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

Skip to comments.

Is There Something Wrong With The Term: "War Between the States?"
Old Virginia Blog ^ | 01-06-2014 | Richard G. Williams, Jr.

Posted on 01/11/2014 11:16:07 AM PST by Davy Buck

However if one truly wants to make such a big deal out of what we call the armed conflict which occurred in America from 1861 to 1865 , and if its historical accuracy and honesty that one truly seeks, then I think Douglas Southall Freeman is, perhaps, the truest to historical accuracy in coining the proper term . . .

(Excerpt) Read more at oldvirginiablog.blogspot.com ...


TOPICS: Books/Literature; Education; History; Military/Veterans
KEYWORDS: academia; civilwar; confederacy; dixie; kkk; militaryhistory; southernaggression; whitesupremacists
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 321-333 next last

1 posted on 01/11/2014 11:16:07 AM PST by Davy Buck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Davy Buck

I enjoy using an older title: “War of Northern Aggression”.


2 posted on 01/11/2014 11:17:39 AM PST by Pollster1 ("Shall not be infringed" is unambiguous.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pollster1

yeh!

Dick.G: AMERICAN !
*****


3 posted on 01/11/2014 11:19:08 AM PST by gunnyg ("A Constitution changed from Freedom, can never be restored; Liberty, once lost, is lost forever...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Pollster1

The war of Southern Rebellion.


4 posted on 01/11/2014 11:19:26 AM PST by Vermont Lt (If you want to keep your dignity, you can keep it. Period........ Just kidding, you can't keep it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Davy Buck

Nothing wrong with it, but people who have no clue might think every state was at war with every other state. lol


5 posted on 01/11/2014 11:19:34 AM PST by GeronL (Extra Large Cheesy Over-Stuffed Hobbit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Davy Buck

“War Between The States” is more accurate than “Civil War” because it was a war for independence and not a war for one faction inside a nation to exert control over the other.

Of course, from Lincoln’s point of view (and that of the victors, who write the history) the Confederate States of America never left the USA, so they see it as a Civil War.

But, the CSA did secede and the USA did defeat them in war and re-annexed them as conquered territory for the duration of “Reconstruction”. To claim that the CSA had no legal right to secede requires an honest person to admit that the colonies had no legal right to present the Declaration of Independence to the legal ruler of those colonies.


6 posted on 01/11/2014 11:22:00 AM PST by Bryanw92 (Sic semper tyrannis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Davy Buck

Call it the ‘War over Slaves’ and be done with it.

:)


7 posted on 01/11/2014 11:25:06 AM PST by James C. Bennett (An Australian.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bryanw92

I understand it was referred to as “The Recent unpleasantness”.


8 posted on 01/11/2014 11:25:57 AM PST by EandH Dad (sleeping giants wake up REALLY grumpy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Bryanw92

The rebels tried to legitimize their insurrection by calling it a secession but no one - even the rebels - considered unilateral secession legitimate.

And the colonialists never tried to split hairs by calling theirs a secession. They knew it was rebellion plain and simple.


9 posted on 01/11/2014 11:27:27 AM PST by rockrr (Everything is different now...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Davy Buck

I think “the War Between the States” is pretty accurate but AMerican Civil War is shorter.

I remember hearing it called the War Between teh States about half the time as a kid, maybe because my grandparents were transplanted Southerners, but not so much anymore.

Don’t know why.


10 posted on 01/11/2014 11:30:10 AM PST by Cloverfarm (This too shall pass ...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pollster1
I enjoy using an older title: “War of Northern Aggression”.

Without Northern aggression, there would have been no war.

11 posted on 01/11/2014 11:30:27 AM PST by SampleMan (Feral Humans are the refuse of socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Davy Buck

Well, as soetoro links himself to Lincoln, who could blame a secessionist?


12 posted on 01/11/2014 11:32:36 AM PST by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: James C. Bennett

So, are you saying that buying and selling human beings like cattle is bad? Who knew?


13 posted on 01/11/2014 11:33:21 AM PST by stinkerpot65 (Global warming is a Marxist lie.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Pollster1

That’s what I call it because that’s what it was.


14 posted on 01/11/2014 11:33:32 AM PST by Bulwyf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: James C. Bennett

It was never about slavery.


15 posted on 01/11/2014 11:34:28 AM PST by Bulwyf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Bryanw92

As A kid in school I questioned why the south wasn’t simply allowed to go its way. I was rudely informed that I had it all wrong. But the story as told in school never made sense. I think they should have simply left and that was that. If you look at when Lincoln freed the slaves and the fact that he did not free them in the territories that remained in the union, it puts the lie to the “it was a war against slavery meme.”

Frankly, I think now would be a good time for the red states to leave the union and take the nukes along.


16 posted on 01/11/2014 11:35:02 AM PST by Gen.Blather
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: rockrr

LOL!


17 posted on 01/11/2014 11:35:50 AM PST by Lee'sGhost (Johnny Rico picked the wrong girl!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Pollster1

I agree with the rights of the states. Though not all people’s were allowed to determine their states fate.

Anyway, war could have been avoided. You didn’t see Castro attack Gitmo after he took over power. Evil, but smart man.

Fort Sumter could have been eventually negotiated, but the Rebs decided to start the war.


18 posted on 01/11/2014 11:35:53 AM PST by Vaquero (Don't pick a fight with an old guy. If he is too old to fight, he'll just kill you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Davy Buck

That used to be an important term of distinction in the Old South.

The Confederate states claimed that the Constitution gave them authority to secede.

Lincoln and the North claimed that no such authority existed.

Thus, the North called Southern soldiers “rebels,” and the North called the conflict a “Civil War.”


19 posted on 01/11/2014 11:36:37 AM PST by zeestephen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gen.Blather

If the libtards stayed true to form, they would demand that we take the nukes with us. I vote all the South haters stay in the blue states where they are with people more their ilk.


20 posted on 01/11/2014 11:37:57 AM PST by Lee'sGhost (Johnny Rico picked the wrong girl!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 321-333 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

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