Replies

“Star of the West was an American civilian steamship that was launched in 1852 and scuttled by Confederate forces in 1863. In January 1861, the ship was hired by the government of the United States to transport military supplies and reinforcements to the U.S. military garrison of Fort Sumter. Cadets from The Citadel fired upon the ship...”

1. A ship was fired upon by military school boys. Yeah, that’s a valid casus belli.

2. Resupplying and reinforcing Sumpter was an act of war that precedes any action by the Confederacy.

“Cite a verifiable historical source for that statement.”

Verifiable? Really?

My great-grandparents were there, and they told my grandparents, who told my mother, who told me. Not good enough for you? Tough. That’s all the time I propose to spend on this.

Seems kinda odd that you would snip off the salient point from your wiki quote. You know, where your copy and paste clipped off, “effectively the first shots fired in the American Civil War.[1][2]”

Confederate artillery, confederate powder, confederate shot, being fired under orders a confederate officer. Doesn’t matter who pulled the lanyards.

“My great-grandparents were there”. Sort like Elizabeth Warren being told she was of native American descent, got it.

dsc: "2. Resupplying and reinforcing Sumpter was an act of war that precedes any action by the Confederacy."

But in order to "strain out a gnat" of Lincoln's resupply missions to Sumter & Pickens, we must first "swallow the camel" of Confederate seizures of dozens of Union forts, ships, arsenal, mints, etc., threats against Union officials and firings on Union ships.

Further, how do we ignore the fact that Jefferson Davis had already ordered (note the date) Forts Sumter & Pickens taken by force, if necessary?

"It is scarcely to be doubted that for political reasons the U.S. govt. will avoid making an attack so long as the hope of retaining the border states remains.
There would be to us an advantage in so placing them that an attack by them would be a necessity, but when we are ready to relieve our territory and jurisdiction of the presence of a foreign garrison that advantage is overbalanced by other considerations.

"The case of Pensacola [Fort Pickens] then is reduced [to] the more palpable elements of a military problem and your measures may without disturbing views be directed to the capture of Fort Pickens and the defence of the harbor.
You will soon have I hope a force sufficient to occupy all the points necessary for that end.
As many additional troops as may be required can be promptly furnished."
[Jefferson Davis to Braxton Bragg, 3 Apr 1861]"

dsc: "My great-grandparents were there, and they told my grandparents, who told my mother, who told me."

Historians have long searched for physical evidence or contemporary reports to support the wildest of claims about Sherman's (or other Union commanders) alleged "atrocities".
So far, no success.

Here is a listing of the US Civil War's "top ten" atrocities, of which two POW camps are #1 & #2 worst.
Sherman's "march to the sea" is down the list at #7, and it does claim significant numbers of civilians died, but also points out that Sherman ordered his men to leave unharmed anyone who didn't resist.
We must first suspect then that those who did die were in fact resisting.
And the salient fact here is that physical or documentary evidence for Sherman's alleged massive atrocities has never been found.