Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: DiogenesLamp
Yes, but the myth and inaccuracies are primarily from those who take the side that Fedzilla had a right to force people to remain in the Union.

Had the South not started a war with Fedzilla then her railroads wouldn't have been trashed or her slaves freed. Let that be the lesson to you.

When asked how they can defend a position so at odds with our founding principles (as articulated in the Declaration of Independence) their only answer is "Slavery!!!!"

One of our founding principles is that if you're going to start a rebellion, regardless of whether the reason is "taxation without representation" or defending slavery, then you had better win it. Another lesson for you.

The fact is, the North could not invade the South for the stated purpose of forcing them back into the Union without violating the very principles upon which this nation was founded.

The fact is that the North was not invading anything until after the Confederacy resorted to armed conflict to further their aims.

Their arguments invariably boil down to a form of "Might makes right."

More like the Union had the better cause, preservation of the United States. The South just had that slavery thing.

53 posted on 12/05/2014 9:46:09 AM PST by DoodleDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies ]


To: DoodleDawg
Had the South not started a war with Fedzilla then her railroads wouldn't have been trashed or her slaves freed. Let that be the lesson to you.

Your argument is tantamount to someone responding to being hit by a pea-shooter with murder.

The attack on Ft. Sumter was stupid, but the Fedzilla response was by far disproportionate. No one was killed in the shelling of Ft. Sumter, and I cannot help but think this is because the Confederates really had no intention of killing anyone. Because of the zero casualties as a result of their attack, I suspect they were just trying to make a big show and scare people.

One of our founding principles is that if you're going to start a rebellion, regardless of whether the reason is "taxation without representation" or defending slavery, then you had better win it. Another lesson for you.

It is folly to think we "won" the war of Independence. Britain just decided to stop fighting us. Had Lincoln been in charge of England, we wouldn't have gained independence.

More like the Union had the better cause, preservation of the United States.

And what makes this a better cause than the preservation of the United Kingdom?

Why are slave states breaking away from the United Kingdom better than Slave states breaking away from the United States?

58 posted on 12/05/2014 11:05:18 AM PST by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies ]

To: DoodleDawg

Not for nothin, but the north didn’t really invade. We never left the country.


191 posted on 12/07/2014 3:59:12 PM PST by Vermont Lt (Ebola: Death is a lagging indicator.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson