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

To: DoodleDawg

The difference is that Lincoln was in control of events, as Buchanan had been before him when shots were fired at The Star of the West. Buchanan had sent an army to suppress the Mormon rebellion in Utah Territory but he didn’t choose to do the same against South Carolina. I suppose if he had and had started the civil war himself he would be regarded as a Great President instead of the goat that he usually is.

It was Lincoln’s decision to call up 75,000 troops for an invasion rather than let events play out short of war. The battlefields are in the south, not the north, a fact ignored since its meaning is obvious on its face.

Lincoln’s decision for war, and he made this on his own Congress being out of session, pushed the wavering border states into joining the Confederacy, guaranteeing a long and bloody war.


160 posted on 04/26/2016 9:16:35 AM PDT by Pelham (Trump/Tsoukalos 2016 - vote the great hair ticket)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 159 | View Replies ]


To: Pelham
The difference is that Lincoln was in control of events...

As was Jefferson Davis, and for a longer period than Lincoln was.

It was Lincoln’s decision to call up 75,000 troops for an invasion rather than let events play out short of war.

Having bombarded Sumter into surrender then war was what the Southern states had already decided on. Lincoln's call for troops was merely in response to that.

The battlefields are in the south, not the north, a fact ignored since its meaning is obvious on its face.

I'm not sure what your obvious meaning is. The South started the war. The fact that you can't then keep your enemy off your territory is hardly your enemy's fault.

Lincoln’s decision for war, and he made this on his own Congress being out of session, pushed the wavering border states into joining the Confederacy, guaranteeing a long and bloody war.

Again, the case could be made that war was forced upon him.

162 posted on 04/26/2016 9:40:40 AM PDT by DoodleDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies ]

To: Pelham; DoodleDawg; rockrr; Bodleian_Girl
Pelham: "The difference is that Lincoln was in control of events..."

So Lincoln issued orders for the Confederate assault at Fort Sumter?
**NOT***

Pelham: "...if [Buchanan] had [responded to Star of the West with force] and had started the civil war himself he would be regarded as a Great President instead of the goat that he usually is."

President Buchanan was a Democrat from central Pennsylvania, not so far from my home.
Today you can see Confederate flags flying on houses in many small towns near here.
Back in those days, Buchanan was known as a "Doughfaced Northerner" because of his Southern sympathies.

Buchanan did not believe secessionists had acted lawfully, but he also did not believe the Federal Government should use force to stop them.
Lincoln shared that view, except that by contrast, he interpreted Confederate violence against Union property as rebellion, and the Confederate military assault on Fort Sumter as war.
As such, Lincoln had a constitutional responsibility to defeat them, which he did.

Pelham: "It was Lincoln’s decision to call up 75,000 troops for an invasion rather than let events play out short of war."

Confederate provocations "short of war" were the events from January through April 12, 1861 -- seizures of dozens of major Federal properties, forts, ships, arsenals, mints, etc.
But Davis' assault on Fort Sumter was a clear act of war which Lincoln could not ignore.
Further: if Lincoln's call for 75,000 troops on April 15, 1861 was an "act of war", then the Confederacy's call-up of 100,000 troops on March 6 was the real beginning of Civil War.
And even after Lincoln's call, Davis could still have asked for a peaceful resolution.
But he never did, not ever.
Instead, he called up another 400,000 Confederate soldiers, formally declared war on the United States and sent military aid into Union Missouri.

So Civil War was the Confederacy's choice, to which Lincoln responded appropriately.

Pelham: "The battlefields are in the south, not the north, a fact ignored since its meaning is obvious on its face."

No, the first battlefields, in early 1861, were in Union states, like Missouri and Maryland, where Confederates assaulted Union troops, resulting in dozens killed.
Further, the Confederate military threat against Washington DC was immediate in early 1861, and constant throughout the war.

The first Union "invasion" of Virginia, and first Confederate battle death (June 10, 1861), did not come until after Virginia formally voted to join the Confederacy and its declared war on the United States.

Pelham: "Lincoln’s decision for war, and he made this on his own Congress being out of session, pushed the wavering border states into joining the Confederacy, guaranteeing a long and bloody war."

In fact, none of the four Border States ever voted to join the Confederacy -- Delaware, Maryland, Kentucky & Missouri -- though all did provide small numbers of troops to Confederate armies.
But Davis' assault on Fort Sumter, and Lincoln's response, did drive the four Upper South states -- Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee & Arkansas.
These had previously refused to join the Deep South in secession, but now felt forced to chose, and so did chose to protect slavery within the Confederacy.

Finally, the choice for "a long and bloody war" was strictly the Confederacy's, which could have, on any given day, asked for peace on terms much more favorable than the Unconditional Surrender they fought on, and on, and on, to finally achieve.

170 posted on 04/27/2016 5:27:40 AM PDT by BroJoeK (a little historical perspective...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies ]

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