[Non-Sequitur]

It could be just as easily said that the first shot was fired by South Carolina troops at the Star of the West in January. And the first call for 100,000 troops came weeks before Sumter, at a time when you claim the south wanted a peaceful solution. A peaceful solution at the end of a gun apparently.

I'm not trying to split hairs, mind. Just pointing out that an claim you are attempting fails due to fallacy.

[GOPcapitalist]

It could be just as easily said that the first shot was fired by South Carolina troops at the Star of the West in January.

No, not really. Unlike the Harriet Lane, the Star of the West was an isolated incident with no proximity to the start of the war. Citing it as the first shot is no more applicable that citing John Brown's raid, or Potowatamie Creek for that matter, as the first attack of the war. The Harriet Lane on the other hand occurred in the immediate proximity of Sumter and helped expedite the move on Sumter. It was therefore the first shot of the war.

And the first call for 100,000 troops came weeks before Sumter

Your point? The Lincoln was making war on the south only weeks out of Sumter by way of his blockade and soon issued his own call for an additional 75,000 to the yankee troop ranks. It is only common sense that the south would prepare for what was coming by having their own army assembled.

I'm not trying to split hairs, mind. Just pointing out that an claim you are attempting fails due to fallacy.

Your history is false and correct history is needed for you to do what you claim. Therefore your attempt to use it to demonstrate a fallacy that you do not even understand fails you. Nice try though.