Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: mhutcheson

The facts support your article. I’ve long argued that it was not a “civil war”, which is defined as a war between citizens of the same country, but rather a “war of Northern aggression.” Nothing in the Constitution forbids states from seceding. Your article is great because it’s based on facts and not the fabrications of the victors. Lincoln should have listened to that member of his cabinet that suggested he let the South go in peace. Great article.


32 posted on 01/20/2014 2:03:49 PM PST by lakecumberlandvet (Appeasement never works.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: lakecumberlandvet
The facts support your article. I’ve long argued that it was not a “civil war”, which is defined as a war between citizens of the same country, but rather a “war of Northern aggression.” Nothing in the Constitution forbids states from seceding. Your article is great because it’s based on facts and not the fabrications of the victors. Lincoln should have listened to that member of his cabinet that suggested he let the South go in peace. Great article.

Didn't the south fire the first shot?

43 posted on 01/20/2014 2:10:07 PM PST by Partisan Gunslinger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies ]

To: lakecumberlandvet
"let the South go in peace" is totally bogus

A war between the two countries would have occurred before 1880. The issue would have been borders and western expansion.

96 posted on 01/20/2014 2:42:22 PM PST by reg45 (Barack 0bama: Implementing class warfare by having no class.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson