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

To: rockrr

The South seceded because they perceived an economic benefit to so. The North decided to prevent the secession because of a perceived economic benefit. The cost of the war on both sides was much greater than either anticipated.

Since then, there as been a need to justify the carnage in religious and moral grounds and to diefy Lincoln.

It’s like tryng to convince someone that the Trojan War was fought over some chick with a pretty face. It probably had more to do with regional power, maritime shipping lanes and access to raw materials.


33 posted on 12/01/2012 2:05:27 PM PST by SC_Pete
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies ]


To: SC_Pete

The south rebelled against the results of an election that signaled a national sea-change in attitude toward slavery. They lost an election and had a temper tantrum.

Slavery was being phased out amongst the civilized nations of the world but the southron slavocrisy reacted much like Øbongo does - instead of adapting to the changing circumstances, they doubled-down on their unholy investment.

The north reacted in self-defense. None of the rest of what you wrote has any relevance.


34 posted on 12/01/2012 5:56:46 PM PST by rockrr (Everything is different now...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | 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