[Anonymous Political Junky]

NO, the north did not end slavery. What they did was to be the aggressor toward the southern states. Certain southern states had already made plans to get rid of slavery before the north ever started their farce of a civil war. I say farce because once the states seceded they were no longer part of the U.S., therefor no civil war. In MO, the war was going on for about a decade before the official date of the war started. The war was about states’ rights and it was not really about slavery, except toward the end of it, when Lincoln realized that he had to do something to be able to win. As usual it was all politics and some great wonderful thing that Lincoln wanted to do to purge the south of slavery. It would probably help you if you read up on the history of the country and especially the War of Northern Aggression and then you might actually get educated about what was really was going on in the country at that time.

[aberaussie]

If I remember my history correctly, Lincoln only freed the slaves in the states which had seceded, not in the states that remained in the union. His concern was for politics, not for freeing the slaves.

[imjimbo]

You make some good points. If true emancipation was really Lincoln’s aim, why were the slaves in non-secessionist states EXEMPTED-?! Lincoln’s war of Northern Agression was really the beginning of the end of the U.S. Constitution. The Second American Revolution was unsuccesful.

[vidbizz]

ny good books that you would recommend on the subject?