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

To: donmeaker

If the Army of Northern Va were to have captured DC, it would have been considered a tactical victory, not a strategic victory. The South wasn’t interested in taking and holding Northern territory. The whole point of secession was the opposite of that. I feel like I am talking to someone with less than a full deck when I post to you. Kind of a creepy feeling I get.


846 posted on 04/10/2013 5:37:01 PM PDT by central_va (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 844 | View Replies ]


To: central_va

Sorry, southern armies invaded several states and territories. Arizona, Missouri, Kentucky, Vermont(!) Pennsylvania, and Maryland.

That indicates that they didn’t want to be let alone. In like manner, their attacks on US forts indicates that they wanted a war. South Carolina, too small to be a country and too large to be an asylum, needed a war to bring in Virginia.

They wanted a war. They got it. They lost it. The problem was the US didn’t hang enough traitors.


851 posted on 04/11/2013 12:12:58 PM PDT by donmeaker (Blunderbuss: A short weapon, ... now superceded in civilized countries by more advanced weaponry.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 846 | 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