Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Non-Sequitur
To put the entire blame on the South (which you do on most of these threads) for starting the war is like the Arabs saying the Israelis started the Six Day War.

The South was looking for a fight. There is no denying that. Beauregard in Charleston was itching to fire on those forts.

Lincoln by resupplying the forts, on purpose, gave the South the provocation.

Both sides are equally guilty for this war. No side escapes censor for its start.

So, let me repeat my main point: The South was looking for a fight, and Lincoln only too gladly gave them what they were looking for.

You can spin and dance around this issue all you want, but both sides thought it would be decided at First Manassas and both sides thought they would get want they wanted. A restored Union or Independence. In that mind set, they only too eagerly collided at Fort Sumter.

1,023 posted on 05/29/2007 1:16:08 AM PDT by carton253 (I've cried tears and stayed the same.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 971 | View Replies ]


To: carton253

How dare you inject history into this discussion!


1,024 posted on 05/29/2007 1:20:03 AM PDT by durasell (!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1023 | View Replies ]

To: carton253
The South was looking for a fight. There is no denying that. Beauregard in Charleston was itching to fire on those forts.

And yet all of your Southron cohorts would have us believe that the entire blame for the conflict lies with Lincoln. I give you credit for admitting that the South was looking for an excuse.

1,049 posted on 05/29/2007 4:07:55 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur (Save Fredericksburg. Support CVBT.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1023 | View Replies ]

To: carton253
Sorry, hit enter too soon.

Did either side really want a war? I honestly don't know. I think that Lincoln was trying to do whatever he could to avoid one while at the same time hanging on to the remaining federal property in the South. But did he really, honestly believe that there could be a peaceful resolution? I don't know for sure. I think that the South was a little more anxious to resort to war believing, as you pointed out, that it would be a short and fairly bloodless one. But once the die had been cast at Charleston there was no more desire on the North to rein in the dogs of war than there was in Richmond.

1,051 posted on 05/29/2007 4:13:16 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur (Save Fredericksburg. Support CVBT.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1023 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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