Replies

As a historian, let me remind everyone this has never, ever happened before, not in Lincoln's most "tyrannical" days

Well there were some military men like Thomas J. Jackson, Robert E. Lee, James Longstreet and a few of their close associates who gave it one heck of a good try. Do you honestly think that if Gettysburg Day 2 had gone the other way and the army of Northern Virginia had marched on Washington they would not have "Removed" Lincoln? Take a look at the percentage of active duty West Pointers who went rebel, it is over 50%. Only two garrisons in the entire south fired a shot, Forts Sumpter and Pickins. The rest turned over their facilities, weapons and supplies in tact to the rebels.

The big Union generals like Grant & Sherman were all out of the military when Sumpter was fired on. The best way to look at the Civil War is that the active duty army went largely Confederate. The Navy and the reserves went largely Union.

You make good points, but if they marched on Washington, I think a good argument could be made that they would have closed ranks. Don’t forget, Lincoln’s worse critics came from HIS side, the radicals. The point is, we’ve had a long, long history of military supporting the administrations-—ANY administration, since then.

Do you honestly think that if Gettysburg Day 2 had gone the other way and the army of Northern Virginia had marched on Washington they would not have "Removed" Lincoln? Take a look at the percentage of active duty West Pointers who went rebel, it is over 50%.

I have to respectfully disagree with your analysis. There was never any intent by the South to overthrow the Federal government or remove Lincoln. The idea of moving on Washington was intended to force a peace and recognition of the Confederacy. And as for the officer corps, those "going south" did so to their own states not the Confederate Army. The labels "Civil War" or "War of the Rebellion" stuck as a consequence of the outcome of the war, not because they were accurate.

If, God forbid, things should now develop into armed conflict to restore the national government, it would be the USA's first true civil war. And development of a "civilian security force" would mark the Crossing of the Rubicon in the minds of most of those I served with, I believe.