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

To: equalitybeforethelaw

The United States wasn’t much interested in “sealing the deal that the union stood for something other than brute force.” They were trying to end a war that had dragged on for four years by destroying the enemies will and ability to fight. The rebelling states could have stopped it any time they wanted.


46 posted on 10/19/2010 10:47:37 AM PDT by Bubba Ho-Tep ("More weight!"--Giles Corey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies ]


To: Bubba Ho-Tep

“They were trying to end a war that had dragged on for four years by destroying the enemies will and ability to fight.”

Yeah, the old “we destroyed the village to save the village” meme. Or “we were just following orders”. Take your pick. You are what you do, not what you say you will do. Or more to the point, what you told people you did.

“The rebelling states could have stopped it any time they wanted.”

Believe this is what is known as a two way street amigo.


48 posted on 10/19/2010 10:52:26 AM PDT by equalitybeforethelaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies ]

To: Bubba Ho-Tep
The rebelling states could have stopped it any time they wanted.

The states didn't rebel, they seceded from the Union as they had a perfect right to do. The Union didn't want them to so they pushed the South until a war started. The Union could have left the seceded states alone BEFORE a war started but they chose(or Lincoln did)to make sure a war started in order to force the states back into a Union they no longer wanted to belong to. If you join something you have the right to unjoin, but the Union didn't see it that way therefore there was a war, of the Union's making.

72 posted on 10/19/2010 12:52:29 PM PDT by calex59
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | 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