You can check in but you can't check out.
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 ...
My SIL (hubby’s ancestors are from the south) still calls it the “War of Northern Aggression”
True. I wanted the Southernphobes to have to go and ask their moms to explain it to them.
-- Granny Clampett.
Don’t forget North Carolina.
Eventually wouldn't have taken long. Anderson had informed the Confederates that he would have to surrender within three days or so if not resupplied.
To me, the US died after that war, it was all a downhill slide to where we are today.
RE: “It was never about slavery.”
I disagree.
If you take slavery out of the dispute, I don’t see how you motivate millions of soldiers - North or South - to run across open fields into direct gunfire.
I mean, would you risk your life today to stop California or New York City from seceding?
Not me.
In 1860, as war talk heated up, half the people in America had lived their entire lives within 100 miles of their birthplace.
Very hard for me to believe that farmers in Vermont got so agitated about farmers in Georgia seceding from the Union that they went to war.
According to the author of this article, RE Lee used the term Civil War, so I fail to see why any good southerner would object to the term.
The Mafia and the CIA not withstanding....
I do believe the southern soldiers disliked the idea of a government far away telling them how to live and what to pay them among other things.
Another one of the truths about the war was that it tipped the scale of power to the federal government, creating the snowball rolling downhill that eventually became Obama and our new system of unlawful governance...Obamunism.
Those who cannot see the war for what it was beyond the part that involved slavery don’t seem to understand that they support the thing that Obama possible, and therefore support Obama.
They really hate that fact. But it is another simple truth.
You can check in but you can't check out.
“Bumps in the road”- Barry Obama
I see that from my own research on things, and I agree that paved the way for today. Slavery was what they cried about to the public to gain support.
“but no one - even the rebels - considered unilateral secession legitimate.”
Says you, a yankee liberal.
You are correct. It was about slavery. Southerners did not want to be enslaved by northerners and their all powerful federal government.
Civil War works for me. The country was divided in half
“Definitely not the CSA losers.”
Or the northern states that started slavery and held onto it even after the civil war was over.
Somebody pointed out that many people hadn't ever been more than 100 miles from their homes. Part of it was that a war was a source of excitement, an excuse to travel, to partake of the pomp and glitz and glory of military service. Of course, it wasn't quite so much fun once they got there.
Mafia...post-war U.S. Same thing.
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.