And bombarding Fort Sumter sets up Bayonet Rule.
The enslavement of millions of human beings certainly qualifies as "Bayonet Rule." Of course, the efficacy of "future political action" in such circumstances requires that both sides be rational.
But if one side is so wedded to its tyannical institution that it is willing to fight to the death to maintain and expand it; and if that side is so irrational as to defend the enslavement of millions on the grounds of "freedom and self-determination," then it is highly unlikely that the evil can be ended by merely political means.
Hey brother, trying to teach a Yankee about the righteousness of the Secession, and the egrigiousness of Lincoln's War of Aggression is like trying to teach a pig to sing. Its a waste of your breath and annoys the pig.
We know the why of it, and the Yankee PC whore graduates of 'Carpe Dementia' will always want to believe they were right. But they are the ones who sold out the Constitution and their freedoms for a pack of lies and B.S.
Pay no attention to them, they are the holdovers of the Communist ideology.
The choice of the laws of War was exceeedingly ill-advised, the result inevitable.
After you lose the war, you can't call "do-over" with the laws of Peace. As the Vietnamese say,
"Sin loy, minoy".
Are you saying the US should pursue a non-intervensionist foreign policy? I'm all for that. But to cite a Civil War veteran out of the blue, without explaining its contemporary context, was confusing.