Posted on 10/05/2017 11:30:13 PM PDT by vannrox
My two permanent party duty stations in the United States. Fort Hood and Fort Polk.
“However, the Civil War was not fought over slavery.”
I agree with the Red a Guard analogy.
But, “However, the Civil War was not fought over slavery.” This discredits you.
The Civil War due to slavery and only slavery.
I think it’s a bit more complicated than that. Perhaps slavery was the reason the Confederacy came into being, but the Union was simply fighting against secession, at least initially.
Basic at Ft Polk, AIT at Hood.
(snip) As the Confederacy entered its final days, the Missouri Confederates were amongst the last to give up the fight. Richmond fell on April 3, and General Lee surrendered the Army of Northern Virginia at Appomattox on the 9th, but still the Missourians would not lay down their arms. This was due in part to the belief they would not be allowed to return to their homes in peace.[70]
See also The Boat-Burners One of those sure he would not be allowed to return to his home in St. Louis was the convicted saboteur, Robert Louden. He had escaped from Union custody while being transferred from Gratiot prison to Alton prison during General Price’s raid the previous October, but a death penalty still hung over him should he ever be captured again. After the war, Louden would claim that on the night of April 26-27 he engineered the most gruesomely spectacular strike any of Tucker’s saboteurs ever attempted. Using another of Thomas Courtenay’s coal torpedoes, Louden said he had snuck aboard the Sultana at Memphis and deposited the bomb in the coal piles near her furnace. Shortly after leaving Memphis, Sultana’s boilers exploded, resulting in the deaths of over 1,700 Union POW’s returning to their homes from southern prison camps.[71]
Jefferson Davis, having escaped from Richmond before its fall, tried to make it to the Trans-Mississippi to continue the fight. Union troops were in hot pursuit of the rebel President- without-a-capital. Dispatched to help in the hunt was the famous detective, Allan Pinkerton. He was also instructed to see if he could track down Tucker, Louden, and their colleagues. Pinkerton reported back to Washington on June 6, 1865 rumors both men were on the move. Circulars were dispatched as far away as California alerting Union authorities to keep a close eye out for them.[72] ---- http://www.civilwarstlouis.com/History2/tuckerswar.htm
Both of you are wrong, AND, both of you are right.
Basic at Fort Leonard Wood, AIT at Fort Huachuca.
Needs proofreading.
It’s unfortunate that a secondary comment about the Civil War is the focus of discussion (both in the article and the posts). It is a sidetrack that misses a much more important point.
We are seeing a very real attempt across academia to create a cultural revolution here. There are real and continuous attempts to stifle our inherent rights to speech, press, assembly and religion. To control what is permissible to think and enslave our minds.
On campus, and increasingly in the media accusations of “offensive” are used as a club. A deliberate attempt to deny the ability of those who do not wish to tow the current leftist party line to share ideas that do not conform.
These are our inherent liberties that are at stake. I wish we would focus on that. Sorry for the rant, but you all struck a nerve.
-rg84
Nearly every teacher in this nation ( Pre-K through university graduate school) was trained by godless Marxists in Marxist-run colleges and universities. This is true for both private and government schools.
Scary! ....But few conservatives make this threat a priority.
The fall of Atalanta was a watershed event in US history. After Atlanta the war became unpopular in the South and everyone knew what the final out come would be. Lincoln won the ‘64 elections as a result.
Except Lincoln himself said the war was not about slavery. Rewriters of history like you are dangerous people.
If that’s the case, why no Emancipation Proclamation in 1861? Of course, the Lincoln lovers will say there was no “political will” for it, but had slavery been the central cause of the North’s aggression, freeing the slaves should have been the first action of the Lincoln Administration, before the call up of troops and the invasion of Virginia.
True that !
Just a few years ago, NEA was offering copies of Saul Alinsky's book, "Rules for Radicales" to members
and encouraging its implementation in the classroom.
Is there any wonder why Ayers and other Marxist radicals went into education as a career choice - to further the revolution!
“The Civil War due to slavery and only slavery.”
Only to liberals. You don’t know history to say such a thing.
The dumbing down of America on display.
It doesn’t seem right to look back and say it was only about slavery. A Southerner at the time would say they were fighting off the invaders. Before the Emancipation Proclimation a Northerner would say they were supressing a rebellion and trying to preserve the union. They considered Southerners traitors.
When we say it was about slavery we are assigning a modern simplistic interpretation to the event. There is nothing in the constitution that says the south could not break from the union. Remember the part about “in the course of human events”. How can it be said we are a free country when states are being held against their will? These are troubling questions people like to sweep under the rug by saying it was about slavery.
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.
