, reflection, and reconciliation but the fire eaters were having none of it.
As another poster pointed out you appear to be interested in nothing less than total submission by Lincoln. Do you impose the same threshold by other presidents? Is it your preference to see the United States carved up, chewed upon, and turned under?