[x]

What you fail to realize is that the War for Southern Independence would have occured even if the first slave had never been brought to American soil by the yankee slave traders. Read The South Under Siege by Frank Conner.

Huh?

Africans were first brought to the colonies by the Dutch (Jamestown, 1619).

They were sold as indentured servants.

Nobody forced Southerners to buy slaves or to make slavery the foundation of their economy.

[cowboyway]

Nobody forced Southerners to buy slaves or to make slavery the foundation of their economy.

You guys just won't let it go.

It wasn't about slavery then any more than its about slavery now.

Why, I'd bet my two matched grays that if we were to draw a line in the sand, say east to west along the Potomac, that we could both, South and north, raise large armies that would be willing to engage in bitter combat, just like our forefathers, for no more of a reason than we just don't particularly like each other. (Except this time we'd get West Virginia, Kentucky, part of Ohio, part of Indiana, part of Illinois and maybe some of Michigan.)

[stand watie]

nobody forced the DYs to go to Africa & capture slaves, bring them to the USA, sell the slaves, own the slaves, etc,etc,etc.

the FACTS ARE that about the same percentage of northerners & southerners owned slaves = 5-6%.

face it, "x", you've been LIED TO & made a FOOL of.

anybody who believes (as you DO) that the WBTS was ONLY or even MOSTLY "about slavery" is a "useful idiot".

laughing AT you.

free dixie,sw