Well written and thought out.
It is only well reasoned from a lopsided point of view. Recall that Slavery was as legal in the North as it was in the South. The US Constitution recognized slavery as legal. This fact takes the well reasoned idea that everyone keeps referring to off the table.
Slavery is immoral, sinful and just wrong but it was legal. We don’t invade states for following the law.
We invaded the South for a variety of reasons but the biggest reason of Mr. Lincoln was to preserve the Union.
Mr. Lincoln made it clear early on that the war was not about slavery and in fact he didn’t make it about slavery until he saw the Union as losing the war. After the proclamation the North got behind the war. One of my great, great grandfathers died from the war. Another great, great, grandfather heard Mr. Lincoln speak and thought that was one the highlights of his life. My great, grandmother told me about 60 years ago how her father’s face would light up as he spoke about Mr. Lincoln.
Personally, I believe the war should be called “The War of the Northern Aggression”. That being said I am glad the nation was held together but I believe there would have been much easier ways to do it. It would have been a relatively simple matter for the US to purchase the freedom of all slaves. That would have been much cheaper than the war and saved a million lives.
The war to me will always have been a mistake. We should have sued for peace and come back together and solved the problem.
The Republic as it was before the Civil War did not survive. We no longer have a republic where the Federal government derives its powers from the States but just the opposite, it is sickening when I think about it.
No, I’m afraid the article was not well thought out, not at all.