The war between North and South

BostonGlobe ^ | May 9, 2006 | PETER S. CANELLOS

[stand watie]

every post you do makes you look MORE ignorant & FOOLISH.

THANKFULLY, you also make the LEFTIST/REVISIONIST "DAMNyankee coven" look REALLY BIGOTED/dumb/BAD! (so PLEASE continue to post.)

free dixie,sw

[M. Espinola]

"every post you do makes you look MORE ignorant & FOOLISH.

That's impossible Norman, you hold the title in that department, LOL.

[GrandEagle]

I know it's a bitter pill to swallow, but it's true
Now THAT's funny....
Slavery was on the downhill slide world wide and would have died a natural death here in the US.
Slavery was the catalyst for the war for Southern Independence, sure; but it most certainly was not the only reason by far. The secession of Southern states was brought about by a ever enlarging Federal Government who ignored the very document that gave it it's authority.
Now, aside from speeding the abolition of slavery along by a few years, what was really won?
In the few years after the war ended, the Constitution was effectively laid to rest, and we ended up with what we have now.
A mammoth, ever intruding, all knowing, all seeing, police state where we still enjoy the remnants of Liberty, but only at the whim of the federal government.
We are no different than a nation with a King - we just happen to have a fairly good king right now.

Cordially,
GE

[D1X1E]

A very factual and reasoned argument. One thing missing though is the fact that Lincoln offered to let slavery stand and not interfere if the South would agree not to secede. The South refused. A counter offer was made that the South would abolish slavery if southern states would be left in peace to secede. The Union refused. This seems to suggest that slavery was not initially the major issue or cause for the war to either the South or the North.