Posted on 06/09/2009 8:47:35 AM PDT by Davy Buck
My oh my, what would the critics, the Civil War publications, publishers, and bloggers do if it weren't for the bad boys of the Confederacy and those who study them and also those who wish to honor their ancestors who fought for the Confederacy?
(Excerpt) Read more at oldvirginiablog.blogspot.com ...
I think that you're the one being deceptive and/or absurd and not me. In reply 988 you allegedly quote Klein saying that there were 'approximately 11 ships' and 'approximately 2000 troops'. That shrank to 8 ships and 1400 troops in reply 1108. Not you post a link that says 8 ships and 1400 troops AND crew, not 1400 troops. I'll wait until you can arrive at a consistent story.
If you have trouble with the count, you will see it is 11 ships and 1400 men and troops according to this official record.
Pawnee, Powhatan, Harriet Lane, Baltic, Illinois, Atlantic, Yankee, and Uncle Ben. Sorry but no matter how many time I count that it comes to 8 and not 11. And before you claim was 1400 troops, not men and troops. Like I said, your tale changes by the hour.
But this is off the point, which was your denial that there was ever a "secret" effort on Lincoln's part to deceive the Confederate leaders, which I have shown you is completely false.
You've shown nothing of the sort.
Say what? Were there no troops already IN the fort?
Interesting question. I looked it up and found this interesting National Parks Service web site that explains what was going on. [Link] (The answer is no, there were no federal troops in the fort.)
This site says there were two men at Fort Pulaski at the time the Georgia militia took it over on January 3. http://ourgeorgiahistory.com/wars/Civil_War/ftpulaski.html
Perhaps they are referring to this January 1861 cannon shot at Vicksburg: Link
The Governor of Mississippi was warned that Federal troops were coming down the river for action against Mississippi a la the Star of the West. So he stopped ships on the river to inspect their content. After inspection he let them proceed. A cannon shot was fired across the bow of one ship (or perhaps several) that did not heed the request to stop for inspection. Nothing was found in the inspections, so the effort to inspect ships was stopped after a few days.
How does it not? Prior to the rebellion virtually all imports landed in Northern ports and virtually all cotton exports left from Southern ones. How can that make sense if your claim that the South consumed the vast majority of all imports is true?
Two of those three sources refute your claim, and Davis' claim, that there were 1400 troops bound for Sumter and/or Pickens. The OR, and the link you posted earlier, prove Davis and you to be wildly exaggerating the number of troops involved. "Allegiance" by David Detzer puts the total at 200. Your own link posted earlier puts it at 160. You are proven wrong by your own sources.
But shows your claim that the South consumed the majority of all imports to be impossible.
Bull. But if you think it has then by all means feel free to go over it again.
How could it be? If $19 out of every $20 of tariff revenue was generated by Northern consumers then how could the South's secession break that? It may reduce it slightly. It may cause some budget shortfalls. But the revenue stream would continue, with or without the South's exports. As the FY1863 figures showed; without the South providing anything close to pre-rebellion export levels the U.S. still imported enough to generate $103 million in tariffs.
So that's why one can easily show that your claim that the South's secession broke the revenue stream is complete nonsense. And why the three pieces of evidence I gave supports this.
And you ignored what follows: "...but beyond what may be necessary for these objects, there will be no invasion, no using of force against or among the people anywhere. Where hostility to the United States in any interior locality shall be so great and universal as to prevent competent resident citizens from holding the Federal offices, there will be no attempt to force obnoxious strangers among the people for that object. While the strict legal right may exist in the Government to enforce the exercise of these offices, the attempt to do so would be so irritating and so nearly impracticable withal that I deem it better to forego for the time the uses of such offices. The mails, unless repelled, will continue to be furnished in all parts of the Union. So far as possible the people everywhere shall have that sense of perfect security which is most favorable to calm thought and reflection.:
In other words, all government functions would continue without interruption, but in such a manner that would avoid escalating the crisis. But escalation of the crisis was what Davis wanted all along.
it was the TEXAS Navy & the book is REAL, though "bubba, the LIAR" will try mightily to convince everyone otherwise. (fwiw, he SAID that he TRIED to buy a copy of that "nonexistent book"!!!)
laughing AT you & the other DIMWITS of "The DAMNyankee Coven of FOOLS, LIARS, BIGOTS, etc", who are DIM enough to believe ANYTHING you post.
free dixie,sw
LAUGHING AT YOU,LIAR as MOST readers here DO.
free dixie,sw
Nonsense. You are today 100% free to sit on your b*tt, b*tch, moan and complain about alleged injustices 150 years ago.
You are also 100% free to get off your dead *ss, go and talk to your neighbors, friends, associates & anyone else who'll listen about voting for more conservative candidates.
So which actions do you expect would produce the better results?
In 1860 the issue was argued in two ways, as I understand it:
But the real argument was: even though the Constitution does not explicitly forbid secession, it does forbid "rebellion," "insurrection," and "domestic violence," all of which the South clearly committed against federal property and people -- starting even before some states seceded.
Therefore it was a "War of Southern Rebellion," with full Constitutional sanction.
the power of DAMNyankee bayonets did NOT make "mr linkums war" either JUST or even moral. instead, the war to "preserve the union of the UN-willing" was simply CRIMINAL on the part of his MIS-administration & for nothing more than POLITICAL POWER & $$$$$$$$$$$ for the northern ELITES.
furthermore, a century & a half of DAMNyankee SELF-serving, sanctimonious, LIES have not changed the TRUTH.= the war against the CSA was/IS still DISHONORABLE.
free dixie,sw
get the message: NOBODY believes you on ANY subject. your reputation is RUINED.
free dixie,sw
or have we once more found you to be IGNORANT of the truth, "not overburdened with gray matter" and/or simply being DISHONEST???
free dixie,sw
On the other hand, your “reputation”, that of a bigoted baboon, remains intact. “Everyone” says so ;’}
What good is personal freedom without economic freedom? Your Yankee grade freedom is for the birds. I am a white male, as such the Feds have institutionalized racism against me, that alone causes me to question my "freedom".
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.