His “country” was his state and if Washington had of been put in the same predicament he would have made the same decision.
I disagree.
George Washington was our nation’s first nationalist as well as first president. He was a grand unifier who famously warned against foreign entanglements and hyper-partisanship. Washington was a moderate who eschewed political factions and sought to find common ground among the many discordant voices.
Throughout his career in Virginia’s House of Burgesses and as president of the Constitutional Convention, Washington took labors to remain in the role of moderate. In his twenties, while serving in the Virginia legislature, when the House of Burgesses was divided between moderates and militants in their resistance to the British royals, Washington played a pivotal role by bridging the divides with personal diplomacy, dining with leaders of the different factions.
In the months and years after the war, Washington strived to forge a national identity. He was fiercely defensive of our fledgling nation and responded harshly to criticism of her - either from other countries like France or Great Britain, or from factions internally.
Recognizing the inadequacies of our confederation, Washington was an early advocate of a constitutional convention to address those inadequacies. A Federalist, Washington believed in the necessity of a strong central government.
During the constitutional debates, Washington insisted that the Articles of Confederation be overhauled quickly. “Otherwise,” he wrote, “like a house on fire, whilst the most regular mode of extinguishing it is contended for, the building is reduced to ashes.” What was needed, Washington thought, was any solid national government.
https://mises.org/library/george-washington-image-and-its-influence
Naturally Washington was fond of his home and Virginia, but he staked his reputation, his fortune, and his very life in the defense of his nation.