My friend,
The South was defending slavery. That’s not something that can be tolerated by a society that has the power to do something about it. If the south would have just been willing to let the territories west of the Mississippi be free, slavery would have have slowly vanished in the south without a war....politics...but not war....alike it did in much of South America. Instead, the south felt threatened and wanted a slave state to match every free state. This was their fatal mistake because slavery was never a long term option. Ultimately, this is what led to war and their destruction. It’s sad because the South has a nobility about it that to this day can’t be matched by the northerners. That nobility was definitely tarnished due to slavery.
Lincoln did not initially send his armies into the South to end slavery, but to end what he called a rebellion. It was only later, when things were going hard, and the North was questioning whether the bloodshed was worth saving the Union, that he picked up the public relation ploy of slavery. Since slavery was evil, it was ready made for his purposes. That had already been well prepared by the Abolitionists.
Read his first inaugural address. His cause for war was secession by the South, not the institution of slavery.
“Ultimately, this is what led to war and their destruction.”
If the South was fighting for slavery, who was fighting against slavery?
“My friend, The South was defending slavery.”
So was the North. Wasn’t like they banned it. Heck, the vast majority of slave trade money was held in New York city.
To claim the entire war was nothing but the defense of slavery is retarded and ignorant.