Well, I suppose it depends on the viewpoint now doesn't it?!
To Southerners, LINCOLN was the aggressor. He could have withdrawn the troops from Southern Soil, as was requested. He chose not to do so, and to attempt to resupply said troops, KNOWING FULL WELL, that the Confederacy would never tolerate such actions. So therefore he started the ball rolling. And to compare Germany and Japan is totally assinine! Both of those countries committed actions of agression FIRST. The South never invaded the North. So once again, the term "War of NORTHERN AGRESSION" is correct.
Well of course he is, since southerners have to justify the war somehow. But Lincoln took no hostile actions against the south, other than holding on to that property not already seized by the southern states. He did not threaten Charleston, did not fire on anyone regardless of provocation. Lincoln set out to resupply Charleston rather than allow it to be starved into surrender. He made his intentions clear in a letter to Governor Pickens. There need have been no war at all, except that the south chose to start one.
And to compare Germany and Japan is totally assinine! Both of those countries committed actions of agression FIRST.
Bombarding Sumter into submission would certainly qualify as an act of aggression.
The South never invaded the North. So once again, the term "War of NORTHERN AGRESSION" is correct.
The south started the war. The North took the war to them.