[chrisser]

Specifics?

Contact the author of this piece:

Given what a weakened state a split country would have placed us in as we moved into the industrial age, given the force for good that a united and powerful America has been in the world since Appomattox, and considering even his most brazen suspensions of Constitutional rights were temporary, and resulted in no one swinging from the gallows for their opposition to the war, I must support the actions of this great President who was ultimately motivated by love of country, not lust for power.

If the author can attribute America's industrial might, power and force for good to Lincoln to justify the war, then I can attribute its overwhelming debt, restriction of liberty, and out of control federal government to him with just as much justification.

The fact is, nobody knows what the future would have been like had Lincoln worked as hard on a peaceful resolution as he did on forcing the South to adhere to a system of government they felt no longer represented them. It's immaterial if the South was "right" or "wrong" -

"That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.".

If the South didn't have the right to leave the union, for whatever reasons they chose or for no reason at all, then our founding as a nation by severing ties to Britain is a farce.

One example we have, of how things could have been very different, as others have pointed out, is Great Britain, who abolished slavery without a civil war.

[Non-Sequitur]

The fact is, nobody knows what the future would have been like had Lincoln worked as hard on a peaceful resolution as he did on forcing the South to adhere to a system of government they felt no longer represented them.

Or if the South had taken the time to negotiate a fair and equitable settlement of all possible matters of contention before separating with the approval of all the parties impacted.

It's immaterial if the South was "right" or "wrong"...

Especially if you've already blamed the North for the whole matter.

If the South didn't have the right to leave the union, for whatever reasons they chose or for no reason at all, then our founding as a nation by severing ties to Britain is a farce.

Our 'severing ties with Britain' was accomplished only after a little seven year period of unplesantness known as "The American Revolution". So the real difference is that the founders won their rebellion while the confederates did not.

One example we have, of how things could have been very different, as others have pointed out, is Great Britain, who abolished slavery without a civil war.

In every single case where slavery was ended peacefully, it was done through government action and over the strong opposition of the slaveowners themselves. So how long do you think it would have taken for the U.S. slaveowners to agree to end slavery without launching a bloody and protracted rebellion?