Evasion. The original question was, to rephrase it, what entitles you to imply that, absent Fort Sumter, Lincoln and the South would have continued at peace?
Lincoln wanted a war and you know it. He was going for it.
I'm not going to get sucked into defending Jeff Davis so you can play moral-equivalency games and cry "tu quoque! -- Jeff Davis did 'X'!!!". I can't defend Jeff Davis's shortsightedness.
Now let's get back to Lincoln. Do you mean to suggest for as long as a nanosecond, that Lincoln would not have gone to war with the Confederacy, if Davis had foreborne at Fort Sumter?
Never mind Lincoln's baiting Davis. Never mind the lying messages he sent through Ward Lamon and others, the deviousness, and the chicanery of his sending ships off in every direction under secret orders.
Just tell me -- I want to hear you say it, like Landslide Lyndon said -- that Lincoln was not totally committed to war, and would not have gone to war with the Confederacy, if only Davis had left Sumter alone.
Answer the question, please.
Lack of any hostile actions on Lincoln's part, and his declared promise that there would be no war unless the South initiated one. Which they did.
Now let's get back to Lincoln. Do you mean to suggest for as long as a nanosecond, that Lincoln would not have gone to war with the Confederacy, if Davis had foreborne at Fort Sumter?
Yes. Why should he? He had sworn that he would retain posession of the property of the U.S. So long as he did then he felt that he could wait out the southern rebellion and it would fall apart, sooner rather than later. In that he may have underestimated his opponent, but we'll never know.
Just tell me -- I want to hear you say it, like Landslide Lyndon said -- that Lincoln was not totally committed to war, and would not have gone to war with the Confederacy, if only Davis had left Sumter alone.
I just did.