Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

To: Tublecane
I find it reductive to say that because the South cared about slavery more than anything else, the war was about slavery, and leave it at that. It was about slavery and union. It was about slavery, union, and other things.

It was about slavery and what the South saw as the threat to its expansion caused by the election of Lincoln. Any other reason you care to mention pales in importance when compared with slavery. And he evidence supports that.

I have to take into consideration the North’s position in order to understand why the war started, especially since they were the invaders (yes, after Fort Sumpter, which was an act of war, but wasn’t by itself the reason the North invaded, as we all know).

That's like calling the U.S. Army the invader in World War II, which may be strictly true but ignores the fact that if the Germans and the Japanese had not initiated a war then the Army wouldn't have invaded anything. The same is true with the rebellion. The confederacy initiated a war. The North accepted the battle forced upon them and fought it to what was, for them, a successful conclusion. The Union army would not have gone anywhere had not the war come.

How can his side be wrong, when you admit yourself he’s right about Lincoln?

What little Napolitano got right about Lincoln appears to have happened by accident.

Unless you think the North had no choice but to wage war, and everything that happened happened because the South started it.

Well the North did have a choice I suppose. It could have surrendered following Sumter. It could have given in to that at of confederate aggression and given the confederacy what it wanted. Or Lincoln could have recognized the attack for what it was, a act of armed rebellion, and responded accordingly. He chose the second path. There is nothing underhanded or sneaky about that.

It had its own motivations and invaded for its own reasons.

Because the South chose war for its own reasons. No more and no less.

112 posted on 05/06/2009 5:13:39 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies ]


To: Non-Sequitur
You talk as “if” Lincoln thought States had a Right to leave?

That is being dishonest

Can you show me anywhere that he said- States had a Right to Secede?

He was a intelligent fella and knew that sending “supplies” would cause at least a problem {by his own words}

If you threatened me and then showed up at my door- I'd punch you square in the mouth- If I lost the coming fight?

I figure,I'd be right next to Davis

116 posted on 05/06/2009 5:35:25 PM PDT by Idabilly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article


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