[The KG9 Kid]

"... If some would read more about Jefferson Davis, they may learn the the war betwen the states was not about slavery, as many uninformed claim."

It's not uninformed to state that the slavery aspect remains inescapable because Jefforson Davis didn't free the slaves before he fired on Fort Sumter.

[Budge]

It's not uninformed to state that the slavery aspect remains inescapable because Jefforson Davis didn't free the slaves before he fired on Fort Sumter.

A very weak argument.

Let's see if I can help you with this.

You said, "...Davis didn't free the slaves before he fired on Fort Sumter." No, he didn't, because that would be akin to the yankees shutting down the power to all those mechanical marvels they held "in slavery" in the factories only the yankees had.

Do you not understand history, or were you one of those unfortunates who were hand-fed revisionist history?

[Dog Gone]

It's not uninformed to state that the slavery aspect remains inescapable because Jefforson Davis didn't free the slaves before he fired on Fort Sumter.

Slavery was a big part of the dispute leading up to the Civil War. It certainly wasn't the only thing, and arguing whether it the most important thing, or simply a big factor is interesting but will never be resolved.

I don't know that Lincoln or Davis had any constitutional authority to "liberate" private property. Where would they get that power?

[southland]

RE post 10: General Grant didn't release his slaves until after the war.

[Colt .45]

I would suggest that you read the book titled 'A Constitutional History of Secession' by John Remington Graham. Graham, by the way, is a Minnesota lawyer but does a laudable job of lining up and explaining the reasons for the Southern States' secession from the Union. Read it and become informed as to what truly caused the war.