Posted on 08/12/2020 2:31:56 PM PDT by Jonty30
That’s what I like about you pelly - only you could find a pimple on Miss America’s ass.
I was not asking for a response from you, just making an observation.
Your basic point though is correct and rests on the better evidence of Lincoln's own statements: his goal was to preserve the Union, whether that meant protecting slavery or abolishing it. The South though insisted on slavery being preserved at the cost of the Union because they did not want to remain in any form of political association with states that carried the virus of any potential emancipation.
Most of the South thought that the Civil War would be brief due to the South's superior martial valor and skill. For the Southern public, this seemed not an entirely unreasonable line of thinking in that most of the federal officer corps went with the South. The Northern public was not much more realistic.
The esteemed but elderly Gen. Winfield Scott knew better. He proposed a multiyear strategy that raised and trained armies for the North, with the South to be blockaded and slowly weakened. Eventually, the North's armies would invade and divide the South and subdue its populace. This was of course how the war went, but few except top military professionals saw that coming at the time.
Re: “And now the elites in the US are again letting extremists push the country to a civil war.”
I disagree.
I think it is impossible to govern 330 million hugely diverse people as one nation.
I can calmly live next door to, or work with, about 90% of Americans.
But I do not want to be governed by at least HALF of them!
Are you aware of how much war material England provided to the south?
Are you aware that they put 10,000 soldiers in Canada in preparation for intervention.
In 1864 France volunteered to put their troops in the US as peace keepers.
You should read some history books.
“ Between 33,000 and 55,000 men from British North America enlisted in the war, almost all of them fighting for Union forces. ”
The British working and middle classes were for the North and against slavery.
The British ruling class and government wanted to break up the USA and provided massive war material to the south.
Without this war material the South couldn’t have waged war.
” provided massive war material to the south. “
LOL!
Would have to see evidence of their success at that.
Between the blockade and their internal disputes, my understanding is that they could, and did, not.
You describe the South as immature children. Why is that?
Republicans are the party of Abolition dumbass.
You should be embarrassed to have written that.
“A vast majority of the Confederate Navy was built in Liverpool, England during the war using private dollar, and the port also became the unofficial location for the Confederate embassy within Great Britain. Not only were warships commissioned in Great Britain,so too were ships specifically designed to outrun Union blockade forces and smuggle illegal goods to and from Confederate controlled land. The use of Liverpool by the Confederacy, which was a source of great animosity between Union and Great Britain, could have forced Great Britain to join the American Civil War in favor of the Confederate States of America. Had it not been for Abraham Lincoln and his Emancipation Proclamation of 1863, they may have contemplated their role in the war further.”
But no success.
They took the Rebs’ money, built their ships, and it all came to naught. “How convenient.”
Maybe if the South had another ten years it would have mattered, but they didn’t.
“These vessels brought badly needed supplies, especially firearms, and mail. “
Firearms from England, Blockade runners from England, Naval Ships from England.
I’ve proved my point. England was very involved in the Civil War. Most counties would consider what England did an act of war.
In General Southern people are great, but they fought for a very poor cause in the Civil war. So please don’t put words in my mouth.
” Most counties would consider what England did an act of war. “
Maybe.
but none of this made a difference... maybe it was all a ruse to fool the South?
England had much to gain from the certain victory of the North- if they cooperated.
So, tough to view things otherwise.
In a few more years the South could have prepared for war with the North.
They didn’t have those years.
I am not stupid like many around here. I don’t judge the people of the 19th century by 21st century standards of social comportment and culture.
Agreed. I've always thought you set your own standard on everything.
I don’t judge the people of the 19th century by 21st century standards of social comportment and culture.
Except Lincoln? Otherwise why the quote?
The truth doesn't matter? You seem to be some kind of tribalistic race hustler loser that manages the stay around here.
An interesting theory but one which overlooks the fact that the South controlled the government for most of the time up to the rebellion. Alexander Stephens summed it up in his address to the Georgia Secession Convention in January 1861:
"But, again, gentlemen, what have we to gain by this proposed change of our relation to the general government? We have always had the control of it, and can yet, if we remain in it, and are as united as we have been. We have had a majority of the Presidents chosen from the South; as well as the control and management of most of those chosen from the North. We have had sixty years of Southern Presidents to their twenty-four, thus controlling the Executive department. So of the judges of the Supreme Court, we have had eighteen from the South, and but eleven from the North; although nearly four-fifths of the judicial business has arisen in the Free States, yet a majority of the Court has always been from the South. This we have required so as to guard against any interpretation of the Constitution unfavorable to us. In like manner we have been equally watchful to guard our interests in the Legislative branch of government. In choosing the presiding Presidents (pro tern.) of the Senate, we have had twenty-four to their eleven. Speakers of the House, we have had twenty-three, and they twelve. While the majority of the Representatives, from their greater population, have always been from the North, yet we have so generally secured the Speaker, because he, to a great extent, shapes and controls the legislation of the country. Nor have we had less control in every other department of the general government. Attorneys, Generals we have had fourteen, while the North have had but five. Foreign ministers we have had eighty-six, and they but fifty-four. While three-fourths of the business which demands diplomatic agents abroad is clearly from the Free States, from their greater commercial interests, yet we have had the principal embassies, so as to secure the world markets for our cotton, tobacco and sugar on the best possible terms. We have had a vast majority of the higher offices of both army and navy, while a larger proportion of the soldiers and sailors were drawn from the North. Equally so of Clerks, Auditors and Comptrollers filling the Executive department; the records show for the last fifty years, that of the three thousand thus employed, we have had more than two-thirds of the same, while we have but one-third of the white population of the Republic."
It is hard to believe that the South's "wishes and wants" were ignored by the government when they exercised such a disproportionate level of influence over it.
The higher the tariffs, the better the northeast manufacturers did while the worse the south did.
Why?
The truth is not your objective. Your agenda is.
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.